Presentation of Christ in the Temple: Candlemas

Malachi 3:1-4
Hebrews 2:14-18
Luke 2:22-40

+ In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Forty days ago the angels sang, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill towards men." Their praise welcomed the Creator of mankind taking upon himself a living body of a baby, becoming man, and thereby bestowing upon us divinity. We love Christmas because we associate it with new life, family, peace, and lights. The coming of the Prince of Peace conjures stillness and calm and quiet, bringing warmth in coldness, peace in anxiety, and light in darkness. On Candlemas we close out the forty days of Christmas by blessing the candles we will use in our worship through the next year. In the Nunc dimittis, Simeon calls Christ 'the light of the Gentiles and the glory of Israel.' (Glory means splendour, brilliance, radiance, beauty.) The Light came into the world on Christmas, and on Candlemas we distribute the light; light goes out from the altar into the nave, from heaven into the world. Another way we might think of it as the light, the Sun, which first shone in the cave at Bethlehem, has now burst forth into "an ocean of stars." ⁽¹⁾ The light is now with us, in us.

Simeon also recognizes in the baby Jesus that there is a new kind of salvation. S. Luke describes Simeon as a particularly holy man, full of the Holy Spirit. Simeon's piety indeed seems to have caused him to live in expectation, in eager waiting for the consolation of Israel, for the coming of the Kingdom of God. "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." (Mt 5:8) Simeon's purity of heart means that he will see God's Messiah, a new kind of salvation, and then he will be able to depart in peace, to die in peace.

Simeon refers to an inner peace. Most of us find our inner peace under attack as we close out the Christmas cycle. A few weeks ago, Pope John Paul II addressed the diplomatic corps at the Vatican. He said, "I have been personally struck by the feeling of fear which often dwells in the hearts of our contemporaries. An insidious terrorism capable of striking at any time and anywhere; the unresolved problem of the Middle East, with the Holy Land and Iraq. . ." ⁽²⁾ The Holy Father went on to mention several other weighty problems "threatening the survival of humanity, the peace of individuals, and the security of societies." ⁽³⁾ It has been some decades since we have felt such anxiety and fear. War, in particular, is very much on our hearts and minds. As citizens, we have a responsibility to be informed and to be reflective about what is happening, to demand that our politicians live up to their divine calling to serve the common good, to administer justice, and to protect us from evil. As human beings, we have a heart and are concerned about the enormous consequences of our decision for or against war. As Christians, we have the privilege of prayer and of drawing upon the wealth of our Lord's teachings and the wealth of human wisdom to guide us. But as in everything, our Lord and his Church does not make our decisions for us. He does not encroach upon our freedom. He gives us principles to apply to life, not a rule book.

I do not envy our President or any of our civil leaders in making this decision. To dismiss it casually one way or the other is not being serious and truly confronting the issue. The Church does have something to say about war, and the Church's teachings can clarify the morality of war. The Holy Father knows first-hand the horror and cruelty and suffering of war. He says, "War itself is an attack on human life since it brings in its wake suffering and death. The battle for peace is always a battle for life. . . . War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity. . . . War is never just another means that one can choose to employ for settling differences between nations." ⁽⁴⁾ Just before the Gulf War, John Paul II pleaded, "Never again war!" That is unlikely, and war is sometimes a moral obligation. The Church has no doubt that there is a just war. I really can not fathom, for example, how anyone could conclude that World War II was not a just war. War is always evil, but not always the greater evil.

Before any of us draw any conclusions about this possible war, we have to consider its morality. What would Jesus do? We can't presume to know with certitude. I guess that he'd tell us a parable, but I don't know which one. We can't simply quote our Lord saying "love your enemies" in order to argue that war is never a moral necessity. That is 'proof-texting' Jesus in the worst way; that is gross fundamentalism; that is not fully representative of Christ's mind on the issue. Jesus calls us to love our enemies, but he also calls us to love our family, our neighbor, everyone, and that sometimes necessitates protecting loved ones from evil. A just war exists when there is an urgent obligation to defeat evil for the common good. A just war establishes peace; it allows for peace.

There are three conditions for a just war. ⁽⁵⁾ First, there has to be a 'just cause.' Traditionally a just cause has meant "a defense against aggression, the recovery of something wrongfully taken, or the punishment of evil." ⁽⁶⁾ In this century, as technology has made wars so much more destructive, a just cause has tended to narrow to self-defense alone. In any event, to make a determination about whether our cause is just, we need answers to many questions. What is our ultimate intention? Is it to bring peace? More specifically, does the United States have to wait until Iraq, or North Korea, acts aggressively with a weapon of mass destruction before launching an attack? Has the staggering destructive power of modern technology somehow changed the moral calculus so that it is now moral to pre-empt? Could Iraq, or North Korea, justifiably claim that their behaviour is simply a defensive response to provocation in being fingered as part of the 'axis of evil?' Has Iraq aided and abetted al Qaeda, and thereby acted aggressively as an accomplice in 9/11? These are legitimate and difficult questions, and we have to respect our fellow citizens' determinations. Two patriots may come to different conclusions. It is reprehensible, it is not patriotic to question someone's patriotism simply because that person disagrees with us as long as that person is being sincere, serious, and moral in trying to determine if the cause is just.

The second characteristic of a just war is that it must be fought by a competent authority. Thomas Aquinas insists that only sovereigns, or states, have the authority to conduct war. Terrorism of the sort the world has contended with since the 1960s is not ever just, in part because it is the act of individuals, not of legitimate nations. It is an assault not only on innocents, but upon world order, upon civilisation. Government has the authority and the responsibility to protect its citizens and to uphold justice.

Third, a just war is the last resort. The Holy Father recently declared, "War cannot [be initiated], even when it is a matter of ensuring the common good, except as the very last option and in accordance with very strict conditions, without ignoring the consequences for the civilian population both during and after the military operations." ⁽⁷⁾ The word 'last' is another way of saying 'only.' There can not be a just war unless it is the only plausible option available. For example, is the only alternative to war being a Chamberlain, an appeaser, delaying the day of war and increasing the carnage?

At least at this point, determining whether an invasion of Iraq is just is thorny business. What makes it thornier still is that the public probably does not have enough facts to answer these questions responsibly. It is hard to estimate how just our cause is, and it is hard to estimate if we have run out of options. And here is what I find among the most discouraging developments. It seems that one of the reasons why the public doesn't have the facts that would help us answer these questions is legitimate security concerns. Democracies do not work well when the public does not have information, but if the information were freely available to us it appears that our security would be at greater risk. Reconciling individual freedom with public security and reconciling public access to information with public security has become much more challenging. It is not simply greater inconveniences resulting from security concerns, but do we have to suspend some of our civil liberties and some of our democracy, perhaps temporarily, perhaps permanently? That is a huge price. It is a serious challenge to our way of living, to our way of governing.

When we don't feel competent to make some of these decisions, we feel out of control; we have greater uncertainty; our anxiety intensifies. But God is with us, and always will be. Let's not forget our great privilege: prayer. God hears us. God loves us. Pray for peace. Pray for yourself, for your family and friends, for our nation, for our leaders, for the Iraqis, for Saddam Hussein, for the leaders of the world. They need it. Ultimately the decision-making is not ours, but that of our President and Congress. I pray that their decisions are based upon serious, deliberate, prayerful, moral calculations; that their intention is not maintaining our high standard of living; that they are not factoring in their political fortune; that they seek the good of all of humanity; that they remember "blessed are the peacemakers."

+ In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

1. Alan Watts, Myth and Ritual in Christianity, Beacon Press (1968), p. 128.

2. 'Address of His Holiness Pope John Paul II to the Diplomatic Corps,' Monday, 13 January 2003.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid.

5. George Weigel, 'Moral Clarity in a Time of War,' First Things, December 2002. This may be somewhat misleading. Besides the three mentioned by Weigel, other components include: right intent, proportionality of ends, and reasonable chance of success, according to the Rev'd John D. Alexander, 'Be Thoughtful, Not Just Rhetorical - Use and Abuse of 'Just War' Doctrine,' Providence Journal, 30 January 2003. It may be possible, however, to categorize right intent and reasonable chance of success under 'just cause.' In other words, the categories may be somewhat artificial or overlapping.

6. Weigel.

7. 'Address of His Holiness Pope John Paul II to the Diplomatic Corps,' 13 January 2003.