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.
He sure seems to be planning to take a big bite out of somebody.
Beasts have teeth.
Apparently, inexplicably, you don't think handing over this country's economic, social, legal and defense decision-making to some "global authority" is messing with America's national sovereignty.
If that isn't, I don't know what is.
methinks you are beating a dead horse.
Your lips to God's ear.
I should add...and the rest of the planet.
The pope spent 56 pages on this encyclical. He must have some idea who is going to put this vast, global plan into action.
Who would that be?
If he doesn't have someone or something in mind, then he's just wasting everyone's time and patience. It would be like saying you have a great new invention to ease suffering and then burning the blueprints before anyone saw it.
How can you or any of us blindly hand over our lives and country to some "global authority" if we don't even know who that is? Is he elected? Chosen by committee? Drawn straws? Pedigree? Kind eyes?
Who or what is this "global authority?"
In effect he’s calling for a beast to rise up, made from all the nations ( a beast out of the sea) to have power over the earth and to listen to a power that looks like a lamb, yets speaks like a dragon. Ears to hear my FRiends
In what way, dear sister in Christ?
And if you will ponder that question, all to the good.
If not, then not.
* * * * * * *
Meanwhile, I find I do have a serious, alarming system problem at home.
I'm putting out a plea for help here, from systems-knowledgeable FReepers.
I have a behemoth of a Mac Pro. It has dual processors, and all the "bells and whistles" that are so desired by people who want to have maximal function from a personal computer at home. The operating system software is OSX version 10.4.11.
I have conducted hardware tests, and have found no problem on that score. I suspect — and so do other knowledgeable people I have asked — that the problem is software related.
The precise problem is: the Mac OSX operating system is not loading properly on start-up, or coming out of "sleep mode."
I don't know why. I have already replaced the motherboard on this machine, which is of 2007 vintage.
I am almost in despair over this situation. This machine s not only the basic tool of my professional life, it is my means of communicating with some of the most important personages of my life.
I am worried, almost in despair, about this malfunction situation. I've tried everything I can think of to correct it....
I hope somebody reading these lines might have insights into this problem. If not, I'll be forced to do the very thing I most dread: To take the system back to "primaeval factory settings," and start all over again from Square One.
With that horror in view, I have already done a complete back-up of my important personal files.
Meaning: I'll probably have to reinstall all the software I use, all over again.
If I disappear for a while, that's probably the reason.
But I'll hold off doing that for a while, in hopes there's a FReeper out there who's already been through this problem, and so is in a position to advise me.
Meanwhile, if I seem to have gone missing, that's probably the reason for it.
HELP!!!
I have a behemoth of a Mac Pro ...
Help possible?
Such things are completely understandable, nowadays.
But on the present questions, you've picked out "the wrong guy" to blame.
sorry never had a Mac
That does NOT, however, mean turning over our national sovereignty to a global authority. It means trusting God by living and preaching our Christian principles in our families, our communities, our states, our nation and the world through the strength and purpose of the Holy Spirit, and not some global policing authority with teeth.
God forbid. Our liberty is too precious to relinquish to any global authority of man, however light-filled he may appear.
DrE, I have a post-millennial question. I do not understand your concern with a rising beast when postmillennialism posits an increase of kingdom Christianity and not an increase of lawlessness.
Obviously, I’m misunderstanding something. Could you please fill me in?
That is chilling.
Well, maybe I can take your point. :^)
But on the other hand, my answer to your question would be: YES. Somebody "out there" can help me.
The question is: Will I meet up with this person before I go insane??? :^)
A little historical background: I have been a Mac person since 1985. I am completely "cross-platform," and much of my professional work over the years has been done on a Windows operating system (holding my nose all the while).
Notwithstanding, for typography, for graphics capability, no operating system even comes close to the capabilities of a Macintosh "box," when push comes to shove....
Assuming it is working properly. And until recently, it has always done so.
A little history here: Microsoft completely ripped off the GUI ideas of the earliest Macintosh machines, and actually won in court.
Apple got those ideas — and actually paid down good money to acquire them — from Xerox, who did all the early spadework into the "graphical user interface," but did not at the time think the idea worth developing, for commercial reasons.
Steve Jobs saw otherwise. Bill Gates, who got his start at Apple, was an early contributor to this vision. But he hardly was the originator of it.
And as I said, when the dispute reached the courts, Bill Gates somehow managed to prevail.
post a vanity and I bet you will find a few people here
Ping to 546. Maybe you guys could help BettyBoop with her Mac problem. Thanks, men!
Hmmm, I would say your assumption falls under the heading of "mind-reading."
Hopefully you'll get some able assistance for your ailing Mac so you can eventually help us identify this "global authority" your pope is pushing to control our country and the rest of the planet.
We had a nice Mac until we discovered a technical glitch — apparently the screen goes blank forever when you drop it in the driveway.
AU CONTRAIRE
. . .
There’s NO escaping the meaning of his words.
IF
is postulations are fulfilled about global economic control; gloal migration control; global control of food; etc. etc. etc.
Then the Constitutional Sovereignty of the USA
is more than a lot KAPUT.
Actually, the Constitution has been increasingly shredded for at least the last 100 years by said globalists.
I gather you have not read any of the quotes ref’d in my tagline and evidently plan to avoid reading them or responding to them.
That’s sad, to me. And puzzling.
It rather stunts this dialogue considerably when it’s not possible to have both sides considering the evidence. I’ve read the encyclical. When will you read the quotes?
And the TRUTH OF GOD IN PROPHETIC SCRIPTURE about the END TIMES
and the TRUTH OF REALITY ON THE WORLD STAGE HAVE MET, COINCIDED MOST CONGRUENTLY, MOST IDENTICALLY AT ANOTHER SUPREME FULCRUM POINT IN ALL OF HISTORY.
imho, talking about the encyclical while refusing to face that fact is more than a LOT of folly.
I think I’ll have to ponder a good long time before I can understand you writing those words.
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.