Another Catholic View of War

The Denver Catholic Register recently published a two-part series by Joseph E. Burns on the Christian view of participation in war (and the current war on terrorism in particular). The article was a combination of quotes from the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" and Major Burns' interpretations, opinions, and assumptions.

Though not bound by it, I have no quarrel with the Catechism or the quotes from it. Major Burns' extrapolations, however, are another matter.

The Catechism, for example, states that governments have a right of self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed. It goes on to give criteria for a "just war" and points out that governments have the responsibility for evaluating whether these conditions exist and making the decision on going to war. So far, so good. But Major Burns goes on to conclude that since Congress has lots of experience in just war debates, the role of the Church should be limited to prayers for guidance and advice when needed. Nonsense! The Church also must refine the just war criteria in light of modern warfare, make its own independent judgment on their applicability in a given situation, and call governments to task when they violate or ignore them.

Yes, our government has lots of experience in just war debates -- all of it bad. The result has been that in the recent past, our government has intervened in many conflicts it should have avoided; and when it did intervene, it was usually on the wrong side. Was our Contra War using terrorism against the people of Nicaragua a just war? Was our support of Salvadoran death squads a just war? Was our overthrow of Mosadegh and support of the Shah and his brutal Savak a just war? Was our assassination of the democratically-elected Allende and support for Pinochet a just war? Vietnam? Bosnia? Iraq? Kosovo? Not one of them came close to satisfying the criteria for a just war. In most of them we were either fighting a legitimate government or helping a brutal dictator make war on his own people. Why? In every case, we were on the side of whoever would cooperate with multinational corporations in plundering the resources of their own country.

Giving lip-service to the concept of a just war and calling a conflict one doesn't make it so. Not one of our recent presidents has even tried to go beyond the first criterion. They seem to think that a "just cause" and a "just war" are the same. They are not. "Just cause" is only the first of eight criteria. (They are all discussed in my March 1995 article "Making War: A Christian Perspective." Those interested may read it in full on our web site www.rmbowman.com/catholic .

One of the most-violated of the Just War criteria is that of "last resort." The catechism correctly points out that even in a just cause in self-defense against an aggressor, a government may not go to war until all other means have been exhausted. How often is that criterion satisfied? Never! When our government wants to go to war with a foreign leader who refuses to cooperate with our oil companies in building a pipeline through his country (as in the case of Kosovo and Afghanistan), what happens? Do we use diplomacy and negotiation? No. We make non-negotiable demands and ultimatums. Then even if the opponent agrees to our demands (as did Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic), we refuse to accept "yes" as an answer and go to war anyway.

Were these wars in a just cause? Most Americans think so. (That's what they've been told by the corporate press.) Some of us do not. But did they satisfy the criterion of "last resort"? Absolutely not, and therefore they were not "just wars."

Major Burns goes even further afield in attacking "pacifist chaplains" who he says hold our soldiers in disdain. He is wrong! I know no pacifist chaplains, although there may be some. If there are, they (along with those who hold to either Christian nonviolence or "just war" doctrine) do not hold our soldiers in disdain. What they (and I) object to are the immoral policies which causes our government to send them into battle. As a combat veteran, I believe our service men and women are well served by chaplains who properly question the morality of our wars.

Perhaps most troubling of Burns' statements is that the command to love your enemies does not apply to soldiers at war. He says they should desire the injury of enemy soldiers, and should consider themselves "an instrument of God's wrath on evildoers." What evil and dangerous heresy this is! Any competent military chaplain tells a soldier that he can do his job and still obey the command to love his enemies. His job is not to kill and injure enemy soldiers, but to stop them and render them unable to harm our country and its people. If, in this imperfect world, the only means at his disposal are guns and bombs, then injury to his enemies may well occur as an unintended side effect of his actions. If we had a means to anesthetize opposing soldiers, rendering them harmless captives, then that is what we would do. One need not demonize ones enemy and begin to hate him to be a good soldier. "Go, my son and do your job in good conscience ... and never stop loving your enemy."

Of course, a soldier may come to his chaplain and say, "Father, I just don't think this war is right. We have no business being here, and we're on the wrong side. The people we're fighting are no threat to us." Then the chaplain should say, "You must follow your conscience my son. If you're not sure, then you should give your government the benefit of the doubt and obey your orders. But if you really believe this war is wrong, then you should refuse to kill those on the other side. Ask for a noncombatant assignment. If that is not possible, and you refuse to fight, you may face court martial and punishment. If you are willing to accept that possibility, I will support your decision any way I can."

Burns points out that the Catechism makes clear that terrorism is intrinsically evil because it kills indiscriminately in violation of the eighth of the just war criteria. He then leaps to the conclusion that our current "war on terrorism" is a noble calling. He fails completely to note that our government has often engaged in terrorism (as in the Contra War against Nicaragua or many of the CIA's secret wars) or supported it (as in our support for death squads in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and now Colombia, or our support for Israeli bulldozing of Palestinian villages). There is considerable evidence that our fire-bombing of Dresden and Tokyo as well as the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrorist acts.

Don't get me wrong. There is no excuse for the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center. Those responsible should be treated as the worst kind of criminal and should be punished. I'm not sure that going to war against the Taliban was a necessary or appropriate response. Should we support and pray for the young men and women fighting that war? Of course we should. But as I often tell veterans' groups, the best thing our government could do for combat veterans is to quit making more of them.

Many Christian thinkers believe that the Church went astray at the time of Constantine in dropping its 300-year history of absolute pacifism. They see the Just War Criteria developed by Augustine and refined by Thomas Aquinas as an accommodation to Caesar, not faithfulness to Jesus. For them, the above discussion is irrelevant legalism. But the fact is that the majority of Catholic theologians see Just War doctrine as compatible with Christian faith ... but only if it is faithfully followed. Corruptions of it as expressed in Major Burns' article are unacceptable even to them. The "Jihad" or "Crusade" mentality revealed by Burns is incompatible with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the teachings of Pope John Paul II, and the example of our crucified Savior, the gentle Jesus of Nazareth. I sincerely hope that Burns' words do not reflect the position of the Archdiocese of Denver.

===============================================================

Archbishop Bowman flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam and was stationed twice in Korea. His Air Force duties took him to some 54 countries around the world. He is now the Presiding Archbishop and Primate of the United Catholic Church.

Most Rev. Dr. Robert M. Bowman
United Catholic Church
2066 Deercroft Dr, Viera, FL 32940
phone: (321) 752-5955
email: catholic@rmbowman.com
web: www.rmbowman.com/catholic

Return to:   #Top of Page 

Return to:   United Catholic Church Home Page

Return to:   Master Hosting Site   http://www.rmbowman.com