[Cicero]

The Pope is probably not even aware of what's going on at this point. I think he is probably focused on his goal.

I should have maybe mentioned a third weakness in his thinking, which relates to the other two. He underestimates the duty of the magistrate to enforce justice, by force if necessary. He underestimates the duty of the magistrate to protect the people, by force if necessary. And he underestimates the duty of the Pope to enforce a reasonable degree of faithfulness to the magisterium among his hierarchy, by firing or excommunicating them if necessary.

I'm a little less sure about the last, because it's a prudential judgment, and it's his to make. As for capital punishment and war, those are prudential judgments for the political leaders of nations to make. The Church can only advise them in general terms.

[Romulus]

I'm a little less sure about the last, because it's a prudential judgment, and it's his to make.

While I have no interest in reviving last Spring's debates, I feel obliged to point out that "prudential judgment", while frequently interpreted as a license by those in search of one, is better understood as a solemn duty.

I have little love for the UN, and am willing to admit my wariness of the Holy See's frequently excessive readiness to endorse its legitimate interest in this or that affair. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that the Vatican was right to call for an authentically communal response to Saddam's lawlessness. Entirely apart from pragmatic considerations (which obtain nevertheless) the Vatican was quite right in opposing any appeal to a principal of unilateral right to wage war in the absence of a plausible and present threat.

The Holy See's preference that the matter be referred to the UN should not be seen as an endorsement of world government (ths Catechism's teaching on subsidiarity being quite clear in that respect) but as a useful check on popular passions and political the mischief-makers who manipulate them.