Deal,
You said that while officials of the church expressed “concern” about the Iraq war, you weren’t aware that the Church opposed the Iraq war. I know you’re making a distinction between the official church rulings and the mere pronouncements of the Pope, a distinction that is not always clear to many people outside (or inside) the church. I’d love for you or David to elaborate on what the difference is.
Certainly, I was led to believe by the liberal media that the Pope’s views on the Iraq war went beyond mere “concern.”
Vatican Strongly Opposes Iraq War
Wednesday, March 12, 2003
But in some of the Vatican’s strongest language against a possible war, its foreign minister Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran said a unilateral military strike would be a “crime against peace” with no justification on grounds of self-defense.
Pope says Iraq war threatens humanity
“When war, like the one now in Iraq, threatens the fate of humanity, it is even more urgent for us to proclaim, with a firm and decisive voice, that only peace is the way of building a more just and caring society,” he said.
The Pope, in a speech to employees of Catholic television station Telepace, added: “Violence and weapons can never resolve the problems of man.”
Pope urges world to avoid Iraq war
Monday, 13 January, 2003, 15:29
Without naming countries, the pope said efforts for peace were urgently needed “in the Middle East, to extinguish the ominous smouldering of a conflict which, with the joint efforts of all, can be avoided.”
His remarks echoed recent comments about Iraq by top Vatican officials, who have reiterated Catholic teaching that “preventative” war is not justifiable, The Associated Press said.
Pope condemns war in Iraq
Pope John Paul II has expressed renewed opposition to the possibility of war in Iraq, saying the use of military force had to be the “very last option”.
In a New Year address to Vatican diplomats, the Pope said war was “always a defeat for humanity”, and called instead for more diplomacy and dialogue. “War is never just another means that one can choose to employ for settling differences between nations,” he said.
The BBC’s David Willey in Rome says The Vatican clearly does not consider that America’s planned offensive to topple Saddam Hussein meets the conditions of a “just war” laid down by the Roman Catholic Church.
Deal, in addressing specifically my question of why such comments didn’t have more influence on you and other conservative Catholic, you said, “I suppose one reason that Catholics didn’t turn against the war once negative comments were heard from members of the curia and the Holy Father, was that they didn’t feel any obligation to do so.”
I understand why, as a technical theological matter, you would say this. But as a moral matter, I’m puzzled. Why did you not find the Pope persuasive? It was obviously something he thought about and prayed over tremendously. He was not merely giving an off the cuff soundbite; he was saying he thought the administration’s approach to the war contradicted the essence of Christ’s teachings. Why did you find the Pope so profoundly unpersuasive on this issue when you found him deeply persuasive on other issues?
posted May 2, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Steve, as I posted on a previous topic, the Catholic Church wouldn’t be what it is if it didn’t preach against war in general. Especially at a time in human history when we have the means of total earthly destruction in our hands. No one can expect the Vicar of Christ to be a jingoist. It would be a contradiction in terms.
I think the Church did the right thing in emphasizing back in 2003 the moral gravity of such an action. I also believe that President Bush took these concerns seriously. In the end, he took a different approach than that recommended by the Vatican, but I don’t think Bush dismissed them lightly.
posted October 19, 2008 at 6:23 am
The Pope always has much ‘clementia’ after the event. Popes invariably start wars only they never call it that; they just claim to be doing the work of God in ‘the mission fields’. Other people are imperialists, colonisers and fascits; the Cahtolic Church, comprising of the White Pope and his liege army, and the Black Pope and his liege army, actively subvert every country they enter. But they are never terrorists: they persuade a million Koreans or Vietnamese or Inidans to go here and be victimised for holy jesus, but they never start wars; they want George or Tony or the Australians to enter to save the lives of those simple recruits the Jesuits have stoked up, but they never start wars. All they want is peace, but peace after the One True Holy And Apostolic owns the civil service, the judicary, the government and the educational system. When these have bent the knee to the Black Pope ,the White Pope will pay them a visit, kiss the tax-yielding ground, and proclaim peace.
This is how Caesar did it,and the Popes would like every country in the world to answer to the tone of Latin, or at least let each government be run by speakers of Latin; and with Christian values, the future of education and the colonizing church is assured.
With the conversion of Blair and probabky Bush, how can anyone seriously claim that the White Pope is not in agreement with the war on Iraq. Bearing in mind that the best push for conversions follows the smell of napalm, all the several countries on the brink of war since (and including WW11) have been instigated by the Papacy , eitehr through the Jesuits and the Black Pope or through the Curia and the diplomacy of world-wide sovereignty. No other power on earth has this world-wide dimennsion. NATO exercises it on behalf of the Church and the US; but it is the RCC that has greatest power of deterrence thorugh its inernational affiliates.
Most world-leaders are simply afraid of going against the Pope, who is most carefully surrounded by an army of press-men, who lead the images the White Pope is most anxious to create. And any serious scrutiny into either the activities of the Jesuits or Opus Dei or into the international church scene is prohibited. Otherwise , it would become apparent how pro-active christianity is in the most violent scenarios.
Moreover, there is also an army of cleaner-uppers. Whether on the internet or in each country catholic cadres are summoned to action, the army love to come on ‘after the event’ and declare how well the White Pope ‘frowned on war’, ‘urged peace’, ‘responded to the faithful’ and other such euphemisms for what he said before the wars began.
India is a case in point, but it was Georgia before that, the Lebanon before that, Russia before that, South America before that, Vietnam before that, Korea before that, WW11 before that, and so on and so on…..
When do we ever come to read the patterned declaration of war by the Vatican!
Seamus Breathnach
http://www.irish-criminology.com