There was one prominent question at this year’s Markoe-DePorres Social Justice Lecture: Can the Catholic Church ever support military action?

The Rev. Drew Christiansen, S.J., the editor of America Magazine, which features social justice articles, spoke with George Weigel, one of the most widely read Catholic writers today. Yet, despite the high profiles of the speakers, there was an abundance of empty seats in the Skutt Center Ballroom, and attendance would have dropped lower if not for the large number of theology students seeking extra credit.

While Weigel and Christiansen disagreed in their assessment of the challenge of peace, they agreed pacifism is not intrinsic to the Church. Furthermore, especially during the question-and-answer session, they argued Christian politicians must resort to military intervention under some circumstances, a proposal that is problematic to many students and professors.

Many Catholics believe that under no circumstance is war morally permissible, let alone obligatory. Last century witnessed some of the most horrifying violence between human beings. Thus, Christians of the 21st century, the heirs of this brutal legacy, must listen to what the former Pope John Paul II said during a pilgrimage to Japan, “Never again Nagasaki!”

This is a call for military responsibility but does not amount to pacifism. For example, World War II would have been much less bloody had the Roosevelt administration not adopted the philosophy of isolationism, a form of practical pacifism, during the first two years of the Nazi onslaught across Europe. Was Roosevelt acting in a morally responsible way, or was his moral responsibility from a Christian perspective to intervene to stop the Nazi rape of Europe?

While nonviolent resistance is noble and has, on many occasions, been successful, it is not practical in all circumstances. Weigel noted that success in ending Communist rule in Poland was possible in the Gorbachev era, but that may have not been the case during Stalinism.

This lecture could have been an excellent opportunity for Creighton’s numerous pacifists to rethink their positions. A world without war is the dream of many, but does pacifism sometimes amount to the practical equivalence of cowardice and passivity? While Christian civilians may choose to be pacifists, this lecture clearly demonstrated why this is problematic for Christian politicians.

Diplomacy does not always prevent violence. The failure of negotiation does not, however, imply military inaction. In such cases, as during the first two years of World War II, a lack of force leads to even greater violations of human dignity. The Christian is then compelled to do all that is possible to end aggression.

Echoing this thought, Weigel mentioned John Paul II’s support for the ultimately successful peacekeeping forces in Yugoslavia during the ethnic cleansing of the 1990s and appealed to world leaders for similar action in Darfur. These two dramatic cases demonstrate that military intervention is often in the best interests of promoting peace, and that a lack thereof is in the best interest of systematic murder.