Posted on 01/05/2004 5:41:48 AM PST by SJackson
Why would a Roman Catholic cardinal who leads a papal commission express public sympathy for a murderous, sadistic tyrant?
Cardinal Renato Martino unintentionally motivated thoughtful people to ask that question after his remarks following the capture of Saddam Hussein by American troops December 12.
Martino, president of the Pontifical Commission on Peace and Justice, told a press conference that he "had a sense of compassion for him" after watching the video confirming Saddam's capture.
"I feel pity to see this man destroyed, being treated like a cow as they checked his teeth," Martino said.
Many Catholics, such as American conservative Michael Novak, say Martino was not speaking for Pope John Paul II or for the Catholic Church. Regardless, Martino's comments reflect the Vatican's position of appeasing Arab dictators and Islam to satisfy its own geopolitical agenda.
That agenda regarding Israel involves seeking balance between Israeli and Palestinian claims, writes Vittorio Emanuele Parsi, professor of international relations at the Catholic University of Milan.
"The Vatican's political stance remains directed by a cornerstone and long-held principle within Church tradition: Attention must be given to peoples and not their governments," Parsi writes in the October-December edition of the Italian magazine, Diritto e Liberta.
Tragically, that approach explains the pope's inability or refusal to go beyond pro-forma condemnations of terrorism and publicly denounce the "culture of death" within Palestinian society.
The Vatican's geopolitical agenda includes creating a more peaceful world through inter-religious dialogue. The pope hopes he can keep Islam from hardening into a permanent fundamentalism that would "lead to the clash of civilizations that (he) considers ominous for the fate of humanity," Renzo Guolo, professor of the sociology of religion at the University of Trieste and a specialist in Muslim fundamentalism writes in his book, Xenophobes and Xenophiles: Italians and Islam.
But the emphasis on dialogue is so extreme that Rome seems willing to ignore former Muslims who face isolation and persistent threats as the result of converting to Catholicism.
"We feel abandoned," a woman named Nura told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera. "After our conversion, we have no one to support us. We ask the Church and Italy: Protect us, defend us."
Those bishops who oppose the papal approach remembered how the pope, "who ordinarily speaks about all topics, had spread a veil of silence over the persecution of Christians in Muslim countries," Guolo writes.
THE POPE'S goals, while noble, reflect a simplistic, almost naive world view. "For Karol Wojtyla, religious dialogue is necessary – to foster the common good of humanity," Guolo writes. "This dialogue is sustained by the awareness (of) common values across cultures, because these values are rooted in human nature. He seems to believe that only the prophetic message, the utopian perspective, the mystical leap powered by an intense spirituality, can achieve this objective."
Papal objectives aside, Martino's comments also reflect pervasive, virulent anti-Israeli and anti-Western sentiment within the Church's upper echelons. L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican's official newspaper, published the following on its front page during the siege at the Church of the Nativity:
"Rarely has history been so rudely forced and pushed backward by a clear intention to offend the dignity of a people. The land of the Risen One is profaned with iron and fire, and is the victim of an aggression that amounts to extermination."
Two years earlier, Archbishop Hilarion Capucci, the head of a Vatican delegation to Baghdad, called his visit "one of solidarity with the Iraqi people in the face of the international embargo against their country" and "thanked Iraq for its moral and material support for the Palestinian cause."
Some of the pope's highest officials criticize Western culture while ignoring the problems in Arab and Muslim cultures – and seem to reflect the jihadists' justification for attacking innocents.
Take the comments of Cardinal Paul Poupard, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture, made one day before the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks: "Many of the so-called values of present Western civilization are anything but values; the destruction of the family, the exaltation of homosexuality, the spread of pornography, growing immorality, abortion, gratuitous violence, the exclusion of God in the edification of society stir contempt and hatred for decadent Western society in other civilizations."
Or, take Martino's comments five months later: "Not only the United States but the entire West should make an examination of conscience of how we oppress the rest of the world – unkept promises, spreading ways of life that are not moral or acceptable to the rest of the world." Unkept promises? To whom? For what? Osama bin Laden could not have said it any better.
Yet things in Rome seem to be changing. Civilita Cattolica, the official magazine of the Vatican secretary of state, published in October an article decrying Islam's "warlike and conquering face" throughout history and criticizing the "perpetual discrimination" Christians face in Muslim countries.
Given Rome's internal rivalries, however, it remains an open question whether a pope and his Vatican that behaved like Winston Churchill in the face of communism will continue to behave like Neville Chamberlain in the face of jihadism and Islam.
The writer is a Catholic free-lance writer from Fullerton, California.
If you believe the Rummy knew where the WMDs were when the war started or that Saddam was linked to 9/11, I'd start pulling off the tin foil or if your are privy to information get it to the White House ASAP. I happen to agree with Bremer though; the WMDead Enders are putting out "red herrings."
Novak had official capacity when he visited the Vatican in the beginning of 2003; the author chose to ignore the subject all together and yes I do believe its relevant for someone who bills himself as a Catholic conservative to explain the Vatican's position in context.
3 posts so far, and the goalposts continue to move. Now it's not what the Vatican said about Just War theory, it's not whether Saddam actually had WMDs, or links to 9/11, it's what Donald Rumsfeld knew and believed at the moment the war started.
Your later comments again focus in on Novak's argument. But you still haven't touched the Vatican's Just War statements themselves, which did not depend on anything Robert Novak said or did. His diplomatic effort, as you noted, failed to budge Vatican opinion. As such, it can hardly be cited as a source for that opinion.
Seriously now, your initial comment was that the article ignored Augustinian Just War theory, so I assume you're familiar with the theory itself. Have you familiarized with how the Vatican explained the applicability of that in this case leading up to Iraq?
The Just War theory will not work in the age of terror; Thomas Aquinas didn't have to deal with animals who intentionally attacked civilians.
We simply cannot wait for rogue nations to attack and kill thousands of people.
It's time for the Church to catch up.
The Pope was very strong in his denunciations of communism, especially communism in Poland. He supported SOLIDARITY openly.
The Pope is silent on abuses of Christians in Muslim countries and tut-tuts at George Bush, who is seeking to keep the Vatican itself from getting wiped out.
John Paul II is simply afraid of radical Islam.
I don't think I made your point, unless your point was the Vatican is acting completely different from its approach to Soviet communism.
Why is the pope silent about Muslim abuses toward Christians when he was vocal about Communist abuses of citizens?
Sure. Everyone who agrees with you has courage. And when you dodge questions, and switch topics you're simply demonstrating your brilliance. Whatever it takes to look yourself in the mirror.
The problem with your contention is that the Vatican steadfastly neglected its role in any matters of Just War in this case. That's not to say they didn't take a role at all. They just seemed to prefer that of president of the United States to their own.
The Vatican's role in any Just War is to properly explain the Church's teachings on the matter, allowing for informed decisions on the part of those ultimately responsible. It is not to usurp the decision making themselves.
One of the key teachings of Just War is that only the sovereign authority of a state is qualified to make a "Just War" determination - with the obvious qualification that he is ultimately accountable to God, and therefore ought not make it unwisely. What we got instead of Just War theory explainations from the Vatican were the conclusions of a bunch of self-important Cardinals, as if they themselves were qualified to replace a sovereign authority with either their own judgement or that of the (decidedly non-sovereign) U. N. Even worse, some suggested no war can ever be justified without "multilateral consensus." This latter belief actually contradicts Just War theory.
In short, the Vatican seemingly preferred to play the role of small European state to that of spokesman for the Catholic Church in this matter. The fact that some shockingly high officials in the Vatican ignored Church teaching on the matter in order to lecture the United States, with no more authority backing them than their personal opinion (though pretending their statements carried the weight of the Magesterium), is not a proud moment for them. The confusion of the masses who have drawn from certain Vatican spokesmen's actions (and inactions) entirely inaccurate conclusions about Just War theory, and the Church's role in it, borders on scandalous.
You may or may not believe Just War applies to the War on Terror. It would be nice to see someone in the Vatican take up that question themselves, in at least as much detail as the Mr. Novak attempted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.