The war in Iraq, or "Operation Iraqi Freedom", as the Bush Administration has chosen to call it, has certainly polarized people around the globe. In September of 2001, the world was rallying around the United States after we experienced one of the greatest tragedies of history -- the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. Now, little more than 18 months later, many in the world community are calling us the aggressor. Thousands and thousands of people around the globe are protesting what critics are calling a "preventative" war.

As a Catholic, I find myself wondering what the Church says. Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. bishops' conference, probably said it best when he acknowledged that "war has serious consequences, and so could failure to act" and that "people of good will can and do differ" on whether or not this war is "just."

So what does that mean? It means that if Catholics take the time to thoroughly examine all sides of the issue, they may still disagree!

In order to thoroughly examine the war in Iraq to determine whether or not it is "just", we must look to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

"The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
there must be serious prospects of success;
the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good." (CCC 2309)

Someone wrote to me commenting that "to say we can rely on the judgment of the leaders of the U.S. because they may have secret information is... a little hard to swallow."

My reply was that the Catechism doesn't think so. The concluding comment in CCC 2309, cited above, says "The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good."

That means the government needs to make the call. The Catechism does not say that a war cannot be engaged until the Church determines it to be "just". In fact, it specifically states otherwise. The public officials -- in this case, the Bush Administration -- are closest to the situation, they have information not available to the general public, and their job is to protect America, Americans, and American interests.

One common argument claiming to show that the war with Iraq is not "just" is that all other options had not been exhausted. If we go back to the Catechism, however, we won't find those words anywhere. The Catechism never says that all other options must be exhausted. What it says is that "all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective". Obviously, many people believe that this has been achieved.

Other countries have been disarmed by UN resolutions, so disarmament is nothing new. And Iraq was supposed to disarm 12 years ago. Just because their refusal to do so has not been highly publicized does not change the fact.

And weapons of mass destruction? Saddam Hussein is known to have had 5,000 liters of anthrax just a few years ago -- and it is still unaccounted for. How many years does it take before the strategy is judged ineffective?

One reader sent a particularly well-written email explaining why he felt the war with Iraq is unjust. But one idea he presented didn't work for me. He said, in regards to points made in support of the war, "I don't necessarily dispute their validity to JUSTIFY the war in Iraq. But I think there's a significant distinction to be made between finding reasons to 'justify' a war, and a JUST war."

When I first read that, it sort of made sense -- provided that I slightly redefine a word or two. And therein lies the problem with interpreting things such as the Catechism... or the Bible. Not only can the meaning of certain words change over time, the meaning we personally assign to words can differ. Obviously, the latter is much more subjective.

According to Webster's, "justify" means "to show or prove to be just or valid". Therefore, when you agree that my arguments JUSTIFY the war in Iraq, by definition I have proven it to be JUST. How we define "just" does not change the definition of "justify".

And so it goes in the battle over semantics! You said... I said... but what I meant was... but that's not what you said... and on and on. Perhaps the key is to look for the original meaning of the word(s), rather than attempting to pull out and adapt only those things that can be made to support our personal view. To find the truth, we should not start with the assumption that we already have it.

I have also had people remind me that "one may never do evil so that good may result from it." (CCC 1789) The argument, of course, is that we should not go to war as a preventative measure or in order to "liberate" a people who are not asking to be "liberated". Again, this seems perfectly logical at first.

However, the argument presupposes that what is being done is definitely "evil", which is, of course, the point upon which people are understandably disagreeing. To my knowledge, the Church has not come out and called the war "evil", nor has the Church even gone so far as to officially call it "unjust". The Church has said that the war does not meet the criteria to make it "just" -- but that does not make it "unjust", for it is not a clear dichotomy.

I would suggest that the teaching we should not lose sight of comes slightly earlier in the Catechism:

"Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law." (CCC 1787)

That is what I have been trying to do. But I'll admit my opinion sometimes changes from day-to-day as I hear, read, and see more about what is going on.

Terrorism is a type of fighting known as "asymmetrical warfare". It is warfare being carried out against a country by an aggressor who does not answer to a particular governmental body. Eminent danger cannot be determined by watching the movements of troops, or from formal declarations of intent. The attacks come without warning and are usually aimed specifically at civilians.

It is not uncommon to hear people denounce the claims that the war in Iraq is related to the war on terrorism. "There is no absolute connection between Saddam Hussein's regime and the terrorist attack on 9/11/2001," is what they say. "That is only an excuse!"

Then, in the next breath, those same people say that we are asking for more trouble. The war in Iraq is going to trigger terrorist attacks like we've never seen before, and a whole new generation of terrorists will be created!

I understand the fear, and I feel it as well. But that does not help establish that the war is "unjust". If anything, it lends credibility to those who say the war is "just". For what is actually being said is that we truly believe that the damage yet to come will be "lasting, grave and certain." Besides, if there really is no connection between this Saddam Hussein and terrorism, why are we predicting terrorist repercussions?

So where do I stand? Frankly, I'm still undecided... but not for lack of information-seeking or soul-searching. As a general rule I don't approve of force, but I don't know that the "just war" theory, as presented by St. Augustine and St. Thomas is completely adequate when dealing with terrorism, egomaniacal dictators, weapons of mass destruction, and the uncertainty inherent in global politics.

But I could be wrong.

How open are you to hearing opinions that oppose your own?
What do you do to actively seek out God's will?
What is your opinion of the war? How did you come that conclusion?