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.
Nothing in that doctrine calls for more wheat than tares, and when speaking of the narrow gate, the Lord said Few there be that find it.
I could believe that about the authors.
I don’t believe that about the major high integrity responders hereon.
Troublesome.
So . . . how does such a perspective
detect the difference between
“a dress rehersal for the Tribulation.”
and
THE REAL GREAT TRIBULATION?
And, it seems, to me, that the bulk of the REPLACEMENTARIANS et al
have already decreed by the brilliance of their tidy little boxes, that 95% of the GREAT TRIBULATION PROPHECIES
were already mystifyingly fulfilled in 70A.D.
regardless of the illogic of that; the rubber history of that etc.
I can see what you mean. An interesting idea.
Certainly there seems to be a vast overabundance of reliance on man bringing in the ‘Millenial Kingdom’ all by his own brilliance and sweat.
Thx.
The rest of the world belongs to him, thus he does whatever he wants through them, but even one Christian diminishes his kingdom. Those not written in the Book of Life are his to torment, possess, drive mad, whatever he wants
"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!"
-- Luke 2:14And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
-- Romans 8:28
I feel an ice age coming on
The Bible does mention a time when the sun is 7 times hotter.
I don’t recall if that’s during the Great Tribulation or at the end of this present earth & universe’s etc’s life.
The Hopi’s believe the sun is going to be hot enough to destroy all life not hiding for a few weeks sufficiently underground. They are reportedly planning on insuring seeds etc. are with them during that time.
Certainly it has nothing to do with man, pollution etc.
This thread is goint to reach 1000 pretty soon I think
Usually Calvinists are the ones charged with exclusivity. 8~)
In Matthew 7 Christ is cautioning us about the rigors of the Christian life. But there have been billions of Christians who have been given faith in Christ. That's more than a "few," so Christ must not be speaking of quantity as much as quality.
After all, it's a wheat field, not a tare field.
May God abundantly bless you and the new family!
We shall see. The other side tends to lose heart soon after concluding that our side can’t or won’t be cowed into silence.
It’s very sad to me that many aspects of the merits of our side are not being addressed much at all by the other side.
Talking like ships passing in the night is such a waste too much of the time, imho.
Thx.
Perhaps hosepipe has the solution or work-around for you, i.e. the sleep mode setting in CMOS.
The only other thing that comes to mind is a virus (or anti-virus sales gimmick) trying to load up with the operating system, i.e. to stay resident but crashes because it is incompatible.
bump & goodnight.
I might hang around and write me a story though.
I agree Quix. Some people are blinded by the pope’s words.
And inbetween, there's nothing that says things can't look a whole lot like a dress rehearsal for the Tribulation.
My sense was that post-mil looked back into history, and that it saw either Nero or some other Caesar as the Anti-Christ. I saw it easily aligning with the preterist outlook that much of biblical prophecy had already been fulfilled. I also saw it thinking that since this tribulation was past that all that remained was the gradual displacement of the kingdoms of this world with the Kingdom of Christ, at the end point of which He would reign. At one point (that point?) this world would end and a new world would begin.
Am I correct in thinking that post-mil no longer looks for a prophesied, rising anti-christ and an accompanying period of tribulation? Your quote above would seem to indicate that sometimes things might look like such, e.g. perhaps Hitler's Europe, but that that period truly was in the early years of Christianity.
Also, if that was a past period, then what is the threat that many see with the Catholic Church, calling its pope "antichrist." Is that a metaphor for an ac-like interference with Kingdom Christianity?
I think she meant in the wheat field and not in the whole wide world. If there are more weeds in the wheat field than tares, she is correct, it would then be a tare field with scattered bits of wheat. The parable, though, assumes a wheat field.
Please share it by FREEPMAIL if you’re willing and not inclined to do so in a thread!
Hope you had a good sleep.
That’s troublingly shocking, to me. Almost as shocking, or more so, than the Pope’s 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.