Catholic Army

[AClark]

Since the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty…”, why does the church not make any attempt to defend the innocents who are imperilled by the conflicts which currently rage all over the globe? (I am Catholic, and I am not trying to attack our church, I am just curious).

 

[Arclight]

Since the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty…”, why does the church not make any attempt to defend the innocents who are imperilled by the conflicts which currently rage all over the globe? (I am Catholic, and I am not trying to attack our church, I am just curious).

As for Catholic armed forces, I think the world has had enough of the Middle Ages.

 

[AClark]

I am not asking why we do not have Crusades any more, I was wondering why we do not wield our power in order to put a stop to the humanitarian disasters that are so prevalent in today’s world. It seems to me that we could greatly help in situations such as the Ugandan conflict, for example.

 

[LilyM]

Since the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty…”, why does the church not make any attempt to defend the innocents who are imperilled by the conflicts which currently rage all over the globe? (I am Catholic, and I am not trying to attack our church, I am just curious).

The Church is above all a religious institution rather than a secular one - and promotes the cause of imperilled innocents all over the world as best it can. As a secular one there is no way the Vatican has or would be given the resources to have a sizeable military force, nor would it probably be inclined to have one if it WERE possible. It is not its JOB to be a secular power or to act as a secular power would.

Besides which - the Catholics who serve in secular armed forces around the world fulfil these obligations. We are not all to a man obliged to abandon our necessary God-given work in our own countries in order to defend people half-way round the world. Defending OURselves or our OWN countries is, of course, a different matter.

For one thing the citizens of those countries too have an obligation to defend themselves (and usually at least try to do so).

For another there are innocents sucked into EVERY side of EVERY conflict. By interfering, third party forces usually make things worse rather than better for innocents on all sides.

 

[Tidus]

I am not asking why we do not have Crusades any more, I was wondering why we do not wield our power in order to put a stop to the humanitarian disasters that are so prevalent in today’s world. It seems to me that we could greatly help in situations such as the Ugandan conflict, for example.

First off the Church is the Body of Christ not a social service like the Pope said a while back. Besides there is no need, USA is the self proclaimed world police these days. Besides the UN has peace keepers made up contingents of various countries militaries from American to Albanian to Chinese all over the world. My friend was quite surprised when she went across Moldovan-Russian border and saw the US Army with the blue helmets.

However there was a Catholic Army for a while that defended Holy Rome from the tyranny of Free Masonist Italian revolutionaries… needless to say we kind of lost.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zouave#Papal_Zouaves
amazon.com/Popes-Legion-Multinational-Fighting-Defended/dp/0230600581

 

[AClark]

For one thing the citizens of those countries too have an obligation to defend themselves (and usually at least try to do so).

.

There are many people who do not have the means to defend themselves. Would you say that the Ugandan people’s suffering is a result of their unwillingness to fight the Lord’s Resistance Army? Most humanitarian conflicts involve populations who are too poor to defend themselves. I understand that the church is a religious organization, but I do not see how the defence of the oppressed.

 

[Eucharisted]

Catholics do not form Catholic armies, for the Church Militant is engaged in a battle not with flesh and blood but with evil, that is, metaphysical evil: demons. Our weapons are prayer and penance and our armor is Jesus Christ.

Catholics are free to join militaries, including the Peacekeepers of the UN, who do exactly what you prepose the Church do: fight to defend the helpless and bring peace to countries torn by disaster.

 

[AClark]

Thanks everyone! You have all been very helpful!

 

[Arclight]

“How many divisions does the Pope have?” – Joseph Stalin to Pierre Laval, 1935.

 

[redhen]

“How many divisions does the Pope have?” – Joseph Stalin to Pierre Laval, 1935.

Throughout history, he had quite a few.

Here’s a report of the last Hurrah!
Canadian and American Zouaves in the
Papal Army, 1868-1870
umanitoba.ca/colleges/st_pauls/ccha/Back%20Issues/CCHA1944-45/Marraro.pdf

A Google search turned up this Oxford journal
Papal Armies in Thirteenth Century

ehr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/citation/LXXII/CLXXXII/1

 

[Arclight]

Throughout history, he had quite a few.

Here’s a report of the last Hurrah!
Canadian and American Zouaves in the
Papal Army, 1868-1870
umanitoba.ca/colleges/st_pauls/ccha/Back%20Issues/CCHA1944-45/Marraro.pdf

A Google search turned up this Oxford journal
Papal Armies in Thirteenth Century

ehr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/citation/LXXII/CLXXXII/1

I see a need to organize a CAF Cavalry Group for the Holy See.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I am not asking why we do not have Crusades any more, I was wondering why we do not wield our power in order to put a stop to the humanitarian disasters that are so prevalent in today’s world. It seems to me that we could greatly help in situations such as the Ugandan conflict, for example.

The bolded statement makes me think of a scene in a movie but really makes me ask a general question where the notion is born that the power you speak of (assuming military) is ever to be used in connection with the authority of God as a means to exact some justice for the sake of others, when God did not do so in his own defense.

Does this suggest the head of the house leave his home and go in search of the thief, or this a call to arms to carry out the purpose of Christs ministry?

I do not think it is truly a Christian action to transfer upon ourselves (America) the defense of others selectively with respect to the Just War criteria. All of those conditions must be met to declare war and act with violence and we have examples otherwise.

The power I think you speak of and the danger to weild it is fairly described in another popular story as an example to the caution that must be given to it. Nobility does not come with armies.

Ecclesiasticus Chapter 3

3:19. My son, do thy works in meekness, and thou shalt be beloved above the glory of men.

3:20. The greater thou art, the more humble thyself in all things, and thou shalt find grace before God:

3:21. For great is the power of God alone, and he is honoured by the humble.

Does this mean America should not help others that are being persecuted around the world? No, but if we are to wage war because of Christian ethics the Christian banner should not be cloaked and the people liberated by these actions given the message of Christ and protection to accept it freely or deny it the same.

 

[Dtmccameron]

But, suppose that someday, there will be no nation willing to protect innocents as they are slaughtered. Further, suppose that someday, all the nations of the world turn against the Catholic church, and begin actively pursuing its destruction.

Are we still supposed to support our nations, even if they seek our own deaths, and the death of our faith?

(Aren’t hypothetical questions fun! )

Suppose all the nations of the world, or, even just one, and the rest simply stood by and watched. Suppose, oh…Lybia (sorry Lybia) declared war on the Vatican, and started marching troops through Rome unopposed (as the Italian government would be quite pleased with the idea).

Well, what then?

“Hoh, hum, they’ve blown up the Magisterium.”

I suppose it is a good thing that the Church is not a secular institution, but where on this earth is there a nation that is in line with God, that does hold His Law as law? Where is there a nation where we can be citizens of without paying taxes to fund death machines, and immorality?

Where is there a nation that’s really worth defending? Perhaps the one which doesn’t persecute me for this post in wanting something better, but…How are we to have a moral revolution when the State itself is entirely opposed to Morality itself? How can we turn a nation towards God which, by it’s own laws cannot see Him?

 

[manualman]

IMO, it is the duty of catholics not to take up arms to fight oppressors across the world, but to try to stop the unnatural forces that create most of these conflicts.

Doesn’t it ever surprise anybody how well armed the aggressors are in all these conflicts? How does one side in a tribal conflict end up with thousands of sophisticated assault rifles when the soldiers clearly don’t have enough money to buy decent shoes?

The horrifying answer is that the major ‘civilized’ nations of the world produce all these weapons and do a LOUSY job of controlling their movement throughout the world. The Soviets had MILLIONS of AK-47s and similar weapons stockpiled and massive numbers ended up on the black market. The USA is no cowboy with a white hat on that front either.

Rent the DVD of the movie “Lord of War” sometime. The story is fiction, but the DVD comes with an astonishing minidocumentary of the global arms trade and just how tied into it the major economies of the world really are. Appalling.

 

[Arclight]

IMO, it is the duty of catholics not to take up arms to fight oppressors across the world, but to try to stop the unnatural forces that create most of these conflicts.

Doesn’t it ever surprise anybody how well armed the aggressors are in all these conflicts? How does one side in a tribal conflict end up with thousands of sophisticated assault rifles when the soldiers clearly don’t have enough money to buy decent shoes?

The horrifying answer is that the major ‘civilized’ nations of the world produce all these weapons and do a LOUSY job of controlling their movement throughout the world. The Soviets had MILLIONS of AK-47s and similar weapons stockpiled and massive numbers ended up on the black market. The USA is no cowboy with a white hat on that front either.

Rent the DVD of the movie “Lord of War” sometime. The story is fiction, but the DVD comes with an astonishing minidocumentary of the global arms trade and just how tied into it the major economies of the world really are. Appalling.

Why is it appalling?

 

[manualman]

Why is it appalling that Western interests are profiting obscenely from providing lethal weaponry to barbarian thugs?

Do I need to draw you a picture?

 

[Arclight]

Why is it appalling that Western interests are profiting obscenely from providing lethal weaponry to barbarian thugs?

Do I need to draw you a picture?

No, you can explain in you own words why you think its appalling.

 

[manualman]

Part of the characteristics of humanity after the fall of Original Sin is a tendency towards tribalism. Groups that live in proximity with long memories / grudges are more the rule than the exception. When an external power comes in and seeks the favor of one group (say to get oil or mineral mining rights) and offers them ‘defense assistance’ that consists of massive numbers of assault rifles what do you suppose happens to the unarmed neighbors? Slaughter, that’s what happens.

When both groups have clubs, spears and bows and arrows they keep each other in check no matter how much the hatred. When one group suddenly has the power to butcher the other they all too often use that power. It is the story of postwar Africa over and over again

 

[Arclight]

Part of the characteristics of humanity after the fall of Original Sin is a tendency towards tribalism. Groups that live in proximity with long memories / grudges are more the rule than the exception. When an external power comes in and seeks the favor of one group (say to get oil or mineral mining rights) and offers them ‘defense assistance’ that consists of massive numbers of assault rifles what do you suppose happens to the unarmed neighbors? Slaughter, that’s what happens.

When both groups have clubs, spears and bows and arrows they keep each other in check no matter how much the hatred. When one group suddenly has the power to butcher the other they all too often use that power. It is the story of postwar Africa over and over again

I think you’re mostly right. The intractable wars in Africa are better traced back to the arbitrary borders drawn by the colonial states though. The AKs can be great equalizers though.

 

[manualman]

Of course you are correct that clumsy western border lines drawn at the end of the colonial period play a role. But not as big a role as tribal hatreds that predate Euro influence in the area.

And lets not single out Africa. A little history of the American Indians tells a similar story, and of course there are the Balkans, Cambodia, … sigh.