All the Pope's Men (41 page)

January 29, 2003
Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano held a lunch for Italian journalists in which he spoke against the war in sharp terms. “I said to an old American friend: didn’t the lesson of Vietnam teach you anything?" Sodano said, as quoted in Italian press reports. “The Holy See is against the war, it’s a moral position," Sodano said. “There’s not much to discuss, whether it’s a preventive war or nonpreventive, because this is an ambiguous term. It’s certainly not a defensive war. The keys in this moment are in the hands of the United States and Great Britain, and we’re trying to provoke reflection not so much on whether it’s just or unjust, moral or immoral, but whether it’s worth it. From the outside we can appear idealists, and we are, but we are also realists. Is it really a good idea to irritate a billion Muslims? Not even in Afghanistan are things going well," Sodano said. “For this reason we have to insist on asking the question if it’s a good idea to go to war."

January 30, 2003
Tauran criticized a preventive war in response to reporters’ questions at a conference sponsored by the Association of Volunteers for International Service in Rome. “People are talking about a preventive war, but the question we must put before ourselves is how to prevent the war," Tauran said. “We are not pacifists, we are realists," Tauran said, but added that in this case a strike against Iraq does not pass the “just war" test. He mentioned the traditional criteria of proportionality and protection of civilian populations. “Specifically, a war would exacerbate extremism and threaten to inflame the situation in the Middle East. These are two obvious concerns," Tauran said. Asked if the Vatican’s position would change should the United Nations approve a strike, he seemed to suggest it would not. “A UN resolution would be a different track," he said. “It would address the legality of the action. But humanitarian and moral concerns would remain." Tauran denied that the U.S. embassy to the Holy See was applying extraordinary pressure. “We are having conversations, but they are calm and serene," Tauran said. “I would say they are persevering in making their argument." Finally, Tauran was asked if the Pope might try some gesture of peace in the near future, such as sending emissaries to Baghdad and Washington. “We’re thinking about it," Tauran said. “Something might happen in the coming days. But for now there is no concrete plan of action."

February 1, 2003 The Vatican’s official newspaper, L’Osservatore
Romano,
said American policy in Iraq lacked intelligence. “To define a preventive war as a sensible act means not to have, or not to know how to exercise, the intelligence necessary at certain levels," L’Osservatore stated in its February 1 Italian edition. In another article, the official Vatican newspaper wrote that “the international media, determined to understand in the nuances of diplomatic statements the possible development of the Iraqi situation, often forget to concentrate attention on the principal victim of the crisis: the civilian population. Tested by a long embargo and vexed by a dictatorial regime, the Iraqi people [have] lived for months under the exhausting threat of a conflict."

February 3, 2003
American Cardinal Francis Stafford, at the time the president of the Pontifical Council for Laity, put out a statement asserting that “the American government has not offered conclusive evidence of imminent danger to its national security" sufficient to justify a war. Stafford had been contacted by
Inside the Vatican
magazine and released a written statement to several press outlets in Rome. “The concept of a ‘preventive’ war is ambiguous," Stafford wrote. “ ‘Prevention’ does not have a limit; it is a relative term and is subject to self-serving interpretations. Objective criteria must be applied with intellectual rigor. The threat must be clear, active and present, not future. Nor has the American administration shown that all other options before going to war have proven ‘impractical or ineffective,’ " he wrote. Stafford contrasted the call to arms coming from the political leadership of America, Britain, and Iraq with John Paul II’s call to youth to be agents of peace and hope.

February 4, 2003
Martino gave an interview to the
National
Catholic Reporter
in which he discussed the Iraq war, arguing that Catholic “just war" doctrine is undergoing an evolution similar to that on capital punishment, from grudging acceptance to a quasi-abolitionist stance. In both cases, he said, modern society has the means to resolve problems without the use of lethal force. Thus the Catholic response to a preventive war in Iraq is negative. “I would draw a parallel with the death penalty," Martino said. “In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, there is an admission that the death penalty could be needed in extreme cases. But Pope John Paul II in
Evangelium Vitae
said that society has all the means now to render a criminal harmless, who before might have been sent to the gallows. This could well apply to the case of war. Modern society has to have, and I think it has, the means to avoid war," Martino said.

Martino argued that nonviolent alternatives exist to a preventive war in Iraq. “Resolution 1441 provides all the elements in order to solve the problem without going to war," he said. “If there is indeed any proof [that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction], the inspectors are ready to receive them, and to proceed to either destroy them or render them harmless. Let’s try this first." Martino allowed for the “extreme possibility" of war, if convincing proof is offered and Iraq refuses to disarm, but said even then the means of the war would have to be just, meaning protecting civilian populations, and the potential consequences of conflict would have to be weighed. “There will be an increase in terrorist acts, I’m sure," Martino said. “There will be fire, tumult, all over the Middle East. The oil supplies could suffer. The environment could be endangered, as happened in the Gulf War, and in an even worse manner this time.

“Another element to take into account is world public opinion," Martino said. “Everybody is against the war." Pointing to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Martino challenged Bush and the West to resolve it before striking Iraq. “There is a double standard. We already have a war. Why don’t you stop that one instead of starting another one?" Martino expressed strong skepticism about the motives of the Bush administration for seeking conflict. Asked if, like the semiofficial Vatican journal
Civiltà Cattolica
, he believed oil was a factor, he was indirect but clear. “I don’t have the list of the advantages that those who want the conflict are seeking," he said. “But I can say that it’s not excluded that this is on the list of advantages." So when Donald Rumsfeld says oil has nothing to do with it, Martino finds that hard to believe? “I’m not the only one," he said.

Martino said that Western policy makers should examine their own responsibility for global conflicts. “Why do we impose our cultural patterns, of consumption, of corruption, of sex, of whatever, on the other parts of the world? They get fed up with that," he said. “When developing nations have been given promises of help, of debt forgiveness, and they are not kept, this causes frustration," Martino said. “That frustration can translate into terrorism. When a young man doesn’t foresee anything for his future, being dead or alive is about equal. I always say that terrorism can be eradicated not only by rendering harmless one or two thousand terrorists, but by searching for the causes of terrorism," Martino said. “Those causes are three kinds: political, economic and cultural. If we examine our conscience, we can say that there has been, and there is, oppression on these three fronts." Martino stopped short of counseling Catholic men and women in the U.S. armed forces to refuse to cooperate in the event of war. “The responsibility is not theirs, it is of those who send them," he said.

A letter of protest signed by more than sixty American Catholics, including prominent laity and men and women religious, challenged Ambassador James Nicholson’s decision to bring Michael Novak to Rome to argue for the morality of war in Iraq. The letter was faxed to the U.S. embassy to the Holy See.

“As leaders of Catholic organizations, religious orders, theologians, educators, and pastoral workers, we have dialogued and reflected on the current situation in light of our rich tradition of Catholic Social Teaching and our practical experiences," the letter stated. “Our reflection, guided also by the clear and consistent statements from our Church leaders, including Pope John Paul II, have led us to conclude that any military action against Iraq at this time is not morally justifiable. We are very concerned that you have selected one theologian to represent the U.S. Catholic community’s position on the morality of this war without any consultation with recognized Catholic leaders in the U.S. who have helped many of us craft our clear and consistent message against the administration’s actions."

Signatories included the president of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, the chief umbrella group for men’s religious communities in the United States; the national coordinator of Pax Cristi USA, a Catholic peace group; the executive director of the U.S. Catholic Mission Association; and leadership figures in a variety of men’s and women’s religious orders. In a cover sheet accompanying the fax to Nicholson, Trinitarian Fr. Stan DeBoe of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men said Novak represents “a thread of Catholic teaching that is dissenting from current statements from our recognized teaching office in the Church. . . . In his book Tell Me Why," DeBoe wrote, “Mr. Novak explains to his daughter that to be ‘fully Catholic’ one must hold to the teachings of the Church, and if one holds ‘x when the Church teaches non-x, are you fully Catholic? The obvious answer is no’ (page 149). I hope that you and he will not be presenting this as a Catholic analysis of a war on Iraq, since it is not in keeping with current statements and teachings, it is a dissident voice. While dissent is always welcome, it should not be confused with the clear statements made by Church leaders and theologians regarding preemptive strikes, use of nuclear weapons, and the current situation," De Boe wrote.

Nicholson told the
National Catholic Reporter
, however, that the letter was based “on a misunderstanding of the nature of Novak’s visit to Rome. Novak is coming to Rome as a private citizen to present his own views on the relation of the current crisis to traditional notions of just war theory, which have been the focus of considerable discussion in Europe and the United States," Nicholson said. “He is not coming here to represent Catholic teaching or the Conference of U.S. Bishops; he is also not representing the U.S. government. He is participating in the Department of State’s International Speaker program, which seeks to bring leading American scholars and experts from many walks of life to address foreign audiences on issues of priority concern to the United States."

February 5, 2003
Stafford spoke with the
National Catholic Reporter
and was asked if he could envision any circumstances under which a war in Iraq might pass moral muster. “I come at this as a Christian and religious leader who celebrates the Eucharist every day," Stafford said. “It’s not possible for me to celebrate that Eucharist and at the same time to envision or encourage the prospect of war." Asked about whether Catholics in the Armed Forces should comply with orders to fight, Stafford said: “I can’t make the decision for them. As mature, baptized Christians, each layperson has to decide if their being in Christ Jesus, whose peace extends to all persons, allows them to proceed to the destruction of some persons. Each person has to weigh what is being said by the country’s leaders . . . and come to their own conclusion." Stafford added that the Church has always supported a right to conscientious objection, and he hoped that such a right would be available this time as well if it came to armed conflict.

February 7, 2003
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer met the Pope in the Vatican. Fischer also held talks with Sodano and Tauran. “The visit of Minister Fischer was a fitting occasion for an exchange of opinions on the problems of the present moment, in particular, on the well-known crisis of Iraq and on the theme of the future European constitution," a Vatican statement said afterward.

February 8, 2003
The Pope received members of the Community of Sant’Egidio in audience. He said to them: “These days you have gathered to reflect on the theme, ‘The Gospel of Peace,’ a theme that is very important and deeply felt as we pass through the present time marked by tensions and the winds of war. It is therefore ever more urgent to proclaim the Gospel of peace to a humanity strongly tempted by hatred and violence. It is necessary to multiply all the efforts for peace. We cannot be hindered by acts of terrorism or by the threats that are gathering on the horizon. We must not be resigned as if war were inevitable."

Novak met with officials in the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and in the Secretariat of State. At the Secretariat of State, Novak was received by Tauran. At the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, however, Martino delegated the session with Novak to his staff. Novak gave an interview to Vatican Radio after his meetings. He defended America’s willingness to act even without unanimous international support. “It would absolutely be best if there is complete agreement, but the moral principle stands whether there is complete international agreement or not. That is, that it is wrong to allow this violation of the international order we want, when there is a whole group trying to promote international disorder and willing to use the most dramatic acts of terrorism to destabilize existing democracies."

Novak criticized some Vatican commentary on the U.S. stance. “Some of the comments that have come from some Vatican sources have been, they’ve been a little bit emotionally anti-American. Somebody said Americans are inebriated with power, well that’s pretty much of an interpretation, and I don’t see that at all. . . . I just wish people would mind their rhetoric a little bit more. I’ve also seen a number of sources, in Europe generally, but even in
Civiltà Cattolica
, saying that the real motive of the Americans was imperialism or oil. Well I think, if we wanted oil, why didn’t we just take it ten years ago, twelve years ago, when Hussein’s army was broken, the Republican Guard was broken, and the way to Baghdad was straight, the way to the oilfields was straight? That’s not what we want."