RESPONSIBILITIES OF CHURCHES IN THIS TIME OF WAR

A dialogue sponsored by the Massachusetts Council of Churches Board of Directors, Strategy and Action Commission and the Ethics Advisory Board
February 7, 1991

The Rev. Charles Harper:
"Since the conflict broke out.. .we've been very unclear about how to speak a constructive word to the nation, to the government, and I'm wondering if out of our conversation this evening we're going to be able to help each other now that we're in a war. What is the constructive word of peace? What is the constructive word of reconciliation that can be spoken? What is the responsible thing for us to do at this particular time when our nation is waging a war which most of us counseled against before it started? But we're in a brand new situation now. And I'm hearing mostly silence or confusion from folks like us.

Professor Max L. Stackhouse:
"The just war theory as I understand it.. .is based upon the basic presupposition that God wants us to live in peace and that... God wants us to live in a just peace. Because there is sometimes a tension between peace and justice we have to figure out whether it's ever justifiable to take up arms against some vicious force to reestablish the peace. So it's the conflict between justice and peace... First, if there is going to be the taking up of arms it has to be by some legitimate authority. It's not something that a group of individual marauders or an individual can take up and start throwing bombs. The debate about what's legitimate is part of the debate. Second, it has to be a just cause. There has to be a cause which you can publicly convince people is justifiable. If you can't then you can't go. Third, you have to have a calculation that in all probability more good than harm will come out of it. And if those three conditions are met, and they of course drive you into the debate. That itself doesn't solve anything, but it clues us to certain key points, so that you can find out what's going on. And it's the last resort.

"If there is a decision that you go into some kind of military action, then there are other criteria that have to be met and two of them are most decisive: One.. .that you should be discriminate.  Insofar as it's possible in wartime one tries to discriminate between combatants and noncombatants. and so all this debate about how they are treating prisoners and whether or not certain kinds of buildings have been bombed -that debate is about this principle... And some of the arguments about nuclear war [include that] you cannot be discriminate and therefore that weaponry always is unjust. And then the last one is proportionality. And the best way to say that is. you don't burn a house to kill a mouse. You have to have a sense of using the proper amount of force for the kind of problem.

"These things have been institutionalized. They are part of the Geneva Convention... So it's about whether or not a Christian or any other person of conscience can engage in the use of coercive or lethal violence under any conditions... So just war does not mean that all wars are just, but that's the debate: is it justifiable under any conditions...? These are the basic criteria. That's the majority report of the tradition.

"A number of people have argued that in the modem world, though it has not been fully accepted, there's another criterion that should be introduced, and that is are there intentions to seek a just peace on the other side of the conflict, with reconciliation at the end?"

The Rev. Dr. Paul Deats:
"The notion of right intention has been in [the list of just war criteria] for a long time. These criteria have shifted over the years. They never were just laid down by Augustine and it seems to me one of the things we have to do is keep raising the awkward questions. What other criteria do we have to add?

"Ron Williams from Oxford's suggests that "you ought not to conduct a war in such a way that you would jeopardize any efforts at peacemaking'". The way ought to be open for peace now, not just after the conflict. It ought to be written into the just war criteria."

The Rev. Dr. Walter Muelder:
"The Vatican Council indicated that it was doubtful that under modem conditions any war could be just, given the nature of modem conflict. So this is something that has been judged even a quarter of a century ago. and not just by a recent bishop's pastoral or by other groups that have commented on this whole matter...

"We have to speak as American Christians concretely to this situation at some point—not simply about war in general, but about this war. Where is it in the providence of God? and of the churches ministry under the providence of God?

"It becomes the task of the church to say, "tell the whole truth." We will tell the whole truth, if we can, insofar as we can establish it. [We will] clarify that the linkages are manifold. Then the question of what is the cause of the war and whether it fits the just war criteria, become clearer.

"The just war position is the dominant position through the centuries. It has in many ways been a majority position, that is, more churches have held this view than any other. At the same time I want to accent.. .that the so-called pacifist position or peace position is the original and the presumptive position. The fact that you have a just war theory means that the burden of proof is on waging the war. So we have to keep reminding our people that's where the burden of proof is, and not be afraid to speak truth to power.

"Perhaps it would be useful if we would now lift the ethical considerations to a more theological level in order to get into a relevant discussion of what the ministry of the church is. When we raise the question to the theological level, we have to be unafraid to say, "what does God have to do with this situation?' It's a tragic event in the providence of God. God as creator is involved.  God as redeemer is involved. God as renewer [is involved]...Now I think those speak to this situation as well as all others.

"If we ask 'what does God as creator have to say to this situation...?'; who put the resources of the earth where they are? To whom were these resources given? Who are the stewards of these resources? Scarce resources are needed by the whole of humanity which also is created by God.

"So we give context to this debate... We are created beings. We are granted responsible freedom. Therefore we have to come to terms with our responsibility. We are called to do something. No one can sit back in the pew and say 'I have nothing to do with this.' We all are called to respond in some way. We just can't point the finger, because we are created not only as individuals, we are created for community. We are created in community. Therefore we are.. .all interlocked. We are created for a purpose. And that purpose is a world community.

"So when we put this situation into that purpose it should give us some perspective... Yes, this is a sinful mess, a very sinful mess. and it is not just impersonally brought about by the actions of impersonal forces. There are people who have done wicked things and board members who have made wicked decisions in board meetings and there are people who have kept from us the truth... And what is the redeeming activity of God? We believe that it has been made clearest for us in the revelation of Jesus Christ. So we have to ask, what does Jesus Christ have to do with this war?.. .But we are also open to renewal. We aren't stuck in an endless downward spiral of war. We aren't stuck there, not if it's God's world. Therefore the church, ministering in Christ's name, has to ask itself, 'what are the redemptive ministries that we can perform?'-no one excluded, neither the so-called enemy nor our own people. All need our ministry. The troops need our ministry, men and women. The families back here need our ministry. The consciences of all these people need our ministry. Above all conscience is everybody's Christian vocation. So even if it should come to the draft or even out of conscientious objection of those who for whatever reason enlisted in the armed services and now discover that they are conscientiously objected to this war, all the ambiguities of conscience need the ministry, the counseling, the sympathy, the pastoral care of the church. All the divisions within our local churches need our ministry. It has to do with what do we say at the Eucharist.

"The ethical issues, complicated and ambiguous as they are, do get some clarification when we lift them to the theological level and have the courage to ask ourselves the classical Christian question: what does God as creator, redeemer, sustainer, and vivifier have to say to us? What guidance does that give to our ministry?

"We must remind ourselves that the church is a different kind of community from the state. The task of the state is different from the task of the church. We are not an alternate state. The state is a national community. We are an ecumenical fellowship. We have no boundaries. We know no national boundaries if we understand ourselves theologically. Therefore we must not be trapped into nationalistic thinking in the church. We must help lift our people above their nationalistic temptations to think of their universal connections..."