Church in Controversy, Thesis Paper Example

Church in Controversy: American Churches’ Response to U.S Military Action in Iraq

The intervention of the United States military in Iraq is a contentious topic. However, American Churches have held a strong stance on this topic throughout the conflict. While Christianity typically does not promote the idea of war, this theology supports the concept of a “Just War”. The roots of this doctrine derives from Beatitudes in which Jesus tells us “blessed are the peacemakers” (Matt. 5:9); however he also says “let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one” (Luke 22:36). While Christianity emphasizes peace and love, the bible indicates that there are occasions in which one must consider exceptions to this rule. These exceptions are evident throughout history, such as in the Crusades, which were implemented to spread Christianity and defend Europe against the east. While there were many deaths as a consequence of this religious war, the intent was for good and much good was accomplished; Christianity was spread and Europe’s connection with Asia was reestablished. Ultimately, the aspects that should define a war as just should depend on the capacity of the conflict to bring peace and good will to others. If this is not possible, conflict should be avoided. As a consequence, American churches believe that intervention of the United States military in Iraq should have been avoided; if more attention have been paid to the Just War theory, intervention would have been deemed unnecessary and many lives would have been spared.

To understand the erroneous decision of the United States military’s intervention in Iraq, it is first necessary to understand the proper definition of a just war. According to paragraph 2309 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is essential to rigorously consider when military intervention is necessary. While military intervention is almost always required for purposes of defense in attack, the line of ethicality becomes slightly less clear when defending a home nation requires action overseas. Specifically, the Just War theory states that a war is legitimate if the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations is “lasting, grave, and certain”, if all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective, conducting the war will have serious prospects of success, the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated (Catholic Church 2280).

It is evident that U.S Military Action in Iraq does not fall under the definition of a just war. Firstly, the Just War theory states that a war is legitimate if the damage inflicted by the aggressor is long lasting, grave, and certain. When the Iraq war was initiated in 2003, the rationale provided by Congress was that the war was necessary because Iraq was threatening the United States with weapons of mass destruction and the intent of the evasion was to remove these weapons from existence. Although this was the initial purpose of the war, the U.S. military remained abroad to deter threats from Iraqi terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda and to promote democracy. None of the three reasons given as rational for the Iraqi war are long lasting, grave or certain. President Bush invaded Iraq based on hearsay that that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (Schmidt, 2008). There was no clear evidence of this at the start of the war and there was no long-term threat of their use. While it would certainly be grave if the Iraqi government possessed dangerous weapons and intended to use them to harm the United States, there was no clear evidence for this. To deal with this controversy, it is essential for the church to spread knowledge regarding peace in international affairs. Christianity teaches that all actions should be done for a just purpose and cause and that these reasons should be rational. This war is an example of a failure of human ethics. Theologian Michael Minch states, “the United States military, like most others, also affirms its own set of military ethics” (Minch 35). Rather than carefully considering and slowly deciding whether war is legitimate, President Bush decided to take rushed action. As a religious man, it is interesting that President Bush made this decision; it was expected that this emphasis on religion would have educated him on the value of life and the horror of war. However, since Bush was able to define military ethics as the commander-in-chief, he is able to bypass ethical reason. This indicates that there is a greater need for Christianity to spread messages of peace through sermons. Furthermore, implementing education programs for the general public would assist this cause. For example, initiating public service announcements aimed to shift popular opinion and denounce the truth about war would contribute to this cause. Even for individuals who are not Christian, the ethical laws that guide decision making are the same. Therefore, the church should place an emphasis on spreading the message of proper ethics and rational decision making.

Ultimately, churches believe that the United States invasion of Iraq could have been avoided on this basis. Rather than carefully considering the political state of affairs between the two countries and whether it was rational to believe that an attack was imminent, President Bush ignored reason and made the rash decision to send our troops to the Middle East. Interestingly, even after the United States military confirmed that there were no weapons of mass destruction, troops remained overseas to counter terrorist groups and aid democracy in the country. However, it is important to understand that since Iraq was not threatening our personal democracy or safety in a certain way, the detainment of the troops abroad was highly unethical. While Iraq would benefit from a democratic and peaceful government, a violent intervention is not the manner in which this should be accomplished. It is essential for the church to emphasize that life is valuable and decisions should be made on the basis of the potential of lost life. Since the Iraq War has already ended the lives of more people than a potential attack on the United States would have caused, it is necessary for the church to warn local politicians against the decision to go to war in order to influence the federal government.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that before initiating a war, it is essential to consider alternatives. While there have been several peace attempts with Iraq since the start of the Iraqi War, such as the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, there were no significant attempts to initiate peace talks before the start of the war. The Catholic Church is in major disagreement with this action because failing to do so creates a violent situation whereas peace talks could prevent violence if effective. It is possible that peace attempts were not made because the United States government believed that they would fail. However, in order to ensure that the best decision is being made for the country, attempting to peacefully solve a conflict is necessary. If these peace talks were effective, it would have prevented an 11 year war. The church is uniquely able to peacefully solve conflict. Before the conflict in Iraq, Pope John Paul II stated that war should the “the very last option” (Pope John Paul II). American church’s should therefore have consulted the pope and asked him to speak out in favor of peaceful resolution. His influence may have contributed to a peaceful solution rather than the continuous violence seen in the Middle East.

Furthermore, the church states that a war should only be conducted if the war will have serious prospects of success. In the case of the Iraqi War, success could be defined as the successful detection and removal of weapons of mass destruction, deterring terrorist groups, and bringing democracy to the people. While these causes appear to be noble and somewhat necessary for safety, it is important to consider the feasibility of these tasks. Iraq’s history is full of religious conflict and suppression of certain freedoms. Many United States citizens do not agree with the lifestyle of the average Iraqi, but it is necessary to understand that this lifestyle is normal from their point of view. It is difficult for a military intervention to change what many don’t want to be changed even though it will provide them benefit. For example, the political power of the average citizen is suppressed. If the population had a greater say on the state of affairs, they would be greater represented in both local law making and foreign policy. On the other hand, it is reasonable to believe that the United States military would be able to track and disarm weapons of mass destruction, but this was the only feasible goal of the Iraqi War. Once this part of the mission failed, it would have been best for the troops to return home. Instead, they remained to track down terrorist groups, which was futile particularly because it is difficult to distinguish the difference between terrorists and civilians based on appearance. As a consequence, many innocent lives were taken. Many American churches have attendees that are family members of those overseas. Therefore, they have a personal connection with those who are risking their lives. As a consequence, this relationship could be used to lobby Congress to put an end to the war.

The last requirement of the Just War theory is that the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. As mentioned above, it has been impossible for the United States military to distinguish between terrorists and innocent citizens in many situations. Therefore, many innocent lives have been lost. While some terrorists have been found and eliminated, the negative impacts of the war on Iraqi citizens is greater than the good it causes in protecting the United States. Since it is clear that more evil was done with the use of arms than good, the Just War theory is violated. The Just War theory states that, “The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing” (Catechism 2263). The best way to protect the United States is by defense rather than offense. American churches should promote this principle because it is a more peaceful measure that could be implemented to ensure the safety of the country.

An article entitled “Was Iraq an Unjust War? A Debate on the Iraq War and Reflections on Libya” supports the claim that the Iraq war failed to meet any of the just criteria (Fisher 697). Although the reasons for this were discussed above, Fisher makes an interesting point concerning the authority that the United States government believed they had in the decision to invade a foreign nation. Specifically, even though there were concerns about justice, the United Nations had given the government permission and reason to invade Iraq. In addition, there had been no attempt to analyze the amount of good that could be done as a consequence of invasion versus malice. The Catholic Church would consider this uncertainty as reason to avoid war. The Just War theory states that war is only rational if it has the capacity for doing good. Without analyzing the potential outcomes of the situation, it is impossible to determine this possibility. Therefore, the Iraqi War appears to primarily be an act of evil in which the United States government only exhibited interest in its own safety and not the lives of individuals living in other nations. American churches preach tolerance of others. It is necessary to extend this tolerance to the way we think about foreign affairs. While we believe that democracy is essential for the happiness and health of all people, it is important to recognize that not all people think this way and it is not necessarily our role to intervene. As such, churches should promote tolerance and recognize how this should impact our involvement in the lives of people in different cultures.

While it’s clear that the Just War theory defines the Iraqi War as unethical, and a majority of American churches agree with this sentiment, Catholic workers believe that the church leadership in the United States is evading “their moral and canonical responsibilities regarding the war on the people of Iraq” (Waldrop). Bishop William Skylstad, president of the US Bishop’s conference, issued a statement discussing the need for the war in Iraq to be expanded and intensified. However, this clearly contradicts the role of the Catholic Church as peacemakers. The author claims that a major reason why there is so much debate over the Iraq war is over whether the war is just or unjust. He claims that “While people can indeed come to different conclusions about the Iraq War, not all of those opinions are morally equal” (Waldrop). It is therefore essential to recognize this, and the job of the church is to support moral opinions and actions. Therefore, many Christians, including the author, widely support the belief that the concept of a Just War should be followed not only when making the decision to go to war but to also consider it when deciding whether a war that has already been enacted is just or unjust. It is unfortunate that such a thing is under debate within American churches, but true Christians understand that most wars are not justifiable and it is more reasonable to find rationalization to end war rather than to promote its continuation. There are many church leaders who are passionate about this topic, such as the pope and Robert Waldrop. Therefore, to emphasize a need for change, they should address these issues to their congregation in an attempt to promote the spread of knowledge about just war and the consequences of unjust war. According to the Catechism, “Injustice, excessive economic or social inequalities, envy, distrust, and pride raging among men and nations constantly threaten peace and cause wars. Everything done to overcome these disorders contributes to building up peace and avoiding war” (Catechism 2317). Therefore, it is necessary to ensure equality to avoid war.

In his address to the diplomatix corps, Pope John Paul II addresses the disagreement over the validity of the Iraqi war by stating that “everything can change” (Pope John Paul II). In this speech, he calls for a respect for life and no to selfishness. Ultimately, the Iraqi War can be considered a violation of these two rules. If the United States government had a true respect for life, it would have carefully considered the potential American and Iraqi deaths that would result. As the invading country, it is our responsibility to make this consideration, rather than the invaded country that has a greater need to protect itself. Furthermore, the United States was certainly being selfish when it decided to invade Iraq. The invasion was entirely due to self-interest and the want to convert a repressed country to a democratic one (Elman 400). While this seems like it would be done to benefit the Iraqi people, this is not the case. The United States had a long-term interest in establishing allies in the Middle East for trade and military presence. President Bush believed that a successful conversion of Iraq to a democratic nation would contribute to a partnership that would benefit the United States. Above all, Christian churches place a value on the respect of live. Since God created life, we are prohibited against making decisions that would take this right away. The Catechism states, “Injustice, excessive economic or social inequalities, envy, distrust, and pride raging among men and nations constantly threaten peace and cause wars. Everything done to overcome these disorders contributes to building up peace and avoiding war” (Catechism 2262). Therefore, American churches must promote knowledge concerning the difference between legal rights, ethical rights, and rights given to us by God.

In “War and the Catholic Church”, the author claims that one of the only reasons that the Catholic Church would consider a war just is if it were for self-defense (Siedenburg 1). Interestingly, this opinion places the United States’ involvement in the Iraqi War into a gray area. President Bush would claim that the war was declared for self-defense against weapons of mass destruction and terrorist attacks. However, the Catholic Church also believes that claims for self-defense must be evidence based to justify the negativities of war. In this situation, even though the United States claimed that the war was a matter of self-defense, the government did not have enough evidence that the Iraqi government would use weapons of mass destruction against the United States. Furthermore, there was no confirmation that there was a partnership between the Iraqi government and terrorist organizations that have attacked the United States. Therefore, it was unreasonable to initiate this war. American churches should intervene in an attempt to define self-defense. According to just war, there needs to be a clearly defined need for violent action to be included in defense. The Catechism states, “If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s” (Catechism 2264). If this does not exist, this action constitutes unethical violence.

While the above discussion primarily concerns the fact that the Iraqi War fails to be considered a Just War and is generally opposed by American churches, it fails to discuss the negative impacts of avoiding the definition of a Just War in determining whether a war should be waged. It is clear that loss of life and prevention of peace are major negative outcomes of unjust war, but it is also important to consider the changed status of the irresponsible country in world politics. An article entitled “Global War on Terror,” Identity, and Changing Perceptions: Iraqi Responses to America’s War in Iraq” addresses this issue (Pitchford 695). Ultimately, the U.S. involvement in the Iraqi War has created a concept of anti-Americanism in the Middle East. This will have a negative impact on relations that the United States has with foreign countries in the future and supports a negative stereotype of the country as a whole due to a single erroneous foreign decision. The role of the American church in this situation should be to repair damaged relationships between the United States and the Middle East. To do so, they should send messages of good will to make it clear that our intent is good.

An additional issue concerning the Iraqi War is the fact that the government and media failed to rely truth to American citizens throughout the conflict. While a certain degree of privacy is necessary to ensure that military operations are successful, Americans didn’t learn many facts about the war until it began to end. As mentioned previously, there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction. This lie was made to justify the war, which was not approved by the UN Security Council. Since the purpose of the war was blurry and not understood by the American populace, it could be considered unjust. An article entitled “Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War” discuss the role that the media played in fooling the public (Kull 569). Ultimately, the cooperation of the government was necessary for this to be possible. American churches could play a role in clarifying the truth of these matters. It would also be helpful to initiate discussions in the congregation in order to dispel rumors and understand the basis of these untruths.

It is clear that the American involvement in the Iraqi war is a violation of just war principles. The theory clearly states that “all citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war” (Catechism 2307-17). While the American government is not primarily a Christian nation, the Constitution was written based on Christian principles. Therefore, its involvement in the Iraqi War was contradictory. Furthermore, rather than working to avoid war, the American government did the opposite. There was little reason for war between the United States and Iraq before the invasion, but prolonged stationing of the troops overseas provided a cause for war that is now difficult to disband. The Catechism of the Catholic Church alludes to the crime of war as well again by stating that “Anger is a desire for revenge” (Catechism 2302-3). It explains that anger and revenge are not just reasons to commit a violent act. While the worry that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was a real concern, the true tension that triggered the conflict was Iraq’s proximity and interactions with enemies. Furthermore, the disagreements the two nations had over oil trade fueled this anger. The Catechism clearly indicates based on these two principles that the Iraqi War was unjust. It is important for American churches to emphasize the Christian basis of American law and how this behavior should direct our actions.

In conclusion, a war is justifiable if conflict is certain, if peaceful options are not effective, if the attempt will likely be successful, and if more good is done than harm. As a consequence, American churches generally don’t approve of the Iraqi War. It has been demonstrated that there is no clear evidence for the war’s rationale, peace talks were not attempted, and that the conflict resulted in many more civilian than terrorist deaths. It is essential to adhere to the Just War theory to avoid future mistakes and to rectify current harmful situations. It is necessary to emphasize that even though the Just War theory was not followed during the declaration of the Iraqi War, it is not too late to follow its principles; many troops are still stationed overseas and the greatest good would be to bring them home unharmed.

Works Cited

“Address of his holiness Pope John Paul II to the diplomatix corps.” L’Osservatore Romano, Jan.  2003. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.             <http://catholicism.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=catholicism&cdn=religion&tm=9&f=20&tt=12&bt=7&bts=7&zu=http%3A//www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2003/january/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20030113_diplomatic-corps_en.html>

Catholic Church. Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000. Print.

Elman MF. (1997). Paths to Peace: Is Democracy the Answer? Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Fisher, David. “Was Iraq an Unjust War? A Debate on the Iraq War and Reflections on Libya.” International Affairs 87.3 (n.d.): 687-707. JSTOR. Web.

Kull S, Ramsay C, Lewis E. (2003). Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War. Political Science Quarterly, 118(4): 569–598.

Minch, Michael. When Soldiers Aren’t Heroes: An Essay. (2004). Retrieved from http://www.uvu.edu/ethics/seac/When%20Soldiers%20Arent%20Heroes.pdf

Pitchford, Jenna. The “Global War on Terror,” Identity, and Changing Perceptions: Iraqi Responses to America’s War in Iraq. Journal of American Studies (2011), 45, pp 695-716.

Schmidt BC. (2008). The Bush Doctrine and the Iraq War: Neoconservatives Versus Realists. Security Studies, 17(2): 191-220.

Siedenburg, Frederic. “War and the Catholic Church.” JSTOR. The University of Chicago Press, n.d. Web. 10 Feb. 2014. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2764200>.

Waldrop, Robert. Just Peace. A Catholic Worker Response to the US Bishops’ Statements on Iraq, November 2006-January 2007, 25 Feb. 2007. Web. 10 Feb. 2014. <http://justpeace.org/bishopsandunjustwar.htm>.