Posted on 08/20/2009 12:30:40 PM PDT by IbJensen
As observers continue to decipher the meaning of Benedict XVI’s latest encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, all appear to agree that the passage of note, the passage that may prove historic in its implications, is the one that is already becoming known as the “world political authority” paragraph:
In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a 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. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority. . . .
Could Benedict be in favor of world government, as many now believe? Taken in the context of papal writings since the dawn of the UN, as well as Benedict’s own opinions, recorded both before and after his election as pope, the passage gains another meaning. It is in reality a profound challenge to the UN, and the other international organizations, to make themselves worthy of authority, of the authority that they already possess, and worthy of the expansion of authority that appears to be necessary in light of the accelerated pace of globalization.
It is true that Benedict believes that a transnational organization must be empowered to address transnational problems. But so has every pope since John XXIII, who wrote in 1963 that “Today the universal common good presents us with problems which are worldwide in their dimensions; problems, therefore, which cannot be solved except by a public authority with power, organization, and means coextensive with these problems, and with a worldwide sphere of activity. Consequently the moral order itself demands the establishment of some such form of public authority.”
But such an authority has been established, and we have lived with it since 1948, and in many ways it has disappointed. So Benedict turns John XXIII’s formulation on its head: Morality no longer simply demands a global social order; now Benedict underscores that this existing social order must operate in accord with morality. He ends his own passage on world authority by stating that “The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization. They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order. . . .” Note the phrase “at last.”
What went wrong? According to Benedict, a world authority worthy of this authority would need “to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth.” The obvious implication is that the current UN has not made this commitment.
To understand how the UN has failed, we must delve into the rest of the encyclical. According to Benedict, the goal of all international institutions must be “authentic integral human development.” This human development must be inspired by truth, in this case, the truth about humanity. Pursuit of this truth reveals that each human being possesses absolute worth; therefore, authentic human development is predicated on a radical defense of life.
This link is made repeatedly in Caritas in Veritate. “Openness to life is at the center of true development. . . . The acceptance of life strengthens moral fiber and makes people capable of mutual help. . . . They can promote virtuous action within the perspective of production that is morally sound and marked by solidarity, respecting the fundamental right to life of every people and individual.”
To some, it must seem startling how often Benedict comes back to life in an encyclical ostensibly dedicated to economics and globalization. But this must be understood as Benedict’s effort to humanize globalization. It can be seen as the global application of John Paul II’s own encyclical on life, Evengelium Vitae.
Without this understanding of the primacy of life, international development is bound to fail: “Who could measure the negative effects of this kind of mentality for development? How can we be surprised by the indifference shown towards situations of human degradation, when such indifference extends even to our attitude towards what is and is not human?”
Throughout the encyclical, Benedict is unsparing in the ways in which the current international order contributes to this failure; no major front in the war over life is left unmentioned, from population control, to bioethics, to euthanasia.
But none of this should come as a surprise. Since at least as far back as the UN’s major conferences of the 1990s—Cairo and Beijing—Benedict has known that the UN has adopted a model of development conformed to the culture of death. He no doubt assisted John Paul II in his successful efforts to stop these conferences from establishing an international right to abortion-on-demand. At the time, Benedict said, “Today there is no longer a ‘philosophy of love’ but only a ‘philosophy of selfishness.’ It is precisely here that people are deceived. In fact, at the moment they are advised not to love, they are advised, in the final analysis, not to be human. For this reason, at this stage of the development of the new image of the new world, Christians . . . have a duty to protest.”
Now, in his teaching role as pope, Benedict is not simply protesting but offering the Christian alternative, the full exposition of authentic human development. Whether or not the UN can meet the philosophical challenges necessary to promote this true development remains uncertain. But it should not be assumed that Benedict is sanguine; after all, he begins his purported embrace of world government with a call for UN “reform,” not expansion.
It’s not a rationalization. I begin to wonder if you understand the term.
The preacherman quoted is lying just enough to rope in the gullible and those inclined to hate the Church founded by Christ simply out of principle.
I can see you just fine.
More than you’ll ever admit.
I'm not Roman.
I've explained this to you many times.
Yes, he does. For each one.
However, since Petronski has pronounced what
REALITY IS (as usual, quite in contradiction to the reality most of us observ) . . . heaven and earth must kowtow to
the new Petronskian Matrix
or be digitally disintegrated post haste.
LOL.
Most type “A’s” with reactive aggressive anger components in large bureaucratic !!!!TRADITIONI!!!! bound organizations sound that way. It seems to be partly genetic.
Quite the opposite, actually. I understand anti-Catholic hatred when I see it.
The fact that you’re Elim explains it all.
Welcome to the
KEEPER OF THE CRANIAL BRICK WALL for such threads.
Install thick foam helmet before engaging in dialogue.
Vatican agent, then.
He didn’t mock God,he was pokin’ fun at the Pope.
I’m so glad to see you back. I’ve missed you. Mary
When my ex-Catholic husband finally got born again, he said,more than once, that it was like a weight lifted off his shoulders to know that God’s grace would never leave him even if he sinned. He knew he could confess his sins to His Saviour and be forgiven right then and there.
You don’t have a clue, do you Petronski. I feel sorry for you.
Sorry Salmon season hereabouts..
Fileting and smoking some of them..for the fall/winter/spring..
Lots of reds and pinks(humpys) this season.. a few silvers and chums..
Grouse and moose season starts after that..
Don't hunt moosies but I murder a few birds..
1. regulated by law: i.e. based upon a written charter specifying and limiting its power;You would also have read his clear statement that "the Church does not have technical solutions to offer, and does not claim 'to interfere in any way in the politics of States.'", but instead has "a mission of truth to accomplish, in every time and circumstance, for a society that is attuned to man, to his dignity, to his vocation." From this it is clear that Caritas is not advocating the establishment of a global superstate (ruled by UFO aliens or otherwise), but instead a cooperative international legal approach (such as a treaty) to regulating global development and finance to prevent the exploitation and misery of the kind that has resulted from the recent economic crisis.2. [founded upon] principles of subsidiarity and solidarity: a "bottom-up" federation of sovereign powers [Ubi societas, ibi ius, "every society draws up its own system of justice"], not a centrally-controlled global superstate;
3. [created to ]establish "the good of... individuals, families and intermediate groups who together constitute society"; and
4. [be committed to] securing authentic integral human development, beyond mere economic and technological growth, and always inspired by the values of charity in truth.
It is important to remember that while Rome has always opposed communism, the Church is not on the side of the USA, or capitalism, or the UN, or the EU, or European people, or any other group. The Church is on the side of the human race, and it is the duty of the pope to represent the species as a whole, Catholic or not, and especially the least among us. I applaud Pope Benedict XVI for doing just that.
Amen to that...
My son in AK salmon fishes, hunts, etc. He regulary meets bears in his travels. Brrr. Well, I’m personally glad you are back amongst us.
You said — Everyone viewing “The Eternal Jew” can make up their own mind by viewing the comparisons that are made in the film....
—
Interesting comparison you make... :-)
That a Nazi propaganda film — is likened to — the comparison of the “Bible” vs. “Catechism of the Catholic Church”... LOL...
The Eternal Jew
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eternal_Jew
The Eternal Jew is a 1940 antisemitic German Nazi propaganda film.[1] Its title in German is Der ewige Jude, the German term for the character of the “Wandering Jew” in medieval folklore. At the insistence of Nazi Germany’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, the film was directed by Fritz Hippler.
[ ... ]
You are WRONG.
I read all that.
It just was obliterated by his other statements and by the
HARD REALITIES
OF THE SATANIC GLOBAL GOVERNMENT ALREADY FIRMLY ENTRENCHED AND TO REMAIN SO UNTIL CHRIST OBLITERATES IT AT ARMAGEDDON.
NO ONE that I have read from your side has YET
to deal with those issues and facts remotely realistically in ANY of the threads and discussions of this encyclical.
NO ONE.
PING TO THE JUST ABOVE REPEATED BELOW:
ALL HIS WONDEROUSLY IDYLLIC STATEMENTS ARE WHOLESALE MEANINGLESS in the face of the global government already in power. And to write that SUCH A GLOBAL GOVERNMENT IS NEEDED only strengthens their hands with the 1.+ billion RC’s.
Hideous.
You are WRONG.
I read all that.
It just was obliterated by his other statements and by the
HARD REALITIES
OF THE SATANIC GLOBAL GOVERNMENT ALREADY FIRMLY ENTRENCHED AND TO REMAIN SO UNTIL CHRIST OBLITERATES IT AT ARMAGEDDON.
NO ONE that I have read from your side has YET
to deal with those issues and facts remotely realistically in ANY of the threads and discussions of this encyclical.
NO ONE.
Where are you in AK? I forget.
You have not proffered a comparison of "the Bible vs." anything.
You are speaking of that lying scoundrel's own personal interpretation of Scripture.
Perhaps it is yours too, I don't know.
Let's review: my comparison was (a) a slick and convincing but deeply deceptive presentation about the faith of a group of people v. (b) the reality about that group of people and their faith.
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.