Posted on 10/05/2004 3:12:10 PM PDT by dangus
The Catholic Church is horrified at events now going on in Spain, where the newly elected Premier is moving to squash all outward signs of Spain's religion, and impose a radical, left-wing, anti-religious government which permits every sort of perversion and evil. Read about it at this post: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1235221/posts
The responsibility for this nightmare, however, lies nowhere else than the Vatican itself. Spain was led by a decent, Christian conservative. Now, this Satanic minion, Jose Luis Rodrigo Zapatero has taken over the country. And the reason is that the Vatican State Department declared war on the allied coalition against Iraq.
Failed your logic course, did you?
I was not addressing the linked article.
Do you think that meetingtea party he had with Tariq Azziz before the war had anything to do to influence his decision to speak out?
And I was responding to your post #14.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this to say about a just war:
2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.
The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
I don't believe that any of these points were satisfied with respect to Iraq, but especially point #1 "..........lasting, grave and certain."
Not "possible", "probable" or "highly likely". Certain.
Iraq is on the way to becoming an Islamic state. "Democracy" will be a very poor bulwark against this spiritual onslaught and time will show the folly of our actions, if it hasn't already.
Sorry, I'm one of those Catholic subversives whose first reaction to a problem is find what the Catechism says about it, rather than the US Constitution or the GOP manifesto.
The French intelligence agency, as well as Germany, Russia, Israel, and the United States, were all CERTAIN that Hussein had WMDs.
They were also certain that he had violated 14 UN strictures.
Taking him out was simply an extension of Gulf War I, another war that the Vatican opposed.
The Vatican has no answer to the war on terror, except to take the issue to the UN. The Catholic Catechism is also out of date in dealing with murderous Islamists. Waiting for Kofi Anan to approve of our actions is a prescription for death.
As to what will happen in Iraq, neither you nor I have any idea about the future, except that we will have bases there for a very long time. And that is a good thing.
Thanks to both of you for telling the truth.
>>>"And the reason is that the Vatican State Department declared war on the allied coalition against Iraq."<<<<
>> Failed your logic course, did you?<<
I guess you did. I never implied a syllogism.
I wouldn't blame JPII personally, but the Vatican State Department did politically align itself with the leftist, nihilist scum of Europe in attempt to thwart the war.
Iraq invaded Kuwait. That plainly created a just-war situation. A ceasefire was negotiated on the basis that Irq would dismantle its warmaking ability. When it became clear that Iraq had violated the terms of the peace agreement, the United States, who had fought virtually alone to win PG1 contrary to modern legend, moved in to conclude the war which Hussein had been raging against his own people since 1991.
The socialist myth is that the sanctions were starving Iraqi people. The reality is that Hussein was, making billions for himself while he SHUT THE WATER OFF so that the his own people could not plant their crops.
The damage done to the Kurds, the Marsh Arabs, and the Shiites was lasting, and grave.
I've gotta butt in on that statement.
I think both the Pope and the President played their roles as anticipated by the Catechism. The Pope kept urging us to try one more time to settle things without going to war and the President, who actually has the responsibility (according to the Catechism), made the judgement that we had done everything that was reasonable, we had made the extra efforts and there was no possibility that Hussein would agree to abide by the truce terms without us going to war.
2308
However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."
2309
The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
Ouch.
While the Vatican's position may have been a contributing factor, it is not the exclusive factor as your statement implies. That is why I cannot accept your conclusion.
Also please note that the Vatican State Department is NOT the Catholic Church!
What is it?
That the Church is "unsure how to face this"? Dithering Vatican ninnies, in other words?
The Church will "face this" in the same way that it has faced every other crisis in its history. With the Gospel of Jesus.
And it will triumph.
But, what about the threat of terrorism, and what of nations that support or shelter terrorists?
By the standard of the Catechism, it would seem that we must sit idly and allow the murder of innocents through terrorism.
I think this is something the Church needs to address more explicitly.
"Sedevacantists have a reputation for anti-semitism. You further that reputation."
Hmmm .... you seem to use the anti-semitism card as readily as others use the race card. That is bad and lazy reasoning; the kind of thing Mel Gibson has to deal with in that cesspool called Hollywood.
But what I have noticed is your tendency to malign Wojtyla (e.g. over Iraq) and to praise him to the heavens (e.g. when on one of his Assisi-type trips). Remember, no-one outside (or inside for that matter) America is duty bound to support its grand designs .... Coca-Cola and McDonalds is not a fair exchange!
No they're not. But they're also not going to stop the United States from protecting its interests and defending itself from threat.
That ought to be clear as a bell by now.
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.