Oh hush up, Cardinal Martino!

Your talking isn't helping your public image (or the Church's):

"A senior Vatican cardinal on Tuesday condemned the building of walls between countries to keep out immigrants and said Washington's plan to build a fence on the U.S.-Mexican border was part of an "inhuman program".

Cardinal Renato Martino made his comments at a news conference presenting Pope Benedict's message for the Roman Catholic Church's World Day of Migrants and Refugees, in which the Pope called for more laws to help immigrants integrate."

...

Asked if the U.S.-Mexican fence was the wrong thing to do, Martino said: "Yes, that's exactly what it is." [More...]

Gee, I wonder what famous country has a big wall around it. Around almost the entire perimeter, in fact. Jeff, how about you help the Cardinal remember (hint: you've been there before, Cardinal, and visit it often).

Update: One of the causes for my taking exception to the Cardinal's words:

CCC # 2241

The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

I've also read Pope Benedict's "Message for World Day of Migrants and Refugees" and find no references to walls protecting boarders being immoral. The document speaks about the integration of individuals in countries they are already residing in and discourages families splitting up (presumably because one of them has obtained a legal work visa and not others). More lively debate on Jeff's combox wall.

As for Martino, he's been doing this sort of stuff for a long while. Here are a couple selections from a piece by Michael Novak on Martino's famous reputation on these types of issues:

When I was in Rome last February, Cardinal Martino was already under heavy fire for his intemperate and irrepressible anti-Americanism. Even those who before the war leaned more to the French/German position than to the American were dismayed by his uncalled-for comments.

Il Foglio pointed out today that Cardinal Sodano, the secretary of state (the official who functions something like a prime minister for the Vatican, the top leader of administration domestic and foreign), not only changed the whole title of the document on World Peace released today but also edited out the most offensive passages of Cardinal Martino, from whose department the draft arrived in the last few days.

The title, for example, went from "International Law, a Way of Peace," to the less ideological "An Ever Timely Commitment: Teaching Peace." Other rhetorical flourishes were also edited out, according to Il Foglio.

...

As for Cardinal Martino, he has made clear on many occasions how bitterly he feels toward the United States on many fronts, not only in the case of Iraq. He has not been altogether prudent. He does not seem to be aware of how oddly his behavior comports with the far more nuanced and modulated views of those around him with greater authority than his. [source]

More on Martino from Amy Welborn:

When I heard on the radio yesterday, "A Vatican Cardinal has criticized the US for the way it has treated Saddam Hussein," I immediately said, "Martino." Yup. What an idiot. Once again, we revisit the Mysteries of Vatican Diplomese, which are, to tell the truth, more abstruse than the Mystery of the Holy Trinity... I see no sense in trying to unpack why Martino said what he said and what he should have said. He said it, and it's done a lot of damage - one wishes someone would send Martino a tape of ten minutes of the local drive-time radio call-in show we heard yesterday as we left Chicago.

I'd recommend everything Amy has to say about Martino.

More on Martino from Mark Shea:

"...as some of the behind-the-scenes dynamic of this act of stupidity are fleshed out, I find they are reflecting something of the same arguments going on in the Vatican that Novak mentions. In plain English, so far from reflecting the General Will of the Vatican, Martino was stubbornly bound and determined to say his foolish remarks against the counsel of his advisors and not a few people in Rome are unhappy that, instead of keeping the focus on the message he was supposed to give, he diverted the focus to himself."

Prof. Brainbridge talks about Martino here.

Jimmy Akin takes Martino to task for his public statements about Saddam and the death penalty: "In any event, these are statements unworthy of responsible churchmen. If one wants to oppose the death penalty on various grounds, fine, but these aren't worthy ones, and these kinds of deliverances do not further rational dialogue on the matter."

I guess my point with all these quotes is that I'm not the first nor the only person in the world to point out Martino's foibles. If I was uncharitable in the way I expressed my frustration with his actions, I apologize for that. I make no apologies for disagreeing with Martino's continued unreasonable criticism of so many American projects (be it the Iraq war, the treatment of Saddam, the impending execution of Saddam, or the wall ... and there will be others I'm sure).

I also continue to warn against equating every last word of Martino's with the words and authority of Pope Benedict and the Chair of Peter. Basic Catholic ecclesiology shows that following Cardinals on prudential decisions as if they are Popes speaking ex cathedra is misplaced zeal and those who insist upon doing so can leave themselves as well as the Church at large open to embarassment when their positions are evaluated more fully.