A statement on religion and peace should begin with some affirmations about the bases that our churches and synagogues have for speaking and acting in the sphere of international relations.

Underlying all else that we may say or do here is the Biblical faith that God is Lord of our nation and of all nations. As the prophet said, “all the nations are us nothing before him, they are accounted by him as less than nothing and emptiness” (Is. 40:17). As Amos said earlier: “Did I not bring up Israel from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Canhtor and the Syrians from Kir?” (9:7). The faith that all nations are under the judgment and providence and mercy of God is central to Biblical religion. Since it is the nation that so easily becomes the ultimate object of loyalty for its citizens, this faith in God transcending the nation is always a warning against national idolatry. And in our time it is political idolatry, the worship of any social group or system, that is the greatest obstacle to the tolerance and humaneness which are essential conditions for decent relations among nations, essential conditions for peace.

In this discussion of Wars of National Liberation I will be concerned more with ethical method than with setting forth policy implications and conclusions, I shall develop this method around six points of reference: (1) the phase of ethical reflection, (2) levels of analysis arid responsibility, (3) examination of assumptions, (4) analysis of wars o£ national liberation, (5) exploration of criteria of justice, and (6) suggestions for policy.

The Phases of Ethical Reflection, Etlucal reflection would seem to require three overlapping phases that are, hopefully, cumulative. There is first the examination of stance or perspective, the bringing of assumptions into the open, the questioning of stated goals in terms of their real intent. At the least, this means self-awareness and openness; at the most it becomes the road to repentance. The second phase is that of assessing the situation, exploring options and possible consequences. It is worth noting that our assumptions significantly influence our definition of the nature of the problem and color our judgment of risks. The constructive phase seeks to relate the criticized norms to the assessment of the situation, to draw out the implications as guides to policy decisions, to keep ends and means in some kind of harmony.