« Wow. | Main | Wash for Life »
September 06, 2006
The Peace Pope
Angelo Matera in the NCR(egister):
Catholic “hawks” in the United States had been unhappy with Pope John Paul II’s stance against almost all wars, a position they viewed as unrealistic and a departure from their interpretation of the classic “just war” tradition that began with St. Augustine. For them, the figure of St. Benedict became a symbol, and the Pope’s name a secret code, for those who believed they saw most clearly the threat of Islamic fascism and the need to use violence in the clash of civilizations between the West and Islam.
They clearly hoped that Benedict XVI would look more favorably on the United States’ use of armed force in the fight against Islamic terrorists and rogue states.
But with the Vatican’s reaction to the recent Israeli incursion into Lebanon, the hawks discovered they were only half right about the new Pope.
While Benedict has indeed been firm in calling Europe back to its Christian roots and warning against the “dictatorship of relativism,” any speculation that he would diverge from John Paul II’s “Gospel of Peace” ended when the Holy Father came out strongly against Israel’s pre-emptive attack on Lebanon.
Why did the pro-war Catholics misread the Pope so badly on this issue? One reason is that they had overlooked, or chosen to ignore, the Holy Father’s clear and repeated references to another inspiring Benedict — Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922)
Matera, who is the editor in chief of the excellent Godspy site, follows with a discussion of Benedict XV's efforts to bring some peace and justice out of the Great War, and then outlines Benedict XVI's statements on the Israel-Hezbollah conflict. This is the first in a series, and the next piece might get some juices going. It's previewed as: "Hawks circle Benedict."
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
On grounds of factual accuracy alone, I wouldn't have described Israel's incursion into Lebanon as a "pre-emptive attack." Israeli forces entered Lebanon only after Hezbollah forces went into Israel and captured two Israeli soldiers.
Posted by: Sean Gallagher at Sep 6, 2006 9:44:37 AM
i think it is much more simple. Benedict thinks in conservative theological terms so people assumed he would support everything the christian right does. That is way to simplistic. First of all, he is German. He is not going to think about war the same way people who have never experienced war do. He is not going to casually talk about breaking eggs to make an omlette. He has been on the other end of the bombs.
Posted by: Randy at Sep 6, 2006 9:45:16 AM
I do wonder if NCR(egister) here also isn't missing the marked shift in tone of the Vatican midway through the Lebanon war.
It did not end up being an endorsement as such of Israel. But they stepped back considerably in their criticism of Israel's ius in bello conduct, as I believe an article linked by Amy noted at one point.
Posted by: Richard at Sep 6, 2006 10:02:07 AM
I learned some new things in that article. The timeline I think is the most impressive part. The next article in the series should be interesting.
In the end, I think those sincerely misunderstanding the Vatican have been given the impression, erroneously, that there is a wide diversity of opinion within the Vatican. For many, there is shock that Cdl Sodano could be in his position. The idea that his views were very consistent with other Vatican officials seems inconceivable.
I look forward to part II.
Posted by: M.Z. Forrest at Sep 6, 2006 10:12:18 AM
I hope that conservatives find ~even more~ to gripe about before Benedict XVI's time as Holy Father is over. Blessed are the peacemakers. - PH
Posted by: Philip Howard at Sep 6, 2006 10:17:57 AM
test
Posted by: amywelborn at Sep 6, 2006 11:21:38 AM
"He is not going to think about war the same way people who have never experienced war do."
Few people on this planet have had more experience of war since 45 than the Israelis. Few people on this planet have had less experience of war since 45 than the Germans. Experience of war may indeed impact one's views on war, but I doubt that it necessarily causes an adoption of pacifist views. Hitler saw World War I at its worst in the trenches in Flanders, and this certainly did not slake his appetite for war.
Posted by: Donald R. McClarey at Sep 6, 2006 11:25:34 AM
The more articles I read about this pope's movements and decisions the more I think people don't think of him as a person of his own ... rather someone who has to meekly or humbly rubber stamp previous popes or known influences ... like some simple caretaker pope! But I haven't seen a pope yet who is for war these days ... just or not!
And then we have another "startling" statement/communication that those conservatives so certain of the man must also find a little disconcerting:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605026.htm
and that is a lot more than simply forwarding parameters for such gatherings.
Posted by: chris K at Sep 6, 2006 11:37:31 AM
Chris K hit it right on the head. Pope Benedict XVI - before and immediately after he became pope - symbolizes something to conservative Catholics. It's not much different than the case of Chicago's Cardinal Bernardin and liberal Catholics. There's more (or less!) to their followers hopes about them than to the men themselves. People ~expect~ predictable positions and behaviors from them, and are shocked when those predictions are not confirmed. I hope the Holy Father continues schock both liberals and conservatives alike. If he did that, he'd approach the saintly actions of John Paul II. - PH
Posted by: Philip Howard at Sep 6, 2006 12:43:43 PM
Sean-
"Israeli forces entered Lebanon only after Hezbollah forces went into Israel and captured two Israeli soldiers".
Just for the record, and not to start an argument, there have been some questions raised about just where, exactly, the Israeli soldiers were in relation to the border.
Posted by: Dudley at Sep 6, 2006 1:02:39 PM
Sometimes I wonder if critics of conservative Catholics assume more about their opponents than is actually true. Can someone please point me to all the conservative essays lamenting Pope Benedict's apostasy, his selling out the "dream"? Where are all the conservatives lamenting that the Pope has sold them out? Sure there have been little critiques here and there by Jody Bottum, Neuhause, Robert Miller, but these are well-intentioned questions about the Pope's statements. I think many (most?) conservative Catholics, like this one, just want the Pope to be Catholic, to refrain from being put into any box. I want Pope Benedict to challenge me and am open to his guidance and teaching -- on every subject including on issues of war and peace.
Posted by: Will Barrett at Sep 6, 2006 1:51:17 PM
Dudley,
The Hezbollah ambush was 2 miles inside of Isreal. A platoon sized battle ensued in which 7 members of the IDF lost thier lives, and2 others were captured. The Isrealis were on a road well inside of thier borders. If one takes into account the ongoing Hezbollah motar attacks leading up to the ambush, Isreali's reaction was anything but pre-emptive. Matera, I suppose couldn't resist injecting this piece of revisionism
Posted by: JP at Sep 6, 2006 2:09:08 PM
"Sometimes I wonder if critics of conservative Catholics assume more about their opponents than is actually true. Can someone please point me to all the conservative essays lamenting Pope Benedict's apostasy, his selling out the "dream"? Where are all the conservatives lamenting that the Pope has sold them out? Sure there have been little critiques here and there by Jody Bottum, Neuhause, Robert Miller, but these are well-intentioned questions about the Pope's statements. I think many (most?) conservative Catholics, like this one, just want the Pope to be Catholic, to refrain from being put into any box. I want Pope Benedict to challenge me and am open to his guidance and teaching -- on every subject including on issues of war and peace." (emphasis added by me)
Amen, Will.
Posted by: Jay Anderson at Sep 6, 2006 2:25:49 PM
The charge is:
[Catholic hawks {Conservative would seem to apply equally well.}] clearly hoped that Benedict XVI would look more favorably on the United States’ use of armed force in the fight against Islamic terrorists and rogue states.
Will's reply:
Can someone please point me to all the conservative essays lamenting Pope Benedict's apostasy, his selling out the "dream"? Where are all the conservatives lamenting that the Pope has sold them out?
Posted by: M.Z. Forrest at Sep 6, 2006 3:17:45 PM
Please! There were plenty of "conservative Catholics" here and elsewhere claiming that a Pope conscripted to fight in WWII, knew nothing of war, and should keep his idle musings on pacificism to himself while Israel levelled Lebanon.
Posted by: al at Sep 6, 2006 4:00:57 PM
I just want to see the evidence. No doubt there were those who were critical of the Pope's and the Vatican's statements. I haven't followed it all as closely as I might have. But did anyone really say that the Pope should keep his "idle musings" to himself? There were some who thought that his statements were off to some degree. (I cannot put myself in their camp because I tend toward the view that Israel's response was disproportionate but am sympathetic to the Israeli dilemma).
Posted by: Will Barrett at Sep 6, 2006 4:42:41 PM
I think most of those who actually studied what Cardinal Ratzinger said and wrote before becoming Pope are not surprised at all at his actions since becoming Pope. They are simply a continuation of what he was doing before becoming Pope.
Ratzinger opposed the invasion of Iraq, stated that such a preemptive war was not in the Catechism and said we ought to be considering if the Just War Theory is even valid today.
God Bless
Posted by: Chris Sullivan at Sep 6, 2006 4:57:43 PM
Here are some words from Our Lord that all Catholics - and all Christians - ought to meditate upon deeply whenever the subject of war comes up in any form. (No doubt these quotations will infuriate some people out there - which I find very ironic, given Who said them.) All verses are from Matthew 5, in the New King James Version:
9: Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
38: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
43: Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.
The implications are quite clear: Christians are forbidden from engaging in the violence of this world, which is in keeping with James' observation that "Friendship with the world is enmity with God." The interests of any self-aggrandizing nation, whether that nation be the US, or Iran, or even Israel in its current apostate state, are those of the world, and thus at enmity with God.
Numerous other verses might be cited as well to buttress the point, but the ones above are probably the most relevant ones.
Posted by: Michael at Sep 6, 2006 5:11:44 PM
Thanks for the exigesis, Michael! I'll be sure to remind my loved ones & neighbors that I am forbidden to "engage in the violence of the world" in case they are threatened...Fool.
Posted by: Tom G. at Sep 6, 2006 5:55:42 PM
"and said we ought to be considering if the Just War Theory is even valid today."
He said no such thing, Mr. Pacifist.
Posted by: Sydney Carton at Sep 6, 2006 6:40:42 PM
Hmmm, I wonder if anyone knows whether St Pius V was canonized in spite of his lobbying the temporal powers for a preemptive naval assault on the Turks, or in part because of it. Since the Blessed Virgin Mary is most credited with the victory at Lepanto (under the name of Our Lady of Victory) would that make her unChristian?
I'm no "hawk", and putting the rhetoric aside, I think most reasonable Catholics would never expect the pope to do anything other than pray and plead for peace, which is what he should do. Whether the world accepts the fact or not, he is Vicar of Christ, and pope to all peoples. However, there may come a day, like in centuries past, where unfortunately the pope will have to ask for the use of force and will be praying for peace through victory again.
Posted by: Rick Lugari at Sep 6, 2006 6:56:30 PM
Sydney,
Cardinal Ratzinger said :-
"To say nothing of the fact that, given the new weapons that make possible destructions that go beyond the combatant groups, today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a "just war."
See http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=34882
The Holy Father is right. There are no Just Wars.
God Bless
Posted by: Chris Sullivan at Sep 6, 2006 8:03:39 PM
Chris,
You are such a liar. That's right, a LIAR. The Pope never said that there are "no just wars." In fact, you know he said the exact opposite at his address in Normandy:
"Here it is clear that the intervention of the Allies was a bellum iustum, a "just war" . . . perhaps the clearest example in all history of a just war."
Where was that reported? Here:
http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2006/08/war-no-good-to-anyone-words-of.html
Who participated in the comment thread on that post? You. You wrote:
"I suppose a war could be "just" in the sense of meeting a strict requirement of justice, or a list of required criteria..."
and
"maybe a war can be both "just" in a limited and restricted sense but also evil and cause more harm than good..."
Why, those are YOUR words! So you KNEW the Pope said WW2 was the "clearest example in all history of a just war." So it would be an un-truth, ergo, a LIE, to have told me now, today, that the Pope said there are "no just wars." He said WW2 was one. In fact, he used very clear words about how just it was: the CLEAREST EXAMPLE IN ALL HISTORY.
Additionally, he also had something to say about your radical ideology of pacifism:
"An absolute pacifism that refused to grant the law any effective means for its enforcement would be a capitulation to injustice. It would sanction the seizure of power by this injustice and would surrender the world to the dictatorship of force."
I'm really tired of you, and can see why you've been banned from numerous blogs. And I advise you to stop lying to me, because I'm not the moron you obviously think I am.
Posted by: Sydney Carton at Sep 6, 2006 9:21:14 PM
Sydney,
I meant that the Holy Father is right that today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a "just war."
That there are no just wars is my own opinion, because deliberate killing is always wrong.
Perhaps I should have made this distinction clearer in my post.
God bless
God Bless
Posted by: Chris Sullivan at Sep 6, 2006 9:44:14 PM
Chris,
I think you were imprecise in your first post where you wrote:
Ratzinger opposed the invasion of Iraq, stated that such a preemptive war was not in the Catechism and said we ought to be considering if the Just War Theory is even valid today.
The question is not whether the Just War Theory is valid. The question is whether any modern wars can be fought justly under the criteria of that theory. Or in other words, do modern weapons remove modern wars from falling within the principles of a just war?
Posted by: Will Barrett at Sep 6, 2006 11:05:14 PM
