Jaidness
04-06-2005, 09:43 AM
Conservatives distort papal legacy on Iraq war
In commenting on the legacy of Pope John Paul II, nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh, former Bush administration ambassador to the Vatican Jim Nicholson, and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly each tried to minimize the significance of the pope's stated opposition to the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq. Limbaugh suggested that John Paul II opposed the Iraq war because popes are obligated to oppose all wars, but in fact the pope made several statements demonstrating support for just and necessary wars; conversely, Nicholson tried to minimize John Paul II's objections to the invasion of Iraq, claiming falsely that the pope was never morally opposed to the war. O'Reilly suggested that the Vatican's opposition was motivated by the pope's deputies and their dislike for American secularism.
Rush Limbaugh
On the April 4 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Limbaugh suggested that John Paul II opposed the Iraq war because of a universal opposition to war among all popes:
The point is, you know, Pope John Paul II after 9-11 talked to President Bush and said, "You got to do something about people like this that will bomb and kill innocent people and then retire into sovereign countries and hide." He told President Bush this. Now, publicly, he came out against the Iraq war, but I can't think of a war the pope has ever come out for publicly. It's almost something they can't do as men of quote, unquote "peace." But my point is, I throw that out. "The Pope opposed Iraq."
Limbaugh's assessment of the pope's unequivocal opposition to the war is unfounded because John Paul II, while ardently anti-war, accepted and understood the need for a nation to act in self-defense. In his 1995 encyclical "Evangelium vitae" (Gospel of life), John Paul II cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church and St. Thomas Aquinas to uphold "legitimate defence" for "the common good of the family or of the State":
Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason.
The Vatican used similar language prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, seemingly offering support to the impending action. According to a September 25, 2001, Washington Post article:
The spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, described the Vatican's views in an interview with the Reuters news agency at the end of a three-day visit to Kazakhstan, during which the pope repeatedly called on the world to maintain peace. Navarro-Valls's statement added a new dimension to the pope's pacifist message, seeming to allow for support of a military response to the Sept. 11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in which more than 6,000 people were killed.
"It is certain that, if someone has done great harm to society, and there is a danger that if he remains free he may be able to do it again, you have the right to apply self-defense for the society which you lead, even though the means you may choose may be aggressive," Navarro-Valls said.
Jim Nicholson
On the April 4 editions of CNN's American Morning and Fox News' Fox & Friends, Nicholson, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, acknowledged that the pope publicly opposed the Iraq war and that he was not a pacifist, but tried to downplay his opposition by falsely claiming several times that John Paul II "never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq."
But prior to the March 2003 invasion, the pope sent a letter to Bush that referred to the impending conflict as "immoral." According to a March 18, 2003, Dallas Morning News article: "One of the strongest anti-war voices belongs to the pope. He sent an envoy to visit with Mr. Bush this month with a letter that called the war 'immoral, illegal, unjust.'"
However, on Fox & Friends, Nicholson said:
They had a disagreement about Iraq but you have to pay careful attention to what the pope said about Iraq. He never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq.
And on American Morning, Nicholson twice made the inaccurate claim, unchallenged by host Carol Costello:
The pope never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq, and he never said it was. He said war is a defeat for humanity and war is not inevitable, and we agreed with that. And that's why the president made such an effort at the U.N. to get resolutions to get Saddam Hussein to cease and desist.
I worked that diplomatically. The pope sent a cardinal to Baghdad. Tariq Aziz [then-Iraqi deputy prime minister] came to Rome and we get -- tried very hard to get them to reveal what they had and so that we could avoid war, which is the -- the pope always wants to avoid war. He's a man of peace. But he's not a pacifist.
[...]
In commenting on the legacy of Pope John Paul II, nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh, former Bush administration ambassador to the Vatican Jim Nicholson, and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly each tried to minimize the significance of the pope's stated opposition to the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq. Limbaugh suggested that John Paul II opposed the Iraq war because popes are obligated to oppose all wars, but in fact the pope made several statements demonstrating support for just and necessary wars; conversely, Nicholson tried to minimize John Paul II's objections to the invasion of Iraq, claiming falsely that the pope was never morally opposed to the war. O'Reilly suggested that the Vatican's opposition was motivated by the pope's deputies and their dislike for American secularism.
Rush Limbaugh
On the April 4 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Limbaugh suggested that John Paul II opposed the Iraq war because of a universal opposition to war among all popes:
The point is, you know, Pope John Paul II after 9-11 talked to President Bush and said, "You got to do something about people like this that will bomb and kill innocent people and then retire into sovereign countries and hide." He told President Bush this. Now, publicly, he came out against the Iraq war, but I can't think of a war the pope has ever come out for publicly. It's almost something they can't do as men of quote, unquote "peace." But my point is, I throw that out. "The Pope opposed Iraq."
Limbaugh's assessment of the pope's unequivocal opposition to the war is unfounded because John Paul II, while ardently anti-war, accepted and understood the need for a nation to act in self-defense. In his 1995 encyclical "Evangelium vitae" (Gospel of life), John Paul II cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church and St. Thomas Aquinas to uphold "legitimate defence" for "the common good of the family or of the State":
Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason.
The Vatican used similar language prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, seemingly offering support to the impending action. According to a September 25, 2001, Washington Post article:
The spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, described the Vatican's views in an interview with the Reuters news agency at the end of a three-day visit to Kazakhstan, during which the pope repeatedly called on the world to maintain peace. Navarro-Valls's statement added a new dimension to the pope's pacifist message, seeming to allow for support of a military response to the Sept. 11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in which more than 6,000 people were killed.
"It is certain that, if someone has done great harm to society, and there is a danger that if he remains free he may be able to do it again, you have the right to apply self-defense for the society which you lead, even though the means you may choose may be aggressive," Navarro-Valls said.
Jim Nicholson
On the April 4 editions of CNN's American Morning and Fox News' Fox & Friends, Nicholson, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, acknowledged that the pope publicly opposed the Iraq war and that he was not a pacifist, but tried to downplay his opposition by falsely claiming several times that John Paul II "never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq."
But prior to the March 2003 invasion, the pope sent a letter to Bush that referred to the impending conflict as "immoral." According to a March 18, 2003, Dallas Morning News article: "One of the strongest anti-war voices belongs to the pope. He sent an envoy to visit with Mr. Bush this month with a letter that called the war 'immoral, illegal, unjust.'"
However, on Fox & Friends, Nicholson said:
They had a disagreement about Iraq but you have to pay careful attention to what the pope said about Iraq. He never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq.
And on American Morning, Nicholson twice made the inaccurate claim, unchallenged by host Carol Costello:
The pope never said it would be immoral for us to go into Iraq, and he never said it was. He said war is a defeat for humanity and war is not inevitable, and we agreed with that. And that's why the president made such an effort at the U.N. to get resolutions to get Saddam Hussein to cease and desist.
I worked that diplomatically. The pope sent a cardinal to Baghdad. Tariq Aziz [then-Iraqi deputy prime minister] came to Rome and we get -- tried very hard to get them to reveal what they had and so that we could avoid war, which is the -- the pope always wants to avoid war. He's a man of peace. But he's not a pacifist.
[...]