C
CollegeStinks
Guest
Pope Pius VII said this with regards to the First Barbary War, which was a war early in America’s history in which we fought against the Berber Muslim states of North Africa. The Pope said this of course because, as is historically routine, the Muslims in this region were kidnapping, maiming, and killing Christians, defiling and raping their women, and holding their children for ransom. America’s interest in this war however had nothing to do with that issue, but about its own interests… Yet in fighting this war, the United States of America did a great deed for the Christians of southern Europe and northern Africa.
What strikes my curiosity is how similar this conflict was to both the Crusades and the modern wars in the middle east - all of which were essentially sparked by Islamic terrorism one way or another. Even if America’s interest isn’t really fighting Muslim terrorism but procuring something else, one cannot deny that terrorism was at least the enabler allowing us to justify going over there to the public. Likewise, America’s interest in the First Barbary War was not fighting Muslim terrorists but rather protecting the safety and interests of Americans. Even so, Pope Pius VII approved, and enthusiastically so.
What is my point? Why in the world is the prudential judgement of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI disproportionately condemning of America’s wars in the middle east? At best, we are doing much for Christians by attempting to rid the region of Muslim extremism, of people who wake up each morning wanting nothing more than to kill Christians, similar to the Crusades which were endorsed by good Popes of the past. At worst, we have no interest in doing the aforementioned, but may have the same result anyway, just like the war which Pius VII, in his wisdom, declared did more for the cause of Christianity than the most powerful nations of Christendom had done in ages.
Why does it seem to me, that modern Christians are so vehemently opposed to warfare without giving the due consideration necessary to determine whether or not it is just? It seems as though no matter what, Christians in the current age are always going to condemn violence, inherently, and propose instead a false peace which demands the refusal to take up arms even in the face of grave evil. The modernist notion of peace is not the peace of which Jesus spoke. The modernist notion of peace instead is simply the cooperation with evil, and a willingness to tolerate grave injustices instead of fighting them. Bear with me, brothers and sisters, and realize how this can be used to Satan’s advantage. If good and Holy men proclaim pacifism as their doctrine, there is no threat to evil. Satan loves tolerance and pacifism, because for the last 50 years or more they have allowed a great multitude of evil forces to wreak havoc on the land unchecked.
Mark my words, so long as there is sin on this Earth, no Christian can ever advocate a strict policy of pacifism in good conscience, because in doing so he demands that evil not be dealt with, but ignored or cooperated with, or worse, welcomed. The true desire for peace is not that which refuses violence and instead seeks to normalize evil and injustice as a mere difference to be tolerated, but instead it recognizes that true peace only comes through Jesus Christ, and only lasts in the Kingdom of Heaven. Only by ridding evil from this world will there ever be true peace. Alas, only Christ alone can remove all evil once and for all, and this we are promised he will do. But that doesn’t render our time here meaningless and futile.
There is nothing in Church doctrine that condemns fighting or warfare. For over a millennium good Christians have gone to war, good Christians have claimed land, good Christians have fought for the strong, for the weak, for the healthy and sick, for the rich and the poor, but most importantly good Christians have always fought for that which is just. The Lord Jesus Christ does not frown upon the just war, nor does he spite the valiant and virtuous soldier. On the contrary, fighting for the Kingdom of God brings glory to His Name and to the souls of those who perish in such an endeavour. War is not intrinsically evil, nor is violence. Remeber the chant in Exodus: “The Lord is a Warrior; the Lord is his name.”
What strikes my curiosity is how similar this conflict was to both the Crusades and the modern wars in the middle east - all of which were essentially sparked by Islamic terrorism one way or another. Even if America’s interest isn’t really fighting Muslim terrorism but procuring something else, one cannot deny that terrorism was at least the enabler allowing us to justify going over there to the public. Likewise, America’s interest in the First Barbary War was not fighting Muslim terrorists but rather protecting the safety and interests of Americans. Even so, Pope Pius VII approved, and enthusiastically so.
What is my point? Why in the world is the prudential judgement of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI disproportionately condemning of America’s wars in the middle east? At best, we are doing much for Christians by attempting to rid the region of Muslim extremism, of people who wake up each morning wanting nothing more than to kill Christians, similar to the Crusades which were endorsed by good Popes of the past. At worst, we have no interest in doing the aforementioned, but may have the same result anyway, just like the war which Pius VII, in his wisdom, declared did more for the cause of Christianity than the most powerful nations of Christendom had done in ages.
Why does it seem to me, that modern Christians are so vehemently opposed to warfare without giving the due consideration necessary to determine whether or not it is just? It seems as though no matter what, Christians in the current age are always going to condemn violence, inherently, and propose instead a false peace which demands the refusal to take up arms even in the face of grave evil. The modernist notion of peace is not the peace of which Jesus spoke. The modernist notion of peace instead is simply the cooperation with evil, and a willingness to tolerate grave injustices instead of fighting them. Bear with me, brothers and sisters, and realize how this can be used to Satan’s advantage. If good and Holy men proclaim pacifism as their doctrine, there is no threat to evil. Satan loves tolerance and pacifism, because for the last 50 years or more they have allowed a great multitude of evil forces to wreak havoc on the land unchecked.
Mark my words, so long as there is sin on this Earth, no Christian can ever advocate a strict policy of pacifism in good conscience, because in doing so he demands that evil not be dealt with, but ignored or cooperated with, or worse, welcomed. The true desire for peace is not that which refuses violence and instead seeks to normalize evil and injustice as a mere difference to be tolerated, but instead it recognizes that true peace only comes through Jesus Christ, and only lasts in the Kingdom of Heaven. Only by ridding evil from this world will there ever be true peace. Alas, only Christ alone can remove all evil once and for all, and this we are promised he will do. But that doesn’t render our time here meaningless and futile.
There is nothing in Church doctrine that condemns fighting or warfare. For over a millennium good Christians have gone to war, good Christians have claimed land, good Christians have fought for the strong, for the weak, for the healthy and sick, for the rich and the poor, but most importantly good Christians have always fought for that which is just. The Lord Jesus Christ does not frown upon the just war, nor does he spite the valiant and virtuous soldier. On the contrary, fighting for the Kingdom of God brings glory to His Name and to the souls of those who perish in such an endeavour. War is not intrinsically evil, nor is violence. Remeber the chant in Exodus: “The Lord is a Warrior; the Lord is his name.”
