Posted on 05/03/2003 8:36:08 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
VATICAN CITY, MAY 2, 2003 (Zenit.org).- Citing what he sees as a lack of effective mechanisms to direct the process of globalization, John Paul II proposed "a new constitutional organization of the human family."
The Pope addressed the issue of "The Governance of Globalization" when he met today with some 70 scientists, writers, philosophers, economists, sociologists and jurists, members of the Pontifical Academy for Social Sciences. The "processes by which capital, goods, information, technology and knowledge are exchanged and circulated throughout the world today often elude the traditional mechanisms of regulatory control put in place by national governments and international agencies," the Holy Father said in his address.
"Special interests and the demands of the market frequently predominate over concern for the common good," he added. "This tends to leave the weaker members of society without adequate protection and can subject entire peoples and cultures to a formidable struggle for survival."
"Moreover, it is disturbing to witness a globalization that exacerbates the conditions of the needy, that does not sufficiently contribute to resolving situations of hunger, poverty and social inequality, that fails to safeguard the natural environment," the Pope said.
"These aspects of globalization can give rise to extreme reactions, leading to excessive nationalism, religious fanaticism and even acts of terrorism," he warned.
He continued: "All of this is far-removed from the concept of an ethically responsible globalization capable of treating all peoples as equal partners and not as passive instruments. Accordingly, there can be little doubt of the need for guidelines that will place globalization firmly at the service of authentic human development -- the development of every person and of the whole person -- in full respect of the rights and dignity of all."
The "true success of globalization will be measured by the extent that it enables every person to enjoy the basic goods of food and housing, of education and employment, of peace and social progress, of economic development and justice," the Pontiff said.
However, this "goal cannot be achieved without guidance from the international community and adequate regulation on the part of the worldwide political establishment," he continued.
Consequently, "now is the time to work together for a new constitutional organization of the human family, an organization that would be in a position to meet the new demands of a globalized world," the Pope said.
"This does not mean creating a 'global super-state,' but continuing the processes already under way to increase democratic participation and promote political transparency and accountability," he concluded.
Christ prayed in the following words:
"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
That they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us [...]"
You cannot be truly one with Christ and separated from other Christians. No one is saved alone.
I do not believe that the worth of my faith is contingent upon my Church union with fellow believers.
I don't agree with your interpretation of the scripture you quoted in your reply to me.
What is your interpretation then?
It was but that was in a very closed, homogenous social structure (Christian-only) in a very narrow timeframe. It didn't include collective ownership and sharing within the wider diverse culture. It is doubtful that it worked for very long.
The Catholic Church is not the chosen Church any more than the Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, etc., etc., etc. It is a community of Christians who get some things right and some things wrong.
His audience with Tariq Aziz is an example of something very, very wrong! His notion that only the UN can sanction a just war, is very, very wrong. We know what the Pope thinks about greed and materialism, and war and peace what we don't know that much about is what the Pope thinks about sloth and incontinence, self defense and the individual.
I will gladly take it upon myself to inform the Pope that sometimes Love carries a sword, and if he can't or won't address that, then that is something he'll have to sort out for himself.
No,I was not saying that at all,my statements had nothing to do with you and the fellowship of other Christians.
In fact,I was trying to say,you should go fellowship with non-Catholic Christians.
I'd say the soul atrophies when one starts to lose their integrity,and that would include both individuals and entities.I interpreted what you said as a symptom of the disconnectedness that occurs when one's beliefs,words and actions are not in accord.
That you have read
That's true, but I read extensively.
"...he has not once since the end of the Iraq war expressed gratitude ..."
That you have read.
Actually, I've scoured Zenit.org (the official Vatican website) for three weeks, and he hasn't said one word about the liberation of Iraq's 24 million citizens.
"...the Holy Father knew for 20 years that priests were molesting children ..."
So the press has told you.
No, so Fr. Thomas Doyle, secretary to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops from 1982-1985 has told me and everybody else in a number of articles. He sent documentation to Rome about clerical abuse during that time period.
I don't get my information from the mainstream media anymore than you do. You're just reading the wrong sources.
Then to whom to you turn to teach the truth of the Christian faith? Yourself? If so, then you are setting yourself up as the sole, infallible authority on matters of faith. You have become your own Pope -- the Head of the "Church of AlbionGirl".
Are you seriously claiming to be an infallible teacher of matters of faith and morals?
If you do and you need to put your faith in him that is fine with me, I don't object to it, I don't want to disuade you from that point of view.
Thanks. However, I must point out that I have no "faith" in the Pope. The pope is a human being. My faith is in the Holy Spirit, who through His Divine power prevents the Pope from teaching error as truth.
The Pope is a man, nothing more, nothing less.
That's true. He is a sinner like the rest of us. The only difference is the charism of infallibility -- which is God working through the pope, not an aspect of the Bishop of Rome's own existence.
He may be a Vicar of Christ, but he is capable of fallibiliy vis-a-vis doctrine, no ifs ands or buts about it.
Do you know what "vicar" means? It means an official in whom the Sovereign vests the unlimited power to speak and act as his own agent. In other words, a vicar is one whose words and deeds are to be taken as being the words and deeds of he Sovereign he represents. With this in mind, it's easy to see that since the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, he speaks for the King in matters of faith and morals.
The now defunct sins of old tell me that.
Huh?
The ease with which an annullment can be had in the Catholic Church today, tell me that.
"Ease"?
The Catholic Church is not the chosen Church any more than the Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, etc., etc., etc. It is a community of Christians who get some things right and some things wrong.
Unlike the Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and other sects, however, Our Lord Himself founded the Catholic Church and charged it with the forgiveness of sin, the propagation of the Faith and with the power to make the once-for-all Sacrifice of Our Lord at Calvary eternally present by the priestly transubstantiation of bread and wine into the Most Precious Body and Blood of Our Lord.
His audience with Tariq Aziz is an example of something very, very wrong!
Why? He also met with Gorbachev, Castro, and other Bad Guys. He even met with the guy who pumped a bullet into his guts! Why would that be wrong?
His notion that only the UN can sanction a just war, is very, very wrong.
Which is why he never said any such thing. (And even if he had, His Holiness is perfectly capable of being 100% wrong about political matters.)
We know what the Pope thinks about greed and materialism, and war and peace what we don't know that much about is what the Pope thinks about sloth and incontinence, self defense and the individual.
We don't know what his views are on public transportation, the designated hitter rule, or whether he prefers Manhattan or New England clam chowder, either!
Seriously: try the Vatican website. Everything the man has written as Pope is there. You'll find that he has had a great deal to say on those subjects.
I will gladly take it upon myself to inform the Pope that sometimes Love carries a sword, and if he can't or won't address that, then that is something he'll have to sort out for himself.
That's certainly true -- but our Pope is neither a coward nor a pacifist. Our Pope sees his role in the world to be that of the defender of the weak, innocent, and helpless, and to that end he is rightly opposed to war -- as we all should be! -- except as a last resort.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Yours in Christian fraternity,
The Bible and prayer for guidance.
If so, then you are setting yourself up as the sole, infallible authority on matters of faith. You have become your own Pope -- the Head of the "Church of AlbionGirl".
No I'm not. I do not pretend to be infallible. I too call on the Holy Spirit for guidance. And I have not established a Church.
Thanks. However, I must point out that I have no "faith" in the Pope. The pope is a human being. My faith is in the Holy Spirit, who through His Divine power prevents the Pope from teaching error as truth.
I don't believe in the Pope's infallibilty by means of the Holy Spirit. While the Holy Spirit is infallible, the Pope can still get it wrong because he is human. We will have to agree to disagree on this.
The Pope is a man, nothing more, nothing less. That's true. He is a sinner like the rest of us. The only difference is the charism of infallibility -- which is God working through the pope, not an aspect of the Bishop of Rome's own existence.
Was it this same charism of infallibility which taught that if one were to accidentally touch the Host, it was a sin? That the host was to be touched only by 'consecrated hands'? Was this the same charism of infallibility which enjoined Church and myriad principalities during the Middle Ages? Did Borgia possess this charism of infallibility too?
I'm sorry but I can't believe that.
The now defunct sins of old tell me that.
See above note on the doctrine of consecrated hands. And by the way is not going to Mass on Sundays still considered a Sin?
"Ease"?
Yes, ease. All it takes is time and money. There are many people who have received annullments for 'irreconcilable differences', and not just for reasons accepted by Pastors and Priests as Scripturally based.
Unlike the Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and other sects, however, Our Lord Himself founded the Catholic Church and charged it with the forgiveness of sin, the propagation of the Faith and with the power to make the once-for-all Sacrifice of Our Lord at Calvary eternally present by the priestly transubstantiation of bread and wine into the Most Precious Body and Blood of Our Lord.
I believe Christ established his Church with Peter and his disciples, but I don't believe that what descended from that has the same imprimatur. I just don't. Too much corruption, too much murder, too much rapacity ensued for me to be able to believe Christ resided there.
Do you know what "vicar" means? It means an official in whom the Sovereign vests the unlimited power to speak and act as his own agent. In other words, a vicar is one whose words and deeds are to be taken as being the words and deeds of he Sovereign he represents. With this in mind, it's easy to see that since the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, he speaks for the King in matters of faith and morals.
I misused the word Vicar then, and won't make that mistake again.
This Pope is a good man and has showed he can be courageous, but his response to the pederasty problem has been weak, very, very weak. And his idea that only the UN can decide whether war is necessary or not is intellectually bankrupt in the extreme. His audience with Aziz a disgrace.
Having said all that, I must confess that if my life were to be put on display I would not measure up in goodness to the Pope and would far outpace him in the bad. But the Shepherd has a greater responsibility because he has his flock.
I will close as you did in saying thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Yours also in Christian fraternity.
As a Caatholic I use a strange admixture of available means to help on the journey. Somethimes I say the rosary and after I am finished I ask the Holy Ghost to lead me to some scripture that will enlighten me or that I should think about or in other ways help. About four or five weeks ago,I used that means and I found myself in the Apocolypse,chapters 2 and 3,(the letters to the churches).. It was especially helpful,as I was chatting about something tangential to that on Free Republic.
Anyway the words that especially jumped out were:"they say they are Apostles but are not;they lie"and in two other letters;"those who say they are Jews,but are not;they lie".
Anyway it seemed to me that there was a warning to the churches to be especially careful of those people who claimed to be what they were not.
Reflecting on that in the context of the Catholic Church in America,it struck me that the church is full of people who claim to be Catholic and are not;they lie. This seems to me to be at the heart of so many of the problems in the church and society at this time. It creates confusion and chaos. It is from that perspective that I took your post to heart,understanding why you felt the way you did,yet unwilling to not take the time to point out to you that for all concerned,yourself as well as the Church,you might consider another place to be. Or at the least ask that you not call yourself Catholic while denying what the Church teaches. I hope that helps.
Or,best of all,you could rethink your position and recognize that our leadership is riddled with imposters and as a layperson come back with your New Catholic Catechism and fight them,join us in the battle,we need bright,holy,faithful Catholics.
I also think if you read what the Pope has said in view of where his charism applies,you will be in agreement with those tenets that are necessary and can disagree with his opinions that are his personal ones. Although I find myself in agreement with practically everything he says,once I understand it.
I too appreciate the thoughtful comments of B-Chan, A. Pole and yourself, but with all due respect I cannot comply with your wish that I either find a more suitable Church, deny that I'm a Catholic or return to the fold chastened and mum.
I was baptized in the Catholic Church, made my first Confession there, recieved First Communion there, and finally confirmed there. I will continue to express my thoughts regarding the direction and state of Catholic affairs because I am Catholic, and the Church is not (nor should it ever be) above criticism both from within or without.
If you and others such as yourself consider people such as myself a thorn in the side of the Church, I'm afraid that's something I can't do anything about. The Church can always excommunicate me if she feels I've stepped over the line, it is her right and I would comply.
Establishing a comfort zone for the Church during these difficult and chaotic times by hoping the doubting Thomases make themselves scarce is not something that will or should happen. Most especially because of the imposters you have alluded to.
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.