"Prince of Peace" The Catholic Church and the Threat of War in Iraq
The Catholic Church and the Threat of War in Iraq
December 5, 2002
During these days before Christmas, these days of Advent, we hear a great deal of so-called Christmas music on the radio and in the shopping malls. Of course most of it is about the vague reality of the "holidays" and not about the Holy Days celebrating the great and tremendous mystery of the "Word made Flesh," the Incarnation. G.F. Handel’s classic oratorio "Messiah" is one of the great exceptions. While listening to this splendid music you will hear the chorus singing these words of the prophet, Isaiah. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given. And the government shall be upon his shoulders. And his name shall be called wonderful, counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace."
Since Jesus Christ, whose birth we are preparing to celebrate, is the Prince of Peace, we Catholics and all Christians are called to be peacemakers in our own hearts, our families, our communities and our world. Yet, when the Holy Father and the American Bishops speak about the importance of seeking a peaceful solution to the growing conflict between the U.S. government and the government of Iraq, many Catholic people and Catholic commentators in the media dismiss our concerns and challenges as "unrealistic, out of touch with the real world. Now, with Christmas just days away, a great number of international experts predict that our country will be at war with Iraq in the early months of the new year. As you formulate a response to this crisis in your own heart and soul, I ask you to be attentive to my voice and the voices of my brothers in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
It is obvious to everyone that our nation, Iraq and the world face grave choices about war and peace, and pursuing justice and security. These are not only military and political choices, but also moral ones because they involve matters of life and death. Traditional Catholic teaching offers ethical principles and moral criteria that should guide these critical choices.
Three months ago, Bishop Wilton Gregory, President of our Conference, wrote President George Bush to welcome efforts to focus the world's attention on Iraq's refusal to comply with several United Nations resolutions over the past eleven years, and its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. This letter raised serious questions about the moral legitimacy of any preemptive, unilateral use of military force to overthrow the government of Iraq. Taking into account developments since then, especially the recent unanimous action of the U.N. Security Council, we still have grave concerns about the justification for war.
We Bishops have no illusions about the behavior or intentions of the Iraqi government. The Iraqi leadership must cease its internal repression, end its threats to its neighbors, stop any support for terrorism, abandon its efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, and destroy all such existing weapons. We welcome the fact that the United States has worked to gain new action by the U.N. Security Council to ensure that Iraq meets its obligation to disarm. We join others in urging Iraq to comply fully with this latest Security Council resolution. We fervently pray that all involved will act to ensure that the current U.N. search for weapons in Iraq, will not simply be a prelude to war but a way to avoid it.
While I cannot predict what will happen in the coming weeks, my fellow Bishops and I wish to reiterate questions that may still have to be addressed. While I have no definitive conclusions, I do have serious concerns and questions that may help you to reach sound moral judgments. I acknowledge that Catholics and other people of good will may differ on how to apply traditional "just war" norms in particular cases, especially when events are moving rapidly and the facts are not altogether clear. Based on the facts that are known to us, the Bishops of this country continue to find it difficult to justify resorting to war against Iraq. This is because there is no clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature. With the Vatican, the bishops from the Middle East and those from around the world, we fear that resorting to war, under present circumstances and in light of current public information, would not meet the strict conditions in Catholic teaching that allow the use of military force as a last resort.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church limits just cause for war to cases in which "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations is lasting, grave and certain." (#2309) We are deeply concerned about recent proposals to expand dramatically traditional limits on just cause to include preventive uses of military force to overthrow threatening regimes or to deal with weapons of mass destruction. Consistent with the proscriptions contained in international law, a distinction should be made between efforts to change unacceptable behavior of a government and efforts to end that government's existence.
In the judgment of your Bishops, decisions concerning possible war in Iraq require compliance with U.S. constitutional imperatives, broad consensus within our nation, and some form of international sanction. That is why the action by Congress and the U.N. Security Council are important. As Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, Vatican Secretary for Relations with States, has indicated, if recourse to force were deemed necessary, this should take place within the framework of the United Nations after considering the consequences for Iraqi civilians, and regional and global stability.
The Catechism also teaches that the use of force must have "serious prospects for success" and "must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated" (Catechism, #2309). We Bishops certainly recognize that not taking military action could have its own negative consequences. We are concerned, however, that war against Iraq could have unpredictable consequences not only for Iraq but for peace and stability elsewhere in the Middle East. The use of force might provoke the very kind of attacks that it is intended to prevent, could impose terrible new burdens on an already long-suffering civilian population, and could lead to wider conflict and instability in the region. War against Iraq could also detract from the responsibility to help build a just and stable order in Afghanistan and could undermine broader efforts to stop terrorism.
The justice of a cause does not lessen the moral responsibility to comply with the norms of civilian immunity. While we recognize the improved capability of modern weapons and serious efforts to avoid directly targeting civilians in war, the use of military force in Iraq could bring incalculable costs for a civilian population that has suffered so much from war, repression, and a debilitating embargo. In assessing whether the death of innocent civilians (often referred to as "collateral damage") is justified, we must value the lives of Iraqi men, women and children as much as we value the lives of members of our own family and citizens of our own country.
We urge that our nation and the world continue to pursue actively alternatives to war in the Middle East. It is vital that our nation persist in the very frustrating and difficult challenges of maintaining broad international support for constructive, effective and legitimate ways to contain and deter aggressive Iraqi actions and threats. We support effective enforcement of the military embargo and maintenance of political sanctions. We reiterate our call for much more carefully-focused economic sanctions which do not threaten the lives of innocent Iraqi civilians. Addressing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction must be matched by broader and stronger non-proliferation measures. Such efforts, grounded in the principle of mutual restraint, should include, among other things, greater support for programs to safeguard and eliminate weapons of mass destruction in all nations, stricter controls on the export of missiles and weapons technology, improved enforcement of the biological and chemical weapons conventions, and fulfillment of U.S. commitments to pursue good faith negotiations on nuclear disarmament.
Some American citizens may feel that personal dislike for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, the suspicion that he has weapons of mass destruction, anger over the terrible attacks of September 11, 2001 and frustration over the government's inability to find Osama bin Laden, are reason enough for war. But this is more emotion than reason. Even if the current U.N. weapons inspection finds such weapons, even if Iraq's declaration of December 8 is not deemed credible by the United States and a U.N. resolution gives legal justification for a military attack by our country, the moral justification for such a preemptive attack remains highly questionable.. An armed conflict with Iraq will almost certainly result in the death of a large number of innocent people and possibly result in more instability in the region and more terrorism around the world.
We Bishops know that there are no easy answers. Ultimately, our elected leaders are responsible for decisions about national security, but we hope that our moral concerns and questions will be considered seriously by our leaders and all citizens. We invite others, particularly the Christian faithful, to continue to discern how best to live out their vocation to be witnesses and agents of peace and justice.
I urge you to join me in praying for those who will be directly affected by war, especially those in military service and their families. Pray for President Bush and other world leaders as well that they may be given the wisdom to find the way to step back from the brink of war with Iraq and work for a peace that is just and enduring. If such peace is not possible, then what does it really mean to say that Christ, the Prince of Peace, has been born in the cold stable of our world? What does it mean to celebrate Christmas?
