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.
I’m reminded of that good Roman Catholic, Tom Ridge, who now trashes the hand that fed him (and kept his family safe) in his revolting new book.
Thankfully, I’ve not exposed myself to that trash.
Evidently the
writing of pontifical encyclicals
has no association with
the least bit of an understanding of
realities in our era, either.
Fascinating, that.
The short answer is "he's almost never infallible."
The longer answer is "he's only infallible when speaking ex cathedra and when speaking of doctrine specifically [government, politics and economics don't qualify as doctrine]. Only the Magisterium, when viewed as a whole over time, is held to be 100% infallible."
The detailed answer is that 99.9% of all papal statements aren't made ex cathedra. The possibility (and opportunity) always exists that the Pope will speak in error doctrinally, if he's not speaking ex cathedra - and there have only been a handful of ex cathedra statements made in the entire history of the Catholic Church (remembering that infallible teachings must by definition be on dogma and doctrine). Thus, the possibility that any pope will speak in error regarding political and economic issues is [statistically speaking] a rock solid 100%, according to the doctrine of papal infallibility. There's no reason to say that Pope Benedict XVI can't be advocating socialism, and I think the recent is pretty clear that even if he's not outright promoting it, he's certainly in support of it. I'm afraid that all too many Catholics push their admiration of the Pope into idol worship, believing that the Pope speaks impeccably in all matters. As one FReeper explained it to me years ago, "papal impeccability is not a Catholic dogma."
But in the end, the final answer to the question of "So is the Pope above criticism? Is he infallible?" is "Shut up and kiss the ring." No one is permitted to question the Vicar of Christ's guidance. If he says that
- food and the access to water are a universal right of all humans,as he did in his recent encyclical Caritas in veritate, you'll be expected to step aside and let the centralists and socialists take over. Your eternal salvation is in jeopardy if you don't go along with whatever he says, whenever he says it.
- abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution will hinder the achievement of lasting development
- technologically advanced societies can and must lower their domestic energy consumption
- labor unions should expand their influence over those outside their membership, and beyond national boundaries,
- a reform of the United Nations Organization is necessary, likewise a reform of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the "family of nations" can acquire real teeth.
Too true, an element of desire need be present doesn't it? A desire to truly understand and not merely to interpret in the best or worst light depending on what serves your intent best.
I gave him a significant degree of some benefit of the doubt for quite a number of weeks.
I’ve seen nothing suggesting convincingly that this encyclical warranted anything more than outrage.
Lofty sounding globalist double-speak is unfitting for his role or his person or his position or even the term “Christian.”
In fact, and unfortunately, we can look forward to radicals taking the Holy Father’s words out of the context of holiness and wisdom and instead using them to justify that awful end of all secular governments that we know in our guts is only a matter of time...
UNMITIGATED HOGWASH.
The context is somewhat MORE disturbing than taking the paragraph and key sentence by themselves.
THE POPE IS THE ONE SANCTIONING OVERTLY AND EVEN AMIDST THE DOUBLE-SPEAK
clear elements of the satanic global government.
The “CONTEXT” only makes it worse.
The “context” makes him appear to be
either an evil duplicitous globalist complicit stooge
or
a clueless idiot.
The context provides no comfort for those of us who would prefer to see him in the best light.
IF he REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY
BELIEVE, THINKS, ASSUMES, PRETENDS
that his sliced and diced; massaged and magled nice words & double-speak phrases are going to mollify satanic tyrannical globalism any time before Armageddon,
then
he’s clueless beyond hope.
And a clueless Pope is worse than hopeless.
Realities of our era? Do tell. Who’s realities; your’s, mine, the Sudanese Christin being persecuted or the Brazilian dying of dysentery?
The reality is is that America and capitalism are exactly what you and most of the freepers who regularly hector the pope accuse him and the Catholic Church of being: man made institutions filled with idols and false gods, the land of another gospel. Y’all act like America is some place special, a place to be proud of, why? Is it heaven, is it more holy than Canada or Java?
Time to face the real reality Quix, America and free market capitalism are nice and all, I like living here, but God’s creation and His children extend far beyond our borders and familiar economic system.
The only one world government the Pope calls for is one that recognizes the intrinsic worth of man due to his being created in the image and likeness of God and the kingship of the Lord. I would think you would welcome that.
We can always find what we want to find in most wighting can’t we? If this were not true we wouldn’t have multiple Christian denominations now would we?
How many years have you lived overseas?
How close to how much poverty have you been to overseas?
How much have you loved an overseas culture and people?
I’ll stack my understanding, experiences, perceptions and feelings in such matters up against yours any day.
Certainly the USA is full of secular etc. idols. And no few religious ones as well.
The Pope is clearly cling for a world political new order.
There’s NO ESCAPING THAT THE ONLY SUCH that is going to be remotely in the least bit of power . . . and rather tyrannical and complete it will be as Scripture is clear about
is the satanic global government.
What is he doing giving the least bit of a hint of support for
ANY
such regardless of how wrapped in platitudes and double-speak????
Sheesh.
Well I'm just meat for the grinder then
What is it about control freaks, I really would like to know, as enslaving a man's spirit is as bad as enslaving a man's body and most times they want both
INDEED.
There are many agents of the evil one working knowingly and unknowingly towards his wicked ends, the Pope is not one of those agents.
I prefer to think you’re right about the latter.
I wish I had more confidence on that score.
Prayer never hurt!
Prayer is priceless.
INDEED.
However, I think Scripture outlines some things about the END TIMES that are unalterable.
The global government is one of them.
Speaking on faith and morals is one thing; world governance is quite another.
We've been feeling the 'bite' for decades. Now comes the real mastication.
Plenty of truth to that.
And muddying things big time all together . . .
sure isn’t wise, to me . . .
unless one . . . is trying to help the enemy.
And where, pray tell, did you get this?
It is you, invisible one, who is not reading or understanding the writings. You didn't even copy the word I created correctly.
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.