Speaking for myself, I just go ballistic when I rake my eyes over something as outrageous as the article below. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the Pope speaking on matters of faith and morals, but when he expounds on matters he knows nothing about (like just war), he's going too far. What on earth does war have to do with morals? Nothing, I submit. Nothing at all. Sometimes I wonder if this man is a closet liberal. Blessed are the Peacemakers INDEED! What about "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"???? I would be very interested to know if there is a recall or impeachment process within the church that could be implemented to "retire" this pacifist peacenik Pope and elect one more attuned our American sensibilities and the pressing necessity for war.

In Christ,

Tom

POPE CALLS FOR PEACE FAST ON ASH WEDNESDAY

By Johanna Bennett The Catholic Weekly March 2, 2003

Pope John Paul II has called on Catholics to fast for peace on Ash Wednesday, saying "the future of humanity" will never be determined "by terrorism and the logic of war".

"Never, never, never!" he told the gathering in St Peter's Square as he announced the Day of Peace - March 5 - in his Sunday message, calling on Catholics to show support for peace on this first day of Lent.

And, in concluding his peace appeal, he echoed Matthew's gospel in which it says: "Blessed are the peacemakers".

His appeal for peace came in the wake of his historic meeting the previous day with British Prime Minister Tony Blair - the first meeting between a Pope and British Prime minister in 30 years. Mr Blair was accompanied by his black-veiled Catholic wife, Cherie, and three of their four children, who later also met the Pope.

The meeting was said to be "cordial" although "the message was politely but firmly put", according to Vatican sources.

The Pope called on Mr Blair to "avert the tragedy of war".

The Vatican has refused to bless a war on Iraq, which Mr Blair strongly supports.

It believes such a war could unleash a wave of terrorism.

Pope John Paul told the British prime minister in their 15-minute private meeting that a war with Iraq would be an unjust war.

There has been much talk that an attack on Iraq would qualify as "a just war". (The concept of a 'just war' is a Catholic tradition that was refined out of the experiences of World War II. The theory is included as part of the Catechism).

In recent weeks the Pope has emerged as the voice of moral argument against war with Iraq. And in his Sunday message he said: "The international community has lived with great apprehension due to the danger of war which could upset the entire Middle East region."

At a news conference after meeting the Pope, Mr Blair addressed the moral question, saying: "If we fail to disarm Saddam peacefully then where does that leave the authority of the United Nations? And if we leave Saddam in charge of the Iraqi people, who are the principal victims?"

The comment was by way of reply to the leaders of the Catholic and Anglican Churches in England and Wales, who have questioned the moral legitimacy of a war on Iraq.

The Vatican said the meeting was part of the Pope's peace plan and that Pope John Paul also hopes to make a direct appeal to the US President, George Bush.

The Pope has urged Catholics to turn to prayer and fasting, and appealed to all parties concerned to try to "resolve with pacific means" the current crisis.

-- Tom (TMarcotte2000@yahoomail.com), April 13, 2004

Answers

Gee Tom- We pray for peace every week at mass.

-- Mark Advent (adventm5477@earthlink.net), April 13, 2004.

Yes that dastardly Pope prays for peace! How dare he want an end to war and killing and the ruination of hope! we MUST put a stop to him!

( disclaimer: I am beign fasisious, I eman the reverse of what I say.)

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 13, 2004.

Psalm 122 (KJV)
6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee. 7 Peace be within thy walls, and prosperity within thy palaces. 8 For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, Peace be within thee. 9 Because of the house of the LORD our God I will seek thy good.

Isaiah 9
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Romans 12
18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

God is concerned about peace, and those who pray for it are seeking that which God desires.

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), April 13, 2004.

Tom,

Apparently you get off on trying to push people's buttons. We should try to get a Pope more attuned to our American sensibilities? Give me a break. No one is going to try to impeach Pope John Paul. He is not going to retire. Many conservatives consider him a liberal (as do I). There are many positions he takes and many things he says that exasperate me. But many liberals think he is conservative. He definitely is conservative on the culture of death --abortion, euthanasia, and contraception and as well as same sex marriage. He is not going to retire. He is providing an awe-inspiring example of working hard and living faithfully while suffering so much. He should always be in our prayers, and we should always pray that the Holy Spirit continues to watch over him and the Mother Church. We must have faith. Quit trying to yank our chains.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), April 13, 2004.

"There are many positions he takes and many things he says that exasperate me."

Would it be yanking your chain to ask you to expound on that statement?

-- Tom (TMarcotte2000@yahoomail.com), April 13, 2004.

The Holy Father is his own man (and God's). Take him as he is, and think verrrrry carefully on any point where you may disagree with anything he says.

BTW, IMHO, labels like "conservative" and "liberal" are myopic and foolish. I believe the Holy Father agrees on that point too.

God bless,

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), April 14, 2004.

Emily: you could well add to the list of texts:

Matthew 5:9 "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Enrique

-- Enrique Ortiz (eaortiz@yahoo.com), April 14, 2004.

Personally, until I get up some morning and there is a burning bush in my front yard and the voice of the Almighty issues forth from it telling me that He has appointed me His new spokesperson on earth, I am quite content to leave that job to His Holiness, the Pope.

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), April 14, 2004.

Gee, if I saw a burning bush I'd want to run it by the Pope and a good physcologist before I did anything about it.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), April 14, 2004.

It's quite revealing when someone hurls the word "liberal" as an insult. Defined by Webster (not political opportunisism), liberal means: "bountiful, generous, progressive". The original liberal was named Jesus Christ.

-- Brendan Ward (me@myplace.net), April 14, 2004.

Websters offers the Dictionary, not Political definition. Politically Liberals faour the left-of-centee Philoosphy.They have a Hisotry of socialism and oppression.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 14, 2004.

Brendan is correct, If one choses to define a word with his own perception rather than the literal meaning, opportunism is in play and that is revealing.

-- Dean (DJB1586@mailbox.com), April 14, 2004.

"I have no problem with the Pope speaking on matters of faith and morals, but when he expounds on matters he knows nothing about (like just war), he's going too far."

Really, the Pope hasn't a clue about war? As I recall he lived in Poland, a country that wasn't a country for a long long time. He live through a Nazi invasion of his country and a Soviet invasion of his country. Not only was he living in Poland but he was also in the army. His father was also in the army during WWI.

Tom, I don't think that you give the Pope enough credit. He is an incredibly intelligent man. I am sure he knows more about war than Bush would ever hope to know.

It doesn't suprise me that the Pope would make such a statement. He love people, all people, incredibly. He knows what war is like and what it does to people. In his life-time the US has been involved in 6 wars. Poland has been involved in 1 and a revolution. The Balkans have been involved in several. Israel has been involved in 2, I think. Indian has been involved in a "war" with Pakistan for several years. He witnessed the wars in Africa and the Pacific region, and several revolutions. He also witnessed the civil war in Haiti. Don't tell me this man does not know war. He has lived in a time when wars were short by history's standards, but killed more people than any other war, ever.

He is a man that has witnessed so much hate and death. Now we ask him to give his ok on more death and hatered?

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), April 15, 2004.

As Catholics, it will never be our job to second guess the Holy Father, it is ours only to listen and to pray that we might be drawn closer to him and to our church.

This church will never be a cafeteria, where we are free to choose which courses we like and which we will do without. The fullness of truth is here for all to be nourished.

I too feel, that what will come of this "war," if it is followed through with conviction and resolve, will be good for the people of Iraq and our relations with all the nations of that region. But, when I find myself on the other side of the fence with our Pope, it makes me uncomfortable and I would suggest that it is probably me who needs to mature in my "faith" rather then him.

-- Leon (pookieboy@hotmail.com), April 15, 2004.

I don't suppose anyone has noticed that the original article doesn't actually quote the Pope but rather puts words in his mouth with respect to the whole Just war thing.

If anyone can find anything on vatican.va that has the Pope being specific and making direct statements that an invasion of Iraq would be categorically immoral and that the UN alone is the moral authority in world affairs, please let me know.

But as it stands everyone here is arguing not about what the Pope actually said, but what a media outlet wishes or thinks he said.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), April 15, 2004.

The pope dont know what he talks about, Viva Bush

-- El Tonto (Eltonto@teladetontos.com), April 16, 2004.

Ironic how Tom puts his reasoning in context by saying, ''Is it time to retire our Pope?''

How many popes have we retired before this, Tom? You sound like the idiot with a ''Save Our Rain Forests'' bumper- sticker. How many rain-forests ever depended on his rear bumper?

The Pope has a right to his opinions. Just as anybody has. He's a pacifist with his own obligations to conscience. He speaks from the heart, not ex cathedra. In the case of this war in Iraq, I myself disagree with his position. Not so much because I'm wise; of course not. There are many mitigating factors at play in the world today. One of the most important is leadership, IMHO. This present super-power has an obligation to weaker states; to uphold justice. Peace would be an excellent choice for the leaders of this world if it were simply for sale, or free. But we must ocassionally be willing to fight for it.

If the Pope had ever shown us definitively that the war was an unjust one, I would favor his position. Otherwise, it has no bearing on realities. Christ said very aptly: ''There will be wars and rumors of wars.'' I find that quite a revelation, and never more than now.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), April 16, 2004.

The Pope is not a pacifist. Words mean things guys. If you call someone something, you have to know what it means and if it has more than one meaning, you should define which one you're using. Otherwise confusion results.

From his perspective, nations should not rise in war against each other. I agree. They shouldn't. But he doesn't believe "therefore" that police and armies are illegal and immoral "always". Pacifists do. He has taught before - as the Catechism does, and as the Bible does, that soldiers have a place and states do have the right to self- defense as well as reponsibility to defend the defenseless. You just can't sit by while armed thugs kill or maim civilians. But of course, there are better and worse ways to "stop" or change the situation.

The Pope has consistently written that the use of "modern weaponry" (which is defined by John XIII as nuclear, biological and chemical arms or overwhelming and INDISCRIMINATE use of conventional arms), is highly immoral. Thus, almost as an a priori, he considers warfare to be highly risky in that such weapons or tactics are more likely to be used in war than not.

So with respect to the US and Iraq he warned both sides against using such armaments. And lo and behold, neither side used such weapons.

I agree with him. Use of use weapons or indiscriminate use of conventional weaponry is immoral categorically precisely because it is indiscriminate! But this doesn't apply to satellite guided munitions or other modern CONVENTIONAL weapons and modern US tactics which specifically are DISCRIMINATE: they actually have bombs that don't blow "out" but "down" or to one side. I'm sure the Pope and cardinals either don't know this or haven't paid much attention. Their education in warfare was the Russian Front.

In an ideal world all people would be mature and virtuous adults and refrain not just from injustice but also sin.

However, we don't live in an ideal world and most people in control of countries DON'T act like mature, virtuous Christians. So what do we do? Platitudes won't work. Telling people to "oh behave" won't do.

The Pope is a man of prayer - so asks us to pray and fast. I agree with him as all Catholics should. I have prayed and fasted for peace in Iraq and elsewhere. He also asks for solidarity with the people of Iraq. What does that mean? It doesn't mean: get the hell out of there and let them kill each other! It doesn't mean : feel really good about oneself while being "for" peace while not doing a thing to effect it!

Solidarity means reaching out to help eliminate barriers to peace - such as unjust structures of sin.... the only ONLY difference between the Pope and Bush - for anyone who has actually taken the time to read what these two leaders have actually SAID and written, is the manner and timing by which structures of sin are to be dismantled.

The Pope favored a diplomatic approach under the aegis of the UN - "world community". Yes, it would have been wonderful had all 209 countries on earth joined together as one in requesting Iraq to come clean on its violations... but they didn't. Specifically several Security Council nations were actively (illegally) dealing with Iraq while supposedly "enforcing" the UN sanctions!

He obviously thought that it was possible to negotiate with Saddam as a reasonable head of state. He also thought it was reasonable to expect the Baath regime to be honest in its relations with "the world community" (which means what exactly?). But this is no longer a "Catholic faith and morals" question but one of modern geo-politics and questions of FACT. I'm sure his motives were the best and his intentions were the best, but to think further diplomacy is preferable to war, you have to base this not on principles but on facts leading to a prudential decision.

He also was at pains to not endorse a war which was feared to be "Christian vs Muslim" in perception if not reality because as Pope he didn't want to see Iraqi Christians killed by the majority's backlash (a majority who are members of the so-called peaceful religion of Islam).

Yes, Islam preaches peace and brotherhood...for members. Yet even that doesn't keep Sunnis from murdering Shiites does it? Or keep ethnic rivalries from erupting either (Somalia is virtually 100% Muslim and the famine there was a result of civil war among MUSLIMS).

So I think the Pope's attitude was pretty reasonable for him given the stakes: he could not in conscience support a war because these hot-headed barbarians use any pretext to kill their neighbors - witness the bloodshed in Nigeria when all it took was an article in a newspaper mentioning Mohammed and beauty pagents to spark a city-wide pogrom that killed hundreds of Christians and ended with dozens of churches burnt to the ground.... yes, if I were faced with people like that and no army at my back, I'd call for peace and calm too!

In this situation - which no one, NO ONE, has denied or can deny, it is wholly OK for the Pope to pray for peace and plead that this not become a war of religions. But politically, between the US and Iraq as nations not faiths, further pretense to "diplomatic solutions" was naive after Iraq snubbed the UN's last "warning" in February 2003.

Regime change was the only option short of UN surrender of any pretense to being a body capable of enforcing standards of conduct.

You might not like the outcome: defeat of Saddam and messy aftermath while the whole social order is reconstructed and new power structures created...and of course the free media always focuses on the negative rather than the previous halcyon good times and perfect joy media of Propaganda Ministry days...but not liking the current state of affairs is no excuse to claim that the Bush Administration alone has a monopoly of evil and everyone else is innocent and wonderful people who would have lived happily ever after if only left alone.

The Pope and others argued against the UN embargo because they were told (by the propaganda ministry) that 100,000 children were dying of starvation a year. Now, suppose that's true. Since April 2003, it's pretty much proven that few children are dying of starvation or anything else in Iraq! Even the recent violence has not claimed the lives of more than several hundred Iraqis - and those are mainly the terrorists and militia men gunned down while shooting back.

If you accept what the Cardinals accepts as truth: 100,000 children dying per year, with what is true now: 10,000 or so IRAQIS per year killed by terrorists or extremely rare US misses and mistakes, then you have to conclude that the war was a moral success and the only problem is one of PERCEPTION (i.e. propaganda) not REALITY.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), April 16, 2004.

I agree, Joe. You put most everything in perspective. When I said John Paul II is a pacifist, I meant in the context we have here. His warnings were that the whole middle east would explode in war; and that war ''never solves anything''.

To me it's clear the Pope was just one more person who really believed there were weapons of mass destruction about to be employed in the Iraq war. He seemed to think so just as Bush and the coalition did. In retrospect, we can hardly blame the Pope for cautioning the west. As for the middle east, his words never register there anyway.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), April 16, 2004.