Odd Comments from the Vatican about Islamic State
As you may know, Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL, etc.) stated that one of their objectives was to fly their black flag over St Peter's. The threat was specific and unmistakably serious, if perhaps not credible (at least not yet). The Vatican in its turn has on more than one occasion spoken out strongly against the goals and tactics of these evil people. However latest comments leave one a bit puzzled.
For example, Pope Francis referred to Islamic State tactics as "terrorism on a scale that previously was unimaginable." The Vatican Secretary of State also chimed in, labeling those tactics with which we have all become all too familiar as "unprecedented atrocities." These characterizations were followed by a rejection of war as a means to counter this evil.
While one might reasonably question the rejection of war, it is rather the descriptions of Islamic State tactics that cause me to pause and wonder what these two leaders had in mind when they use words like "unimaginable" and "unprecedented." Over the course of its 2,000 year history, the Vatican has faced barbarian hordes, invading armies and war on a global scale that have employed tactics as bad if not worse than Islamic State, if not in intensity, then certainly in scale. This isn't to minimize the terror demonstrated by summary executions, shooting and beheading innocent combatants and civilians, including children, or the mass rape and selling into slavery of women. But, really, when one thinks of the atrocities of the Roman Colosseum and Pope St Leo the Great facing off against Attila the Hun in the early part of first millennium, or Pope Pius XII facing off against both Hitler and Stalin in the latter half of the second millennium, we have to wonder why it was necessary to use such hyperactive adjectives to describe the sort of atrocities that barbarians, fascists and communists consider nothing more than everyday methods to acquire and sustain total domination over their subjects.
Whatever their reasoning here, the use of such terms also causes one to shake one's head when, in the face of such atrocities, the Vatican announces:
For example, Pope Francis referred to Islamic State tactics as "terrorism on a scale that previously was unimaginable." The Vatican Secretary of State also chimed in, labeling those tactics with which we have all become all too familiar as "unprecedented atrocities." These characterizations were followed by a rejection of war as a means to counter this evil.
While one might reasonably question the rejection of war, it is rather the descriptions of Islamic State tactics that cause me to pause and wonder what these two leaders had in mind when they use words like "unimaginable" and "unprecedented." Over the course of its 2,000 year history, the Vatican has faced barbarian hordes, invading armies and war on a global scale that have employed tactics as bad if not worse than Islamic State, if not in intensity, then certainly in scale. This isn't to minimize the terror demonstrated by summary executions, shooting and beheading innocent combatants and civilians, including children, or the mass rape and selling into slavery of women. But, really, when one thinks of the atrocities of the Roman Colosseum and Pope St Leo the Great facing off against Attila the Hun in the early part of first millennium, or Pope Pius XII facing off against both Hitler and Stalin in the latter half of the second millennium, we have to wonder why it was necessary to use such hyperactive adjectives to describe the sort of atrocities that barbarians, fascists and communists consider nothing more than everyday methods to acquire and sustain total domination over their subjects.
Whatever their reasoning here, the use of such terms also causes one to shake one's head when, in the face of such atrocities, the Vatican announces:
"Faced with the present challenges, attention must go to the roots of the problems, recognize also the errors of the past and try to favor a future of peace and development for the region, focusing on the good of the person and the common good. Experience has demonstrated that the choice of war, instead of dialogue and negotiation, multiplies the suffering of the entire population of the Middle East. The way of violence only leads to destruction; the way of peace leads to hope and progress. The first urgent step for the good of the population of Syria, Iraq and the entire Middle East is to put down the weapons and to dialogue."We understand the desire to avoid the kind of wars we've witnessed recently in the Middle East which have solved nothing and caused death and injury to countless innocents, but can the Vatican seriously believe that Islamic State will put down their weapons and "dialogue"?
Comments