The Moral Case for War

I am astounded at the religious opposition to the liberation of Iraq. The Koran clearly advocates war (often with little to no moral justification) and Jewish law and history is resplendent with calls for just warfare, from Abraham[i] to the divine command to utterly decimate the heathen in the promised land[ii] to the prophecy of the militant advent of their Messiah[iii]. It is, therefore, to the Christian faith, my own faith, which I turn my attention.

First, let me step aside for a moment to clarify certain moral ambiguities which have been falsely portrayed by those who oppose this war. It is obvious at this point that our military action is not unilateral, “in defiance” of the world community, or condemned by any moral nation even if these concerns were relevant. It is also fashionable, though specious, to assert that missions of disarmament for self-defense, liberation of an oppressed people, and regime change are divergent and conflicting missions. They are not; they are the same objective. The greatest weapon of mass destruction is a regime which oppresses its own people to genocidal levels and actively pursues weapons of mass destruction. A missile can be destroyed but, under a leadership bent on domination, that missile will most certainly be rebuilt. No disarmament can be successful under these conditions.

The pursuit of resolution by peaceful means has been performed (over twelve years worth of pursuit). Likewise, this is not, in point of fact, a pre-emptive war or unprovoked assault. The current Iraqi regime invaded a peaceful country, was defeated, and a conditional ceasefire declared. The discussions of U.N. resolutions are actually discussions regarding the violation of the conditions of the ceasefire—a ceasefire in a war which was never resolved. For twelve years, peaceful means were sought to enforce the conditions of this ceasefire until finally, beyond any and all contention, it became clear that the ceasefire had been violated and would never respected. Far from preemptive and unprovoked, the current war is a continuation of the original defense of Kuwait. Most importantly, the motives of this war are just. Though varied in specifics, all the various aspects of the ideology which has lead this nation to war can be distilled to a single point: the protection of the innocent, be that in the form of protecting America and our allies from threat to the protection of the Iraqi people themselves from genocide. At this point, the repeated horrific violations of human lives and the commission of inhuman acts, evil acts, by the regime is beyond debate.

St. Ambrose and St. Augustine have articulated and enumerated the Biblical call for just war and I would not presume to be a better spokesman. Instead, let me simply summarize the barest bones of the argument that the faithful may find comfort in the Holy Writ.

Christ himself repeatedly defended the innocent in his incarnate lifetime. The most obvious example is the scourging of the moneylenders in the temple where he defended the innocent worshippers who were being deceived and the sanctity of the temple itself (an innocent establishment and symbol incapable of defending itself)[iv]. He also defended children and a prostitute against stoning. Although these events were not depicted as violent encounters, it is important to understand, lacking the implied use of force, these actions would have been hollow and possibly unsuccessful.

Likewise, Christ never expresses an opposition to the military. He advised the disciples to arm themselves[v]. When presented with the opportunity to influence a Roman centurion and speak against the man’s position as a soldier, not only did Christ not rebuke him, he commended his faith[vi]. Acts 10 shows us that many of the early Christians were actually in the military. Cornelius is described both as a centurion and a righteous man. Let us also not forget that Christ himself will, taking up the Old Testament mantle of the conquering Messiah, lead the greatest of all battles without shirking or restraint[vii]. It is clear, both from the character of God the Father and Christ’s example, there is no call to pure pacifism within the Christian faith and no flinching from a righteous battle against evil and in defense of innocence.

At this point, critics will raise such quotes as “Thou shalt not kill”, “Turn the other cheek”, and so on. I would urge to them, rather than reciting portions of the liturgy from cliché and interpreting them on the basis of Christian “common myth”, actually read these passages in the liturgy and understand them in the context they were written. These quips are not even the complete sentences spoken in some cases—beyond taken out of context, they are taken out of perspective and basic grammar. The choice to not exercise self-defense (with a severe evidence on ‘self’) is a gainful choice to further the ministry of Christ through example, not an excuse to shirk civil or moral duty.

Following the establishment of the fact that war and/or violence is not, in and of itself, evil, forbidden, or even discouraged by God, the next step is to examine the proper role of government. Throughout both New and Old Testaments, the role of government is two-fold: the establishment of internal justice and the protection of its people from external danger. In effect, this is a return to the singular pursuit of the protection of the innocent. It is intuitive that the standards applied for internal justice within a nation are the same standards which should be applied externally to dealing with other nations.

Finally, an in this case most salient, it is the duty of a Christian to support his government, up to and including military service, at all times unless the government issues the individual a command which is in direct contradiction with the laws of God. Even in this case, the defiance is limited to the individual in question and in acceptance of the risks and consequences of these actions[viii]. At the root of the discussion is a simple truth: God has placed the government over the individual and, if God did not wish them to rule, he would remove them (one of the perks of being omnipotent). This is clearly and brilliantly spelled out to the early church in Romans 13:

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained by God. Whosoever, therefore, resists the power resists the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves judgment.

“For, rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same; for he is the servant of God to thee for good.

“But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is a servant of God, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

“Wherefore, ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also; for they are God’s servants, attending continually upon this very thing.

“Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”

Given all of this, it is clear that we go forth to protect the innocent, at home and abroad, including in Iraq. We fight a just war, under a just government, for a just cause, for just motives, and we are morally obligated, therefore, to give just support, duty, and honor. God bless and keep our nation, its leaders, and the men and women fighting against evil. Brethren, good hunting.