Let me direct your attention to an issue that we all face in our life, even if it doesn’t directly affect us. We may not be involved in it, yet given the benefit of instant communication in our highly technological world, the speed with which we hear of things that happen around the globe, you cannot be ignorant of this topic. What I speak of is war.

This is not a topic of which I have intimate knowledge. I have never gone to war; I have never been enlisted in the Canadian military, although I grew up in a military family. And there is only one aspect of war that I have any pretence to address, and that is the morality of war.

There are many facets to war. This is not a simple topic. Unfortunately, in the history of mankind there have been enough benefits of war that we might be inclined to see it as a good. For example, the global depression of the 1930’s was largely overcome by the Second World War. The engagement of the unemployed as soldiers and as factory workers to manufacture the machinery and armaments needed gave European and North American nations a sudden economic boost. But what began as a response to the spread of Nazism and other totalitarian regimes in the middle of the past century has now become institutionalized and accepted as the status quo. The guns over Europe were stilled in 1945, only to be followed by a Cold War that saw the escalation of weapons of mass destruction that, despite efforts to decrease nuclear arsenals, still threatens world peace and destabilizes the legitimate exercise of power around the world. It has been pointed out that every constituency in the United Sates contains either a military establishment or an industry that is a client of the Pentagon. Therefore, when efforts at peace call for the retooling of the economy, and the possible ensuing loss of jobs, congressmen are hard pressed to allow such a disadvantage to befall their constituency. Peace gets great lip-service, but when there is sacrifice to be made in the pursuit of peace, all those affected lay hold to the NIMBY policy … not in my back yard. It is not unlike the more recent matter of the Kyoto accord. Albertans may decry the negative effects on the environment of oil and gas exploration and development, but in the end, the long-term goals of environmental protection are sacrificed to the short-term need for jobs.

September 11^th, 2001 is a date that will be imbedded in the minds and memories of our whole generation. Not only did it spawn immediate concerns about security; it also led to the war in Afghanistan. While the present war waged between the Israelis and Palestinians has a history that predates September 11^th, there is no doubt that the element of terror and suicide bombing that was a hallmark of the attack on the World Trade Centre has been effectively imported into the present conflict. We find ourselves, as a global community, faced with the reality of war and violence as we have not been, globally, since the end of the Cold War and the dismantling of the Soviet Bloc.

An element in the present conflicts has been religion. Any of you who listened to Cross-country Check-up on CBC radio last Sunday will have heard some stimulating debate about the use of religion to justify violence. This is a curious anomaly, given that all major world religions decry the use of violence and its destructive effect on individuals and social systems. This is not to say that religion hasn’t been called upon previously as the basis for conflicts worldwide. Northern Ireland, East Timor, Bosnia, Kashmir, and now the Holy Land have been the sites of fierce battles pitting persons of different religious faiths on either side of the firing line. Rex Murphy’s callers made the point, however, and it seemed to me a constant refrain, that religion itself is not the issue. Economics and power are the issues, and religion becomes a motivating factor, because those who control economics and power know of the tremendous benefit of religion to move and motivate people to action.
 

The Church and War

Given this state of affairs, it is an understatement to claim that war is ever on our minds, at least the minds of those of us who read the paper or follow newscasts on our television. Does the Church have a stance on war? What does she say about its morality? Or is this all outside the Church’s domain. At the Catholic Conference in early March of this year in Edmonton, Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary gave a stirring speech about globalization and the Church’s response. He, like other bishops, are not afraid to speak out about such issues, as he is convinced that the Church’s voice on these matters must be heard. Those who are challenged by his words try to dismiss him, questioning the legitimacy of the Church getting involved in political and economic issues. Bishop Henry stands with our present Holy Father in pointing out that these issues are social in nature, not simply political or economic. And it is on this basis that he speaks. Political parties and economic cartels are not his realm, but society and the impact of structures on the lives of people always have been the domain of the Church, and a deep concern of our God.

What does the Church say about war? Too much to be cited here. But allow me to capsulize here that the Church has long taught.

[1] First of all, war is an evil. While a very fundamental teaching, this is often obscured when battle has been engaged. When nations enter armed conflict, of course, there is immense need to motivate and rally the public. When sabre-rattling begins, note the words that politicians will use to speak of the enemy. They are vilified as “an evil nation”, against whom the only appropriate response is annihilation. I do not mean to intend here that the enemy is good, or that what the enemy is perpetrating is not evil. We need only look at the Jewish holocaust that was being carried out by the Nazis in Europe to realize that it was indeed evil. However, the holocaust was unknown to the western world until after Nazi-held areas were liberated, and our troops came upon the death camps of the likes of Auschwitz. Let us make no mistake about it – war of its very nature is evil, and the truth is not served by glorifying war.

I said earlier that I was raised in a military family. The rhetoric of patriotism filled my mind from my earliest days. My father was a career serviceman. He enlisted in the Royal Canadian Navy during WWII, and served on convoys crossing the Atlantic. He spent years engaged in the battles that we watched in war movies starring John Wayne and Cary Grant. It always struck me and my brothers as odd that dad would never tell us stories of the war. If he was there, why wasn’t he telling us about it, so that we could feel proud of him like we felt proud of those air force pilots and sailors on the silver screen? To tell you the truth, dad never told us why he wouldn’t tell us those stories, but by now I’ve figured it out for myself. It’s because there were no stories to tell, at least not to your young impressionable sons. War is evil, plain and simple. It destroys people’s souls, and then goes on to destroy their bodies, until all lies in death. To quote the world’s bishops gathered at the Second Vatican Council, “It is our clear duty, therefore, to strain every muscle in working for the time when all war can be completely outlawed by international consent.” (Gaudium et Spes º81)

[2] Having said that, the Church is not so naive as to think that no country will be drawn into war. Church teaching has therefore allowed for what she has termed a “just war”. To quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church,

2309. "The strict conditions for legitimate defence by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the 'JUST WAR' doctrine.
The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good."

There is no doubt that there are considerable challenges that face us at this time in history. Increasing population and therefore diminishing resources, globalization and the ensuing loss of national control over resources and markets, technology that a changing the way we understand our world and our human potentials, the widening gap between the rich and the poor, the development of nuclear weapons by some of the poorest nations of the world, the rising to statehood of peoples who were previously subsumed into larger ethnic populations -- these and other challenges are making the option of war seem a positive solution for increasing numbers of nations.

What the Church has come to see as the only real option for the world is development. Peace is not won by armed conflict, but by the development of peoples and their ability to govern themselves on a world stage that acknowledges their sovereignty and values their contribution to the world market. In March of this year, there was a conference in Monterrey Mexico, entitled "Financing for Development", which viewed the terrorist attack of September 11th as a manifestation of the crisis of globalization. According to this conference, “The unjust distribution of resources which creates the growing global disparity between the haves and the have-nots must be addressed and challenged if we are to live in a more secure and peaceful environment.”

Jonathan Lash, in a talk entitled "The Other Weapon Against Terror" delivered at the Chevy Chase Club on October 25, 2001 sees a viable alternative to war as the means of correcting the inequalities that exist on the global stage. Mr. Lash is quoted as saying "I want to make a case for fighting poverty, protecting the environment, and improving people’s lives as the key to human security, and the foundation, in the long term, for global security."

In addition, the Passionist priest and cultural historian Thomas Berry, CP, wrote a wonderful article for The Ecozoic Reader entitled "An Historical Moment" and in it he states "As the human population of the world and consumption increase, the natural resources of the Earth are proportionately diminished. They will surely become ever more precious. The strife over who will possess, who will control these resources, will most certainly increase. Meanwhile the spiritual resources needed for a true bonding within nations and between nations have been diminishing as emphasis on political power and money values has increased."

The Church has done more than pay lip service to these solutions. Organizations such as Development and Peace, founded here in Canada in 1967, has promoted the rights of people everywhere to control their economic, political, social and cultural development. In Latin America, Africa and Asia, Development and Peace has funded local groups and grass-roots organizations that are trying to improve living conditions by encouraging alternatives to existing political and economic structures. In doing so, they have established direct and lasting relationships with people of different ideological and religious backgrounds. The bulk of their funds support projects run by local groups: village organizations, women's groups, co-operatives, unions, federations of fishers and artisans, popular education and human-rights networks, and non-governmental development organizations. It is groups like these that are the driving force behind sustainable development.
 

Conclusion

In the wake of September 11^th, Church leaders throughout the United Sates asked themselves, “What should be our response? How do we help our Christian people deal with the tragedy and the war and violence that has ensued?” The Catholic Bishops of Missouri, on October 1^st, offered the following positive actions:

1. to pray. Peace will not be attained without reference to God.

2. to oppose all forms of bigotry. Targeting Muslims and other identifiable minorities within the US with acts of violence makes the innocent the scapegoats of our anger.

3. to prayerfully support the military. Patriotism is best expressed in an honest desire that our own armies respect the conventions of war.

4. to be committed to the end of terrorism. Terrorism must be seen for what it is – an intrinsic evil.

5. to love our enemies. This very challenging command of Jesus calls on us to exercise mercy in all circumstances.

6. to reflect honestly on American culture. Do not recoil from looking honestly and critically at our selves and our lifestyle, and seeing what in us might incite the envy or disdain of others.

7. to promote a culture of life and fashion a civilization of love. The Christian message calls for the conversion of our selves and our world according to the mind and heart of God. Anything less is not worthy of followers of Jesus Christ.