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.
Fascinating questions.
Should be interesting.
Hey, we are used to side-bars. LOL.
Very insightful posting.
THANKS THANKS.
Wish I had a solution.
The word 'obviously' should be in bright fluorescent red! Troubling that they cannot see just how transparent they are.
In this particular case, absolutely yes! - In the era immediately preceeding the Earthly reign (tribulation) the word clearly states that the Holy Spirit will be withdrawn, and that the kingdom will be brought in by the bodily present Lord, and his angels, without a shred of human assistance.
"...lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." -- Matt. 28:20
Life and Scripture make a lot more sense when we see there have been only two eras in mankind's existence -- B.C. and A.D. All history leads up to Calvary and flows from Calvary.
But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel" -- 2 Timothy 1:9-10"(God) hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
>>> But the key paragraph is rather starkly clear. <<<
There are other “key” sections:
This is from section 57:
“Hence 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. 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.”
************************************************************
Once again, the magic-word SUBSIDIARITY solves the problem of how to manage and direct globalization without creating a Frankenstein’s monster of an universal and tyrannical governing power.
That’s your problem, Quix. You just don’t have enough faith in the power of subsidiarity!
The last sentence is important. To say that the managing Authority is to be organized in a SUBSIDIARY AND STRATIFIED way means that power will be distributed EQUALLY to all levels of the HIERARCHY. This is to eliminate any possibility of power being concentrated in one or several places, and especially to undercut any chance of there arising a CENTRAL managing authority. The question arises: is there anything that subsidiarity can’t do?
I’ve read that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution is an example of subsidiarity; look at how well it’s functioned to reign-in the powers of our central gov’t in DC! I’ve also read that subsidiarity is a key principle of EU law. And, of course, everyone knows how sensitive to the needs of local farmers and businessmen the Brussels bureaucrats have been.
Also — once again — what’s up with this goal of “authentic human develpoment”? What does the phrase mean, and what does it entail by making it THE goal of all human peoples? I what sense is it a CHRISTIAN goal?
EXCELLENT POINTS.
Perhaps this is to become the new Mantra:
Our beloved Subsidiarity in the UN.
Lofty be your mandate.
Give us this day our TRUTH IN LOVE; our electric bicycle; our gruel; our unbottled ration of water; our hour of electricity; our kiss of the local oligarch’s ring and butt; our ration of Soma; our ration of bread; . . .
Forgive us our individuality as we obliterate the individuality of others . . .
For yours is the homogonized convoluted mushed mayhem of blood-thirsty globalism now and forever . . . at least until Armageddon . . .
/sar
I think it’s highly probable that Scripture is talking about Holy Spirit being withdrawn.
IT’s not crystal clear, certain.
at least not to a number of folks I have respect for.
The word ‘obviously’ should be in bright fluorescent red! Troubling that they cannot see just how transparent they are.
= = =
So it seems.
"with you" does not necessarily mean in your person/body/human spirit/"soul"..
The Paraclete is "one comes alongside to help".. but not to possess you..
"Demons" seem to want to control people.. The HS does not seem to want that..
Responsibility requires choice.. Human life seems to be a "TEST" of choices..
This is a rarely discussed subject... I Think.. but fairly important..
Where does Jesus end and the HS begin or the Father enter..
If the HS is "there" then so is Jesus.. in essence.. and "the Father" too..
Philip was confused on this issue too..
When he asked "Just show us the father" and we will be satisfied..
What a Spirit/spirit is has not been determined... by humans as far as I know..
EVEN, including OUR own spirits..
Can a Spirit be separate and together at the same time?..
Basically a dimensional "MERGE".. Who knows....
An interesting subject we will know "someday".. I suppose..
EXCELLENT POINTS, imho.
Thx.
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?
Good questions.
For me they were answered best along the lines of Reformational thinking. We are told there will be multiple anti-Christs who are stumbling blocks along the way of fallen humanity as His children are sanctified and brought home. These lovers of lies are tempters. They are connivers to the point where, if God did not prevent it, they would fool even the elect. That's pretty clever.
Nero, Hitler, various popes...they all preach another Gospel. We are to expect their appearance and rebuke them in the name of Christ, always confident that He who is in us is stronger than any of them.
It makes Scriptural sense to me that the spreading of the gospel, as God says, will "not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." (Isaiah 55:11). Christianity has a positive affect on the society around it. That is a demonstrable fact.
Likewise, it makes Scriptural sense that most prophecy has been fulfilled (which also leaves a lot less room for extra-Biblical messing-about. We all tend toward superstition naturally and the best safeguard against misunderstanding the present and future is a secure knowledge of the past.)
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world" -- Hebrews 1:1-2"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
But look at what this conversation on eschatology has done. It has taken the righteous heat off the pope's foul call for a global authority and side-tracked the discussion onto non-salvational matters among us -- which is very much something an anti-Christ might enjoy doing.
I think Christians generally have little awareness of just how vast and prolonged the counter Reformation was/is.
Sigh.
That equivocation is not Scriptural. I don't believe God is an Indian-giver (oh, how politically incorrect). If God has numbered a man as one of Christ's sheep from before the foundation of the world, that man, at a time of God's choosing, will be indwelled by the Holy Spirit who will lead him to salvation. No road is perfectly straight. We err and are disciplined along the way. But Christ says He is in us and will never leave us, and I believe Him.
"Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you." -- John 14:17-20
"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" -- 1 Corin. 3:16
"What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" -- 1 Corin. 6:19"Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." -- Luke 17:21
That's only a fraction of God's word which tells us Christ is within all believers.
Revelation 20:1
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
20:2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;
20:3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while. .
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.