A
anarchocatholic
Guest
The Illusion of a Guilt-Free War, Part One
By the Catholic Peace Fellowship
On the outskirts of Baghdad, the decision was cemented. Army specialist Joshua Casteel knelt before his altar of cutout cardboard icons where his ranger-bead rosary and office book lay. As he prayed again the Magnificat—Mary’s song of mercy in Luke 1:46-55—he knew his task.
He would finally apply for conscientious objector status, an honorable discharge from an institution he had served for eight years. He had lived war and had said, “enough.”
For Joshua, the issue wasn’t fear of dying, but of becoming, as he put it, “one who kills.” So, relying on daily prayer and devotions, he went through the long application and was granted conscientious objector status with an honorable discharge.
Problem is, if he had followed the advice of Wayne Laugesen—whose article, “Shalt Thou Kill?” was in the 11/27 issue of the National Catholic Register; he may have disregarded his conscience. Laugesen misrepresents nearly 2,000 years of Church teaching on participation in war. Instead of moral instruction, he gives moral support to the idea that soldiers are thoughtless automatons not responsible for what happens in war.
At the Catholic Peace Fellowship, we work with soldiers every day. They call us with questions about military discharges like conscientious objection. Helping them is part of our mission to make the Church’s teaching on war and conscience concrete. We also give workshops and publish a theological journal, The Sign of Peace.
Some suggest that our job as a Church is to keep silent in wartime for fear of hurting people’s feelings. This was not the path chosen at Vatican II, when the Fathers began “a fresh reappraisal of war” and gave explicit support for conscientious objectors as well as for soldiers who take discernment seriously (see Gaudium et spes, 77-82). Indeed, we must not neglect young people in situations where it is difficult to make moral choices, and easy to do wrong. Those who have been through war know it is, at least, an occasion of sin.
Yet Laugesen writes that Catholic soldiers “needn’t worry” about killing because “Catholic doctrine would place any guilt on the commander in chief—not the soldiers.” Not true. Put it in big neon lights: not true. Simply because a commander has declared war doesn’t make that war just. Nor does it make all action within war permissible. And no soldier is ever to turn his conscience over to his commander—not even under military law!
Laugesen’s idea of guilt-free war needs to be corrected, for the sake of Catholic soldiers who want real answers to real questions.
Let’s start with basics. The Church teaches two legitimate ways for a Catholic (soldier or civilian) to respond to evil. The less common but more ancient is nonviolent resistance—pacifism. For the first 198 years, no Christian was allowed to use deadly weapons, period. Many saints were martyred for refusal to remain in the army. They opposed Roman paganism, but also saw Jesus’ nonviolence as normative. “We are soldiers of Christ,” they would say, “part of the great army of peace, the Church.”
PART TWO IN NEXT POST…
By the Catholic Peace Fellowship
On the outskirts of Baghdad, the decision was cemented. Army specialist Joshua Casteel knelt before his altar of cutout cardboard icons where his ranger-bead rosary and office book lay. As he prayed again the Magnificat—Mary’s song of mercy in Luke 1:46-55—he knew his task.
He would finally apply for conscientious objector status, an honorable discharge from an institution he had served for eight years. He had lived war and had said, “enough.”
For Joshua, the issue wasn’t fear of dying, but of becoming, as he put it, “one who kills.” So, relying on daily prayer and devotions, he went through the long application and was granted conscientious objector status with an honorable discharge.
Problem is, if he had followed the advice of Wayne Laugesen—whose article, “Shalt Thou Kill?” was in the 11/27 issue of the National Catholic Register; he may have disregarded his conscience. Laugesen misrepresents nearly 2,000 years of Church teaching on participation in war. Instead of moral instruction, he gives moral support to the idea that soldiers are thoughtless automatons not responsible for what happens in war.
At the Catholic Peace Fellowship, we work with soldiers every day. They call us with questions about military discharges like conscientious objection. Helping them is part of our mission to make the Church’s teaching on war and conscience concrete. We also give workshops and publish a theological journal, The Sign of Peace.
Some suggest that our job as a Church is to keep silent in wartime for fear of hurting people’s feelings. This was not the path chosen at Vatican II, when the Fathers began “a fresh reappraisal of war” and gave explicit support for conscientious objectors as well as for soldiers who take discernment seriously (see Gaudium et spes, 77-82). Indeed, we must not neglect young people in situations where it is difficult to make moral choices, and easy to do wrong. Those who have been through war know it is, at least, an occasion of sin.
Yet Laugesen writes that Catholic soldiers “needn’t worry” about killing because “Catholic doctrine would place any guilt on the commander in chief—not the soldiers.” Not true. Put it in big neon lights: not true. Simply because a commander has declared war doesn’t make that war just. Nor does it make all action within war permissible. And no soldier is ever to turn his conscience over to his commander—not even under military law!
Laugesen’s idea of guilt-free war needs to be corrected, for the sake of Catholic soldiers who want real answers to real questions.
Let’s start with basics. The Church teaches two legitimate ways for a Catholic (soldier or civilian) to respond to evil. The less common but more ancient is nonviolent resistance—pacifism. For the first 198 years, no Christian was allowed to use deadly weapons, period. Many saints were martyred for refusal to remain in the army. They opposed Roman paganism, but also saw Jesus’ nonviolence as normative. “We are soldiers of Christ,” they would say, “part of the great army of peace, the Church.”
PART TWO IN NEXT POST…