Pope Benedict XVI (C) poses with the wives of leaders of South Africa, Mexico, Sweden, India, the European Commission and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) at the Vatican July 8, 2009.
Posted on 07/09/2009 8:45:26 AM PDT by NYer
Pope Benedict XVI (C) poses with the wives of leaders of South Africa, Mexico, Sweden, India, the European Commission and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) at the Vatican July 8, 2009.
VATICAN CITY, JULY 8, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI was visited today by the wives of some of the presidents and prime ministers in Italy for the Group of Eight meeting; he used the occasion to urge these influential women to help Africa.
The audience was in a room adjacent to Paul VI Hall, where the Pope held today's general audience. Filming by the Vatican Television Center showed the Holy Father advocating that the G-8 summit leaders make a commitment for Africa's development. The summit is under way in L'Aquila through Friday.
Those in attendance included the wives of the presidents of Mexico and South Africa, the prime ministers of Great Britain, India and Sweden, and the president of the European Commission. Also present was Josette Sheeran, president of the United Nations World Food Programme.
During the general audience, speaking in English, the Holy Father asked prayers "for all those who serve in politics and the management of economies, and in particular let us pray for the heads of state gathering in Italy for the G-8 summit. May their decisions promote true development especially for the world’s poor."
Gee, where’s Michelle?
Where’s Brunhilda?
Didn’t the America hatin’ Amazon attend?
Thank goodness she wasn’t there! She probably wouldn’t wear a mantilla (head covering) as protocol dictates. She would have been an embarrassment.
I’m not trying to cast dispersions on the Vatican or the wives for this meeting, but something about the meeting of the Pope with the wives of world leaders kind of irritates me.
Folks, why is the rest of the world responsible for Africa? Isn’t it a massive insult to Africans to infer that they are incapable of taking care of themselves? I mean seriously, what gives?
The single most important gift we could give Africa, would be to teach them to govern themselves, plant crops, and be self-sustaining. Then get out of the way.
We’ve been pouring billions in to the region for decades. When does it end?
Honestly, I have never seen more hands out than I have seen in the last couple of years. It’s as if the world, our leadership included, wants to tap the U.S. Citizens dry.
Enough already.
Obama has caught onto the Pope pushing “social justice”. This dove tails nicely with socialism. Odd how they are all in black.
Pope Endorses “World Political Authority”
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | July 7, 2009
The controversial Papal statement comes just before a meeting of the G-8 nations and a scheduled meeting between the Pope and President Obama at the Vatican on July 10.
Some in the media are calling it just a statement about “economic justice.” But Pope Benedict XVI’s “Charity in Truth” statement, also known as an encyclical, is a radical document that puts the Roman Catholic Church firmly on the side of an emerging world government.
In explicit and direct language, the Pope calls for a “true world political authority” to manage the affairs of the world. At the same time, however, the Pope also warns that such an international order could “produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature” and must be guarded against somehow. (LOL)
The New York Times got it right this time, noting the Pope’s call for a world political authority amounted to endorsement of a New World Economic Order, a long-time goal of the old Soviet-sponsored international communist movement. Bloomberg.com highlighted the Pope’s call for a new world order with “teeth.”
The Pope’s shocking endorsement of a “World Political Authority,” which has prophetic implications for some Christians who fear that a global dictatorship will take power in the “last days” of man’s reign on earth, comes shortly after the United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis issued a call for global taxes and more powerful global institutions. U.N. General Assembly President, Miguel D’Escoto, a Communist Catholic Priest, gave a speech at the event calling on the nations of the world to revere “Mother Earth” but concluded with words from the Pope blessing the conference participants.
The controversial Papal statement comes just before a meeting of the G-8 nations and a scheduled meeting between the Pope and President Obama at the Vatican on July 10.
Sounding like Obama himself, Pope Benedict says this new international order can be accomplished through “reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.”
The “teeth” may come in adopting the global environmental agenda, which the Pope warmly embraces.
Sounding like Al Gore, the Pope said that one pressing need is “a worldwide redistribution of energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to them.” He adds that “This responsibility is a global one, for it is concerned not just with energy but with the whole of creation, which must not be bequeathed to future generations depleted of its resources.”
“The Church has a responsibility towards creation and she must assert this responsibility in the public sphere,” he explains.
In a statement that sounds like an endorsement of a new global warming treaty, which will be negotiated at a U.N. conference in December, the Pope says, “The international community has an urgent duty to find institutional means of regulating the exploitation of non-renewable resources, involving poor countries in the process, in order to plan together for the future.”
“The technologically advanced societies can and must lower their domestic energy consumption, either through an evolution in manufacturing methods or through greater ecological sensitivity among their citizens.” he declares.
In terms of how this new “world political authority” should look, the Pope says that it, too, should have “teeth” in the form of “the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums.” Pope Benedict declares that “such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights.”
But the document, which is more than 30,000 words long, is contradictory in that it pretends that a world government can co-exist with freedom and democracy. For example, the statement calls for “a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization.” The term “subsidiarity” is usually defined as having matters handled by local authorities, not international bureaucrats.
In another example of double-speak, the Pope declares that “Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way, if it is not to infringe upon freedom and if it is to yield effective results in practice.”
He doesn’t explain how it will be possible for citizens to influence or control this “world political authority” when they are under its bureaucratic control.
In the statement about how the New World Order could turn into a tyranny, the Pope is also contradictory, declaring that “...the principle of subsidiarity is particularly well-suited to managing globalization and directing it towards authentic human development. In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels that can work together.”
Against, he doesn’t explain how people on the local or even national levels will be able to resist this tyranny.
In a strong endorsement of foreign aid, the Pope says that “In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all.”
But there must be more. He says that “...more economically developed nations should do all they can to allocate larger portions of their gross domestic product to development aid, thus respecting the obligations that the international community has undertaken in this regard.”
This statement seems to be an urgent call for fulfilment of the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals, which involve an estimated $845 billion from the U.S. over a ten-year period.
The Pope goes on to say that the social order should conform to the moral order, but the fact is that on moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality, the agenda of the United Nations is opposed to that of the Catholic Church. Even on capital punishment, there is disagreement. The U.N. opposes it while traditional church teaching (Section 2267 of the Catholic Catechism) allows it in certain cases.
In his statement, the Pope declares that “Some non-governmental Organizations work actively to spread abortion, at times promoting the practice of sterilization in poor countries, in some cases not even informing the women concerned. Moreover, there is reason to suspect that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures. Further grounds for concern are laws permitting euthanasia as well as pressure from lobby groups, nationally and internationally, in favour of its juridical recognition.”
What he doesn’t mention is that some of these groups operate through and with the support of the United Nations.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/pope-endorses-world-political-authority/
They are leading us to a one world order economically and legally - regardless of how they try to deny it. THAT is what they are doing. Obama has a friend - with the exception of birth control and homosexuals - minus those two the agenda is the SAME - only couched in religious noise that is unBiblical. Watch - if not with me, it will be someone else that will argue for the Pope on his agenda of "social justice".
Would you read the document before spouting off?
48. Today the subject of development is also closely related to the duties arising from our relationship to the natural environment. The environment is God's gift to everyone, and in our use of it we have a responsibility towards the poor, towards future generations and towards humanity as a whole. When nature, including the human being, is viewed as the result of mere chance or evolutionary determinism, our sense of responsibility wanes. In nature, the believer recognizes the wonderful result of God's creative activity, which we may use responsibly to satisfy our legitimate needs, material or otherwise, while respecting the intrinsic balance of creation. If this vision is lost, we end up either considering nature an untouchable taboo or, on the contrary, abusing it. Neither attitude is consonant with the Christian vision of nature as the fruit of God's creation.
Nature expresses a design of love and truth. It is prior to us, and it has been given to us by God as the setting for our life. Nature speaks to us of the Creator (cf. Rom 1:20) and his love for humanity. It is destined to be “recapitulated” in Christ at the end of time (cf. Eph 1:9-10; Col 1:19-20). Thus it too is a “vocation”. Nature is at our disposal not as “a heap of scattered refuse”, but as a gift of the Creator who has given it an inbuilt order, enabling man to draw from it the principles needed in order “to till it and keep it” (Gen 2:15). But it should also be stressed that it is contrary to authentic development to view nature as something more important than the human person. This position leads to attitudes of neo-paganism or a new pantheism — human salvation cannot come from nature alone, understood in a purely naturalistic sense. This having been said, it is also necessary to reject the opposite position, which aims at total technical dominion over nature, because the natural environment is more than raw material to be manipulated at our pleasure; it is a wondrous work of the Creator containing a “grammar” which sets forth ends and criteria for its wise use, not its reckless exploitation. Today much harm is done to development precisely as a result of these distorted notions. Reducing nature merely to a collection of contingent data ends up doing violence to the environment and even encouraging activity that fails to respect human nature itself. Our nature, constituted not only by matter but also by spirit, and as such, endowed with transcendent meaning and aspirations, is also normative for culture. Human beings interpret and shape the natural environment through culture, which in turn is given direction by the responsible use of freedom, in accordance with the dictates of the moral law. Consequently, projects for integral human development cannot ignore coming generations, but need to be marked by solidarity and inter-generational justice, while taking into account a variety of contexts: ecological, juridical, economic, political and cultural....
I agree. The Pope, Obama, and the U.N. are very nearly tied at the hip on many matters.
Nowhere!
Taking Scripture out of context will not endorse man made “social justice”.
I can see you don't.
You selectively pick and chose what you like to see and take verses out of context. In this situation you are promoting a one world government through an environMENTAL agenda to accomplish your goals. This is totally unBiblical.
You’re changing the subject. Answer my response, and then I’ll get to you about your new point.
Yes, I read the Bible. Thank you for your lame attempt at mindreading.
No, I am not changing the subject.
I am pointing out that you are wrong and totally unBiblical.
The Bible NEVER states that charity is to be coerced or advocate “social justice”. You are using verses out of context to twist it to your humanistic agenda and bolster the Pope with his misguided agenda.
No “lame” attempt here!
It’s obvious.
Maybe this can help you out:
Pope Endorses “World Political Authority”
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | July 7, 2009
The controversial Papal statement comes just before a meeting of the G-8 nations and a scheduled meeting between the Pope and President Obama at the Vatican on July 10.
Some in the media are calling it just a statement about “economic justice.” But Pope Benedict XVI’s “Charity in Truth” statement, also known as an encyclical, is a radical document that puts the Roman Catholic Church firmly on the side of an emerging world government.
In explicit and direct language, the Pope calls for a “true world political authority” to manage the affairs of the world. At the same time, however, the Pope also warns that such an international order could “produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature” and must be guarded against somehow. (LOL)
The New York Times got it right this time, noting the Pope’s call for a world political authority amounted to endorsement of a New World Economic Order, a long-time goal of the old Soviet-sponsored international communist movement. Bloomberg.com highlighted the Pope’s call for a new world order with “teeth.”
The Pope’s shocking endorsement of a “World Political Authority,” which has prophetic implications for some Christians who fear that a global dictatorship will take power in the “last days” of man’s reign on earth, comes shortly after the United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis issued a call for global taxes and more powerful global institutions. U.N. General Assembly President, Miguel D’Escoto, a Communist Catholic Priest, gave a speech at the event calling on the nations of the world to revere “Mother Earth” but concluded with words from the Pope blessing the conference participants.
The controversial Papal statement comes just before a meeting of the G-8 nations and a scheduled meeting between the Pope and President Obama at the Vatican on July 10.
Sounding like Obama himself, Pope Benedict says this new international order can be accomplished through “reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.”
The “teeth” may come in adopting the global environmental agenda, which the Pope warmly embraces.
Sounding like Al Gore, the Pope said that one pressing need is “a worldwide redistribution of energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to them.” He adds that “This responsibility is a global one, for it is concerned not just with energy but with the whole of creation, which must not be bequeathed to future generations depleted of its resources.”
“The Church has a responsibility towards creation and she must assert this responsibility in the public sphere,” he explains.
In a statement that sounds like an endorsement of a new global warming treaty, which will be negotiated at a U.N. conference in December, the Pope says, “The international community has an urgent duty to find institutional means of regulating the exploitation of non-renewable resources, involving poor countries in the process, in order to plan together for the future.”
“The technologically advanced societies can and must lower their domestic energy consumption, either through an evolution in manufacturing methods or through greater ecological sensitivity among their citizens.” he declares.
In terms of how this new “world political authority” should look, the Pope says that it, too, should have “teeth” in the form of “the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums.” Pope Benedict declares that “such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights.”
But the document, which is more than 30,000 words long, is contradictory in that it pretends that a world government can co-exist with freedom and democracy. For example, the statement calls for “a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization.” The term “subsidiarity” is usually defined as having matters handled by local authorities, not international bureaucrats.
In another example of double-speak, the Pope declares that “Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way, if it is not to infringe upon freedom and if it is to yield effective results in practice.”
He doesn’t explain how it will be possible for citizens to influence or control this “world political authority” when they are under its bureaucratic control.
In the statement about how the New World Order could turn into a tyranny, the Pope is also contradictory, declaring that “...the principle of subsidiarity is particularly well-suited to managing globalization and directing it towards authentic human development. In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels that can work together.”
Against, he doesn’t explain how people on the local or even national levels will be able to resist this tyranny.
In a strong endorsement of foreign aid, the Pope says that “In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all.”
But there must be more. He says that “...more economically developed nations should do all they can to allocate larger portions of their gross domestic product to development aid, thus respecting the obligations that the international community has undertaken in this regard.”
This statement seems to be an urgent call for fulfilment of the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals, which involve an estimated $845 billion from the U.S. over a ten-year period.
The Pope goes on to say that the social order should conform to the moral order, but the fact is that on moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality, the agenda of the United Nations is opposed to that of the Catholic Church. Even on capital punishment, there is disagreement. The U.N. opposes it while traditional church teaching (Section 2267 of the Catholic Catechism) allows it in certain cases.
In his statement, the Pope declares that “Some non-governmental Organizations work actively to spread abortion, at times promoting the practice of sterilization in poor countries, in some cases not even informing the women concerned. Moreover, there is reason to suspect that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures. Further grounds for concern are laws permitting euthanasia as well as pressure from lobby groups, nationally and internationally, in favour of its juridical recognition.”
What he doesn’t mention is that some of these groups operate through and with the support of the United Nations.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/pope-endorses-world-political-authority/
OPEN YOUR EYES!
CLEAR YOUR HEAD!
I'm not sure what Bible you subscribe to, but loving your neighbor and giving alms to the poor is pretty much the main message of the NT in the version I, and the Pope for that matter, use.
It's not his fault people, including you, twist his words for their own political gain.
You keep on talking about the environmental agenda role in this, and I just pointed to you where you are wrong.
Maybe I don’t subscribe to your biblical intepretation. Did that ever occur to you, or you going to keep bloviating?
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.