Catholic Just War

Catholic Just War ^ | 02.27.03

[Coleus]

Catechism of the Catholic Church
Do nations have the right to go to war?
Catechism: 2308 ..."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 of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."105
What are the necessary conditions for to justly go to war?
Catechism: 2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense 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 modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition. These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.
Who determines if these conditions are met?
Catechism: 2309 (continued) The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
TAKEN FROM:  http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

[Coleus]

ping

[APBaer]

Q: "What are the necessary conditions for to justly go to war? "

A: First thou shall try to bring together, to conciliate,and to mend:
and you should start with you own split infinitives

[RobbyS]

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 of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."10

To me this is key.

[dsc]

As bad as national governments are, imagine what a disaster a world government would be.

Perhaps the position of the Church was adopted prior to the advent of highly portable, easily smuggled biological agents.

When Napoleon attacked a country, he had to get his army together, and march to their border before he could even attack outlying areas, much less population centers.

There was time for thought and negotiation, and even if the other country waited until his army was on the march, they had time to respond.

That's not true when the threat is a devout Muslim with a suitcase full of anthrax-leprosy-mu, or whatever.

Does anyone really assert that we must wait until millions die in agony before we can assert our right of self defense, even when we can see old Achmed over there preparing the aerosol dispensers for his attack?

[RobbyS]

The Church seems to forget that such order that exists in the world depends ultimately on the United States States. Without its economic power, its military power the system falls apart and we shall again be faced with the anarchy that we saw in the 1930s. The United States began as a military coalition headed by the United States. The rejection of American leadership by the Soviet Union made that organization irrelevant for many years. Now if they buck that leadership, it will all fall apart.

[Coleus]

ping

[Siobhan]

BUMP

[Salvation]

Great poll! BTTT!

[cpforlife.org]

Thanks for the ping.

This is a tough one. It is always “deeper” than what is revealed publicly; we’ll never truly know what goes on at the diplomatic level.

One angle I have is this: The White House wanted the Pope’s approval on this in a VERY major way. They have sufficient access to put their “best reason/case for war” on his table. I am sure they have tried their very best. JPII is not approving for who knows what, and for how many reasons? It is possible the Holy Father is wrong, but if they had presented some real major-compelling evidence, why would he say no?

Prayer (as always) is the best we can do.

[RobbyS]

So far as the pope is concerned, my best guess is that he knows how dangerous Muslim opinion is for the safety to Christians in the Muslim world.

[RobbyS]

Those who put St. Augustine's theory forward for get that it makes no sense divorced from the events of his life. The began his Christian career as the philospher, attermyping to persuade the Donatists of North Africa to return to the Church. But the Donatists were lined with the Circumcellions, Punic-Africans who opposed Rome and all its ways. Finally he gave up on persuasion and invoked Roman coersion. Reason is not match for the unharnessed human will.

[BlackElk]

The pope would say no for two practical reasons (practical to the Vatican).

First, most Americans are familiar only with the Roman rite of the Roman Catholic Church but there are numerous other smaller rites with long traditions of their own. They are all subject to the pope. One of these is the Chaldean Rite which is headquartered in Iraq.

Second, the pope has the support of most Muslim nations in his resistance to and opposition to abortion and other social issue atrocities. Remember that the Vatican is a nation-state as well as the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church. The pope is effectively the elected monarch of Vatican City. The Vatican participates usefully in a leadership role with Muslims and poor Third World countries in resisiting those UN "Population Control" initiatives which always look like they were cooked up by Her Satanic Majesty, the junior senator from New York who sometimes poses as apparent consort to the Arkansas Antichrist when he is not otherwise engaged.

If the article upon which this thread is based is accurately quoting the Catechism, there is plenty of room for the long-overdue attack on Iraq to be regarded as a "just war." So Damn Insane has already inflicted far worse damage on his own people than we will and the state of modern weaponry or biological and chemical weapons is such that we need not wait in leisurely fashion for today's Bella Abzugs and Barbra Streisands to "be convinced" or for the annihilation of ten million or so Americans by biological warfare before sending So Damn Insane and his thuggish buds to their father below.

Let the games begin, already!!!

[cpforlife.org]

Great points BlackElk!

[BlackElk]

Thanks.

[RnMomof7]

Can I ask how FR Catholics feel on this issue? It seems to me that American conservative Catholics might have a view different than a European Catholic or even the Pope.

How binding is the Popes stand on practicing Catholics

[sinkspur]

How binding is the Popes stand on practicing Catholics

It is not binding at all.

Besides, how would he "bind" a Catholic to oppose the war?

This is a political judgment on the Pope's part, which is no more binding on Catholics than my political judgment.

I was enlightened by another Freeper today (Sabretooth) that the radical Muslims are chomping at the bit to turn this into a crusade against Christians, and a papal siding with the US might just be the trigger.

Besides, preaching peace is the Pope's job. Everybody expects it.

[Antoninus]

I was enlightened by another Freeper today (Sabretooth) that the radical Muslims are chomping at the bit to turn this into a crusade against Christians, and a papal siding with the US might just be the trigger.

Holy smokes, I think I'm about to agree with everything you just said, sinky. There must be a strange alignment of the planets today.

I believe that the Pope's stand on the issue, while it may harm us in the short term, actually helps us in the long run. It gives lie to the radical islamist position that the US is spearheading a "Crusade" against all of Islam. How can they make this claim when the originator of the term "Crusade," the heir of St. Peter, is so wholeheartedly against the military option? Indeed, with the Pope on their side, the idea that the US is launching a crusade against Islam appears ludicrous.

If anyone out there doubts this, imagine what the reaction in the Muslim world would have been if the Pope had vociferously condemned Iraq and called for Europe to support American efforts.

Plus, I think the era when Popes actively call for war has been over for several hundred years...

[RnMomof7]

WOW excellent point men ...Thanks

[ninenot]

Still and all, it seems to me that GWB is doing his best to avoid shooting, as well--IMHO he's trying to SCARE SadSack out of Iraq for the benefit of all concerned.

Refreshing difference from Clinton, who could care less about ANY danger in which he placed our military, (or what long-term repercussions might result from US military interventions.)

War is ALWAYS the last resort.

BTW, I note that the Vatican is sending a delegate to the White House this week...