The attacks aim to eliminate the threat of Hezbollah strikes on northern Israel.

Bernard Toutounji, National Director of Aid for the Church in Need (ACN) in Australia and New Zealand, says the Church is struggling to support the million people who have fled their homes in southern Lebanon.

Beirut, Mount Lebanon and Lebanon's northern regions in particular are bearing the brunt of the internally displaced refugees.

The pontifical charity has announced an international emergency campaign to raise at least 1 million Euros (about $1,8 million NZD), Toutounji says. It will help the Catholic Church in Lebanon cope with the tremendous challenges Christians are suffering.

What the Church is doing to help

The Catholic Church has already sprung into action in Lebanon's northern regions, as it fulfils its Biblical mandate to help people in need. It hopwa donations will help relieve the desperate situation.

The Church has opened facilities such as parish halls and retreat houses to all those fleeing the most dangerous areas, Toutounji says.

Everyone is welcome, regardless of religious or ethnic affiliation.

ACN has already reached out to the seven dioceses and five religious congregations most directly involved in relief efforts.

Toutounji says the money ACN raises will be used to address a variety of needs, including food, sanitary products, mattresses and covers, medication and other essentials.

Many of the Christians in southern Lebanon are farmers. The attacks have prevented them from harvesting their olive and tobacco crops, leaving them without any income.

Children's education has been directly affected, with Catholic schools needing financial help Toutounji says. He explains that while most Catholic schools have opened for online classes, many parents in war-affected regions are unlikely to find work and they will struggle to pay tuition fees.

Critical situation

Although the crisis is affecting the whole country, the worst areas are in the border regions between Israel and Lebanon. Christians are a predominant group in this area.

ACN says most families are being separated.

Many mothers and children are sheltering in Church facilities or with relatives and, despite exposing themselves to danger, fathers often stay in their family homes to protect their property from being stolen.

"Lebanon has been going from crisis to crisis over the past decades, suffering from political instability, an influx of refugees from regional wars, an economic meltdown, the Beirut Port explosion which levelled large parts of the city, and now these attacks from Israel" ACN says.

"Despite all this, the Church has continued to serve the people, providing material and spiritual support at every turn. ACN has stood by our project partners in Lebanon, and we will not abandon them now as they face another hour of need.

"We are confident that our friends and benefactors will understand the urgency of supporting the Church in Lebanon to carry out God's work."

Source

• Aid to the Church in Need

Once again, it seems that the negotiations, which resumed August 21 in Cairo, are likely to fail.

During the Democratic convention, U.S. President Joe Biden stated August 20 that Hamas was "backtracking" on the negotiations for a potential agreement between Israel and the Palestinian movement.

Thousands of deaths changing the dynamics

Hamas rejected the American statement, labeling it as a "green light" for Israel to continue the war.

The Palestinian movement argued that the latest proposals differ significantly from the original plan proposed by the American president, which they claim has now "conceded to new Israeli demands."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government is demanding a permanent Israeli military presence along the Philadelphi Corridor, a 14-kilometer border between Gaza and Egypt, as well as the Netzarim Corridor, an Israeli-controlled axis that bisects the Gaza Strip.

However, just two days after the discussions began in Doha August 17, the United States, Qatar, and Egypt had assured that an agreement was "close" to being signed.

But the number of victims in the Gaza Strip—over 40,200 dead, according to the Islamic movement—has changed the situation.

"Hamas cannot sign a discounted agreement.

"It knows full well that, from the perspective of the Palestinian population, particularly in the Gaza Strip, there will be a sense of having suffered for ten months, lost thousands of people, only to settle for an agreement that doesn't even meet the primary demands of its population," said Thomas Vescovi, an independent researcher and specialist on Israel and Palestine.

On the other hand, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a similar dilemma with the victims of October 7 and the hostages.

"The final decision comes from the Gaza Strip"

The centralisation of Hamas's power in Gaza over the past few months, which intensified after the July 31 assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the main interlocutor and official leader of the Palestinian movement, further diminished the hope for an agreement.

The late Haniyeh was replaced by Yahya Sinwar, Hamas's leader in Gaza, who is entrenched in tunnels and is considered the mastermind behind the October 7 attacks.

"For now, the final decision comes from the Gaza Strip, and therefore inevitably from Yahya Sinwar and other leaders present there," Vescovi explained.

"We can see that, after ten months of war, Hamas is still able to rebuild its forces in Gaza, recruit, and arm itself, so from that point, I don't see any other political force capable of competing with this leadership, at least in Gaza."

During negotiation sessions, the Israeli delegation interacted with a Hamas representative team, which, in reality, holds very little power. Khalil Al-Hayya, the unofficial foreign affairs minister based in Qatar, generally represents the team.

According to Vescovi, "As long as there is no ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, we cannot imagine a reduction in tensions."

• First published in La Croix International
• Kilian Bigogne is a journalist at La Croix

"The international community cannot stand by as this crisis spirals out of control, as the noose of this conflict tightens its stranglehold on the civilian population," she told journalists at U.N. Headquarters in New York.

War and starvation

For more than a year, the Sudanese army and the rival Rapid Support Forces have been engaged in fierce battles.

The war has brought Sudan - already one of the world's poorest countries - to an utter state of catastrophe.

And as always with war, the most vulnerable and poorest suffer the most.

According to the U.N. approximately 18 million Sudanese are experiencing severe hunger - with over five million people on the brink of famine!

U.N. Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Clementine Nkweta-Salami said:

"We have just six weeks before the lean season sets in, when food becomes less available and more expensive."

And Nkweta-Salami added that with two more life-threatening deadlines coming quickly,

These are the rainy season, which makes it more difficult to reach desperate people; and the end of the planting season.

"The people of Sudan are in the path of a perfect storm that is growing more lethal by the day".

To escape the war, and its subsequent famine, over 9 million Sudanese have been forcibly displaced - the largest number of displaced people in the world.

Many of them cross over into neighboring countries like South Sudan - the poorest country on earth!

Sudan Relief Fund

Several years ago, an 80-year-old nun spoke to me very favorably about her personal knowledge of the Sudan Relief Fund.

And since then, I have been keeping informed and contributing to their wonderful life-saving efforts.

They are funding remarkable work, done by remarkable people like Dr. Tom Catena

On a recent visit to Sudan and South Sudan, Sudan Relief Fund's senior vice president Matt Smith sadly reported this:

"To put the crisis in perspective, families are risking their lives to come to a desperately poor country with no resources to help them, because it's preferable to being in the crossfire of Sudan's violent war.

"In the truest sense, they have no other choice". Please kindly make a donation.

The independent research organisation International Crisis Group is urging the United Nations and the United States to urgently mediate a truce.

"All should support a U.N.-led initiative to negotiate evacuation corridors for the suffering population in El Fasher and the surrounding camps for the displaced".

This is where a major military battle is unfolding.

They must "insist on immediate cross-border access for U.N. aid agencies into all areas of Sudan to stave off famine."

Aid alert

Maryknoll - the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America - has prepared an action alert for us. Please kindly complete and send it.

The world's Catholic bishops at the Second Vatican Council declared the following:

"Since there are so many people prostrate with hunger in the world, this sacred council urges all, both individuals and governments, to remember the aphorism of the Fathers:

" ‘Feed the man dying of hunger, because if you have not fed him, you have killed him.' "

• First published in the Clarion Herald
• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist.

"Ethical export policy is a myth," states the WPF.

Of the 32 wars of this century that the WPF analyzed all of them but one received weapons from the leading arms exporting nations - U.S., Russia, France, U.K., China, Germany, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Ukraine, and Spain - even when serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses were clearly on display.

U.S. weapons to the Israeli government's ongoing bombing of civilians in Gaza is current tragic example.

Rivers of mostly innocent civilian blood doesn't deter the ongoing shipments of instruments of death.

Where there's a huge profit to be made, and power to be gained, any serious consideration of morality is virtually nonexistent among the arms exporting countries.

And to a lesser degree it is important to note that some less affluent nations are also involved in the deadly arms business.

Corporations that are profiting the most from the immoral business of weapons production and sales are the U.S. companies Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, BAE Systems (U.K.), Norinco (China), AVIC (China).

If weapons production, and subsequent weapons sales were to end, wars and armed conflicts would virtually come to a halt. Wars can't be waged without weapons.

And think of all the good that could be done, both domestically and globally, if we ever come to our senses and transfer the vast amounts of money spent on weapons of war to building instruments of peace.

Imagine seeing all of that money being used to ensure that every single person on the planet would receive basic human services like adequate food, decent housing, clean water and sanitation, health care, education, life-enhancing jobs with a living wage.

And with these huge funds we could totally and quickly move from dirty fossil fuels to clean energy for our health, the health of our common earth home, and the health of future generations yet to born.

But very sadly, this wonderful scenario is not on the radar screens of the vast majority of rich and powerful individuals, corporations and nations.

At the Second Vatican Council the world's Catholic bishops, in union with S. Pope Paul VI declared:

"While extravagant sums are being spent for the furnishing of ever new weapons, an adequate remedy cannot be provided for the multiple miseries afflicting the whole modern world.

"Disagreements between nations are not really and radically healed; on the contrary, they spread infection to other parts of the earth.

"New approaches based on reformed attitudes must be taken to remove this trap and to emancipate the world from its crushing anxiety through the restoration of genuine peace.

"Therefore, we say it again: the arms race is an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one which ensnares the poor to an intolerable degree."

As dioceses, parishes and individuals we need to tirelessly urge national leaders to finally move away from war preparation and warmaking to nonviolent peacemaking.

It is bread, and not bombs, that humanity is hungry for.

Catholics, other Christians, and all people of faith in the God of peace who are in anyway connected with the arms industry should seriously pray and think about leaving the business of making weapons.

It is truly the morally right thing to do.

Better to have far less money and more peace of soul. With an open heart and mind please prayerfully consider this powerful Pope Francis video.

https://youtu.be/hUtxTvdSF_4?si=P7NIEDuGxq71iKUM

In the actual words of one of the Catholic Church's greatest champions of nonviolence and peace, St Francis of Assisi, let us greet everyone with "Pace e Bene" (Peace and all good)!

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at parish and diocesan venues. To invite Tony, contact him at tmag6@comcast.net.

This year the conjunction is particularly apposite at a time when the air is full of wars and rumours of war.

Wars - past, present and future

Anzac Day recalls the generosity and death of those who fought in a military campaign of the past, draws our attention to those dying in current wars, and asks where we should stand on future wars.

The bringing together of past and present wars is important.

It encourages us to take a realistic view of the war in which the landing on Gallipoli was a small part.

It invites us also to attend to the full reality of what we see around us in Myanmar, Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan.

That realistic view of war naturally invites reflection on the importance of Multilateralism and Diplomacy for Peace.

Anzac Day rightly commemorates those who served, were injured and died on the Turkish beach.

It reminds us of their generosity in volunteering to fight on behalf of the Australian people. They, their families and their children should be held in honour in our memory.

War machines

The battle which gave its name to Anzac Day, however, was a defeat that failed in its goal.

Much of the fighting there was representative of previous wars.

It was part of a long European war, however, in which massive developments in weaponry meant that men killed and died on an industrial scale often without any sight of opposing troops.

It was an introduction to the war of machines. The war that took so many lives, moreover, did little more than plant the seeds for an even more destructive war in which citizens as well as soldiers were fair game.

In that sense, the guns of Gallipoli were a step on the road to the helicopters of Myanmar, the drones in Ukraine and the destroyed cities of Gaza.

They preceded wars in which what counts as victory is the destruction of homes, of lives and of civil society, and the embitterment of generations.

It was set within a world enslaved to a geopolitics in which millions of people are expendable for the prize of a passing advantage. As a Roman writer said of their legions, ‘They make a desert and call it peace'.

Commemorating Anzac Day

Anzac Day is a day of remembering the wars that followed it. It is also a day of compassion for those who suffer in war both in the past and the present.

As we think of the soldiers who fought and died at Gallipoli, we imagine also the families they left behind and to which they returned.

We imagine the soldiers who went with light hearts to fight and returned wounded inwardly by the war, the burden borne by their families, the many women widowed or left single by the death of so many marriageable men.

We imagine the small towns stripped of a generation of young men, and the grief that enveloped so many people.

War is the enemy

Anzac has been described by some military historians as the making of Australia. If so, it did so by stripping and not by building.

That is why in the face of the vastly more powerful weapons used in modern war and the ineffectuality of attempts to preserve civilians from its horrors, Pope Francis follows earlier Popes in describing war as the enemy and calling for diplomacy to end it.

This call is always resisted by those who call on us to take sides in conflicts and see the killing of women and children and the destruction of civil society on the other side as collateral damage.

They habitually see diplomacy as appeasement and anything short of unqualified victory as defeat.

Anzac Day draws us away from the geopolitical chess board to consider the price that so many persons have paid for the wars in which their leaders join.

It reminds us of the need for diplomacy based on respect for the humanity of persons on all sides of conflict.

• First published in Eureka Street
• Republished with author's permission.
• Andrew Hamilton is a Jesuit priest and editorial consultant at Eureka Street

This kind of fasting has its place.

However, if you want to discover what fasting is especially meant to achieve, fast in a way that will bring about a holy change; change for the better for you, change for a better world.

A fast that will make a difference in helping build a better world, is a Christian witness that helps advance the Kingdom of God.

It is a fast that is evangelisation in action.

Let's take our inspiration from the prophet Isaiah:

"Is this not, rather, the fast that I choose: releasing those bound unjustly, untying the throngs of the yoke; setting free the oppressed, breaking off every yoke?

"Is it not sharing your bread with the hungry, bringing the afflicted and the homeless into your house; clothing the naked when you see them, and not turning your back on your own flesh?"

This passage from Isaiah insists that we fast from what Pope Francis continually calls the "culture of indifference." A culture that doesn't care that there are fellow human beings among us who in one way, or another, are bound unjustly.

Countless people struggle daily to find sufficient food, clean water, decent shelter, adequate clothing and medical care.

Around the world many people are locked up in prisons for practising their faith in God, or for political, racial, ethnic reasons or for speaking out.

Others are unfairly imprisoned for minor offences.

Still, more, some 50 million people are bound up by human trafficking - modern slavery.

Then there are those who carry the heavy yoke of running from their native countries because of

• gang violence,
• war,
• desperate poverty,
• inhabitable climate change situations,
• corrupt regimes and
• greed, selfishness, and indifference.

These people seek safety and decent work somewhere, anywhere, in order to support themselves and their families, only to find that in coming to New Zealand they might part of an immigration scam run on social media or What'sApp.

Then there are the children, too little to fend for themselves, too weak to survive when times are tough.

They are often the first to die from hunger, poverty, disease, child labour, and that endless scourge: war!

The big fast, the uncomfortable fast

So, if you and I are ready for the big fast, which will often be uncomfortable and even painful at times, then we need to look no further than to the poor and vulnerable, near and far - our needy brothers and sisters.

Many wonderful organisations are dedicated to building peace, serving the poor, and protecting our common earth home. Link up with them and generously give of your time, talent and treasure this Lent - and beyond!

"If you lavish your food on the hungry and satisfy the afflicted; then your light shall rise in the darkness, and your gloom shall become like midday!" (Isaiah 58: 6-10).

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist.

In our local park each junction of the path is marked by a stenciled message demanding a ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. Large, mainly peaceful, demonstrations in favour of the people of Gaza and of Israel have been held in the major Australian cities.

The media have highlighted increased prejudice and threats made against Jewish people, and have also reported similar experiences by Muslims.

Protagonists for Israel and Hamas have urged the Government and people to support one side whole-heartedly and to reject totally the other.

This pressure to make such a choice is understandable after so many innocent people have been killed. But it should be rejected.

For the people of Israel and Gaza, and so for Australians, the real enemy is war itself.

We should privilege compassion for all the human beings whose own lives and relatives have been destroyed by war, including those in the Jewish and Palestinian communities in Australia.

The object of our policy should be a settlement that respects equally all the people in the region and is not built on deterrence.

Such a strategy may seem to be unrealistic.

But the alternative of endorsing the use of armed force by either side in order to annihilate its declared enemies and to turn its borderlands into shooting alleys is a sure recipe for deepening hatred and future conflict.

The families of those whom our chosen side has killed will breed and inspire the next generation of patriots, freedom fighters or terrorists, call them what you will.

They may very well be confused about what they stand for, but they will be sure about whom they stand against. The resulting entrenched hostility will then corrupt the civic values we claim to be at stake in endorsing the war.

Those who declare that the real enemy is war and who advocate for peace are usually criticised for being naively optimistic.

Some will denounce them as stooges of a hostile power. That may sometimes be the case, but not necessarily so. It is possible to recognise war to be the real enemy, while simultaneously recognising the complex challenges involved in avoiding war and encouraging peace.

In Israel, for example, the Government certainly has a duty to keep its people safe.

It is certainly responding to an attack by a group that wants to destroy Israel. That group is prepared to take and use hostages in order to deter military action.

It may also place its command posts and other military centres close to schools and hospitals, making it certain that many non-combatants are bound to be injured and killed in military action. Nor can a ceasefire be guaranteed to secure the return of hostages, the separation of civilians from combatants, and lead to peace.

These considerations, however, do not justify a war in which many people will die and be left destitute, in which there is no strategy for securing a just peace, and which will be followed by further human misery and the seeds of further wars.

Australia should focus on support for the people who are the victims of war and on pressing for an end to the war and for a just peace.

The focus on persons affected by the war extends beyond Israel and Gaza to Palestinian and Israeli communities in Australia.

They will have lost relatives to war, will be deeply concerned for their countries of origin and fearful for the future.

They should be able to express their convictions and solidarity with their kinsmen and plead their cause publicly in a way that does not lead to conflict with other opposed groups.

Media have a responsibility to report the activities and views of these groups without using them to make political points. This involves taking account of the complexity and volatility of public life.

Demonstrations allow people to take stands. They also draw in partisan people from outside the communities who seek disruption and confrontation.

In times of war these voices can always draw on such creative and tendentious reporting as that of the raped nuns of the First World War and the Weapons of Mass Destruction during the Iraq invasion.

Immigrant communities will always be vulnerable to racial and xenophobic discrimination, doubly so when racist attitudes recently evident in Australia are magnified by the lack of social cohesion associated with economic hardship. Both Muslims and Jews will be subject to racist abuse with all its memories of past trauma.

Seeing war as the enemy abroad entails working to heal and to soothe wounds in the local community, not to exacerbate them.

• Andrew Hamilton S.J. is a Eureka Street editorial consultant and a policy officer with Jesuit Social Services. He taught theology for many years, has contributed widely to theological and religious journals and has had a long-standing engagement with refugee communities and issues.
• First published in Eureka Street

On Nov. 11 the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and several other nations will observe the 100th anniversary of that historic day when the warring nations of the world finally stopped all the killing, injury and destruction which filled the years between 1914 and 1918.

On Dec. 7, 1914 Pope Benedict XV pleaded with the warring parties to observe a Christmas truce.

He asked, "that the guns may fall silent at least upon the night the angels sang."

He was hoping that such a truce would lead to sincere peace negotiations.

Tragically, his plea was officially ignored.

But on Christmas, opposing soldiers along various spots on the Western Front inspiringly declared their own unofficial truce.

And a courageous Catholic American, Ben Salmon, walking in the footsteps of the nonviolent Jesus, refused to kill.

He was sentenced to death, which was later commuted to a lengthy prison sentence of hard labour.

War - for what purpose

World War I caused over 8 million military deaths.

The civilian death toll was even worse at approximately 13 million - largely due to starvation, exposure, disease, military encounters and massacres.

World War I - "the war to end all wars" - instead became a precursor to the even more horrible World War II - the worst war in human history - and scores of wars since ever since.

Honestly, for what?

And the veterans who survive wars very often come home with serious physical, mental and spiritual wounds.

Why do Christians allow our government to put them in harm's way?

Shouldn't followers of the nonviolent Jesus demand an end to this sacrilege - the sacrilege of war and war preparation?

Adequately taking care of veterans' needs, like mental and physical health care and housing, is a moral imperative that demands much more funding.

Deemphasise nationalistic fervour

But for the sake of helping create a culture which opposes war and war preparation, a culture which decries sending more young men and women into one senseless war after another, we need to deemphasise the nationalistic fervour associated with Veterans Day, similarly observed as Remembrance Day in the British Commonwealth, and instead recapture the prayerful and peaceful meaning that was central to what this day was originally called: Armistice Day.

In a June 4, 1926 congressional resolution officially recognizing the end of World War I, Congress declared that the recurring anniversary of the day when hostilities ceased "should be commemorated with thanksgiving and prayer and exercises designed to perpetuate peace through good will and mutual understanding between nations."

On Nov. 11, Armistice Day, let's say no to more war, and demand justice and peace at home and abroad.

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at diocesan or parish gatherings. Tony can be reached at tmag@zoominternet.net.

Speaking about the conflict in Palestine and Israel after praying the Angelus in St Peter's Square this week, Francis asked the world to "think of the children" who suffer as a result of war.

For "all the children affected by this war, as well as in Ukraine and in other conflicts - this is how their future is being killed" Francis told them.

He reminded them that many children were taken hostage on 7 October during the Hamas attack.

In God's name stop!

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says of the over 200 hostages held in Gaza, 33 are children.

"May they return to their families" the Pope prayed.

"May the hostages be freed immediately."

Francis begged that "avenues will be pursued so that an escalation of the conflict might be absolutely avoided."

This is urgent "so that the wounded can be rescued and help might get to the population of Gaza where the humanitarian situation is extremely serious."

The Gaza Health Ministry estimates over 9,000 people have been killed and 32,000 wounded in Israel's war against Hamas.

"I continue to think about the serious situation in Palestine and in Israel where many, many people have lost their lives" Francis said.

"In God's name, I beg you to stop. Cease fire!"

Widespread suffering

Besides those affected by wars, Francis reminded the St Peter's crowd that other parts of the world are seeing great suffering at present too.

He mentioned particularly the people of Nepal, to whom he expressed his closeness.

They suffered an earthquake that killed 150 people on 3 November.

He also prayed for Afghan refugees in Pakistan who are facing mass deportation.

Source

• Catholic Leader

This year, however, it is more likely to be dismissed as an absurd idea.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas will be decided on the ground by the cache of weapons they have accumulated. The response of their allies has already been to make more and more sophisticated weapons available to them.

Meanwhile, arms manufacturers cannot keep up with the demand to sustain the war in Ukraine, to support other military operations, and to serve a host of geopolitical ends.

In a time of financial stringency Australia has committed itself to enormous expense to provide nuclear submarines. Wars themselves are becoming more lethal with the development of drones and other weapons.

As international and national politics become more polarised and violent in tone, national leaders increasingly see it as reasonable and even obligatory to compete with other nations in seeking access to more destructive weapons with which to defend the nation.

It is common sense to believe that only if you are armed to the teeth will you be safe from attack and will peace be promoted.

Taking for granted the destructive power of weapons

And yet, as so often in human affairs, the cloak of common sense proves to be moth-eaten when more closely examined.

There are two main reasons for this.

First, when nations stockpile weapons powerful and numerous enough to destroy human life in the world many times over, the destructive power of the weapons becomes taken for granted.

People cease to be shocked by it. As a result, the risk of a paranoid or reckless leader using them without regard to the consequences grows higher rather than diminishes.

In such an event it is also more likely that other nations will respond by using their own weapons.

Even if nations are deterred by others' possession of nuclear weapons, other weapons are powerful enough to destroy cities and to drive peoples into exile.

Neither the possession of nuclear weapons by Russia and the allies of Ukraine prevented Russia from invading Ukraine and Ukraine from resisting the invasion at the cost of so many soldiers' and civilians' lives and of the nation's economy.

Because conventional weapons and drones are now seen as normal, the wholesale destruction of civilized life is also taken for granted.

The dangers of a world in which peace depends on nations matching one another in the destructive power of their weapons are evident in current international conflicts.

In Ukraine Mr Putin threatens to withdraw from treaties based to limit the spread and use of nuclear weapons.

Strategists, too, talk openly about how Ukraine's allies should respond if they are used. North Korea also possesses nuclear weapons and leans on their possession for their security.

The rivalry between China and the United States, both nuclear powers, too, risks descending into open conflict in which Australia could be involved.

Pope Francis links personal conversion with international disarmament

Second, the rush to amass more and more expensive weapons ignores the opportunities to shape a better world, which are lost by spending heavily on arms.

The money could have been allocated to public transport, hospitals, schools, care for the aging, more generous benefits and social housing, for example.

Instead, the profits from arms sales, often magnified by lax oversight from government departments, go to large corporations and contribute to inequality.

The expenditure on arms then becomes self-reinforcing and further impedes the ability and willingness of governments to fund just social programmes.

In nations that encourage large munitions firms, weapon making becomes a significant part of the economy. Disarmament is then seen as a threat to employment.

This diversion of resources to the manufacture and use of ever more destructive weapons is now a critical threat to the survival of the world as we know it.

It directly threatens global warming through the emissions generated in the manufacture and use of weapons.

More importantly, it diverts focus from the imminent danger of climate change and from the urgent need to restructure economies, transport and manufacturing in order to prevent emissions rising above their already damaging levels.

In making the weapons and fighting the wars we deem necessary to preserve a world worth living in, we shall surely destroy it.

The irrationality of an arms race based on a balance of terror and the terrible suffering caused by modern wars have led Pope Francis, like his predecessors, to condemn the arms trade and the reliance by governments on weapons of mass destruction.

He also points out the connection between personal conversion and international disarmament. If nations store up weapons out of fear, they may reflect personal relationships marked by fear, defensiveness and retaliation.

Non-violence must take root in our most intimate relationships if it's to flower in our global relationships.

Disarmament Week may seem to be an absurdity. Armament, however, is surely a lunacy.

• Andrew Hamilton SJ is a writer at Jesuit Social Services in Melbourne (Australia) and the consulting editor of Eureka Street, where this article first appeared.
• Republished with the author's permission.

The future for Palestinians and Israelis is being erased each passing day. Before it is too late, the United States and Congress should side with peace, not more war, in the Middle East.

Hamas' horrific attacks that killed more than 1,400 Israelis and their abduction of more than 200 civilians should be strongly condemned.

The U.S. and international community should work fervently to hold those responsible accountable while securing the release of hostages. I stand for the safety and dignity of all Israelis.

I also stand for the safety and dignity of all Palestinians.

The indiscriminate, inhumane Israeli response that has already claimed as many as 8,000 lives in Gaza, including many children, must also be clearly condemned.

The U.S. and international community should insist international law be respected with all civilians protected.

As a person of faith, I mourn the tragic loss of all lives and pray for those who have lost loved ones in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.

I also mourn the response of my government, which seems unable to value the human rights and lives of Palestinians.

In stark contrast to the Pope's message, President Biden has made clear which "team" the U.S. is on by asking Congress for billions more in weapons for Israel.

This not only makes the U.S. complicit in unfolding war crimes; it also fuels anti-American sentiment, undermining national and global security.

Having lived through the 9/11 attacks, I understand the fear and outrage that terrorism inflicts on a community.

But two decades of endless war, military quagmires, trillions of dollars spent and more than 432,000 civilians killed from our global war on terror should have taught us that war is not the answer.

Instead of pouring more weapons into the conflict with one hand while supporting humanitarian aid with the other, President Biden and Congress should be fervently working to help halt the killing while addressing the root causes, so the cycle of war and violence does not repeat itself.

Some media coverage is not helping. My middle-schooler, after a discussion about cable news with classmates, believed once an attack is labeled "terrorism," there are no limits to the violence used in response. This is not the way international law works.

International humanitarian law does not allow the indiscriminate bombing of civilians.

Hospitals, churches, schools and residential neighborhoods are not legitimate military targets, especially when they are providing refuge for thousands fleeing for their lives.

Killing and abducting civilians can never be tolerated. But waging war against an entire population in response only deepens suffering, inviting more attacks.

My Quaker faith calls me to reject all forms of violence and to continually work to prevent war, break cycles of violence and rebuild relationships.

But people of all faiths — or those not religious at all — can see the horrors of this war and what may come next.

More than 70 Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other organisations, including my own, recently signed this interfaith and civil society letter calling on Congress and the president to press for an immediate ceasefire and provide some measure of peace, security and humanitarian assistance to the civilians of both Israel and Gaza.

We agree all violence against civilians by Hamas and the Israeli military is to be condemned and must stop at once. A ceasefire should be declared, respected and enforced on both sides.

Protecting civilians, securing the release of all hostages and ensuring humanitarian aid can flow freely requires a halt to the fighting.

And rather than sending billions more in weapons, the president and Congress should work to de-escalate the conflict and insist Hamas and Israel fully respect international humanitarian law.

I cannot begin to understand the trauma and suffering people are now experiencing in Gaza and Israel, but I can choose to stand on the side of peace and of ending the killing, the side where human dignity for both Israelis and Palestinians still resides together.

• Bridget Moix is general secretary of the Friends Committee on National Legislation and its associated Quaker hospitality center, Friends Place on Capitol Hill. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.
• First published in Religion News Service. Republished with permission.

The modernisation seeks to fill a twenty-six-year gap and reflect some of the modern challenges.

Dr John Kleinsman, director of the NZ Catholic bishops' Nathaniel Centre for Bioethics, is delighted with the bishops' update.

Kleinsman describes the new document as a "succinct overview of eight key moral areas, including a new section on information technology and artificial intelligence."

Among the modern challenges the bishops consider

• Information technology and artificial intelligence
• Justice and correction systems
• War and peace
• Poverty
• Discrimination and abuse
• End-of-life issues
• Beginning of life issues
• Integrity of Creation

Kleinsman says that people generally know what the Chucrh teaches but are unsure of why.

Te Kahu o te Ora - A Consistent Ethic of Life summarises key points which can give people greater insights into Catholic thinking, comments Kleinsman.

"It is a great source for open and informed discussions", says Kleinsman who, as well as being a theologian, is a married man, father and grandfather.

The original Te Kahu o te Ora was inspired by Cardinal Joseph Bernardin's A Consistent Ethic of Life.

Bernardin's work grew from his observation that we must act consistently because all human life is sacred.

It was Bernadin's view that it was inconsistent to protect life in some situations but not in others.

In the years following Roe v. Wade, Bernardin argued that human life is always valuable and must be respected consistently from conception to natural death.

Being pro-life is not only about abortion or euthanasia.

Being pro-life must encompass war, poverty, access to health care, education and anything that threatens human life or human wellbeing, he argued.

Stephen Lowe, the Bishop of Auckland, the Apostolic Administrator of Hamilton and President of the NZ Catholic Bishops Conference, describes the update as "Opportune".

Lowe says human life and emerging challenges are interconnected.

"The essence of Te Kahu o te Ora is the interconnectedness of all life, from the womb to the Earth," he said.

Lowe says Pope Benedict put it well some years ago:

"There are so many kinds of desert. There is the desert of poverty, the desert of hunger and thirst, the desert of abandonment, of loneliness, of destroyed love. There is the desert of God's darkness, the emptiness of souls no longer aware of their dignity or the goal of human life. The external deserts in the world are growing, because the internal deserts have become so vast."

"While traditional human life issues continue to need our attention, we are now facing many new problems, all interlinked.

"The key message of Te Kahu o te Ora is that everything is connected, whether it is life in the womb or the life of the Earth," Lowe repeated.

Sources

• Supplied
• Catholic Sun

Crux reports on August 5 that during a semi-private meeting, a Russian Orthodox bishop expressed regret for the Ukraine war, thanking Francis for supporting the Ukrainian people.

"I would like to thank you very much for all you have done for the Ukrainian people," the Russian Orthodox bishop told Pope Francis.

The comment was made during a private meeting with interreligious leaders and was translated by Portuguese Father Peter Stillwell, director of the Portuguese bishops' Department of Ecumenical Relations and Interreligious Dialogue.

However a report from the Pillar, the American news website, makes it clear the politics of a private meeting did not translate to the World Youth Day public devotion where there was a notable absence of any reference to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The meditations there centred generally on problems that youth typically face, such as uncertainty about the future, issues with mental health and the scourges of drugs, pornography and alcohol, but also conflict and a lack of religious freedom.

While there were general references to the suffering caused by war, there was no mention of the conflict that has the world on edge.

The Vatican's handling of the Ukraine issue has been fraught with tension.

During the past two Via Crucis observances on Good Friday in Rome, the Holy See insisted on including a symbolic gesture for peace in Ukraine, involving both a Ukrainian and a Russian.

Neither time was Ukraine amused, leading to strained relations between the Vatican and Kyiv.

According to a source within the WYD organisation, Rome initially insisted on a similar gesture though it was unclear if it was intended for the Via Crucis devotions.

The Ukrainians made it clear that there would be diplomatic repercussions this time, and local organisers managed to dissuade the Holy See from repeating the gesture.

A compromise was reached including a visit to Ukraine by Bishop Américo Aguiar, who headed the WYD task force, to assure local Catholics that they had not been forgotten.

It is unknown whether Pope Francis' decision to hold a private audience for Ukrainian pilgrims, during which he prayed with them, was also part of the compromise.

The delicate handling of the Ukraine issue underscores the Vatican's complex position in a conflict that has strained international relations.

The Pope's actions continue to be scrutinised as the world seeks a peaceful resolution to a crisis that shows no signs of resolution.

Asked en route to Rome why he skipped the peace prayer at Lourdes, the Pope said he did not want to give publicity to a public prayer.

"I prayed! I prayed! I prayed to the Madonna and I prayed for peace. I didn't make publicity. But I prayed. And we have to continually repeat this prayer for peace."

A Vatican official, speaking on condition he not be named, denied that any ecclesial-diplomatic considerations entered Francis' decision-making.

Sources

• Crux
• The Pillar
• Associated Press

He is raising questions about the ethical implications of the Catholic President's move.

Malloy, in a statement issued by the Peace Committee, highlighted the fact that numerous countries, including the Holy See, have ratified the International Convention on Cluster Munitions.

This convention explicitly prohibits using, producing, transferring and stockpiling these armaments.

"More than 100 countries, including the Holy See, have signed the 2010 Convention on Cluster Munitions which bans their use due to their indiscriminate nature and the risks they pose to civilian populations long after the cessation of hostilities," writes Malloy.

He also noted that the United States and Russia have not signed the agreement, highlighting the urgent need for participation.

Malloy and his predecessors have consistently called on the US government to endorse both the Convention on Cluster Munitions and the Mine Ban Treaty.

Last week, the Defense Department made an announcement regarding the provision of "additional security assistance" to address Ukraine's critical security and defence requirements.

The assistance includes the shipment of cluster bombs which are designed to explode above a target and release smaller submunitions that can cause substantial damage to personnel and military equipment.

Critics argue that these bombs pose significant risks to civilian populations due to their wide coverage area.

Additionally, there is concern about the potential for unexploded ordnance remaining on battlefields, posing ongoing threats to civilians long after conflicts have ended.

President Biden's decision to supply Ukraine with cluster munitions faced bipartisan opposition in Congress this week.

Several dozen Democrats joined Republicans in voting to amend the National Defense Authorisation Act to block these munitions' shipment.

However, the amendment ultimately failed to pass.

Bishop Malloy highlighted that Pope Francis has addressed the issue of antipersonnel mines and cluster munitions, urging all countries to commit to these conventions in order to prevent further harm to individuals.

While recognising Ukraine's right to self-defence, Malloy highlighted the importance of continued prayers for dialogue and peace.

Malloy expressed his support for and shared Pope Francis' moral concerns and aspirations regarding this matter.

Sources

• US Catholic Bishops
• CNA

He said the conflicts reminded him of the World War II Allied military landings at Normandy, France.

"It was the beginning of the fall of Nazism, it's true.

"But how many boys were left on the beaches in Normandy?

"They say, 30,000. …

"Who thinks of those boys?

"War sows all of this.

"That is why you, who are journalists, please be pacifists, speak out against wars, fight against war. I ask you as a brother. Thank you."

Pope Francis' heartfelt request to journalists to be pacifists touched my heart.

Many years ago, as a young man, I found myself in U.S. military basic combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey.

While firing my M-16 weapon at life-like pop-up targets, it occurred to me the army was not training me to hit targets, but instead to kill some poor guy like me in a far-off country who got caught up in the propaganda of his own country's war machine.

I came to fully realize this was all wrong. And I knew that in my desire to imitate the nonviolent Jesus, I could kill no one.

I spoke to my drill sergeant about my deep anti-war feelings and my desire to apply for conscientious objector status.

He urged me to wait until I completed basic combat training and apply for CO status when I arrived at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indianapolis, for Advanced Individual Training.

I'd previously trained as a journalist, and at Fort Harrison, I was receiving additional training as a broadcaster for Armed Forces Radio in Germany. But that exciting future did not deter me from seeking CO status.

My broadcast instructors tried to convince me that the chances of my having to shoot someone from a radio station were extremely remote. However, I knew my role as a military journalist and radio disc jockey would be to boost the morale of those who would be pulling the triggers and dropping the bombs.

I knew that I could have nothing to do with this unholy enterprise.

Although the Holy Father's inflight press conference plea, "You who are journalists, please be pacifists, speak out against wars, fight against war," was on that occasion directed to journalists, it is reasonable to believe that his pacifism plea is also extended to all people of goodwill.

And it is important to clarify that pacifism does not mean lying down and allowing brutal aggressors to kill and destroy.

Quite the contrary!

Pacifism, or the preferred terms "nonviolent resistance" and "active nonviolence", is courageously committed to using the numerous nonviolent, highly effective tools available to limit and even stop armed aggression.

For example, please see Pax Christi International's Catholic Nonviolence Initiative and The Nonviolent Peaceforce.

The late preeminent theologian and biblical scholar, Fr John McKenzie said, "If Jesus does not reject violence for any reason, we do not know anything about Jesus. Jesus taught us not how to kill but how to die."

On September 7, 2013, countless believers across the globe and over 100,000 people in St Peter's Square prayed with Pope Francis for peace in Syria and throughout the world.

During the four-hour prayer service at St Peter's, the Holy Father said, "We bring about the rebirth of Cain in every act of violence and in every war. … We have perfected our weapons, [while] our conscience has fallen asleep, and we have sharpened our ideas to justify ourselves. As if it were normal, we continue to sow destruction, pain, death!

"Violence and war lead only to death; they speak of death!

"Violence and war are the language of death."

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at diocesan or parish gatherings. Tony can be reached at tmag6@comcast.net.

Since the end of February 2022, they have welcomed hundreds of needy families.

"During the first few weeks of the war, there was a lot of movement in our monastery. People came from many different cities in Ukraine, such as Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Kyiv, Boryspil, Irpin, Zhytomyr, Chernobyl, Odessa, Horlivka, Slovyansk, Donetsk and Luhansk.

It was mostly women and children, accompanied by their husbands who would help their families cross the border before returning to fight for their country", explains Sister Klara.

The nuns estimate that to date, more than 500 people have been through their monastery.

"Currently, the monastery mostly hosts those who do not plan to go abroad, and some of them don't have a home to return to either. Now we have 75 people here, including the sisters from our community in Zhytomyr", says Sister Klara.

The Benedictines of Zhytomyr were finally forced to evacuate their convent after spending several days in air raid shelters in the basement of the local cathedral, as their building was under constant threat of bombardment.

To help people overcome these difficult and traumatic times, the nuns involve everyone in the daily chores and services, such as cleaning the monastery or working in the kitchen and the dining hall.

One of the cells has been turned into a playroom for the 20 children who are staying there.

Roman, Anna and child

Roman, Anna and their two children, a month-old baby and a seven-year-old boy, are one of the families currently living in Solonka.

They are originally from Kharkiv and held on for 10 days or so after the war started, but when the situation worsened, they decided to leave.

They had already packed their bags and were in the hallway when a rocket hit their building.

"The house caught fire; all the windows were blown out", Roman tells ACN.

They thought they would not be able to leave because the house was filled with thick black smoke.

The neighbour's house had also been hit, causing even more damage.

Out in the street, people were running in all directions to get as far from the house as possible, fearing the gas pipes might explode. Roman and Anna took their children and their bags and started walking.

Eventually, they waved down a car that drove them to the house of a friend's mother. "But there were bombings there as well, especially at night. It was awful. We couldn't sleep, and the kids were getting nervous", Roman explains.

They decided to head to Lviv on the train with other refugees.

When they arrived, they realised that what they had read online was true, the city was overcrowded, and there were no rooms available.

Anna found a place to stay on the floor of a home for mothers and their children, but that was not what she wanted, especially as her baby was still so small.

With growing frustration, they were going from one place to the next, but nobody was able to help.

Finally, they sat on a bench, completely worn out.

The baby was cold, and they didn't know what to dress it in.

That was when a nun came up to them and asked: "Do you have a place to stay? Is anybody expecting you?"

They replied in the negative, adding that they were desperate.

The nun suggested they go to the monastery, where they were given a clean room, food, clothes and powdered milk for the baby.

Anna was beside herself with joy. "We will remember this moment and be grateful for the rest of our lives."

Later they learned that Sister Hieronima, the nun who offered them help, had not planned to go by the train station that day but felt that she should see if anybody needed help.

Anna has no doubt: "It was divine providence. A sign from God!" and Roman agrees: "The Lord saved us!"

The sisters have left their cloister and the silence to which they are usually committed, but they believe that this is what God is asking of them at this time.

"This is how our community of nuns and monks reads the signs of the times, and this is how we envision our service now".

This ministry of selfless hospitality is bringing many people closer to God.

"Most of the refugees are not believers, but sometimes they come to pray", explains Sister Klara.

"During the feast of the Annunciation, we celebrated the wedding of an elderly couple from Zhytomyr in our church. Another young couple from Kharkiv is preparing for the sacraments of reconciliation and marriage and will also baptise their son. Several people have made their first confession".

She ends by saying that despite all this new work and dedication, prayer time continues to be the mainstay of their lives.

"We have kept up our rhythm of common prayer in the Liturgy of the Hours, and we have additional hours of adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Glory to the Lord in all things!"

• María Lozano writes for Aid to the Church in Need.
• Republished with permission.

Since the official opening of the Archibald Baxter Peace Garden on October 29, 2021, the site has quickly established itself as an important national and local landmark.

The central feature in the garden is a powerful statue titled "We Shall Bend but Not Be Broken," created by Arrowtown sculptor Shane Woolridge.

The statue commemorates the mistreatment of Baxter for his refusal to go against his convictions and take up arms in World War 1.

An information plaque explains the context and the form of field punishment (known as Field Punishment No 1), which Baxter experienced in Flanders in 1918.

Baxter describes the experience in his book We Will Not Cease (1939):

"My hands were taken from round the pole, tied together and pulled well up it, straining and cramping the muscles and forcing them into an unnatural position ... I was strained so tightly against the post that I was unable to move body or limbs a fraction of an inch."

For Woolridge to craft such an evocative representation of field punishment that is appropriate to display in a public place is a remarkable achievement.

The design invites the onlooker to reflect on what it would be like for someone to be stretched and bent in this way for hours.

Baxter's son, the poet James K. Baxter, describes field punishment as a "torture post" and it was known colloquially as "crucifixion". However, the visual image of the memorial — and the inscription which accompanies it — are expressions of human dignity, not just pain and suffering.

Baxter is not depicted directly and but his experience is suggested in two different ways.

First, the upright pole is constructed from 70 stacked stone discs. These are suggestive of the compressed vertebra disks of a person constrained on the field punishment pole for hours.

The message is understated but clear for those who wish to reflect on it.

Second, a bronze sphere hanging from the top of the structure recalls the well-known images of Baxter during field punishment, especially the painting Field Punishment no 1 by Bob Kerr, depicting both field punishment and Baxter himself in this indirect and understated way manages to convey the suffering he experienced without being too overwhelming for a public memorial in a prominent location.

At the opening ceremony, Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson spoke on the tragic irony that because Baxter was determined to stand up for his principles, he was forced to bend in pain for many hours.

Archibald Baxter

Baxter's son, the poet James K. Baxter, describes field punishment as a "torture post" and it was known colloquially as "crucifixion". However, the visual image of the memorial — and the inscription which accompanies it — are expressions of human dignity, not just pain and suffering.

Baxter is not depicted directly and but his experience is suggested in two different ways.

First, the upright pole is constructed from 70 stacked stone discs. These are suggestive of the compressed vertebra disks of a person constrained on the field punishment pole for hours.

The message is understated but clear for those who wish to reflect on it.

Second, a bronze sphere hanging from the top of the structure recalls the well-known images of Baxter during field punishment, especially the painting Field Punishment no 1 by Bob Kerr, depicting both field punishment and Baxter himself in this indirect and understated way manages to convey the suffering he experienced without being too overwhelming for a public memorial in a prominent location.

At the opening ceremony, Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson spoke on the tragic irony that because Baxter was determined to stand up for his principles, he was forced to bend in pain for many hours.

Robertson recognised this as an inspiration for all who call New Zealand their home.

Baxter and the other conscientious objectors exemplify what Robertson described as "standing upright as a New Zealander".

Emeritus Prof Kevin Clements has noted the appropriateness of the memorial's elevated position just above George St. One can look across the harbour to the Fallen Soldier's memorial (1923) at the crest of the peninsula horizon.

The two memorials, nearly 100 years apart in age, both speak to the courage and the cost paid by those they remember in different ways.

Clements is chairman of the Archibald Baxter Trust, and it is the trust which had the vision for this public gift. It undertook the fundraising, commissioned the work and liaised with the Dunedin City Council to make it possible.

I first encountered Baxter's story when I was invited to offer the Archibald Baxter Memorial Trust lecture in 2015.

This annual lecture is held each year on or close to International Peace Day, September 21.

After the lecture, my Otago colleague Associate Prof John Stenhouse encouraged and guided my research into Baxter's religious views.

It was a fascinating journey.

In his later years, Baxter became Catholic, but he is usually described as an atheist because for much of his life he was not a member of a church and did not identify as religious.

It is clear that he was not religious in a conventional way, but there is also evidence that, in some ways, he always had a strong personal faith.

When he was categorised as an agnostic in Wellington jail, he declared this was wrong.

His wife, Millicent, said that he would insist that he was not a member of a church but said, "I am a believer".

During the lowest point of suffering during field punishment, Baxter appears to have derived personal support from religion, but he said he did not act for religious reasons.

Because Baxter was so reticent about his beliefs, it is hard to know for sure what he made of religion.

In the biography of Millicent Baxter, Out of the Shadows, Penny Griffiths details a revealing story.

Archie and Millicent converted to Catholicism in 1965, and Archibald took the baptismal name Francis, after Francis of Assisi.

However, his niece insists that her father (Archie's brother Donald) never knew about his conversion until his funeral in 1970.

Religion was seen as a very private matter.

While the national memorial is not about Baxter's religious faith— or his presumed lack of religious faith — the sense of restraint it shows with regard to field punishment is very fitting for how Baxter himself viewed public expressions of faith.

Under the surface, there is much more than is first apparent.

• David Tombs is the Howard Paterson Professor of theology and public issues at the University of Otago.
• First published in the ODT. Republished with permission.
• David Tombs, ‘Under the Surface: Archibald Baxter's Religious Faith' in Geoff Troughton (ed.),Saints and Stirrers: Christianity, Conflict and Peacebuilding in New Zealand, 1814-1945. Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2017, pp. 122-43. Available at http://hdl.handle.net/10523/12755

If he were alive today, he would be in his 90s, but he died when he was three years old, victim of what would today be a minor infection. However, before the development of antibiotics there was no such thing as a minor infection.

Had Martin caught that infection two decades later, he probably would not have died. He was a victim of the not-yet that living when he did imposed upon him and his family.

That is the problem with living in time rather than some sort of timeless eternity. The past puts limits on us in the present while the future only tantalizes us with hopes and possibilities that may happen but will themselves be limited by constraints handed on from and through our time.

There is no such thing as "starting from scratch." We cannot erase the past and start anew. We must build on what the past presents to us, advancing the good and ameliorating the bad. But we cannot start over.

Our action or inaction occurs in a context that shapes it and forces a response that falls short of any ideal. And so, my grandparents could only watch, weep and pray as their little boy suffered and died.

Jesus lived with the same limitations. The Incarnation means that he, though God the Son, was hemmed in by his time, his culture, his language, his religion, his education, his society and much else. He transcended many aspects of it.

But there was much he could not do. He and we can only live in the world we inherit and inhabit.

That is why searching Scripture for simple answers to modern challenges is seldom of use. WWJD (what would Jesus do?) today is unknowable because he did not have to "Do" what we must do.

That is one of the reasons that Christian doctrine and practice have evolved over the millennia: they must re-do their "Do" in every new age.

That uncomfortable truth faces us as we gaze horrified at Russia's war against Ukraine.

While there are people — generally people far removed from reality — who like war for political or voyeuristic reasons, most of us want peace despite the different descriptions and conditions we might give to it.

Vladimir Putin has created a context of violence for Ukraine and the rest of the world that cannot be met solely by nonviolence. It must be met with varying degrees of regret-filled counter-violence.

The day when violence can be halted by non-violence has not yet come

The alternative is to allow violent bullying to go unconfronted in any realistically effective way. The war in Ukraine poses a challenge to absolute pacifism that would condemn any military action, or at least refrain from supporting it.

We know that the violent response to Russia's attack and violations against the few norms to limit atrocities in war will do little to relieve the world of violence.

That response may even create a new Cold War if it does not expand to the broader World War 3 that Russia's foreign minister has threatened.

In fact, by supplying Ukraine with weapons and military intelligence while damaging the Russian economy and oligarchs through sanctions and confiscations, other countries are engaging in that war by proxy.

Is there a realistic alternative? If it were possible to reset the world to a state where violence could, in fact, be headed off or halted by innocence, then non-violence of the sort epitomized by saints like Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King would be more generally effective than it has been.

Thanks in part to their example, a case can be made that non-violence is growing as a way to defang the demon of violence. Perhaps through activities such as theirs the world will one day be violence-free. We can and must hope, pray and work for that day.

It took the worst war in history to stop the genocidal madness of Nazi Germany and Japan in the last century and there is no reason to believe that anything other than war would have done so.

One result of that horrific violence was revulsion toward much that was considered normal until then and is now deemed atrocity.

Russia's use of indiscriminate urban bombing and the threat to use tactical nuclear, biological and chemical weapons are condemned as a throwback to a kind of warfare that in Europe at least has been outgrown.

So perhaps we are advancing, but the day when violence can be halted by non-violence has not yet come and we must live without a reset button in a world of not-yet.

That means that even we who follow the Prince of Peace must in some situations accede to and even participate in war with the hope that it may somehow make the situation better for those who come after us.

As my grandparents faced Martin's illness and death, I assume they hoped for a day when other parents would not endure the same.

• William Grimm is a missioner and presbyter in Tokyo and is the publisher of UCA News.

The past several weeks surely have been extremely frustrating for Pope Francis.

First of all, his tireless and ever more urgent appeals for an end to the fighting in Ukraine, which began in late February with Russia's invasion of the country, have been completely ignored.

And he's had absolutely no success in convincing Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, to denounce the war or convince Vladimir Putin to agree to an Easter ceasefire.

Francis keeps repeating that he's willing to do everything he can to help stop the war, but he has to know in his heart of hearts that (as it's been said here before) there is no role for the Roman pope in the Russia-Ukraine mess.

That must also be extremely frustrating for him.

But whether the war ends tomorrow or drags on for a very long time, there is another issue that is bogging him down. It's his advanced age and questionable health.

Cancelled appointments and scaled-back ceremonies

The head of the Holy See Press Office on Friday told journalists that Francis had cancelled all his pre-scheduled appointments for the day in order to have some necessary medical check-ups.

The press officer did not give any details, but in an interview with an Argentine newspaper that was published on the same day, the 85-year-old Jesuit pope revealed that the nagging problem he's been having with his right knee is a torn ligament.

The knee ailment has hobbled him for several weeks and it even forced him to skip or scale down processions and certain other physical activities during the liturgies of Holy Week.

Most notably, Francis did not even preside at the Easter Vigil, but sat among the assembly. The next day he was able to lead the Mass in St. Peter's Square but had to sit for most of the "Urbi et Orbi" Message that he delivered afterwards.

And a few weeks earlier, during an April 2-3 trip to Malta, the pope had to use hydraulic lifts to board his flights and even to visit a below-ground shrine.

Extra weight and major surgery

The bum knee is not the only health issue that is dogging him. Francis also has said that he suffers from sciatic nerve pain, and it is obvious to all that he's a lot heavier than he was nine years ago when he was elected Bishop of Rome.

In addition to all that, he underwent a major operation last July when surgeons removed about one-fifth (13 inches) of his large intestine. He remained hospitalized for ten days but was quick to resume normal activities without further convalescence.

The exact state of the pope's health is not clear because Francis doesn't like to reveal any more than required. He was extremely secret last July, for example, over releasing details about his surgery.

But he impressively soldiers on under obvious physical limitations, giving little indication of the aches and pains he feels.
Doing more and keeping people off balance

This pope clearly likes to keep people guessing — and off balance -, which appears to be part of his way of governing and surviving as a total outsider in ecclesiastical Rome and the Vatican.

For instance, after last July's surgery there were rumors floating around that Francis had cancer and some surmised that they did not originate with the pope's "enemies", but with the pope himself!

And his response was to give more live and recorded addresses, meet more people, hold more audiences and get back to traveling.

He's made three international trips since the surgery (Hungary-Slovakia, Iraq and Malta) and has four more on his calendar for the coming months — Lebanon in mid-June, South Sudan and DR-Congo in early July, Canada a few weeks later, and Kazakhstan in September.

Is this just another way to show that he is healthy or is the sign of someone who is in a race against the clock?

If it is the latter, then expect Francis to do a lot more than just hopscotch around the globe.
Major appointments to be made

One of the most urgent matters of business is revamping the top leadership in the Roman Curia in order to ensure the reform that goes into effect on Pentecost Sunday (June 5) is carefully and enthusiastically implemented.

The pope will also be creating new cardinals soon. There are currently 117 electors, but that number falls to 110 by the end of the year. If he sticks to the 120-limit set by Paul VI, he will have ten slots to fill.

But popes are free to change the number of electors if they choose and they can also modify the rules and protocols in place during the sede vacante (interregnum between one pontificate an another) and the conclave.

Just about every pope who has lived more than 33 days has done so and it is expected that Francis will also. There is an urgent need to precisely define the process by which a Roman Pontiff freely resigns and codify the rights and duties of a former pope.

Bound and determined

Finally, keep an eye out for further changes to the Synod of Bishops, possibly to give it a more deliberative role in universal Church governance or even transform it into a body that is not just for the hierarchy and the ordained.

Francis has launched an audacious experiment called "synodality" in an effort to truly awaken all the baptized (i.e. the so-called laity) and make them active participants in how the Church operates.

The Synod itself will likely have to be further modified to enhance and facilitate this development.

The pope is getting old and his health is naturally declining. But he is trying mightily not to show signs of slowing down.

Though the clock is ticking, Francis is convinced there is still a lot more do. And he seems bound and determined to get it done.

• Robert Mickens is La-Croix International Editor in Chief. He has lived, studied and worked in Rome for 30 years. Over that time he has studied at the Gregorian University, worked at Vatican Radio and been the Rome correspondent for the London Tablet. He regularly comments on CNN, the BBC and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
• First published in La-Croix International. Republished with permission.

The visit came two and a half years after John XXIII's Pacem in terris refashioned the Catholic social and ethical lexicon, and two decades, almost to the day, after the 1945 establishment of the UN itself.

The pope ended his address by invoking the refrain of mourning and determination that became a global mantra after the Holocaust and served as the UN's raison d'être: "Never again."

Speaking, he declared, on behalf of both living and dead—the victims and survivors of war, the poor and disinherited, the youth who dream of a better world—the pope issued a solemn call for an end to armed conflict:

Never again the one against the other!

Never again! Nevermore!…

It suffices to remember that the blood of millions, that numberless and unheard-of sufferings, useless slaughter and frightful ruin, are the sanction of the pact which unites you, with an oath that must change the future history of the world: No more war, never again war! Peace, it is peace which must guide the destinies of peoples and of all mankind!

The speech's tone was humble and determined, permeated by faith in the possibility of international goodwill and human progress.

It bore the same sense of open-palmed, non-defensive solidarity with the world that, two months later, would suffuse Gaudium et spes, Vatican II's Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World.

Before the UN, Paul previewed a phrase he would later include in Populorum Progressio, calling the Church an "expert on humanity" ready to offer its humane, integral vision of peace and dignity to a world labouring to make itself new.

Soon after the 1965 visit, Time-Life Books produced a special edition commemorating the whirlwind, daylong papal trip to New York.

Among other things, the volume included an English-language transcript of the UN address, which appeared alongside Life magazine photos documenting armed conflicts unfolding around the world.

Opposite the final page of text, a full-page, black-and-white image shows U.S. Marines trudging past a North Vietnamese man lying on his back, dead in the sand. His half-closed eyes gaze outward, his fingertips graze his abdomen; he wears shorts and a button-down shirt; he is barefoot.

The commemorative publication heralded Paul VI's visit to the UN as a "call to conscience." The juxtaposition of his elegant plea for world peace with images of intractable war was meant to evoke the urgency of this call.

Seen through the eyes of history, however, it also suggests a tragic irony. At the top of the page, an italicized pull-quote declares, "The hour has come for a halt."

The Vietnam War would rage for another decade. In the end, it gave way not to peace but to desolation and generations of haunted dreams.

The summer after the pope came to the UN, British-American poet Denise Levertov completed "Life at War," which she composed in response to the Vietnam War.

The poem laments war's numbing effect, the banality with which we—she writes in the first-person plural—have trained ourselves to regard images of death and dismemberment and innocent suffering, our resistance to the horror-response they ought to evoke in us, our willingness to mollify our consciences by entertaining the supposed necessity of the whole thing.

"The disasters numb within us / caught in the chest, rolling / in the brain like pebbles," the poem begins. One can only imagine what Levertov, who died in 1997, would think of the modern newsfeed—or, more accurately, of the doomscroll reflex with which we imbibe images of war today.

War reaches into the future to destroy a world not yet born

Three stanzas in, she writes, "the same war / continues." Every war is the same war, Levertov seems to suggest.

Interpreted primarily as a commentary on Americans' willingness to depersonalize overseas conflict, there's a temptation to read in these lines a cynical desperation: it's just one far-away horror after another.

But Levertov's work rejects cynicism in the same way that Paul VI's UN plea for peace requires a level of earnestness that today feels inconceivable.

I take Levertov to mean something different: every war is made, ultimately, from the same stuff.

The monsters of war shapeshift here and there, like a rash that appears on the face, then the hands, then years later on the back—not three different rashes, as you had thought, but the same rash, fruit of the same subdermal virus, breaking out all over, receding from view but never gone.

It is wrenching to revisit Paul VI's UN address today, as Russian missiles rip through Ukrainian neighbourhoods, flattening schools and theatres and maternity wards.

Thousands are dying and millions are fleeing their homes in a war of aggression that feels catastrophically tailor-made to set off a domino effect of global conflict and, impossibly, to dredge up the same nuclear anxieties behind the nearly six-decade-old papal address.

For Paul VI, and seemingly for Levertov, there is nothing that can be said of one war that cannot be said of every war.

In this sense, Russia's bombing of a Mariupol maternity hospital on March 9 serves as an apt, nauseating metaphor for war itself. War reaches into the future to destroy a world not yet born. The only hope for humanity is peace.

But, however prescient as they were, Paul's words also feel like a space-age vestige of some past future, an artifact that belongs in the same aesthetic category as Disneyland's Tomorrowland and Corita Kent lithographs and the UN headquarters.

1965 was hardly a simpler time: when, midway through the address, Paul refers to "those terrible weapons that modern science has given you"—weapons that "produce nightmares" even before they "produce victims and ruins"—he is calling to mind the acute possibility of global nuclear annihilation.

Yet I am struck by how thoroughly we—Levertov's we—have lost the taste for world peace. We know too much and too little. Indeed, throughout decades of U.S. military involvement in the Middle East, Americans heard remarkably little about peace, even aspirationally.

In a post-9/11 world, the other side of war was not peace but merely less-visible war, war that was drone-operated and remote and ignorable, where the sort of conscience-stirring images to which Levertov alludes are kept far away from the front page.

Russia's war on Ukraine has rendered such examinations of conscience inescapable.

And because this is so, the times demand of us what, in the words of Paul Ricoeur, we might term a second naïveté about peace—a re-embrace of the thing that we once felt too wise and world-weary to allow ourselves to keep wanting.

In stirring video addresses to his compatriots and world leaders, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky seems to be coaxing the world toward precisely that kind of embrace.

Of course, his immediate aims are more concrete: come to our assistance; look at the truth of what is happening here. But behind these strategic demands lies a deeper, spiritual plea, one captured in the final lines of Levertov's poem:

nothing we do has the quickness, the sureness,
the deep intelligence living at peace would have.

The time is right to retrieve world peace from the punchlines of Miss America jokes and restore it, unabashedly, to its rightful place atop the wildest dreams and highest aspirations and most zealous prayers of humankind.

• Susan Bigelow Reynolds is Assistant Professor of Catholic Studies at Candler School of Theology at Emory University (Atlanta, USA).
• First published in La-Croix International. Republished with permission.