Archbishop's web site Denver Catholic Register Parishes Catholic Pastoral Center
January 9, 2002
No government is above Church counsel regarding war, catechist says
Secretary for Evangelization and Catechesis reflects on peacemaking and just war
Marco Roman is Secretary for Evangelization and Catechesis for the Archdiocese of Denver.
In the months since Sept. 11, various media, including Catholic publications, have printed widely differing commentaries about the principles of peace-making and just war.
In a way, we should expect this. The Church for many centuries has seen military service as honorable and often vital for the common good. Under carefully defined conditions, war may be necessary and just.
But the Church also understands the havoc created by war and the urgency of seeking and building peace.
As Christians, we need to remember this healthy tension in Catholic moral thinking about war, whenever we express ourselves on the subject. Thus while my friend and colleague Joseph Burns offered some valuable thoughts on just war teaching in his Denver Catholic Register columns of Nov. 14 and 21, 2001, I would take issue with him in three key respects.
First, if our goal is peace — as it always should be — then we need to reflect on the witness of those who have dedicated their lives to peace through non-violence. And I think we need to do that much more seriously and positively than Burns seems to suggest.
Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers ..." (Mt 5:9). He made no similar remark, "Blessed are the war makers," because even those who take part in a just war do so only to secure or restore peace.
The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" says:
"Those who renounce violence and bloodshed . . . bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligation of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risks of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death" (2306).
The Church teaches that Catholics have an obligation to work for the avoidance of war and for the cooperation (not merely "co-existence") among peoples that undergirds peace. Peace must never be a regrettable casualty of our national politics. Peace rooted in justice must be a priority.
Second, patriotism is not a blank check citizens write to their leaders. Real patriotism must include a healthy critical review of government policy. This is why C.S. Lewis — well aware of the German Christian experience of Nazism — was always so uneasy about identifying patriotism with Christian virtue.
It's very true that after all reasonable efforts for peace have failed and "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right to lawful self-defense" (CCC 2308). A government that cannot or will not defend its citizens cannot sustain its legitimacy.
But in any national discussion about war, the Church must have a pivotal role to play. Burns acknowledges this, but he might easily be misunderstood when he says that "it is the role of the government, and not the Church, to evaluate the criteria for a just war."
While the decision-making authority for war must obviously rest with government, we need to remember that no government is above the Church's counsel. No policy — especially something as jugular as the decision to wage war — is exempt from her moral witness as a guardian of the common good. After all, who better than the Church of Jesus Christ can bring God's presence to the table of public discourse?
The U.S. bishops, in their recent pastoral message, "Living with Faith and Hope after September 11," underscore the need for Catholics to better understand the legitimate differences which exist within the Church on issues of war and peace.
They tell us:
"Policy makers and all citizens must struggle with serious moral questions and make informed judgments about how our nation can respond justly to a terrifying threat. While we have offered our own judgment about aspects of this question, we recognize that application of moral principles in this situation requires the exercise of the virtue of prudence. Some Christians profess a position of principled non-violence, which holds that non-military means are the only legitimate way to respond in this case. This is a valid Christian response. While respecting this position and maintaining a strong presumption against the use of force, the Church has sanctioned the use of the moral criteria for a just war to allow the use of force by legitimate authority in self-defense and as a last resort. Those who subscribe to the just war tradition can differ in their prudential judgments about its interpretation or its application."
Throughout Church history, courageous peacemakers have stood firm against those who pursued violence. From the early Christian martyrs, to saints such as Francis of Assisi and Catherine of Siena, to the extraordinary popes of the 20th century, Catholics can point to an unbroken line of holy men and women who bear witness to the hope that peace, which ultimately derives from the Prince of Peace, can deliver mankind from "the ancient bondage of war" (CCC 2307).
When our nation is savagely attacked, as it was on Sept. 11, we may be tempted to ignore or belittle those speak out for non-violence. That would be a mistake. The men and women defending our country under arms deserve our respect, gratitude, prayers and support. So do our leaders who guide them. But those Catholics who question violence, those who honestly and sacrificially take the road of non-violence, have no less character and deserve no less respect.
My third and final point is this: Jesus told us to "love one another." He didn't say, "love one another — unless you're in combat." Burns suggests that "the (Christian) command to love enemies is clearly not addressed to soldiers at war." Again, I disagree. Even in a just war, we can't allow ourselves to forget that the enemy is human and a child of God. However evil the enemy's actions, however much violence is required to constrain that evil in self-defense, still, we're called to love.
But of course love is hard, and anger is easy — which is why the witness of peacemakers is so critical.
Contact Us
