John Morreall and Tamara Sonn (2013) have argued that since there is no consensus on definitions of "religion" among scholars and no way to isolate "religion" from the rest of the more likely motivational dimensions (social, political, and economic) it is incorrect to label any violent event as "religious".
Examples include the War of the Three Henrys and the Succession of Henry IV of France during the French Wars of Religion, the Hessian War and the War of the Jülich Succession during the Reformation in Germany, and the Jacobite risings (including the Williamite–Jacobite wars) during the Reformation in Great Britain and Ireland. For example, many armed conflicts may be simultaneously wars of succession as well as wars of religion when two rival claimants to a throne also represent opposing religions. Secondly, it has been argued that religion is difficult to isolate as a factor, and is often just one of many factors driving a war.
Some commentators have questioned the applicability of religion to war, in part because the word "religion" itself is difficult to define, particularly posing challenges when one tries to apply it to non-Western cultures. See also: Definition of religion and War of succession § Applicability His definition of 'war of religion' thus became:Ī war legitimised by religion and/or for religious ends (but possibly fought by secular leaders and soldiers). David Onnekink (2013) added that a 'religious war' is not necessarily the same as a 'holy war' ( bellum sacrum): 'After all, it is perfectly acceptable to suggest that a worldly prince, say, a Lutheran prince in Reformation Germany, engages in religious warfare using mercenary armies.' While a holy war needs to be authorised by a religious leader and fought by pious soldiers, a religious war does not, he reasoned. Philip Benedict (2006) argued that Repgen's definition of 'religious war' was too narrow, because sometimes both legitimisation and motivation can established. wars should only be termed, in so far as at least one of the belligerents lays claim to 'religion', a religious law, in order to justify his warfare and to substantiate publicly why his use of military force against a political authority should be a bellum iustum. Although ulterior motives may never be known, war proclamations do provide evidence for a belligerent's legitimisation of the war to the public. Konrad Repgen (1987) pointed out that belligerents may have multiple intentions to wage a war, may have had ulterior motives that historians can no longer discover, and therefore, calling something a 'religious war' (or ' war of succession') based merely on a motive that a belligerent may have had, doesn't necessarily make it one. See also: Just war theory, Religious terrorism, and Religious violence Matthew White's The Great Big Book of Horrible Things gives religion as the primary cause of 11 of the world's 100 deadliest atrocities. Īccording to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 121, or 6.87%, had religion as their primary cause. However, studies on these cases often conclude that ethnic animosities drive much of the conflicts. In several conflicts including the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the Syrian civil war, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, religious elements are overtly present, but variously described as fundamentalism or religious extremism-depending upon the observer's sympathies. Other scholars have argued that what is termed "religious wars" is a largely "Western dichotomy" and a modern invention from the past few centuries, arguing that all wars that are classed as "religious" have secular (economic or political) ramifications. Answers to these questions heavily influence conclusions on how prevalent religious wars have been as opposed to other types of wars.Īccording to scholars such as Jeffrey Burton Russell, conflicts may not be rooted strictly in religion and instead may be a cover for the underlying secular power, ethnic, social, political, and economic reasons for conflict. The degree to which a war may be considered religious depends on many underlying questions, such as the definition of religion, the definition of 'religious war' (taking religious traditions on violence such as 'holy war' into account), and the applicability of religion to war as opposed to other possible factors. In the modern period, there are frequent debates over the extent to which religious, economic, ethnic or other aspects of a conflict are predominant in a given war. Saladin and Guy of Lusignan after the Battle of Hattin of 1187Ī religious war or a war of religion, sometimes also known as a holy war ( Latin: bellum sacrum), is a war which is primarily caused or justified by differences in religion.