Reflection by Prof. Leonardo Salutati, published on the Alfonsiana Academy blog
As of December 31, 2024, the current international context includes 56 active conflicts in the world (Global Peace Index 2024), the highest number ever recorded since the end of the Second World War, and is marked in particular by two conflicts, each dramatic in its own way: the Russian-Ukrainian conflict due to the nuclear threat and the Israel-Palestinian conflict due to the brutal violation by both sides of the dignity of the human person, which is always endangered in any situation of violence. In this context, it is most appropriate to reprint two essays, first published in the 1980s and released in early October under the title Peace. Theological Perspectives. The author is the moral theologian Bernhard Häring († 1998), the one to whom we owe a decisive contribution in drafting the pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, to the point that Cardinal Léon-Joseph Suenens—one of the four moderators of the Second Vatican Council—called him as ‘like a father.’
The two texts address the Christian commitment to peace, rooted in the biblical message and faith in the Crucified and Risen Christ, the peacemaker par excellence and witness to nonviolence. This reflection is well-timed than ever, indeed necessary, if the human family truly wants to free itself from the mentality and practice of war.
Father Bernhard Häring became a priest during the dark and sad times of the Second World War, during which his vocation to commit himself to the issue of peace and nonviolence matured and his conviction that in the future the world would have even greater need of messengers of the Gospel was strengthened.
The events of the war made him aware of Hitler’s cynical manipulation of values. By abusing religion for the purposes of power and by assuming the obligation of obedience as an absolute value, he pursued his criminal agenda. From this tragic experience, Häring reflected on the importance of a key word, “responsibility,” for the development of a new morality that fosters liberation, through mutual aid, from the structures of sin. In his view, this new approach, after the Holocaust, could express the liberating power of the Gospel.
He is convinced that moral theological reflection is not simply called to integrate cultural data, but must also play an active and proactive role in culture, to be a “leaven” supporting the promotion of human dignity. In the context of issues related to peace and war, he is convinced that moral theology is called to play a proactive and provocative role in culture, since the most typically biblical demands are in clear conflict with contemporary ethical-theological models ( just war theory ), which must be abandoned in favor of a language and practice renewed in spirit and content, which will occur with the encyclical Pacem in Terris of Saint John XXIII and with the section dedicated to this theme in Gaudium et Spes (particularly nn. 77-82).
Häring sees the choice of nonviolence as an essential component of the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Mt. 5), which he defines as “the most classic Gospel text on nonviolence.” At the heart of Matthew’s passage, in fact, Jesus invites his listeners to overcome the law of retaliation and to extend love even to their enemies (Mt. 5:38-48), calling them to embrace nonviolence as an expression of faith in peace, a gift of the Messiah and the fulfilment of the law. Furthermore, Jesus’ words are not to be interpreted as optional pious advice but have a normative value and open up new paths for Christ’s disciples that they “will follow according to the measure of the grace they have received.”
Häring strives to clarify the nature and essential characteristics of nonviolence, partly because he is not entirely convinced by the negative connotation of the word, which exposes it to the risk of reductive interpretations that suggest inactivity, passivity, and inertia in the face of evil and the wicked. He thus seeks to define it in an active sense, whereby nonviolence is not “the absence of something, but rather the presence […] of the burning force of love”; it is not the “psychic suppression of aggression, but the transformation and continuous use of energies in the right direction.” In this sense, an expression of nonviolence is the courage to “speak forcefully precisely to those who have the means to do harm.” Furthermore, nonviolence includes taking a stand on behalf of victims, that is, those “who are discriminated against, exploited, and oppressed,” without, in turn, neglecting “concern for the moral integrity and human dignity of those degraded by the unjust use of power.” However, if even after resorting to all nonviolent means, it is not possible to “contain the aggressor and the unjust actor within limits or to overcome an unjust ‘status quo'”, a “disciplined use of force” is permitted, while, on the contrary, any type of violence is considered an “undisciplined and unjust use” of force.
Häring observes that a person can fail in their quest for identity as a child of God when, raised by violent people, they learn to develop equally violent responses, developing an essentially defensive and confrontational identity. Conversely, those raised in nonviolence have an excellent chance of integrating it into their life plan and choosing it as a fundamental value, thus creatively overcoming their identity crises. Ultimately, “love of enemies is a central aspect of God’s action in Christ and of following Christ” and requires the practice of nonviolent love as the most effective form of resistance and struggle against evil and violence. The Gospel of peace and reconciliation, therefore, cannot be reduced to a pure utopia or a promise reserved for the afterlife, but rather implies for all Christians a slow process of assimilation and translation of its insights into the fabric of personal and social relationships.
Source: https://www.ilmantellodellagiustizia.it/2025/la-profezia-della-pace-di-bernhard-haring
