Posted on 05/06/2014 3:49:04 AM PDT by NYer
Vatican City (AsiaNews) - The Holy See has responsibility for the Vatican City State. It "has no jurisdiction [. . .] over every member of the Catholic Church", but it does "foster [in each of them] an interior conversion of hearts to love God and one's neighbour." In view of this, notwithstanding their affiliation with any Catholic institution, individuals are "subject to a particular State authority. [And] The obligation and responsibility of promoting justice in these cases resides with the competent domestic jurisdiction."
In presenting the Initial Periodic Report of the Holy See to the Committee on the Convention against Torture, Mgr Silvano M Tomasi spoke out today in Geneva against misleading views that identify the Catholic Church with the Holy See, and place a legally non-existent liability on the latter for acts committed by Catholics.
"The Holy See," he said, "wishes to reiterate that the persons who live in a particular country are under the jurisdiction of the legitimate authorities of that country and are thus subject to the domestic law and the consequences contained therein. State authorities are obligated to protect, and when necessary, prosecute persons under their jurisdiction."
"The Holy See exercises the same authority upon those who live in Vatican City State in accordance with its laws. Hence, the Holy See, in respecting the principles of autonomy and sovereignty of States, insists that the State authority, which has legitimate competency, act as the responsible agent of justice in regard to crimes and abuses committed by persons under their jurisdiction." This also applies to people who belong to Catholic institutions.
Speaking specifically about torture, the Vatican diplomat said that the "Holy See considers the Convention [. . .] a valid and suitable instrument for fighting against acts that constitute a serious offence against the dignity of the human person."
He noted that the Church, at its highest levels, came out against Torture, in particular through the papal magisterium after the Second World War and aligning Vatican City legislation in accordance with the Convention.
The "Holy See," he added, will continue to advocate, "on a global level the values and all human rights that [. . .] are a necessary component for friendly relations among peoples and peace in the world."
The "introduction of other themes, of which the Convention does not speak, effectively diminishes the original focus of the Convention and thus further jeopardizes the situations for those who are truly being abused, tortured and punished." This, in turn, "runs the risk of not only being ineffective, but even counterproductive."
Although not explicitly stated, the reference here is to those who would like to include sexual abuses committed by members of the clergy in the Convention against Torture.
the committee's review of the Holy See's initial report under the Convention Against Torture is part of a much larger debate over whether the U.N. should be actively promoting social and cultural rights that conflict with the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church and other religions.
What, if any, legal limits should be placed on the ability of a woman to secure an abortion?
Is one's sexual orientation a matter of nature or a personal choice deserving of equal treatment before the law in all cases?
Should the definition of marriage be changed to include unions other those between one man and one woman?
To what extent can the government lawfully interfere with the right of parents to provide for the moral, religious, social and sexual education of their children?
Theoretically, the Committee Against Torture could interpret as a form of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment any teaching or practice of the Catholic Church that conflicts with what the committee deems to be a person's right in one or more of these areas.
Exactly. This U.N. unit considers the Catholic Church’s teachings against premarital sex, contraception, sterilization, abortion, artificial human reproduction technologies, embryo experimentation, homosexual conduct, “gay” “marriage,” the LGBT social and political agenda, etc.etc. to be torture, and/or violations of “Human Rights”.
The UN imagines that the Vatican has total control of every Catholic as it desires to have total control of and over every person on the planet. That we are all made serfs/slaves to the UN dictatorship. And I’m not being sarcastic reference the UN goals.
The thing that is bizarre is that Islam genuinely violates human rights every day, particularly the rights of children and women, and actually engages in physical torture and imprisonment...yet I don’t hear a peep from the UN.
This attack on the Church is pretty bold. I think it’s very accurate to say that the UN wants to take the place of the Catholic Church in the world.
The UN doesn’t understand that the Church is more than the Vatican - that is, the Church is much more than its simple administrative center, and that even the Vatican is administrative only in the loosest of senses. However, it makes a convenient target and also an easy one, because it draws upon the “leyenda negra,” the Black Legend, that is part of the consciousness of Western Europe not only in relation to Spain but in relation to the Vatican.
Progressives everywhere and at all times have always seen the Church as the one obstacle to their goal of total control of humanity (for its own good, of course). The Vatican is a visible reminder of its existence and I think we’re going to see more and more blatant attacks on it. I hope Pope Francis is ready for this.
When I read the headline, my first thought was "somebody's suing the Catholic church." And I was right!
Say they don't have a policy for the dumping of some toxin and the German office pumps that waste into the Rhine River. Is the home office responsible? (Granted Germany has strict laws against this, but most countries have strict laws against raping children too.)
People cannot go against their conscience, and, if their conscience is conformed to the understanding of the Church then the Church has the power, through the individuals that align themselves to it’s beliefs, to change things within a nation and to object to practices which the individual conscience of the believer cannot allow. Now, whether the individual takes and active stance in opposing or chooses to let their vote speak is up to the conscience of that individual as they are able or equipped and how he/she is lead by the Holy Spirit. Supporting an organisation that lobbies for the truth can be one way a more timid person can do this!
Mel
This has been the case in modern democracies - I think the UN plans to try and change this and make people totally subject to the laws of the land and not their own conscience. Still the right to believe, suffer and die for our beliefs remains ours and suffering and death only affirm it!
BINGO! Those 200 school girls, abducted 3 weeks ago by Militant Islamists, are a good example. The UN has remained SILENT and, up until yesterday, so has the msm.
What on should pull into full consideration is the priests committed pedophilia and in some cases rape. But it was a personal sin/crime. It was not used to force conversion to the faith, as such, I do not see how the UN can reconcile it to torture condoned by the Church/Holy See.
Verses
Islam and many muslims around the world use rape etc. as very real torture against those who refuse to convert to Islam.
Was BP responsible for the gulf oil spill?
If they turned a blind eye to a known issue, yes.
LOOK! A SQUIRREL!
The UN was silent for years on child molesting priests and the subsequent coverup.
The "introduction of other themes, of which the Convention does not speak, effectively diminishes the original focus of the Convention and thus further jeopardizes the situations for those who are truly being abused, tortured and punished." This, in turn, "runs the risk of not only being ineffective, but even counterproductive."The same principle which was to be seen in the insistence on “following the Geneva Conventions” when the US was struggling in Iraq against people who were using the Geneva Conventions as a rulebook on what not to abide by.The Conventions as written are not naive, and do not prescribe limits on the treatment by signatories of people who systematically violate the Conventions. Thus, those who would apply the strictures of the Conventions to signatories but not to non-signatories not only are not promoting respect for the Conventions but are actually delegitimating them. They promote the idea that to be a signatory is to be a sucker.
So the idea that the Holy See can be held legally accountable for 400,000+ priests in all places globally and at all times in the way proposed by the plaintiffs, is dubious.
Current members of the U.N. Committee Against Torture include (not a complete list):
Xuexian Wang, China
Essadia Belmir, Morocco
Nora Sveaass, Norway
Satyabhoosun Gupt Domah, Mauritius
George Tugushi, Georgia
Abdoulaye Gaye, Senegal
Yeah, I trust China to be able to discern human torture when it truly occurs.
< /sarc >
As always, Bishop Sheen was 100% correct.
The UN blowing more “hot air” in the wrong direction.
The UN still remains silent on Non-Catholic Clergy Abuse & Crimes. Seems you're next.
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.