General and complete disarmament

[koda]

Topher:

Of couse the Vatican does not think that. The Church is not pascifist. In fact, pacifism is heresy.

So is killing hundreds of thousands or innocent civilians, which is what a nuclear bomb does.

No one wants to get blown up (or shot, or etc…) by terrorists or even legitimate armies and it is not surprising that we go to extremes to try to prevent such. But as Christians we need to realize the God is not an American. We are no more special to him than the Chinese. Jesus taught us to learn to see him in everyone, especially our enemies. If we do not, how are we different from non-Christians? Our faith is supposed to sustain us even in the face of death. Our faith is in God, not bombs. Do you really think that Jesus would approve of the use of nuclear weapons on anybody? Really? I don’t want to die either, but I’m willing to die for God.

I also find it interesting that many of the same folks who jump all over anyone who does not believe wholeheartedly in every word of the Church should so easily disregard such a vital call.

 

[Matt25]

Topher:

Of couse the Vatican does not think that. The Church is not pascifist. In fact, pacifism is heresy.

Which Council defined Pacifism as a heresy? Has Pax Christi been excommunicated? Also see paxchristiusa.org/COCT.pdf

The Vatican and U.S. Catholic Bishops support
conscientious objection for those for whom
military participation would be a violation of
deeply held moral convictions. In the U.S.
Bishops’ Declaration on Conscientious
Objection and Selective Conscientious
Objection, U.S. Bishops wrote, “…It is clear
that a Catholic can be a conscientious objector
to war in general or to a particular war ‘because
of religious training and belief.’…we should
regard conscientious objection and selective
conscientious objection as positive indicators
within the Church of a sound moral awareness
and respect for human life.”

 

[lillysan]

I disagree with this becasue this is not what the pope himself has said on the issue. Living in a town where nuclear weapons are actually made, well of course not now because of our wonderful (sarcasm)Bill Clinton, there really is a need for our country to have these weapons. And personally working at one of the laboratories and knowing what is going on in other coutries without these nuclear weapons stockpiles we ouselves could very easily be wiped out. People need to stop being wimps and see that there is a need for us to have them as a deterant. As it is because of the test ban treaty signed by Bill Clinton, once again, we are dealing with old weapons aging with no way to test them. We at this point are not allowed to make any new nuclear weapons. Which I really hope the test ban treaty will be overturned. We should begin to start making them again. This gives our country a chance to keep peace. Before people begin to make rash jugements of our nuclear weapons, one much actually know what they are talking about. Not to mention that they should have the facts. I am sorry but many more would have died without the use of our original nuclear weapons in Japan. No one wants to make a decision to kill many people but that is how countries protect their people and the catholic church is not against that.

 

[Matt25]

Ani Ibi:

Are you suggesting that it is not right to threaten to use them?

Yes.

The US Bishops document The Challenge of Peace, looked at just this question osjspm.org/cst/cp.htm

1. The political paradox of deterrence has also strained our moral conception. May a nation threaten what it may never do? May it possess what it may never use? Who is involved in the threat each superpower makes: government officials? or military personnel? or the citizenry in whose defense the threat is made?
2. In brief, the danger of the situation is clear; but how to prevent the use of nuclear weapons, how to assess deterrence, and how to delineate moral responsibility in the nuclear age are less clearly seen or stated. Reflecting the complexity of the nuclear problem, our arguments in this pastoral must be detailed and nuanced; but our “no” to nuclear war must, in the end, be definitive and decisive…

…We believe it is necessary, for the sake of prevention, to build a barrier against the concept of nuclear war as a viable strategy for defense. There should be a clear public resistance to the rhetoric of “winnable” nuclear wars, or unrealistic expectations of “surviving” nuclear exchanges, and strategies of “protracted nuclear war.” We oppose such rhetoric…

…Even a nuclear attack directed only at military facilities would be devastating to the country as a whole. This is because military facilities are widespread rather than concentrated at only a few points. Thus, many nuclear weapons would be exploded.

Furthermore, the spread of radiation due to the natural winds and atmospheric mixing would kill vast numbers of people and contaminate large areas. The medical facilities of any nation would be inadequate to care for the survivors. An objective examination of the medical situation that would follow a nuclear war leads to but one conclusion: prevention is our only recourse…

150. We do not perceive any situation in which the deliberate initiation of nuclear warfare, on however restricted a scale, can be morally justified.

 

[koda]

lillysan:

I disagree with this becasue this is not what the pope himself has said on the issue. Living in a town where nuclear weapons are actually made, well of course not now because of our wonderful (sarcasm)Bill Clinton, there really is a need for our country to have these weapons. And personally working at one of the laboratories and knowing what is going on in other coutries without these nuclear weapons stockpiles we ouselves could very easily be wiped out. People need to stop being wimps and see that there is a need for us to have them as a deterant. As it is because of the test ban treaty signed by Bill Clinton, once again, we are dealing with old weapons aging with no way to test them. We at this point are not allowed to make any new nuclear weapons. Which I really hope the test ban treaty will be overturned. We should begin to start making them again. This gives our country a chance to keep peace. Before people begin to make rash jugements of our nuclear weapons, one much actually know what they are talking about. Not to mention that they should have the facts. I am sorry but many more would have died without the use of our original nuclear weapons in Japan. No one wants to make a decision to kill many people but that is how countries protect their people and the catholic church is not against that.

To say this is to ignore the evidence - just read Matt25’s posts where he has excerpts from the CCC and other Official Catholic Sources which condemn any and all use of nuclear weapons. It is also the teaching of the Church and Jesus that violence or the threat thereof does not result in peace. I’m not being sarcastic here, but just how would you explain to Jesus that it is okay to kill thousands of innocent people? Please see my post below where I address this issue and why we have to be willing to die for our Lord but not kill for him. I ask you (not just you, but all who share this belief) to really pray and consider this question. We are supposed to realize that the Kingdom of God is at hand, if only we make it so. There is no place for nuclear war in God’s kingdom.

 

[lillysan]

koda:

To say this is to ignore the evidence - just read Matt25’s posts where he has excerpts from the CCC and other Official Catholic Sources which condemn any and all use of nuclear weapons. It is also the teaching of the Church and Jesus that violence or the threat thereof does not result in peace. I’m not being sarcastic here, but just how would you explain to Jesus that it is okay to kill thousands of innocent people? Please see my post below where I address this issue and why we have to be willing to die for our Lord but not kill for him. I ask you (not just you, but all who share this belief) to really pray and consider this question. We are supposed to realize that the Kingdom of God is at hand, if only we make it so. There is no place for nuclear war in God’s kingdom.

Really what I have to say is that I really hope your prayers will help your family when the US disarms thier nuclear weapons and North Korea, China and anyone else sends a nuclear weapon our way. I will pray too but this might not be enough.
One has to be reasonable and open thier eyes. Nuclear weapons are a part of our world and to think that all the other countries which, such as China, are communist and are not allowed to have a religion, are going to disarm because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO!!! I agree that there is no place in Gods kingdom but it is here and as I said earlier have a deterant for peace. It is the only way. I ask you to pray and I will also to see if there is any way to get around this. At this point I cannot think of anything Can you?

 

[lillysan]

koda:

To say this is to ignore the evidence - just read Matt25’s posts where he has excerpts from the CCC and other Official Catholic Sources which condemn any and all use of nuclear weapons. It is also the teaching of the Church and Jesus that violence or the threat thereof does not result in peace. I’m not being sarcastic here, but just how would you explain to Jesus that it is okay to kill thousands of innocent people? Please see my post below where I address this issue and why we have to be willing to die for our Lord but not kill for him. I ask you (not just you, but all who share this belief) to really pray and consider this question. We are supposed to realize that the Kingdom of God is at hand, if only we make it so. There is no place for nuclear war in God’s kingdom.

I also want to say that when I read the above by Matt25 CCC. I do not see that it is saying that having them as a detterant is wrong. I would not say it is good to start a nuclear war and would really not encourage a nuclear war to say the least!

 

[Andrew_11]

Matt25:

Thats like saying I will stop robbing banks if the crooks agree to stop robbing banks first.

This is one of the worst analogies i have ever heard. Saying cops will stop robbing banks when criminals stop becoming violent is a much better analogy.

 

[koda]

lillysan:

Really what I have to say is that I really hope your prayers will help your family when the US disarms thier nuclear weapons and North Korea, China and anyone else sends a nuclear weapon our way. I will pray too but this might not be enough.
One has to be reasonable and open thier eyes. Nuclear weapons are a part of our world and to think that all the other countries which, such as China, are communist and are not allowed to have a religion, are going to disarm because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO!!! I agree that there is no place in Gods kingdom but it is here and as I said earlier have a deterant for peace. It is the only way. I ask you to pray and I will also to see if there is any way to get around this. At this point I cannot think of anything Can you?

Actually, I can. If following Jesus means I die, then I’ll die. Jesus says again and again that this world is not our home. We’re to concentrate on getting into heaven, not killing large groups of innocent people to stay in this one. Jesus warns “do not be afraid of those who can take your life, but only of those who can take your life and your soul.” Personally, I’d choose my soul over my life any day. Jesus taught us not to worry about the other guy doing the right thing - they will have to answer for themsevles. Regardless of the acts of others, we are to do the right thing.
Please explain how your philosoply fits with this teaching. And, again, how do you explain this to Christ? He died for us that we should have eternal life in heaven, not on earth.

 

[JohnDz]

The thought that Christians can endorse nuclear weapons makes me want to cry. How can relying on nuclear bombs for security be equated with trusting in the Lord? How can weapons that can destroy whole cities, with all the men, women, and children in them, be pro-life? It seems to me that Christ’s teaching is not encapsulated in the doctrines of secular conservatism any more than those of secular liberalism – what comes from heaven does not fit in neatly on earth. I imagine nuclear weapons had their place during the Cold War, but if we hold onto them forever they will eventually be used.

 

[JohnDz]

The enthusiasm of some Christians for nuclear weapons makes me want to weep. How can relying on nuclear bombs for security be equated with trusting in the Lord? How can weapons that can destroy whole cities, with all the men, women, and children in them, be pro-life? It seems to me that Christ’s teaching is not encapsulated in the doctrines of secular conservatism any more than those of secular liberalism – what comes from heaven does not fit in neatly on earth.

 

[Gray_Mouser]

Matt25:

Thats like saying I will stop robbing banks if the crooks agree to stop robbing banks first.

Actually, it’s like saying that you will stop employing bank guards
when crooks stop robbing banks.

Gray Mouser

 

[Gray_Mouser]

koda:

Actually, I can. If following Jesus means I die, then I’ll die. Jesus says again and again that this world is not our home. We’re to concentrate on getting into heaven, not killing large groups of innocent people to stay in this one. Jesus warns “do not be afraid of those who can take your life, but only of those who can take your life and your soul.” Personally, I’d choose my soul over my life any day. Jesus taught us not to worry about the other guy doing the right thing - they will have to answer for themsevles. Regardless of the acts of others, we are to do the right thing.
Please explain how your philosoply fits with this teaching. And, again, how do you explain this to Christ? He died for us that we should have eternal life in heaven, not on earth.

Freely laying one’s life down to witness to the faith is a great gift from God to the Church. But you cannot make it a requirement for all people for the simple fact that not all are called to martyrdom. The Catechism makes it quite clear that we have a right to preserve our own lives under normal circumstances and that includes the right to defend ourselves (scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2264.htm). Indeed, defending yourself can not only be a right but a responsiblity one must meet (scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2265.htm).

The Catechism also points out that defense of one’s country is a requirement of the common good (scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2240.htm ).

Total disarmament might qualify as a prudential judgement (although how prudent it would actually be is debatable) but it certainly seems not to be a doctrine of the Church.

Gray Mouser