Province News

President or Pope? Column by Fr. Ken Overberg, SJ
Friday, March 28, 2003

Fr. Ken Overberg, SJ
Fr. Overberg writes this column for Cincinnati's Catholic Telegraph. A collection of his essays, focusing on the consistent ethic of life, titled 'Creating a Culture of Life' has recently been published by Thomas More Publishing.

Given the increasing pressure for war (I write as the United Nations considers new resolutions on Iraq), we face a challenging question: do we listen more closely to President Bush and Secretary Powell than to Jesus, Pope John Paul II and the U. S. Bishops?

On this issue of war against Iraq, there really is a great difference between our political and religious leaders. Because so much of the media seems to be hyping the war, perhaps many people are not aware of Pope John Paul’s consistent opposition. In his address to the Diplomatic Corps, for example, the pope said; “War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity.” Solutions in the Middle East “will never be imposed by recourse to terrorism or armed conflict, as if military victories could be the solution.” (For more, see www.vatican.va.)

The Vatican addressed the United Nations with these words: “On the issue of Iraq, the vast majority of the international community is calling for a diplomatic resolution of the dispute and for exploring all avenues for a peaceful settlement. That call should not be ignored.” Similarly, a Commission of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that the conditions of the just war theory are not met in the current situation (see www.usccb.org for more statements and information on Iraq).

Many who support President Bush in this matter are probably unaccustomed to dissenting from the Pope and our own bishops. Even the Telegraph highlighted a dissenting theologian in its front page coverage of Michael Novak.

None of us, of course, want to dissent from Jesus. Yet his life and teachings about the reign of God are quite emphatic. “But to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you” (Luke 6:27-28). “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9; see the entire Sermon on the Mount, 5:1-7:29).

Jesus’ vision promotes nonviolence, not passivity. Contemporary Scripture scholars have helped us to appreciate this distinction. “Turning the other cheek” (Matthew 5:38-42) is really about creative, nonviolent resistance, an action designed to protest oppression in the context of Roman occupation in the first century (see Walter Wink’s The Powers That Be, pp. 98-111).

Wink also convincingly shows how a very old religion directs politics and culture in both Iraq and the United States. The heart of this religion (rooted in ancient Babylon) is the conviction that violence saves. Just listen to our administration’s rhetoric and study its strategic plans. We all have been raised in THIS religion, our values shaped by TV shows including cartoons that convince us from an early age that violence saves.

We are tempted to dismiss creative, nonviolent resistance to evil as idealistic and finally futile. History shows, however, that it does work, as in the Philippines, Poland, and many other places.

The challenge remains: President or Pope? Are your deepest values and commitments rooted in the religion of violence saves or in Jesus’ trust in a nonviolent God who saves?