www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Just war, pacifists, suicide bombers, and terrorists

I am suspicious of both extremes - both doves and hawks.

It seems we can never have peace on this earth, and so you have to stand ready to defend yourself at all times. Surely, that is why we pray for soldiers in our Liturgies.

But you cannot see war as anything but a last resort and you don't want to jump the gun.

On the war in Iraq, I tended to think they should have listened to JP2 and tried a little more diplomacy. JP2 was a man with a great strategic and political mind, as well as a holy man. He'd seen more of the world - and lived through two oppressive regimes himself - so I figure he knew more than any cubicle-dweller analyst.

I guess I never really bought into "just war theory," favoring the viewpoint that war is always bad, but if you have to get into one, then you must always behave justly. Now that we have war, it is our duty to behave justly. Fortunately, despite a few bad apples paraded on the news, our military is full of good people. Several of my friends and relatives are in the military - a couple had been to Iraq for Gulf I and again this time - and they seem to come back with a different perspective than we get through media outlets - one that is more positive for the future of the Iraqi people. They are closer to it than we are, so I surely hope they are seeing a better future.

I just remembered something I once read on a bulletin board outside an Evangelische Kirche (Lutheran Church) in Germany (in German, of course):
May the power of love triumph over the love of power!

Hi Tammy!

Your post is a good one and asks some good questions.

There are no simple answers to your questions. There are several positions that a Christian can legitimately hold, ranging from opposition to the current efforts in Iraq to full-fledged support for these efforts. I recommend clearing away the brush from both sides and carefully considering the arguments from both sides.

As someone who fully supports both the War against Terrorism (in Afghanistan and elsewhere) and the War in Iraq, I will put out just a few items to chew on:

-Pope John Paul II was absolutely correct about the necessity to avoid war. But we must consider that both sides must be willing not just to negotiate for peace but also to actually work for peace. Many of the well intentioned anti-war folk seem to forget the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians murdered by Hussein. There were 12 full years of negotiation between the end of Gulf War I and when the American-led coalition of forces removed Hussein from power. The cries of �give peace a chance� and �more negotiation� were meaningless. While it is certainly possible that there were other methods that could have worked no one suggested any realistic ones and the decision was made to remove Hussein. The necessity to avoid war must be balanced with the idea that standing by for 12 years doing nothing to stop the genocide and other murder in Iraq (the position taken by most of Western Europe) was not acceptable as continued course, either. And now that we find that many of these same Western countries benefited with billions of dollars profit in the now infamous �Oil for Palaces� scandal at the UN. In WWII it is theoretically possible that a peace could have been brokered with Hitler to keep us out of the war. But what would have happened if we bought a few years peace and it only gave Hitler time to defeat England and Russia and then to rearm and come after us? In the end there are no easy answers and people of good will can disagree.

-Yes, we do have suicide bombers on the loose. But we had them prior to 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Remember the first attack on the Twin Towers in the early 1990s? And of course, 9/11 came before the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. The wars did not create terrorists. It only made them come out and fight (and most of them in Iraq are coming from Syria and Saudi Arabia). We could have done nothing (like we did after the first attack on the Twin Towers). But doing nothing doesn�t work. It may buy you a little time (like the tiny amount of time Chamberlain bought with his peace treaty with Hitler), but in the end you still have to face the situation.

-Is it simply all about oil? No. Iraq and Iran were perfectly willing to sell us as much oil as we wanted. If anything, we have been getting squeamish about what they were doing with the oil money they were getting from us. Oil is part of the issue, but not the main part. Sudan is another trouble spot and we are in the middle of a diplomatic push to get the rest of the world to join us to do something. If nothing happens after the diplomatic route don�t be surprised if there is another coalition to liberate the people of Sudan.

-WMDs? I believe they existed and still exist. Are they buried somewhere and we haven�t found them yet? Were they shipped to Syria or somewhere else? I don�t know. We do know that there was corruption in the UN organization that was hunting for them. We don�t know how that played into everything. But if people remember my posts prior to war I made support for the war on other issues (mostly the need to end the slaughter of Iraqis by Hussein). Let�s remember that Lincoln started the War Between the States to preserve the union and only later made the end of slavery one of the main reasons for the war.

-Use democracy and capitalism to fight Islamic fundamentalism? YES! YES! YES! We�ve seen in Germany and Japan how the development of capitalist democracies has kept those countries both free and peaceful. But it will become more difficult as America continues to abandon the Judeo-Christian ethical system and replaces it with a �freedom without responsibility / general consensus� ethical system.

-How do we see through the muddy waters? How can we as God-seeking people, find our place in this? By praying and thinking. There are no easy answers and Christians may hold several views, each opposed to one another.

Admin

Dear Administrator,

Thank you for your well-thought out reply.

One reason this troubles me so, is that it seems to me that one's position on this war becomes entrenched in our conscience. We spend a great deal of emotional energy (attachment to our own pre-conceived notions) supporting or not supporting this highly important issue.

When highly respected people, i.e., JPII, speak out, I feel compelled to seek out the reasons for their strongly held position.

Our own ideas and notions have a place in our relationship with the Holy, Mighty, Immortal One. It seems to me we have an obligation to find the very best solution we can morally support, before we shoot off our ideas and stand behind them with our heels dug in.

I'm only trying to say that right now, I don't feel comfortable enough to say that one side or the other is absolutely right, and yet, we must form opinions, vote, teach our children, etc. what the basis is for our beliefs on something this important.

You are absolutely right; we cannot reason with terrorists. We must defend our children. But what about what the Pope has said?

I don't buy the idea that it is all about oil. That is an argument that is too easily put forth by those who are more interested in "winning" an argument than in trying to delve deeply for the truth in the heart of God.

I am still delving......

Peace,

Tammy

Dear Administrator,

Happy Birthday! We are so blessed to have you among us.

Many happy years!

Tammy

Dear Administrator,
Ask someone who's lived through a war what they think of Bush & his lies and you're likely to get a difference of opinion. I'm in a couple of German clubs and many of the members, or their parents, experienced WWII firsthand. They described their country as "being bombed to hell", having to eat pets, grass, and even canibalism. Did you know that Germany went to war against Poland (and its calvalry) because Poland was a threat to it? When all the buildup to invade Iraq was going on, I thought to myself, "this sure is sudden." I told my family & friends that it's just a pretext to posture ourselves in the Middle East. I think most Americans would've been more comfortable with the truth. Iraq was a threat to us like Poland was a threat to Nazi Germany!
There is genocide going on in the Sudan and other places. Why don't we invade these countries if that makes it morally permissible to invade Iraq?
I thought Bush was superb in how he responded to 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan. I even sort of wished I had voted for him. But I personally think he let his feelings get the better of him in invading Iraq. He's got a lot of explaining to do before the judgment seat of God for all the death & destruction he's caused! Germans think he's going the way of Hitler & Stalin.
There is nothing in the Gospels about blessed are the warmongers! Wolfgang

You know it is a funny thing about the United States...no matter what it does, it is to blame!
We are dammed if we do and damned if we don't.

You mention Stalin and Hitler. Did you ever live in fear under a dictator? Do we live in fear under our President who you say your friends compare to these demonic monsters? Does he hate and want to exterminate the Jewish population? Does he throw dissenters, including religious and the intellegentsia into gulags to die? Does he eradicate the clergy and hate the Church? Does he want to create a 'Fourth Reich' throughout the world? Is he invading countries for personal glory? Does he judge people's features and coloring to see if they are part of the 'master race'?


I think that the comparison you mentioned is nothing short of irresponsible, to say the least.

As for Iraq, I will just say this: Almost forty years ago, Greece lived under a dictatorship for a while. Their beef (the people) until this day with the U.S. is that "why didn't the U.S. depose the dictatorship for us?"

Food for thought?

Alice

P.S. Most of the unfortunate death and destruction in Iraq which you are alluding to is due to the extremist co-religionists of the Iraqi people. The 'insurgents' are Muslim extremists and they are killing their OWN people.

To all who express their honest opinions on this difficult topic thankyou, especially to the few who have remembered our fighting men and women over here in Iraq. PLEASE KEEP ALL THESE PEOPLE IN YOUR PRAYERS and do not treat them like those of us who were in Vietnam were treated when they come home.
From one who was/in both places.

I do keep our military in my prayers, and hope all will do the same. I still have reservations about Iraq and even my Republican congressman voted against our involvement there. True, it was under a horrible dictator, but our reasons for being there were not well thought out, and I don't think the strategies of our Secretary of Defense were all that brilliant. Iraq may prove to be a distraction from our real need to fight terrorism. The question now is where do we go from here?

Demagogue: a person who tries to stir up the people by appeals to emotion, prejudice, etc. in order to become a leader and achieve selfish ends. (Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language)
Dear Alice,
I grew up in the country and know Bush's base so very well. I turned 18 under Reagan and was a nominal Republican until George W. came along. I simply cannot stand someone who would exploit our country and our emotions after a tragedy like 9/11 to wage a personal war against his daddy's enemy. Have you ever thought how weak we would be financially, emotionally, etc. if a real war would come along?
This morning I heard on CNN how Bush had sidestepped the normal nomination process for Bolton as ambassador to the UN. The people on CNN commented how this is becoming a pattern for Bush. He doesn't work within the system. He always finds a way to get his own way. This, to me, is not a sign of a mature person.
An editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer opined on Sunday that in Medieval times a king would lead the troops into battle. Can you honestly believe Bush, who avoided service in Vietnam, would lead our troops into battle? Then the war should not have been started.
I also pray for the troops. I'm sure many of them did not envision they would be fighting for the reasons they are when they enlisted.

Hi Wolfgang!

As I noted in my earlier post, people can agree to disagree on this issue. There are many positions a Christian can legitimately hold regarding the current effort to fight the Islamist extremist ideology. I do know that there are many people who decry the fact that the United States is not involved more actively in places like Sudan. No one wants war. Sometimes war is necessary.

Did President Bush tell lies? Some people believe that he did. I see mistakes, but I don�t see any evidence of lies. From my point of view if one wishes to accuse the president of lying then one must also make the same accusation against all of the people in Congress who supported the war, both Democrat and Republican.

Yes, I am aware that Germany went to war against Poland partly because of a claim that Poland was a threat to it. I don�t see the situations at all comparable. Did Germany lead a coalition to push Poland back into its borders like America lead a coalition to push Iraq out of Kuwait? And then wait 12 years once it failed to live up the peace agreement? Can one really say that taking military action after 12 years of failed negotiations with Hussein is really �sudden�? I just don�t see it.

Also, from my point of view a comparison between Bush and Hitler is extremely irresponsible. Has Bush dismissed the democratically elected legislature? Has he appointed himself dictator for life? Has he started death camps? Has he murdered 6 million Jews and 4 million Christians? He has done none of these and won a plurality of votes in the last election.

With regard to Hussein, I see him as having had no intention to ever live up to the peace agreement. Your good friends the Germans (together with France and others) were making billions of dollars from the �Oil for Palaces� UN scheme to ever do anything about the horror of daily life in Iraq. [And the candidate who appears to be leading in the polls for the next German election is far more conservative and she decries the mistakes Germany has made here.] It seems to me that allowing Hussein to get away with genocide within his own country and to personally profit handsomely off oil that was intended to be sold to feed Iraqis (but never did) accomplished nothing, except to witness to others that they could get away with corruption, too (cf: Afghanistan, Libya, Sudan, Iraq, North Korea, and etc.). As I said before the war started, anyone of the 20+ reasons for the War in Iraq were valid. Together, they made it imperative as 12 years of negotiations had failed.

Sudan? And other places? It is still believed that the diplomatic effort might produce some fruit. [Look at how Libya did a turn about and abandoned its nuclear bomb program merely because they were afraid of an American led housecleaning of that government.] If the diplomatic route fails, then I hope we intervene militarily to stop the genocide there (and elsewhere). It takes a lot of courage to do what is right when the whole world would rather forget about it.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree on these issues. I hope we can at least all agree upon the need for us to pray for a quick resolution to all the problems in the world today.

Admin

Given that a handful of senators would not allow an up or down vote the president opted for a recess appointment. They are perfectly constitutional and very common. President Clinton used recess appointments over 140 times. Many have accused him of immaturity, but never for using recess appointments.

Regarding actually leading troops into battle, I wonder if that editor has the same complaints about Clinton and Kosovo, Bush 41 into Iraq, Kennedy and Johnson into Vietnam, FDR into German and Japan, Wilson into Germany, or Lincoln into the South? If my understanding of history is correct, the last president that actually led troops into battle was Theodore Roosevelt (who is one of my favorites).

The �Just War� Is The Teaching Of The Catholic Church, Not The Extremes Of Pacifism Or Realism.

Shortly after the dastardly terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, almost like clockwork, there were the usual calls by some pacifist clergy and laymen to do nothing in response. One could logically ask, �Is America supposed to sit back and allow itself to be wantonly destroyed by the acts of any aggressors?� We will examine why these pacifist calls are misled in relation to �just war� theory formulated by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas respectively, a theory that provides a necessary mean between the extreme positions of pacifism and realism in regard to actions related to war. In particular we will see that these extremes, especially the purely pacifist option, is not Catholic teaching. Formerly, the necessary criteria for a just war will be examined in light of actions of the Congress of the United States in almost unanimously supporting the President who, using his special authority as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in times of national crisis, called for a declaration of war against the terrorists responsible for these acts, and their sponsoring states. We will ask, �Does the President deserve support for this call to war in light of just war teaching?� We will find the answer to be a resounding �Yes�.

First we will digress somewhat, making some observations on the underlying spiritual issues involved, and asking some questions to lay the framework for our discussion.

Someone should have told the terrorists and their sponsors who have sworn to "kill every American" that "nothing can justify the taking of innocent life."

The United States of America has every right to defend itself, as does any country attacked so cowardly with such devastating results.

Would these same pacifist clergy have appeased Hitler, Stalin and Tojo? If so, if the world would have done nothing, the human misery today would be beyond comparison as the vast majority of the world will be living in assorted gulags with the remainder dying horrible tortured deaths.

To "love your enemy" does not mean that you allow him to indiscriminately destroy your country. That isn't Catholic teaching. To go after the states responsible for sheltering these terrorists means to go after the head of the snake that gives it mobility. It does not mean to destroy innocent lives, but the sad reality of war is that innocent lives will be lost. To tell a country that it has no right to defend itself because of this fact, that it must do nothing in the face of the murder of thousands of its citizens and the destruction of a major part of one of its cities is lunacy.

What would be these clerics� reaction if a terrorist nuke, for example, incinerates Chicago. We are not advocating nuclear destruction of the sponsoring states. However, neither are we advocating that such an option would never be considered for one very good reason. Once that threat is removed, your enemies know your weakness in that you're crying wolf. There is much to be said for strong deterrents. The fact that the world still exists today given the closeness with which it has almost experienced nuclear destruction speaks to that success.

Countries have to realize that their very existence is at stake before aiding and abetting monstrous activities such as what happened on Sept 11, 2001. If that was the case, they might think twice before harboring those who have no concept of "loving your neighbor" but rather slitting his throat to include that of his innocent citizenry as what happened on those doomed flights to the stewardesses. And while we�re talking about loving your neighbor, and loving your enemies, you don�t show love by not witnessing to the truth in the same manner that Jesus was Perfect Love and Truth. One of the highest forms of love is discipline; else anarchy exists. It is not showing love by saying to someone who breaks the Fifth Commandment that you have no punishment coming. Souls are at stake as referenced in Luke 12:4-5.

And I say to you, my friends: Be not afraid of them who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.

But I will shew you whom you shall fear: fear ye him, who after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell. Yea, I say to you, fear him.

Justice demands punishment for such heinous crimes in the same manner that the temporal punishment due to sin must be atoned for in Purgatory, a Catholic dogma.

We live in an imperfect world because of the Fall and the onset of Original Sin. This is something that has been forgotten by those who propose a �world political society� such as Jacques Maritain did in Man and the State. Maritain, despite his protestations to the contrary, proposed a political utopia by nuancing the differences between the state and the body politic. He seemed to feel compelled to do this because of the evolution of weapons of destruction making, in his mind, their use always morally unacceptable. He lays the foundation for what he calls a sound political philosophy leading to a world government. He makes it clear, that he�s not referring to the state as a world government, but rather the body politic, which the state serves.

Let me emphasize once again that the political reality is not the State, but the body politic with its multifarious institutions, the multiple communities which it involves, and the moral community which grows out of it. The body politic is the people organized under just laws. The State is the particular agency which specializes in matters dealing with the common good of the body politic, it is therefore the topmost political agency, but the State is a part, not a whole, and its functions are merely instrumental: it is for the body politic and for the people that it sees to the public order, enforces laws, possesses power; and being a part in the service of the people, it must be controlled by the people.

Maritain wants to transfer a misplaced absolute sovereignty of nation states that are incapable of living together peacefully to a world political body that would oversee these states to insure world stability. This would require a surrender of freedoms on the part of the states for a greater political order, the perfection of the body politic to a common good on a world level. He even goes so far as to propose a �supra-national advisory council� whose members, after surrendering their state allegiance, i.e., their citizenship, become world citizens beholding to no one and nothing other than the aforementioned perfection sought by him. For all his good intentions, Maritain�s argument is extremely flawed in that he�s forgotten a basic tenet of his faith, the spiritual battle for our souls until the end of time, which does not provide the guarantee that those whom Maritain would entrust membership to this elite world advisory panel would not turn from virtue to vice in the promotion of hedonism as a civil right. We�re witnessing this currently with the positions taken by the UN, and the European Union in regard to the promotion of the �culture-of-death� in all of its manifestations as a function of the contraceptive mentality of the age, i.e., abortion, homosexuality, and euthanasia. Today, what we�re seeing is just the opposite of what Maritain intended. It is the sovereign nation state, namely, the United States of America, due to the recognition of the necessity of authentic freedom being rooted in the Gospel by a significant portion of its citizenry, that is standing up to the evil of the father-of-lies whose agents populate world governing bodies. One could counter Maritain that it appears that it is the nation state that is still the place where a sense of human education, national history, and destiny finds its fulfillment � albeit a nation state that has not lost its moral compass.

We are in the battle for our eternal lives. That is the real war. We cannot fight that battle as referred to in Pope Leo XIII�s prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel if we're not here to fight it, letting the modern Neville Chamberlains tell us that doing nothing will allow for "peace in our time." History and the concupiscence due to Original Sin, which will exist to the end of time, prove otherwise. Do we honestly believe that our unilateral disarmament will make the world a Heaven on earth? If so, then our theology is flawed as that means that Original sin doesn't exist, and the devil does not prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls like a raging lion. Has history, in particular, has our faith taught us nothing?

We are working and perfecting ourselves to the real Heaven that can only be attained by abiding by God's laws, not an illusionary natural "heaven on earth" that exists only in the minds of those who have forgotten the supernatural reasons for their creation, their final end. This is why we have to be ever vigilant putting on the armor of God to fight the spiritual battle and its natural manifestation, as all wars have been, raging around us. To be successful we must be a country under God.

We have gone from being a country under God to a country that mocks God. There are hopeful signs with President Bush, whose Administration deserves our unreserved prayers during this time of crisis, that we're slowly getting back to our roots as a country founded under God, and the promotion of the culture-of-death is starting to be mitigated in America. We have a long way to go, however, given the sad events of the last eight years leading to the necessity of debates on the merits of partial birth infanticide, cloning, stem cell research, and the promotion of sexually perverse lifestyles as a cause for affirmative action in a civil rights sense.

Beware more of he who kills the soul than the body. The former has eternal consequences more horrible than anything that can happen in this life to include especially any and all forms of physical death. Evil came into the world as a result of the concupiscence due to Original Sin. Man caused that by disobeying God, not God. God has withdrawn His protection for our country because we've grievously sinned. If we don't become a country under God, instead of mocking Him by disobeying His laws, then what happened on September 11 will seem like nothing to what will happen. This is Biblical. How can a country that has sponsored the culture-of-death to the point of exporting it to the rest of the world expect anything else? Did we honestly think that Almighty God would allow Himself to be mocked indefinitely? If we persist in the manner that we have, leading to this tragedy, we're doomed. Thousands lost their lives in New York. Millions have lost their lives in what should have been their most secure haven, their mothers' wombs. And our country not only allowed that to happen but also encouraged and coerced the world to follow in lockstep. On Tuesday September 11, 2001, our country got a wakeup call!

Is the fact that on one coast thousands of people had their bodies killed, a physical manifestation of the spiritual warfare for our salvation, coupled with the other coast destroying our souls by erasing thousands of years of Judeo-Christian tradition via trashing the family in promoting homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle as "proposed law" in California, "no big thing" to a God Whose mercy is meaningless without His justice? The gospel according to liberal pundits answers, "Of course, it's no big thing. How can you be so stupid?"

In all most all of the wars fought for America with the exception of Vietnam as a function of how it was waged and given the outcome, Vietnam is now completely communist, we have enjoyed the protection of the Almighty. We stood for decency, not debauchery. When my dad and uncles went to war in the 40s, suffering through the agony of the Aleutian campaign and Iwo Jima respectively, our country wasn't telling us that killing millions of innocents in the womb in the most hideous of fashion, and promoting sexual deviancy was accepted law. Do we believe that it was an accident that Vietnam ended as it did in '74 after Roe v. Wade? Not if we believe that God is in control. Our consolation is that God allows good to come out of evil.

The just war theory has its roots are in classical Greek and Roman philosophy; it was transformed by the Christian philosophy of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas; and it has been developed by generations of philosophers hence. It is the official position on the morality of warfare adopted by the Roman Catholic Church, which says that a nation has a right and duty to defend its citizens. Thus members of the armed services are making a genuine contribution to peace.

The challenges to the just war theory, particularly realism and pacifism, to which the just war account is a mean, are worth considering in framing the issue for us. Let us start with pacifism.

Given the drastic consequences of war being an event of untold human suffering and loss, the deaths of many people, both military and civilian, the fragmentation of families, the consumption of valuable resources, and the destruction of the environment, it is important to feel the gravity of the situation of determining whether or not a war is justified. Accordingly, it must be understood that the just war theory presupposes that any war should be avoided if possible, and is a �last resort� option when all else has failed.

On the other hand a judgment is made that the order of justice, to be established and maintained, may require the use of force or the threat of its use. This �threat of its use� has undeniably, since the advent of the atom bomb with its horrendous effects at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, provided a deterrent to any country that would consider the use of such weapons of massive destruction in a first strike mode in the realization that such an attack would immediately invite its own destruction, which would eliminate not only the threat of potential enemies but also itself in the process, thereby making nuclear war nonsensical. What other explanation could there be for the prevention of such a holocaust given the lessons of history? When states have overwhelming force; they are prone to use it to suit their means � an axiom never truer than when these states are tyrannical or totalitarian in nature.

And further, such use of reasonable force is morally required if the commitment to a just peace is serious. This is the heart of the issue distinguishing absolute pacifism from the just war theory. First, there is an empirical/historical claim, that order requires force. Second, there is a moral claim, that there are goods worth the risk of war and that "peace at any price," is unacceptable. Again, we look to recent history for evidence of the truth of the last claim regarding British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain�s attempts to secure �peace in our time� by acquiescing to the devil�s demands in the form of Hitler. What did Chamberlain�s concessions to prevent war at any cost buy us? Answer: the horror that was World War II.

Why not realism then? We must note that the classical philosophers never ceased to be preoccupied with the questions of right rule: they clearly recognized the distinction between might and right, the superiority of persuasion to coercion, the limited claims of partisan politics, and the disorders of greed and ambition as forces animating moral and political life. They were cautious of the reality that the �greater might� prevails over any conception of right, i.e., �might makes right� with its obvious tyrannical implications leading to extreme regimes that Aristotle categorized as bad, and to be avoided. One could add that the realists automatically violate a basic tenet of moral theology, i.e., the end doesn�t justify the means. You cannot do an evil for a greater good, which applies equally to a Saint Louis IX as it does to a Hitler or a Stalin. In other words, it strikes one as strange to take the position that we must kill our neighbors for their greater good.

In the major question on warfare, Thomas Aquinas queries whether it is always sinful to wage war, reflecting skepticism about the enterprise of war as actually practiced. He answers that war is not sinful if it meets three conditions: the war must be declared by proper authority and not by private citizens or groups; second, a just cause is required; and third, there should be a rightful intention, such as the advancement of good or the avoidance of evil.

He cites Augustine as a major authority. Since a whole range of human goods is destroyed and fundamental moral precepts are often abandoned, it is no wonder then that Aquinas in his classic treatment of the issue of war asks "Whether it is always sinful to wage war?" No more war, war never again, is surely the cry of anyone of conscience who has lived its devastations. So what�s wrong with pacifism? Aquinas answers via a reasoned judgment that the very goods of flourishing are at stake, perhaps requiring the necessary sacrifice.

We will now examine in detail Aquinas�s criteria for a just war in light of the actions of the President of the United States in response to the events of September 11, 2001. [See ST II-II, Q.41, a. 1.]

First, war must be an act by "the authority of a sovereign by whose command the war is to be waged. . ." Thomas views strife as an opportunity for indulging "private feelings of anger of hatred." This necessitates a proper authority for the call to wage war. It is incumbent upon political leadership to follow reason, a public reason devoted to a measured good, and a measured action. Competent authority is a criterion that prohibits the waging of private wars for personal ambition and with anarchic results. In the American context it may entail further questions about the separation of powers and congressional war powers. It is not for private individuals to assemble or summon the people. On Aquinas's account, authority is necessary for a community to act with unity; authority must make formal consideration about what is to the common good. Private individuals must act for individual or partial goods. The magistrate has "care for the common good" and a duty to "watch over the common weal." There is a profound political teaching contained in this requirement for proper authority. The nature and purpose of the political community are the terms that set the issue of war in perspective. Just war and proper authority are not first of all a matter of legalism, but rather a condition for political legitimacy. Clearly, the President of the United States, in his call for a war against terrorists and the states that sponsor them meets the first criterion of Aquinas by virtue of the fact that he, as Commander-in-Chief, is called upon to quickly provide for the national security in times of crisis. It is his responsibility alone to alert Congress and the Country as to what actions are required to meet defense requirements in national emergencies.

Aquinas states that the magistrate must use the "sword" to defend against internal disturbances, as well as against external enemies. A judgment is made that the order of justice, to be established and maintained, may require the use of force or the threat of its use. And further, such use of force is morally required if the commitment to a just peace is serious. This is the heart of the issue distinguishing absolute pacifism from just war theory. There is an empirical/historical claim, that order requires force and that such force be in the hands of the authority. There is also a moral judgment that there are goods worth the risk of war and that "peace at any price" is unacceptable. So if war is evil because it destroys a large range of human goods and flourishing, so too must a magistrate protect such goods from destruction by others. War is therefore a political act, a deliberate act by a political authority for a political good. The pacifist misses this complex reality of the possibility and political conditions for human flourishing. By the same token, the political good sets a limit on what kinds of wars may be waged. The realist approach, by which the conduct of war is bound by no moral limit, undermines the very moral and political legitimacy of the regime. Here we see how the theory of a just war begins to provide an ideal mean between the pacifist and realist extremes.

Aquinas' second criterion follows as the next obvious point: a just cause is required, "namely that those who are attacked should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault." The judgment is left in general terms, referring to an underlying assumption of culpability or moral regard. For specifics, Aquinas cites Augustine: "when a nation or state . . . refuses to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects or to restore what is unjustly seized." Not only have the perpetrators of the despicable acts of September 11, 2001 not made amends for their terrorist activities, they hold that what they are doing is justified to the extent that killing innocents on massive scales is a path to meeting their god. Moreover, they publicly proclaim that such acts have always been, are, and will always be virtuous, with no sense of remorse for their actions. They and their sponsoring states freely admit that it is their purpose to destroy any who would dare oppose their bastardized form of religion and concept of a god that commands that the �end justifies the means�, with end and means equally reprehensible given the truth of the Decalogue and its natural manifestation, the Natural Law. Thus, Aquinas�s second criterion for a just war is clearly met.

Prudence is deeply affected by the dispositions of the agent. So war is also about character - of the leaders and the people of the nation. Aquinas next lays down a third criterion to ensure that such risk is not taken lightly or with rash spirit: rightful intention. The rightful intention is the advancement of good - ultimately it is peace.

Again citing Augustine, Aquinas excludes the intention of aggrandizement and cruelty: "The passion for inflicting harm, the cruel thirst for vengeance, and unpacific and relentless spirit, lust of power" are "rightly condemned in war." This demand for right intention not only establishes the proper disposition or frame of mind for conducting such "grave matters soberly," but must be woven through the other two criteria. The goal of peace, a just peace, is the intention of a magistrate in charge of a commonweal and is the order of justice presupposed by a claim to a just cause. It would be a contradiction to intend in the name of justice an unjust goal, an excessive revenge or desire to dominate others. One can ask the pacifists, �How is allowing state sponsored terrorism to go unchecked advancing the cause of good, and ultimately world peace?� The President of the United States rightfully determined that the answer to that question is, �It doesn�t.� Again, the lessons of history are painfully learned as when aggressors are allowed to run roughshod over any adversary, their actions breed more aggression on increasingly wider scales. Never has this been truer than with the observation of the increased frequency of terrorists� acts due to inaction of the nations of the world to unite to stop this evil. For the first time, a nation�s leader formerly recognized that what happened in New York City was not just an attack on America but on all freedom loving people everywhere, dictating a response from the world to stop this unwarranted aggression, an aggression that doesn�t restrict itself to military combatants, nor even admit to targeting military combatants, but rather an aggression of cowardly proportions that targets the innocent. Certainly, Aquinas�s third criterion of a just war is met in trying to completely eradicate this world cancer by not only addressing the symptom, but also the cause � state sponsorship of world terrorism.

These three criteria - rightful authority, just cause, and right intention - form the core principles of the just war theory.

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, in the 1983 Templeton Address, prophetically warns that men have forgotten God and such is the origin of modern wars and oppression.

"The material laws alone do not explain our life or give it direction. The laws of physics and physiology will never reveal the indisputable manner in which the Creator constantly day in and day out, participates in the life of each one of us, unfailingly granting us the energy of existence. ... To the ill-considered hopes of the last two centuries, which have brought us to the brink of nuclear and non-nuclear death, we can propose only a determined guest for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently spurned."

The just war theory, in its full theological dimensions, is open to this higher perspective. For this reason we can only benefit from a return to Augustine's teaching on the just war and learn how to see the city of man in its relation to the city of God. In short, we cannot divorce the natural from the supernatural. These are married via the Natural Law for the sake of our eternity.

Be Not Afraid Of Them Who Kill The Body, Rather Fear Him Who Kills The Soul



THE HOLY GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE



CHAPTER 12.



Christ warns us against hypocrisy, the fear of the world, and covetousness: and admonishes all to watch.



1 And when great multitudes stood about him, so that they trod one upon another, he began to say to his disciples: Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.



2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed: nor hidden, that shall not be known.



3 For whatsoever things you have spoken in darkness, shall be published in the light: and that which you have spoken in the ear in the chambers, shall be preached on the housetops.



4 And I say to you, my friends: Be not afraid of them who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.



5 But I will shew you whom you shall fear: fear ye him, who after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell. Yea, I say to you, fear him.



6 Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God?



7 Yea, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows.



8 And I say to you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God.



9 But he that shall deny me before men, shall be denied before the angels of God.



10 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but to him that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven.



11 And when they shall bring you into the synagogues, and to magistrates and powers, be not solicitous how or what you shall answer, or what you shall say;



12 For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say.



THE NEW TESTAMENT FIRST PUBLISHED BY THE ENGLISH COLLEGE AT RHEIMS, A.D. 1582



THE WHOLE REVISED AND DILIGENTLY COMPARED WITH THE LATIN VULGATE BY BISHOP RICHARD CHALLONER, A.D. 1749-1752



PUBLISHED WITH THE APPROBATION OF HIS EMINENCE JAMES CARDINAL GIBBONS




With the help of Almighty God and only through His help, America will overcome this evil and once again become a great nation under God, something that it hasn't been since Roe v. Wade. That should be our prayer, especially for our military called to defend us, to defend authentic freedom to do what we ought, not license to do what we want.



The innocent who were brutally murdered cry out to Almighty God for the punishment of those who perpetrated this dastardly act, and the states who sponsored them, in the same manner that the millions of innocents who were brutally murdered in the womb do. That's the meaning of justice. God's mercy is meaningless without His justice as the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah could attest to. This is a more than a crime. This is an act of war! We are talking about our very survival as a nation. That should be America's first and foremost consideration. To realize why it was founded, to see how it has strayed, and to get down on its knees and beg a loving God for forgiveness, amending its direction to His will.










We are working and perfecting ourselves to the real Heaven that can only be attained by abiding by God's laws, not an illusionary natural "heaven on earth" that exists only in the minds of those who have forgotten the supernatural reasons for their creation, their final end. This is why we have to be ever vigilant putting on the armor of God to fight the spiritual battle and its natural manifestation, as all wars have been, raging around us. To be successful we must be a country under God. Pray that we will be.






I am a Catholic Vietnam era Navy Veteran, my father and uncles served in WWII in the Army Air Corps and Marines respectively, my uncles going through the hell of Iwo Jima. At least their generation knew that without God's protection, they would have no hope of winning the war. We didn't "legally" kill babies in the 40's and 50's or promote sexual perversion as a civil right. This generation goes out of its way to eradicate any trace of God from the national scene, making disobedience to his laws a matter of public policy in not recognizing that any law is worthless if it is not rooted in the truth of the Natural Law given to us by a loving God for our own well being.



In this moment of national crisis we need to get down on our knees and ask God to bless this country as He has for so long in order to win this tragic war in which we're now immersed. It's not God that brings evil into the world; man does that quite well enough on his own when he acts as agents of the devil. We need God's help now more than ever.



Beware more of he who kills the soul than the body. The former has eternal consequences more horrible than anything that can happen in this life to include especially any and all forms of physical death. Evil came into the world as a result of the concupiscence due to Original Sin. Man caused that by disobeying God, not God. God has withdrawn His protection for our country because we've grievously sinned. If we don't become a country under God, instead of mocking Him by disobeying His laws, then what happened on September 11 will seem like nothing to what will happen. This is Biblical. How can a country that has sponsored the culture-of-death to the point of exporting it to the rest of the world expect anything else? Did we honestly think that Almighty God would allow Himself to be mocked indefinitely? We need God now more than ever in our history. And we need every form of prayer possible, especially Holy Mass, The Divine Liturgy, and the Rosary to ask God through the intercession of Our Blessed Mother for the Grace of conversion that all in America will come to realize that we're nothing without Him. If we persist in the manner that we have, leading to this tragedy, we're doomed. Thousands lost their lives in New York. Millions have lost their lives in what should have been their most secure haven, their mothers' wombs. And our country not only allowed that to happen but also encouraged and coerced the world to follow in lockstep. On Tuesday September 11, 2001, this country got a wakeup call!



My heart goes out to those who suffered in New York. In particular, I have tremendous respect for those firemen, policemen, and emergency personnel who are putting their lives on the line for their fellowmen as my oldest son is a State Trooper, and I know first hand how under appreciated this group is. They are the first to get budget cuts, and the last to get any thanks for heroic efforts. This is not happening in New York because of the enormity of the tragic events of September 11. What's also not happening is any deference to the radical fringe of the ACLU in this country who had the audacity to take issue with a moment of silence, not even called prayer, with the Supreme Court in a state case the week of the tragic New York events. The Senate of the United States broke out in simultaneous affirmation that we wouldn't exist without the protection of the Almighty in singing "God save America."



There is no one who is more pro-choice than God. The choice that he gives mankind is a very simple one. His ultimate gift to us at creation is to choose Him via authentic freedom to do what we ought, or to choose the devil via license to do what we want. He cares about us enough to allow what happened on Tuesday to wake us up to that Truth, to allow good to come out of evil.



The REAL enemy that we are facing is addressed in a forgotten prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel. It used to be said after Holy Mass. It needs to be said again. What happened on Tuesday was a physical manifestation of the spiritual battle for our souls that has been constant since the Fall.



Saint Michael the Archangel, Defend us in the day of battle. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and Do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Hosts, by the power of God, thrust into hell, Satan and all the other evil spirits who wander through the world, seeking the ruin of souls, Amen!



We better get down on our knees and beg God's forgiveness and ask for Divine Intervention to help us through this crisis. We won't have far to go because we've been brought to our knees by the weight of our sins collectively as a nation. More so than any other time in its history this country needs a Catholic witness to the faith as a beacon of hope in overcoming the present darkness. Pray God that happens.



We also need to pray for our military, our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, who will be putting their lives on the line in defense of authentic freedom, not license, if America is to be a country under God.



On September 11, God said, "Enough is enough." You no longer deserve my blessing! What has happened to you, America?



Apparently some in the media are not getting this message. They demand apologies from Christians for doing nothing more than witnessing to the Truth that is found in the Gospel, Truth that is a Someone, not a something.



According to an op-ed from Leonard Pitts of the Miami Herald, eradicating God from our culture, killing millions of babies in the womb, and promoting the filth of homosexual lifestyles is no big deal in the eyes of God. For a person who presumes to know all about God, Pitts needs to review Sacred Scripture, in particular, Genesis 19 in the Old Testament, and especially the New Testament Gospel of Matthew where Christ speaks more of the consequences of serious sin than any other figure.



No, we're told by Pitts that what is important is that our women need to be able to wear bikinis. That�s why the Islamic fundamentalists hate us. Presumably, our women need to be able to contracept and abort generations into oblivion also, and have unlimited freedom to participate in the most debauched pornographic acts imaginable for sale to the rest of the world. Is that what makes us right and them wrong per Pitts' commentary?



Is the fact that on one coast thousands of people had their bodies killed, a physical manifestation of the spiritual warfare for our salvation, coupled with the other coast destroying our souls by erasing thousands of years of Judeo-Christian tradition via trashing the family in promoting homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle as "proposed law" in California, "no big thing" to a God Whose mercy is meaningless without His justice? The gospel according to liberal pundits like Leonard Pitts answers, "Of course, it's no big thing. How can you be so stupid?"



The terrorists committing these despicable acts are wrong and deserve swift justice as well as all of their sponsoring states, but we certainly are NOT right, contrary to what Pitts would have us believe. They kill the body. But our country has been publicly sanctioning the killing of souls and exporting it to the world. Today, it was reported that our Secretary of State, a man who is planning the defense of this country, publicly acknowledged the homosexual partner of a Romanian diplomat, thereby showing to the world that America de facto approves of sexually perverse lifestyles.



We better get "right" with God Almighty or this country is not going to survive this crisis.



In all most all of the wars fought for America with the exception of Vietnam as a function of how it was waged and given the outcome, Vietnam is now completely communist, we have enjoyed the protection of the Almighty. We stood for decency, not debauchery. When my dad and uncles went to war in the 40s, suffering through the agony of the Aleutian campaign and Iwo Jima respectively, our country wasn't telling us that killing millions of innocents in the womb in the most hideous of fashion, and promoting sexual deviancy was accepted law. Do you believe that it was an accident that Vietnam ended as it did in '74 after Roe v. Wade? Not if you believe that God is in control. Our consolation is that God allows good to come out of evil.



It is to be noted Leonard (It's bikinis not baby killing) Pitts has been invited to speak at Penn State as a part of their "distinguished speaker" program this year. Since he's such an expert on God, someone ought to ask him to explain God's admonition in the Bible that he who kills the soul is more to be feared than he who kills the body.




This country needs repentance and to amend its ways in order to get on a strong moral foundation needed to win a war. Instead, God is continuously mocked by the blatant promotion of promiscuity due to the contraceptive mentality of the age.



Our military is now being called to defend freedom. People like Leonard Pitts need to be continuously reminded that we're talking about defending "authentic freedom" to do what we ought, not "license" to do what we want. The former provides the moral foundation needed to survive as a civilization physically, and especially spiritually. The latter is the work of the "father-of-lies" that leads to physical, and spiritual ruin with eternal consequences.

stlouisix,

Might I suggest that you find a way to make your points with more brevity? The longer a post is the less likely anyone is going to bother to read it. I don't have the time to read what must add up to 15 printed pages, but it surely was not composed specifically to respond to the content of this thread?

Ideally, a poster should be able to make his post in the equivalent of two printed pages or less.

Admin