Churches Sound as One Voice (Do Not Initiate a War, They All Say)

The Commercial Appeal, Memphis ^ | March 2, 2003 | David Waters

[willieroe]

In recent months, Americans have been asking each other a vital question:

Should we go to war?

Many of America's church leaders are responding to a different question that seems more to the point:

Should we start a war?

No, say leaders of the United Methodist Church, a denomination whose members include President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

"A preemptive war by the United States against a nation like Iraq goes against the very grain of our understanding of the Gospel, our church's teachings, and our conscience," wrote Sharon Brown Christopher, president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should we start a war?

No, say leaders of the Episcopal Church, a denomination whose members include Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Powell.

"We believe a preemptive strike against Iraq, with the overwhelming force such a strike may require to attain an expedient victory, may have many unintended consequences, including unacceptable civilian casualties. Further, in this instance, we do not support a decision to go to war without clear and convincing evidence of the need for us to defend ourselves against an imminent attack," wrote the House of Bishops.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should we start a war?

No, say leaders of the Church of God in Christ.

"We do not find any moral justification for a preemptive strike in the absence of an attack, or real threat of an attack, upon the United States. A military strike of this nature puts the United States in the posture of aggressive warfare, not defense, which is precisely the behavior we, and your administration, deplore in the Iraqi regime," the COGIC Board of Bishops wrote to Bush.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should we start a war?

No, say leaders of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

"Our bishops' conference continues to question the moral legitimacy of any preemptive, unilateral use of military force to overthrow the government of Iraq. To permit preemptive or preventive uses of military force to overthrow threatening or hostile regimes would create deeply troubling moral and legal precedents. Based on the facts that are known, it is difficult to justify resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature or Iraq's involvement in the terrorist attacks of September 11," wrote Bishop Wilton Gregory.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should we start a war?

No, say leaders of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Orthodox Church in America, the Christian Church (The Disciples of Christ), the United Church of Christ and the American Baptist Churches in the USA.

No, say leaders of the National Baptist Convention, the Progressive National Baptist Convention and the African Methodist Episcopal Church.

No, say the Quakers, Mennonites, Brethren and Unitarians.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should we start a war?

I can't find a single major Christian denomination that says yes.

Contact columnist David Waters at 529-2399 or e-mail waters@gomemphis.com. Faith Matters runs on Wednesdays, Saturdays and Sundays.

[Humidston]

Absurd, eh? I've been watching the NCC and the WCC destroy mainline religion since the '60's.

If you have issues with what I have said, so be it. They are anti-American and the antithesis of all I hold dear.

[Doctor Mongo]

"Priests and Wizards, Bah!" - Conan the Barbarian

[WOSG]

Should we save a woman being raped?

Should we liberate a country?

should we stop a mugging by threatening force?

Should we disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction?


the questions asked lead to the answer.
"start a war" without asking the causes, justifications, ramifications is misleading question at best.

Should you ever punch a man?
What if that man was trying to commit a robbery?
or what if it wsa in self-defence?


This report on the church positions is nothing but ading and abetting the enemy. It doesnt ask whether our reasons for war - liberation of Iraq and the removal of a terrorist-coddling dictator - are justified or not. They are.

[Theophilus]

Got this in an email from a friend:

This is the most proactive solution I have heard.

At a Prayer meeting last night while praying for world affairs, one of the prayer warriors mentioned the Lord waking him in the middle of the night and telling him that if one million people would pray for Sadaam Hussein to abdicate the presidency of Iraq, we would avoid war. We at the meeting promised to contact 10 believers to pray for this and to ask each believer to ask 10 more believers to pray. Please pass this on and with God's mercy, we will avoid such a conflict.

Returned this email:

We're praying for swift, complete and decisive victory!

Psalm 144:1
Blessed be the LORD my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:

        Love Ya, God Bless!

[TrueBeliever9]

United Methodist Church

Isn't this group part of the Council that supports Marxism?

[TrueBeliever9]

For you information and comments

[WOSG]

This is a great editorial ...

"War is evil. But it is necessary when peace and good order are threatened. This basic fact has been glossed over by years of leftist propaganda in the media and especially in education."


... it is clear that, unlike the PC churches mentioned above, this man is truly a devout Christian who follows his conscience and the traditional teaching of the church.

[TommyDale]

Even Jesus Himself only told us to turn our cheeks once.

[carolina_rn7]

You obviously have never been to a 1611 KJV, Bible believing, Independant Baptist Church in the mountains of Western North Carolina. We are praying for these young men and women in our armed forces. Warriors of the Living and Almighty God! Is it a religious war? You bet'cha! The Living Almighty Jehovah God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. The God of the Bible vs. the dead god of the moon, descendants of Ishmael and the terrorists of the middle eastern extremists called muslims.

[LadyDoc]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/788211/posts?page=1


Hannan stands up for war on Iraq


Retired archbishop recalls Nazi horrors


11/13/02

By Bruce Nolan
Staff writer/The Times-Picayune









WASHINGTON -- It was too much for retired Archbishop Philip Hannan of New Orleans to take. As his younger brother bishops Tuesday moved toward telling President Bush how deeply skeptical they are of the morality of a war against Iraq, Hannan, at 89 still the peaceable fraternity's most reliable hawk, rose and argued the other side.

When the globe's only superpower "allows some despotic power to rule the earth, or parts of the earth, we're in terrible shape" morally and politically, he told an audience of about 250.

Hannan's colleagues at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were discussing whether to send Bush a letter much like one their president, Bishop Wilton Gregory of Belleville Ill., sent Sept. 13.

"Based on the facts that are known to us -- a preemptive, unilateral use of force is difficult to justify at this time" under traditional Catholic teaching, Gregory wrote.

Tuesday's preliminary discussion -- led by Boston Cardinal Bernard Law, whose international committee would do the drafting -- centered simply on whether to send Bush a new message. It would be a given, Law said, that the substance would convey Gregory's skepticism, which appears to be shared by many bishops. Several rose to speak in support of the measure. That brought Hannan to his feet.

Attending as a nonvoting observer, Hannan is the senior archbishop in the United States and something of a legend among his colleagues for his relative conservatism in a generally liberal group. As a seminarian in Rome in the late 1930s, he watched Hitler and Mussolini gather power, and as a paratroops chaplain saw the devastation of World War II.

Those experiences shaped his appreciation of military strength, applied early, to oppose tyranny. For that reason, decades later, he was among a tiny handful of bishops who unsuccessfully resisted publication of a Catholic bishops' document deploring the nuclear arms race as immoral.

On Tuesday, he made much the same argument, reminding the bishops that he spoke as one who had stood in the filth of two Nazi concentration camps.

After his speech, Hannan noted that Bush has gathered United Nations support for opposing Iraq. And he said the precision weapons demonstrated in Afghanistan probably would keep Iraqi civilian casualties to a minimum.

But more to the point, Hannan lumped Saddam Hussein with communists and Nazis as notorious tyrants -- and linked him with the terrorists who attacked the United States.

"You finally come down to a situation where they can enslave whomever they wish, whomever they think is against their particular code, and that's what we cannot tolerate," he said.

"They're not realistic because (they've) never seen what is the result of absolute disregard of human rights," Hannan said of the other bishops. "They've never seen it; they don't know what the hell they're talking about."

. . . . . . .

Bruce Nolan can be reached at bnolan@timespicayune.com or (504) 826-3344.





11/13/02

[Charles Henrickson]

Nowhere in the constitution does it state a specific format for a declaration of war. If the Congress authorizes the President to use force, that is more than adequate.

Article I, Section 8:
The Congress shall have power . . .
11) To declare war. . . .

This power is not given to the President in the Constitution. He is the Commander-in-Chief, and so, yes, once war is declared, he is in charge of the conduct of the war. But he does not undertake or initiate a war on his own. Ideally, this should be done by a formal declaration of war by Congress. Short of that, I agree with you, there should be some authorization given by Congress.

Terrorists, by definition, are not a legitimate nation or government. So going after al-Qaeda does not require a declaration of war. But going after Iraq, I submit, is a different kettle of fish.

Of course, nobody pays much attention to the Constitution any more. . . .

[RAWGUY]

Should we start a war?

I can't find a single major Christian denomination that says yes.

Perhaps you should ask the proper question: "Should we retaliate to a pre-emptive strike or be defeated?"

We are not planning a pre-emptive strike as it is impossible for us to do so. Our enemy has already used the pre-emptive strike in this war and there can only be one in any given altercation.

We are not doing this unilaterally either as we have some 30 nations backing us either morally/ethically or with troops or both.

I have heard enough from people spouting their mouths off when they have not properly considered the facts or do not have the understanding to consider them. Everyone has a GOD given right to their own opnion and I will fight to the death to protect that right for any or all of them. No one has a right to their own set of facts as facts are facts and backed by the truth and the truth owes nothing to anyone's opinion (and most assuredly my own opnion).

GOD Bless You my Friends,

RAWGUY

[ex-snook]

The Churches are right.

Congress would not hestitate to 'declare war' if they thought the voters supported it. (including Korea, Vietnam, etc.) Notice the meally mouth way to fake a 'war declaration' - force; consequences, et al. Why not come out and define 'serious consequences' as war and bombing if that is what is intended? Sort of describes a 'sneaky fast pitch' in baseball.

If our representives who support war have the gonads, let them declare war on any country we want to bomb for America and not the UN, democracy or 'our friends'. Clinton bombed a pile of countries with Republican acquiesence. Democrats used to start wars and now the Republicans (one world faction, that is) have taken this baton.

Bush is being led around as a puppet outfitted by new clothes justifications other month. Yes, most of the world not on our payroll and the Churches see that these clothes are transparent.

[Conservababe]

Where do you live, San Francisco?

No, actually, I live in rural Southeast Missouri. From the polls, speak out forums, letters to the editor in our local paper and word of mouth I have learned that Christians in this area are, for the most part, anti-war.

I don't like it either, but it is true.

[motherof2]

I'm glad someone else noticed. We recently left a Presbyterian Church due in part to the emails I received from the Presbyterian USA Church. We have since started attending a Lutheran Church. I signed up for their email too and it is a great deal less active in the area of politics/war.

I found many of the replies here very educational. I didn’t know about their support for Angela Davis.
I don’t understand the Catholic outlook. The Carmelite nuns and I’m sure others, were forced out of their homelands by the Moslems decades ago. This is nothing new and no we did not start it.

I have a book called RELIGIOUS CEREMONIES AND CUSTOMS or THE FORMS OF WORSHIP, published by HUTCHINSON and DWIER in 1836. I don’t proclaim to understand this paragraph fully but read for yourself. Found in the Chapter “Life of MAHOMET.”

“…the following quotation from Dr. Prideaux, on the moral ends of Providence, insuffering this desolating scourge to arise at that particular period of the world, which gave it birth. “At Length,” says he,
“having wearied the patience and long suffering of God, he raised up the Saracens to be the instruments of his wrath to punish them for it; who, taking advantage of the weakness of their power, and the distraction of counsels which their divisions had caused among them, overran, with a terrible devastation, all the eastern provinces of the Roman empire. And having fixed that tyranny over them which hath ever since afflicted those parts of the world, turned every where their churches into mosques, and their worship into a horrid superstition; and instead of that holy religion which they had abused, forced on them the abominable imposture of Mohomet. Thus those once glorious and most flourishing churches, for a punishment of their wickedness, being given up to the insult, ravage, and scorn of the worst of enemies, were on a sudden overwhelmed with so terrible a destruction as hath reduced them to that low and miserable condition under which they have ever since groaned; the all-wise providence of God seeming to continue them thus unto this day under the pride and persecution of Mahometan tyranny, for no other end but to be an example and warning to others against the wickedness of separation and division.”

Moslem is an old spelling of Muslim. Saracens = any Arab or any Moslem

[rwfromkansas]

David Waters is a stupid lefty.

Furthermore, he has only bothered to speak to "mainline" churches (aka, those typically more into a social gospel and activism instead of THE Gospel).

If he would have bothered to come to my church (the Reformed Presbyterian Church), he would have seen we love Dubya and trust that he will do what is right; if we can do this without war, wonderful. But, if we must go to war, we trust that he is leaning on God and we trust that God's purposes will be fulfilled, as they ALWAYS are.

[Valin]

A question I would like to ask them. Don't the Iraqi people deserve a chance to be free?

[Valin]

From our lips to Gods ear.