A LEADING priest, Bishop Reverend William E. Swing, says: “The 20th century was the bloodiest one in terms of religious persecution. More people were killed in the name of religion and faith than any other single source. The next century will be the same unless we change the way we think and shift moral and religious paradigms.”
A cursory glance at the present scenario of insecurity and the crippling social and political order of most nations reveals that we have no other option but to accept what the Christian leader observes. Today, an environment of threat and insecurity has been created to keep the rift and tension alive. Such designs are closely guarded and developed.
Hence, in such an era of instability and insecurity, any effort to find a solution to acute problems through any peaceful means becomes all the more difficult. The ongoing conflict and threats to peace are creating an awareness among the people that peace will not be wholly safeguarded or achieved by politicians, technocrats, military men or the government. This responsibility must be shared by the church also, as with its traditional duty the church is believed to uphold the moral and ethical values of a society.
The problems of war and peace have been universally recognized as an ethical issue. The attainment of peace and stability has remained the ardent desire of the people over centuries.
The desire for peace has become a major subject for debate all over the world. The church is no exception. The various wars fought for grabbing resources and territories have made it clear that the time has come to raise a collective voice against the exploitative and colonizing designs of the developed world. The oppressed must be given their due share and the oppressors condemned and punished. The core issue of political and economic inequality remains the centre of the church’s activity.
In the early days, the church was purely pacifist in its performance. But with the growing popularity of other religions, church policies underwent some drastic changes. Its original pacifist approach was overshadowed by the fear of losing domination and supremacy. And, therefore, it adopted such a strategy in which militarization was not completely ruled out. The church now believes that to safeguard its own boundaries and influence, it must keep pace with the changing social and political order. This drift from total pacifism to somewhat relaxation in dealing with mundane matters varies from country to country, depending on the social and moral issues of that particular country. With the penetration of politics in group interests, the churches were somewhat politicized. The doctrine of ‘just war’ has been the centre of the church’s stand on war and peace. In the words of the UPPSALA Conference of 1983: “The traditional doctrine of the just war has always begun with a moral persuasion against war.”
The actual Christian teaching rejects war of all sorts. But now, the opinion of the church regarding the question of war and peace varies distinctly. On the one hand, it is against war, while on the other, it is actively involved in promoting arms buildup and the politics of creating anger and hatred. This is not true of all churches, but the difference in approach and practice is widely viewed within intellectual circles.
The issue of war and peace has been dealt very specifically by the churches. It has certainly paved the way for various nationalistic uprising in Europe. The case of the Polish struggle is an example of the church’s role as a guide for the nationalist movement. The Solidarnose succeeded with the mass support of Catholic churches all over Poland.
In several countries, church leadership is closely associated with the political authorities — the Church of England, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church and the Nordic Folk Church are examples, while Quakers are exceptions to the general rule of ecclesiastical nationalism.
The history of disarmament and arms control reflects the struggle of the church both at national and international levels. In many European countries as well as in America, churches have been raising voice against defence strategies and the budget allocated for military purposes. These churches have now gained powerful mass support against the strategies of arms-producing nations.
But here also the churches are not fully united. Some of them support the national security policies while others outrightly reject the armament race.
The national conference of Catholic bishops of the US in 1983 circulated a pastoral letter on war and peace. This is an example of the church’s defined and distinct outlook on today’s conflictual war hazards and its extreme concern to maintain peace in the world.
The US churches, with a defined liberal capitalist outlook of the American society, display their views without any compulsion. And for this reason their total rejection of President Reagan’s nuclear policy did not come as a surprise.
The church strongly supported the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The bishops called for the use of conventional arms to safeguard security measures rather than the use of nuclear weapons.
Churches all over the world have criticized the political circles and top military complexes whom they accuse of being the main players behind the war games.
With rising awareness and growing differences between the rich and poor nations, now the realization has gained mass support that the enormous imbalance is the main cause of today’s insecurity and instability.
Here also, the church is playing a very positive role in bringing the issue of economic disparity and has raised voice for a change in the present world order. The church is no longer isolated and alienated from the prevailing political and social setup, and continues to raise voice against gross injustices.
Public rallies are held by churches from time to time against weapons of mass destruction. They have come to realize that security problems should be tackled by taking bold steps and reconciliatory measures rather than by military adventurism.
The World Council of Churches, ever since its founding, has continuously condemned war and always favoured political solutions to conflicts. Another important platform for social change was the establishment of Ecumenical Network in 1988. The idea behind this network was that the reality must be faced without making any compulsion.
Churches all over Europe stress the importance of detente as the only source of peace in the world. They firmly hold the view that unless conflicts are resolved through dialogue and diplomacy, war cannot be avoided.
To a certain degree, churches are very skilled to provide a platform for a new social and moral thinking. But, at present, there is a lack of coordination and unity among them. Rift among the churches has weakened its status as peacekeepers. The actual cause of division is the over-dominating attitude to gain more power and strength.
