Catholic's View On War

[cimlog]

I am under the impression that the Catholic church is against war and fighting. I am starting to worry how I should feel about people like Saddam. He was a great leader leading people the wrong way in life. I agreed that we should dismantle his dictatorship but violence was required. What is the churches view on this?

Plus, are soldiers at fault for fighting in a war the church does not approve of?

[the_rev]

Wow, that is a great question cimlog...

In my opinion, I feel the war was justified, but since the war has been completed, more people have been killed. Peace, Peace and Peace shall reign, that's what our lady said at Medjugorje. Was violence needed, that is a matter of opinion! To are soldiers doing wrong, I don't think so because they are defending us, God only knows if they weren't defending this country, what could of happened if Sadamm was still in power.

That is my 2 cents worth!

[Aloysius]

i'm pretty sure they get the double effect logic in <as long as they believe it is a just war>

.... hmm, cimlog, ever heard of double effect? it's St. Thomas Aquinas's theory on killin in self defense. as long as the intention is to defend yourself, the defense is the effect sought and the double effect is the death of the one you're defending yourself from. so, in cases of self defense, self can include loved ones/countrymen, as long as the intention is defense and not murder, it is justified.

and you could go in depth for hours tryin to figure out whether this war met St. Augustine's definition of a just war. my theory is, only those who know all of the information have any clue whatsoever as to what this falls into with regards to Augustine's just war doctrine. anyway, as far as we knew before the war Saddam had WMDs, did he have them? maybe. did his scientists lie to him telling him the weapons programs were having a better result than they actually were? yes. did we believe that intelligence? yes. anyway, as mere clueless american citizens we should let the big dogs with their eyes on the facts argue that point... i believe it was justified, that Iraq had WMDs AT THE VERY LEAST in the reports the president's eyes saw. and i believe that was a sufficient threat to merit self-defense.

anyway, the soldiers did nothing wrong unless they went over there for the purpose of killing iraquis, if they went there with the purpose of defending our country and the world from a mad dictator, they were justified in killing.

[IcePrincessKRS]

This is from two women I know, both married to men who were stationed over in Iraq.

OK, a couple of thoughts on the war, having used it is a case study in International Law and through a lot of personal reading due to my husband's deployment.

First, I agree with what St. Augustine says, that peace is not the absence of war.  Just because there was not armed combat at the time (although actually there was, just not directed at us) does not mean that there was not already a state of war in Iraq.  If you look at all the UN documents from the past twelve years you see a lot of disturbing things, they were constantly telling Saddam he was in violation of the cease-fire agreement from the first war, but they never did anything about it.  I believe that there are two reason sFrance and Germany did not want to support the war, one was because America was pushing for it, and secondly because both of them had made substantial (illegal) financial deals with the Iraqi government.  War is a horrible thing, and Saddam was involved in waging war on his own people, and I believe planning to make war on other countries shortly.

Secondly, as to whether the Church has spoken on the war.  If you read many of the papal statements they all urge caution, they never say this war is unjust.  It is not for the Pope to make that judgement.  Those in proper secular authority (whether they realize it or not) are the ones who have the graces to make this decision.  The Vatican is in a very difficult position right now.  The UN is constantly pushing it aside and the EU has not even allowed the Vatican to participate or observe those proceedings in any way.  I strongly believe that many of the Pope's statements were meant as a diplomatic move to soften France and Germany to a point where they will all the Vatican to participate in the EU, something which is of great consequence.  Remember, the Pope baisically kept giving the criteria for just war and saying war was a last option, not that this war was unjust.  It was the media that interpretated those words to be anti-war.

Bad things are still happening in Iraq, but they no longer go to villages of dissenters, kill all the men and rape all the women.  They have found mass graves and are dealing with rape victims as young as 4.  Things are hard for the soldiers, but the reality is that they knew what the military does when they signed on.  Many of the soldiers I know who have spent time over there, including the ones who have lost friends, know that they were for a purpose.  There is no greater gift one can give than to lay his life down for another -- this is what our soldiers are doing, it why many of them joined in the first place.

My huband was in Iraq for five months and saw first-hand the cruelty that Saddam inflicted on his people. He spoke to children whose older brothers had been killed by Saddam, and who knew young girls and women raped and killed by his sons or party members.

Whether or not there were weapons of mass destruction is, in my mind, irrelevant. The people were tortured and killed in unspeakable ways in huge numbers. That was mass destruction. Removing Saddam was a good thing.

[PhatPhred]

The way the Catholic Church operates is that the Bishops and the Pope are responsible for determining the appropriate application of the principles of the Gospel to current day events, such as the Iraqi war. This is called the magisterium, that is, the living teaching authority of the Church. The notion that each Catholic needs to determine for himself (or herself) whether the Iraqi war is just or unjust is a mistaken idea that more closely resembles the Protestant concept of private interpretation of Scripture than anything actually Catholic.

The Pope has overall authority for the entire Church, and the Bishops each have individual authority for their own dioceses. In practice, this can result in different rules applying to different dioceses. For example, in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, Bishop Bruskewitz has excommunicated those Catholics who are members of heretical organizations such as Call To Action, Planned Parenthood, and the Society of St. Pius X, among others. However, members in other dioceses are not subject to this excommunication.

Opposition to the Iraqi war has been fairly universal across the Pope and all the Bishops. However, only one Bishop has called on members of his flock to be conscientious objectors on pain of mortal sin:

Therefore I, by the grace of God and the favor of the Apostolic See Bishop of the Eparchy of St. George in Canton, must declare to you, my people, for the sake of your salvation as well as my own, that any direct participation and support of this war against the people of Iraq is objectively grave evil, a matter of mortal sin. Beyond a reasonable doubt this war is morally incompatible with the Person and Way of Jesus Christ. With moral certainty I say to you it does not meet even the minimal standards of the Catholic just war theory.

Thus, any killing associated with it is unjustified and, in consequence, unequivocally murder. Direct participation in this war is the moral equivalent of direct participation in an abortion. For the Catholics of the Eparchy of St. George, I hereby authoritatively state that such direct participation is intrinsically and gravely evil and therefore absolutely forbidden.

[Aloysius]

regardless of all that, which may be objective truth, the subjective truth for each one of those soldiers if they are doing what they're doing with the intention and belief that they are defending their country from a threat, they are acting in self-defense and are not culpably doing anything wrong.

[PhatPhred]

regardless of all that, which may be objective truth, the subjective truth for each one of those soldiers if they are doing what they're doing with the intention and belief that they are defending their country from a threat, they are acting in self-defense and are not culpably doing anything wrong.

Do you distinguish this from the case of a women having an abortion, as long as she subjectively believes that it is only a "clump of cells" that she is having removed?

Or what about the case of an inner-city gang member killing someone from a rival gang to protect their "turf"?

Or the German soldiers in World War II whose excuse was that they were merely following orders?

Are the people in these examples culpably doing anything wrong when they kill, or is the exception that you've outlined more narrow than that?

And is this Church teaching, or your own private belief?

[socalscout]

Do you distinguish this from the case of a women having an abortion, as long as she subjectively believes that it is only a "clump of cells" that she is having removed?

Or what about the case of an inner-city gang member killing someone from a rival gang to protect their "turf"?

Or the German soldiers in World War II whose excuse was that they were merely following orders?

Are the people in these examples culpably doing anything wrong when they kill, or is the exception that you've outlined more narrow than that?

And is this Church teaching, or your own private belief?

1860

Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest

This can be applied to the scenarios you just gave us but of course it depends. Each one you gave is exclusive. For example the pregnant woman might not be committing sin because she has been taught it is a mass of tissue not a human life whereas the German soldier(assuming you are talking about the Death Camps and not the regular soldier) is commiting a sin against basic human nature regardless of the orders.

Also paragraphs 2307 to 2314 talks about war.

2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.

Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace

It looks, to me, that it allows for soldiers to enter conflicts such as the Iraqi conflict without danger of Grave sin. This would not apply to their actions during said service. Of course if our Bishops and the Holy Father say something specific about soldier's involvement then that changes things.

I do not know what the Holy Father said specifically about soldier's invlolvement so please excuse my ignorance on the matter.

Take Care

[cimlog]

Thanks guys.