Pope wants new international order to keep peace

Reuters | January 1, 2004 | Claire Soares

[HAL9000]

VATICAN CITY, Jan 1 (Reuters) - The world needs a "new international order" to solve its conflicts and ensure peace, Pope John Paul said in his New Year's Day address on Thursday.

The ghosts of 2003 -- when the United States invaded Iraq without United Nations approval -- dominated the pope's first speech of 2004.

"More than ever we need a new international order which draws on the experience and results of the United Nations," the 83-year-old pontiff said at a mass in St Peter's Basilica.

"An order which is capable of finding adequate solutions to today's problems, based on the dignity of human beings, on integrating all society, on solidarity between rich and poor countries, on the sharing of resources and the extraordinary results of scientific and technological progress," he added.

Speaking at Christendom's largest church, the pope urged people not to lose hope of finding peace in the Holy Land, which the Vatican feels is vital to winning the war on terror.

"The land in which Jesus was born sadly continues to live in a dramatic condition. And in other parts of the world sparks of violence and conflict have not been extinguished either. But we need to persevere and not bow to the temptation of losing hope."

Turning to Africa, the pope paid tribute to his Burundi ambassador, Michael Courtney, killed on Monday in an ambush the army has blamed on rebels who have refused to join a peace process to end a 10-year conflict.

"(He) was tragically killed...while he was going about his mission of promoting dialogue and reconciliation. We pray for him and hope his example and sacrifice will bear the fruits of peace in Burundi and the world," the pope said.

The leader of the world's one billion Catholics, who suffers from Parkinson's disease that makes it difficult for him to talk, seemed alert and read all of his homily in a clear voice.

But it is unclear what 2004 holds for him. For the first time since his election in 1978, the pope enters the new year with no firm plans for travel, although there have been some invitations.

He was particularly weak on his last foreign trip, a visit to Slovakia in September, when aides had to read most of his addresses for him.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Uh oh, BlackElk's here, ya'll gonna get a spankin' now.

[sinkspur]

Hey, who's side are you on??? I think the Vatican will become rubble when the good God say's it will be rubble, not before.

Perhaps you didn't catch the chatter that the CIA caught about the Vatican being a target on Christmas Eve.

These continued mutterings from the Vatican about new international bodies (who'll be sure to stop US unilateralism in the future) are meant to show the Pope's displeasure at the direction the US is taking in the war on terror.

All this nonsense about "reading between the lines" and "the Pope didn't really say that" don't pass muster as the Pope continues to really say that he does not approve of what we're doing.

[DallasMike]

Notice how certain posters on this thread skipped these bold lines in jumping to the line where Jesus disciplined His first Pope?

Yes, but don't forget that what Christ gave to Peter in Matthew 16:18 He also gave to all of the apostles in Matthew 18:18. Further, Ephesians 2:20 says that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets -- not just Peter -- and that Christ Himself is the capstone. Peter in 1 Peter 2:7 refers to Christ as the "cornerstone" and in verse 4 to believers in general as living stones. In 1 Peter 5:1-2, Peter describes himself as a fellow presbyter, not as the chief apostle.

The Bible does not support the claim that Peter was given unique authority among the apostles. Peter addressed the first council (Acts 15) but it was James who gave the final words. This confirms early church documents (I'll provide links if you wish, but not tonight) that James was the leader of the early church.

[Polycarp IV]

(Hint: It ain't abortion).

Actually, it about who controls and profits from the Middle East's oil reserves, the third world citizens who live there or the West's corporate raiders and their minority Arab puppet "noble" families.

However, demograpghic warfare ("women's reproductive rights," i.e., universal legalized abortion) against third world citizens has figured into the strong alliance between the Vatican and Muslim countries in fighting the culture of death in United Nations conferences for many years now.

The introduction of abortion into the discussion is supposed to draw a moral equivalence between the United States and Saddam Hussein. Don't fall for it.

The US has legally killed more innocents than Saddam Hussein. It is the primary exporter of population control, pornography, and the homosexual agenda via United Nations efforts.

We still have freedom of Religion. We're losing our freedom of speech, and the 2nd Amendment is almost lost.

Unless you are a compromised politician beholden to the powerbrokers, you will never become the President or a Senator or Congressman, with very few exceptions.

Democrat Versus Republican are more and more two sides of the same coin that just pay lip service to differing constituencies.

In a true Republic, the public has a say in legislation, but now in our Republic the judicial branch trumps the will of the majority at whimas well as the executive and legislative branch.

Yeah, we're "better" than Iraq...for a while yet too. But it will not always be so.

[Polycarp IV]

forgive my cut & paste here:

The Catholic doctrine of the papacy is biblically-based, and is derived from the evident primacy of St. Peter among the apostles. Like all Christian doctrines, it has undergone development through the centuries, but it hasn't departed from the essential components already existing in the leadership and prerogatives of St. Peter. These were given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ, acknowledged by his contemporaries, and accepted by the early Church. The biblical Petrine data is quite strong and convincing, by virtue of its cumulative weight, especially for those who are not hostile to the notion of the papacy from the outset. This is especially made clear with the assistance of biblical commentaries. The evidence of Holy Scripture (RSV) follows:

1. Matthew 16:18: "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it."

The rock (Greek, petra) referred to here is St. Peter himself, not his faith or Jesus Christ. Christ appears here not as the foundation, but as the architect who "builds." The Church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men (see, e.g., 1 Pet 2:5). Today, the overwhelming consensus of the great majority of all biblical scholars and commentators is in favor of the traditional Catholic understanding. Here St. Peter is spoken of as the foundation-stone of the Church, making him head and superior of the family of God (i.e., the seed of the doctrine of the papacy). Moreover, Rock embodies a metaphor applied to him by Christ in a sense analogous to the suffering and despised Messiah (1 Pet 2:4-8; cf. Mt 21:42). Without a solid foundation a house falls. St. Peter is the foundation, but not founder of the Church, administrator, but not Lord of the Church. The Good Shepherd (John 10:11) gives us other shepherds as well (Eph 4:11).

2. Matthew 16:19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . ."

The "power of the keys" has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is "over a house" (Gen 41:40; 43:19; 44:4; 1 Ki 4:6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Ki 10:5; 15:5; 18:18; Is 22:15,20-21).

3. Matthew 16:19 ". . . whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

"Binding" and "loosing" were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to "forbid" and "permit" with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to "condemn" or "place under the ban" or "acquit." Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit's leading (Jn 16:13), and to demand obedience from the Church. "Binding and loosing" represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops (Mt 18:17-18; Jn 20:23). St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent.

4. Peter's name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the "first" (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.

5. Peter is almost without exception named first whenever he appears with anyone else. In one (only?) example to the contrary, Galatians 2:9, where he ("Cephas") is listed after James and before John, he is clearly preeminent in the entire context (e.g., 1:18-19; 2:7-8).

6. Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42; Mt 16:18).

7. Likewise, Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2).

8. Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his "faith may not fail" (Lk 22:32).

9. Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to "strengthen your brethren" (Lk 22:32).

10. Peter first confesses Christ's divinity (Mt 16:16).

11. Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Mt 16:17).

12. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.

13. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).

14. Jesus Christ uniquely associates Himself and Peter in the miracle of the tribute-money (Mt 17:24-27).

15. Christ teaches from Peter's boat, and the miraculous catch of fish follows (Lk 5:1-11): perhaps a metaphor for the pope as a "fisher of men" (cf. Mt 4:19).

16. Peter was the first apostle to set out for, and enter the empty tomb (Lk 24:12; Jn 20:6).

17. Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mk 16:7).

18. Peter leads the apostles in fishing (Jn 21:2-3,11). The "bark" (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.

19. Peter alone casts himself into the sea to come to Jesus (Jn 21:7).

20. Peter's words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).

21. Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).

22. Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to "preach the gospel" in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).

23. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).

24. Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!

25. Peter's shadow works miracles (Acts 5:15).

26. Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).

27. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).

28. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).

29. Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).

30. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison - Acts 12:1-17).

31. The whole Church (strongly implied) offers "earnest prayer" for Peter when he is imprisoned (Acts 12:5).

32. Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).

33. Paul distinguishes the Lord's post-Resurrection appearances to Peter from those to other apostles (1 Cor 15:4-8). The two disciples on the road to Emmaus make the same distinction (Lk 24:34), in this instance mentioning only Peter ("Simon"), even though they themselves had just seen the risen Jesus within the previous hour (Lk 24:33).

34. Peter is often spoken of as distinct among apostles (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:28,32; Acts 2:37; 5:29; 1 Cor 9:5).

35. Peter is often spokesman for the other apostles, especially at climactic moments (Mk 8:29; Mt 18:21; Lk 9:5; 12:41; Jn 6:67 ff.).

36. Peter's name is always the first listed of the "inner circle" of the disciples (Peter, James and John - Mt 17:1; 26:37,40; Mk 5:37; 14:37).

37. Peter is often the central figure relating to Jesus in dramatic gospel scenes such as walking on the water (Mt 14:28-32; Lk 5:1 ff., Mk 10:28; Mt 17:24 ff.).

38. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).

39. Peter's name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon, and 6 as Cephas). John is next in frequency with only 48 appearances, and Peter is present 50% of the time we find John in the Bible! Archbishop Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples combined were mentioned 130 times. If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable 60% of the time any disciple is referred to!

40. Peter's proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the "House of Israel" (2:36) - an example of "binding and loosing."

41. Peter was the first "charismatic", having judged authoritatively the first instance of the gift of tongues as genuine (Acts 2:14-21).

42. Peter is the first to preach Christian repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).

43. Peter (presumably) takes the lead in the first recorded mass baptism (Acts 2:41).

44. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).

45. Peter was the first traveling missionary, and first exercised what would now be called "visitation of the churches" (Acts 9:32-38,43). Paul preached at Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20), but hadn't traveled there for that purpose (God changed his plans!). His missionary journeys begin in Acts 13:2.

46. Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal 1:18), and was commissioned by Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.

47. Peter acts, by strong implication, as the chief bishop/shepherd of the Church (1 Pet 5:1), since he exhorts all the other bishops, or "elders."

48. Peter interprets prophecy (2 Pet 1:16-21).

49. Peter corrects those who misuse Paul's writings (2 Pet 3:15-16).

50. Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome, according to most scholars, as its bishop, and as the universal bishop (or, pope) of the early Church. "Babylon" (1 Pet 5:13) is regarded as code for Rome.

In conclusion, it strains credulity to think that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Christian history; in particular, Church government. The papacy is the most plausible (we believe actual) fulfillment of this.

[DallasMike]

The introduction of abortion into the discussion is supposed to draw a moral equivalence between the United States and Saddam Hussein. Don't fall for it.

Excellent point. I didn't fall for the moral equivalence thing, but I do recognize that abortion will eventually bring God's judgment on this country if we don't change our hearts. I'm one of the ones who wonder whether 9/11 might have been a taste of His judgment. If it weren't for the faithful Christians in the United States -- both Catholic and Protestant -- I think that God would have destroyed us years ago.

[GirlShortstop]

These continued mutterings from the Vatican about new international bodies (who'll be sure to stop US unilateralism in the future) are meant to show the Pope's displeasure at the direction the US is taking in the war on terror.

Please cite the line(s) from which you've made these inferences.

[Polycarp IV]

Peter had just professed faith in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. It is this statement of faith on which the Kingdom was and is established.

Thank you for sharing YOPIOS. But that is all it is, your personal opinion.

For the valid interpretation of this verse, one must turn where Christ told us to turn. And that's not the opinions of a bunch of 16th century political opportunists we sometimes call "Reformers."

[DallasMike]

forgive my cut & paste here:

No prob. I disagree with much of it -- for example, #32 says that Peter presided over the first council even though most scholars and several ancient texts dispute that idea -- but it's a handy guide anyway.

I'm going to bed now. Behave tonight or I'll have to call out the Protestant Inquisition on you.

[Cap'n Crunch]

I caught the chatter, however the Vatican is still standing.

'Continued mutterings?' The way I read it the Holy Father seems less than thrilled with alot of things and I didn't have to read between the lines. The man is calling for peace on all sides, terrorists included.

[BlackElk]

WK: See post #519 for definitive proof of your own ignorance as to the auto-da-fe which you claim is a "basic concept." The cap'n knows his stuff far better than you. Lorraine Boettner was a lying idiot. You ought to apologize or go to your room.

Wait, you forgot to tell us the Tales of Maria Monk and Jack Chick's more contemporary anti-Catholic fantasies and lies. Do not hide your light under a bushel.

[sinkspur]

However, demograpghic warfare ("women's reproductive rights," i.e., universal legalized abortion) against third world citizens has figured into the strong alliance between the Vatican and Muslim countries in fighting the culture of death in United Nations conferences for many years now.

And this is likely why the Vatican abhors the war on terror. The Pope sat quietly while we went after bin Laden, but he and his minions have been on the offensive against the US and Britain since then.

What has happened?

A mass murderer has been deposed in Iraq.

Another terrorist leader has thrown in the towel in Libya.

Just today, the President of Sudan publicly thanked George W. Bush for helping bring an end to the civil war that has been ongoing for twelve years in his country.

Why do you think all this has happened? Because we've gone through the United Nations, or some other international organization, as he wanted?

Or because George Bush has drawn a clear line in the sand, and spoken in a language that violent men understand?

Sometimes it takes more than words, Brian. Sometimes it takes a whip.

[Polycarp IV]

Thanks Mike. God Bless you. Its been good sparring.

And I agree with your post 526 complately. I wish Christians could work together instead of debating like this.

[sinkspur]

What makes you think that any "new" international organization that includes France and Germany will be more amenable to nations acting in their own self-interest?

The Pope opposed our incursion into Iraq. Did you miss that?

[BlackElk]

Show me your posts and I'll tell you what you are.

[GirlShortstop]

The man is calling for peace on all sides, terrorists included.

Can you imagine!?!?
I think Sink's busy on another thread continuing his Pope-hates-America diatribe.
Media spin has him hook-Line-'n-sinker

[Polycarp IV]

Yes, but when the Church or fellow Catholic activists employ "the whip" within the Church, you are often the first to howl in protest.

Regardless, its good to chat, Sink. I missed sparring with you.

See my FReepmail from yesterday.

God Bless,

Brian

[Polycarp IV]

The Pope opposed our incursion into Iraq.

Yes, and other good decent honest men also opposed it.

And still do. Its no surprise that we caught Saddam, is it?

Is that our latest justification for it? Does that not now impose upon us the absolute requirement to invade every country in the world with a tryant at the helm, since the only remaining valid justification of the war is freeing oppressed peoples?

Where does it end?

Were there not other countries with worse records of abuse? China? North Korea?

Why DID we invade Iraq, Sink?

Don't give me today's answer! Tell me what we were told the day before we invaded? That was the official line, anything since is situational spin.

[BlackElk]

You are welcome.

[BlackElk]

With some of the recent SCOTUS decisions like Lawrence vs. Texas and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision demanding the licensing of sodomite "marriages," I am afraid that we are in serious danger of a "bottoms up" government such as our Founding Fathers did not envision.