Just ask (in reverse chronological order): “Was religion the cause of the Gulf War I? “ “of the Vietnam War? “of the Korean War?” “of World War II?” “of World War I?” “of the Spanish-American War?” “of the U.S. Civil War?” Certainly, religion can be factored in as A cause of war, but not as THE cause of war of any of the above.

Desperate bigots will cite “sectarian violence” as caused by religion, such as in Northern Ireland, Palestine or today’s Iraq: but then -- by definition -- such strife is not “war.” Moreover, in each of the above cases, the believers protest that their violence is only a defense against attack by others. As ingenuous as such claims may seem, in none of the above is the war started for the religious purpose of “saving the enemy’s soul.” Hence, you could make the case that some sectarian strife is not based on religion.

I would argue that religious identification is often a surrogate for tribalism. While religion suffers contamination from tribalism, more frequently we find race, class, nationalism and the like as more proximate causes or war. And of course, the politically correct will never admit that atheism has been a cause of violence or that there has ever existed a single blood-thirsty atheist in history. To admit that non-religious people can be just as bad as religious people would destroy the argument that “religion is the cause of all wars.”

What concerns me about war is not my faith in God, but the role of institutionalized religion in letting itself be used to legitimize violence. It has been all too easy for kings, pastors, potentates and politicians to manipulate religious teachings and faith motivations to justify greed for land, riches and power. While you don’t have to be a believer to commit such sins, there are just too many instances of organized religion being reluctant to confront the horrors of war.

What has been the most common cause of this pusillanimous abdication of a religious responsibility? In virtually every occasion, it is because a religious faith is attached to national-state interest. Look at the key religious words in the current war discourse: “Save Iraq.” “Mission Accomplished.” “Redeem America’s Promise.” What we see in today’s U.S. is an echo of many wars in the past. It is deplorable manipulation, confusing a common humanity created by God with political advantage for some nation-state.

Some religions – or more precisely – some versions of religion seem prone to this confusion that puts “God on our side.” For instance, the support for the current conflict in Iraq shows a significant “denominational gap.” Evangelicals, Southern Baptists, and Orthodox Jews tend to favor a military victory for U.S. forces in Iraq, while Mainline Protestants, Catholics and Reform Jews advocate the beginning of withdrawal. (Notice I said “tend;” not all members of any one group neatly fall into the same box).

As I see it, Catholicism and mainline Protestantism have learned from past mistakes to avoid the pro-war, pro-military stance that presently occupies many U.S. Evangelical Protestants. I also see signs that within their ranks, Evangelicals are beginning the same evolutionary journey away from making “God and Country” indivisible and are moving towards a biblically based critique of the nation-state. It is the human side of religion to learn the power of grace by repenting of your sins.

I know that for some passionate partisans, committing a sin against your religion’s belief “proves” that all belief is wrong. Such "throw-out-the-baby-with-the-bathwater" thinking is backwards logic, because true religion counters sin. It is also contradictory to suppose that war and all the world’s sins would disappear once religion is done away with. (Robespierre, who started France’s “Reign of Terror,” said as much -- as did some nasty atheists in history who pretended to create a “brave new world” by replacing church dogmas with their own.) But then, those without faith often are the first to cast stones because they see themselves as without sin.

Ironically, one way to combat this bending of faith to material purposes is to increase the amount of religion, so that believers won’t be hoodwinked. Religious reform movements in history have often been more effective at destroying the nexus between a state and religion than the axmen of atheism. In a climate of war, religion has produced Francis of Assisi, Menno Simons, George Fox, Mahatma Gandhi, Dorothy Day, Daniel Berrigan – just to mention the better known of the legions of anti-war people of faith.

Yes, war challenges my faith in religious institutions, but recognizing the power of reform that is always latent in profound faith conviction, I believe religion is a cause for peace.