Posted on 05/05/2009 9:02:29 PM PDT by ReformationFan
Pope: "Non-Negotiable Human Rights" include "Right to Life and Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion"
VATICAN CITY, MAY 5, 2009 (LifeSIteNews.com) - Pope Benedict XVI addressed members of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences yesterday at their plenary session which is focused on the theme of Catholic social teaching and human rights, and called for the promotion of universal human rights based on both faith and reason, affirming the "right to life and the right to freedom of conscience and religion as being at the center of those rights that spring from human nature itself."
The Holy Father noted that though these human rights are not strictly "truths of faith, even though they are discoverable - and indeed come to full light - in the message of Christ who "reveals man to man himself," they do "receive further confirmation from faith."
Giving an historical perspective to human rights as "the reference point of a shared universal ethos - at least at the level of aspiration - for most of humankind," the Pope spoke of the "vast suffering caused by two terrible world wars and the unspeakable crimes perpetrated by totalitarian ideologies," as a consequence of which "the international community acquired a new system of international law based on human rights."
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Many unbalanced “omnipotent busibodies” who are busily engaged in what they call, “saving the planet” , also want us to pervert justice by favoring the poor. Leviticus 19:15 “is a helpful correction” to that notion.
*
“..But the “theologies of liberation”...go on to a disastrous confusion between the poor of the Scripture and the proletariat of Marx.
“In this way they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle. For them the Church of the poor signifies the Church of the class ..” - Pope Benedict XVI - Theologies of Liberation http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df84lt.htm
“..an authentic...theology: [is] one that puts:
[1] God and the life of the spirit first,
[2] DIRECT charitable care of others second,
[3] and only then draws consequences for a just social order.”
- Pope Benedict XVI http://ncrcafe.org/node/1091
Just to clarify, there is no primacy given among Church dogma to that dogma which seeks to end genocide? Hardly believable, especially inasmuch as the Pope again has enumerated this, as well as the freedom of conscience, among the “Non-Negotiable Human Rights.”
-—”For Christians who regularly ask God to “give us this day our daily bread”, it is a shameful tragedy that one-fifth of humanity still goes hungry.”-—
To the extent that Christians are permitted to help, yes this would be a shame. Just as it would be a shameful tragedy for Christians who regularly ask God to “help the most vulnerable and least fortunate among us,” that millions upon millions of the most vulnerable would face slaughter in the womb, the genocide itself often enumerated as a basic human right. If it is a shame that nearly 20% of humanity goes hungry - oftentimes because their countries/leaders prevent assistance that would otherwise help - it is not more shameful that so many children should face outright slaughter, a fate even worse than hunger, especially in a world which condemns hunger and seeks mercy for the hungry, yet sees fit to put its blessing on the holocaust of the unborn?
Where do we need to win hearts and minds more - convincing the rest of the world to feed the hungry, or convincing them to stop the slaughter of the unborn? Which moral lesson needs to be taught more in this day and age? Which lesson demands the stand of a martyr, and which will face no worldly rebuke?
Your is a mistaken sentiment, seeking to relegate to less significance a dogma specifically enumerated among the absolutely non-negotiatable rights recognized by the Church. Your compartmentalizing reveals much as well (-—”And one wonders how much support the Papal call to international social activism will find among the those who have bought into that peculiar American heresy because it furthers their anti-Obama political agenda”-—), for what Catholic could separate the Right to Life and protection of the unborn from the category of international social activism? It is one in the same.
-—”...respecting the natural law...”-— Again, one cannot compartmentalize so-called “natural law” from God's law(s). If one is to state that environmentalism and eliminating social inequalities is compelled of the believers by the Church, one needs to make a better case than creating a fictional, worldly term in the hopes of diverting people from the fact that one is claiming it as God's law (”natural law”). The Church has no problem asserting Truths with the Authority of the Spirit, so one needs to claim the same Authority when trying to assert a new, or perhaps inadequately recognized, moral law. Is it the claim here that God cedes nature laws independent of His own? Or is the claim that God requires environmental activism and the active elimination of social inequalities among nations as part of our Communion with Him?
Yes, there is primacy given to enumerated Human Rights of the Church; and one needs to speak with Godly Authority when suggesting that the dogma of stopping genocide be relegated to equal-to or less-than-equal-to other considerations - and back it up with the Word.
***I seem to remember the Lord only asks for 10%!***
The OT Lord or Jesus?
The only NT references to supporting the Church come from Paul. Plus, we have more support for Sunday as the Lord’s day rather than Saturday, for our Judaizing friends. :)
1 Cor 16:
1
1 2 Now in regard to the collection for the holy ones, you also should do as I ordered the churches of Galatia.
2
On the first day of the week each of you should set aside and save whatever one can afford, so that collections will not be going on when I come.
2 Cor 9:
5
So I thought it necessary to encourage the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for your promised gift, so that in this way it might be ready as a bountiful gift and not as an exaction.
6
Consider this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.
7
Each must do as already determined, without sadness or compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
Nothing about 10%. Just give what you can.
Dogma's don't supersede,dear brother.Dogma's come directly from Christ and are perfect teaching
Obama's political agenda's are anti Christ just the same as those who say america is great because we have a freedom to do whatever we please and choose evil because of political power
Obama is evil based on abortion alone and having political power to want it
“Are you saying that the bishops shouldn’t oppose abortion until they rectify their collective dereliction of duty in catechizing their flock?”
No, I am saying that a number of them are heretics. And heretics, as +John Chrysostomos reminds us, P, as well as those who are in communion with them, are enemies of God.
“Kolokotronis - please amplify, what is the ‘heresy’ you allege and why should anyone not be “anti-Obama”, in your opinion?”
Several of these heresiarchs, that theological clown from Pennsylvania springs immediately to mind, have stated, publicly, that the imagined anti-abortion “dogma” of the The Church is the most important of all dogmas; that it trumps all other theological considerations. That’s heresy. Their meddling in another bishop’s diocese, even if he approves, is a violation of the canons, though that’s not heresy, just proper grounds for being removed from their sees.
“why should anyone not be “anti-Obama”, in your opinion?”
There are multiple reasons, which apparently the majority of Roman Catholics and indeed American citizens seem to share. These bishops, instead of preaching heresy, violating the canons and essentially having their heads explode over what is going to happen in another diocese, ought to read the Fathers, learn the canons and then preach the Truth as The Church has preserved it, not play silly, and frankly embarrassing political games.
“It doesn’t supercede any other dogma, like like you and I discussed a few times now.”
Alex, I know that. That’s why I say they are heretics when they proclaim it.
“BXVI is right; we have the entire doctrine of the Church to obey, and not just the current headlines.”
Exactly!
[...]
"..Let us recall the fact that atheism and the denial of the human person, his liberty and rights, are at the core of the Marxist theory. This theory, then, contains errors which directly threaten the truths of the faith regarding the eternal destiny of individual persons. Moreover, to attempt to integrate into theology an analysis whose criterion of interpretation depends on this atheistic conception is to involve oneself in terrible contradictions. What is more, this misunderstanding of the spiritual nature of the person leads to a total subordination of the person to the collectivity, and thus to the denial of the principles of a social and political life which is in keeping with human dignity. ...
[...]
"..We are facing, therefore, a real system, even if some hesitate to follow the logic to its conclusion. As such, this system is a perversion of the Christian message as God entrusted it to His Church. This message in its entirety finds itself then called into question by the "theologies of liberation."
[...]
"...As a result, participation in the class struggle is presented as a requirement of charity itself. The desire to love everyone here and now, despite his class, and to go out to meet him with the non-violent means of dialogue and persuasion, is denounced as counterproductive and opposed to love.
If one holds that a person should not be the object of hate, it is claimed nevertheless that, if he belongs to the objective class of the rich, he is primarily a class enemy to be fought. Thus the universality of love of neighbor and brotherhood become an eschatological principle, which will only have meaning for the "new man", who arises out of the victorious revolution. ...
[...]
"..But the "theologies of liberation", which reserve credit for restoring to a place of honor the great texts of the prophets and of the Gospel in defense of the poor, go on to a disastrous confusion between the poor of the Scripture and the proletariat of Marx.
In this way they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle. For them the Church of the poor signifies the Church of the class which has become aware of the requirements of the revolutionary struggle as a step toward liberation and which celebrates this liberation in its liturgy. ...
[...]
"..The new hermeneutic inherent in the "theologies of liberation" leads to an essentially political re-reading of the Scriptures. Thus, a major importance is given to the Exodus event inasmuch as it is a liberation from political servitude. Likewise, a political reading of the "Magnificat" is proposed. The mistake here is not in bringing attention to a political dimension of the readings of Scripture, but in making of this one dimension the principal or exclusive component. This leads to a reductionist reading of the Bible.
Likewise, one places oneself within the perspective of a temporal messianism, which is one of the most radical of the expressions of secularization of the Kingdom of God and of its absorption into the immanence of human history.
In giving such priority to the political dimension, one is led to deny the radical newness of the New Testament and above all to misunderstand the person of Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, and thus the specific character of the salvation he gave us, that is above all liberation from sin, which is the source of all evils. ..
[...]
"...Faith in the Incarnate Word, dead and risen for all men, and whom "God made Lord and Christ" is denied. In its place is substituted a figure of Jesus who is a kind of symbol who sums up in Himself the requirements of the struggle of the oppressed.
An exclusively political interpretation is thus given to the death of Christ. In this way, its value for salvation and the whole economy of redemption is denied. ...
[...]
"..For them, the struggle of the classes is the way to unity.
The Eucharist thus becomes the Eucharist of the class. At the same time, they deny the triumphant force of the love of God which has been given to us.
[...]
"...the source of injustice is in the hearts of men. Therefore it is only by making an appeal to the moral potential of the person and to the constant need for interior conversion, that social change will be brought about which will be truly in the service of man.
For it will only be in the measure that they collaborate freely in these necessary changes through their own initiative and in solidarity, that people, awakened to a sense of their responsibility, will grow in humanity.
The inversion of morality and structures is steeped in a materialist anthropology which is incompatible with the dignity of mankind.
[...]
".. the overthrow by means of revolutionary violence of structures which generate violence is not ipso facto the beginning of a just regime. A major fact of our time ought to evoke the reflection of all those who would sincerely work for the true liberation of their brothers: millions of our own contemporaries legitimately yearn to recover those basic freedoms of which they were deprived by totalitarian and atheistic regimes which came to power by violent and revolutionary means, precisely in the name of the liberation of the people.
This shame of our time cannot be ignored: while claiming to bring them freedom, these regimes keep whole nations in conditions of servitude which are unworthy of mankind. Those who, perhaps inadvertently, make themselves accomplices of similar enslavements betray the very poor they mean to help.
The class struggle as a road toward a classless society is a myth which slows reform and aggravates poverty and injustice.
Those who allow themselves to be caught up in fascination with this myth should reflect on the bitter examples history has to offer about where it leads.
They would then understand that we are not talking here about abandoning an effective means of struggle on behalf of the poor for an ideal which has no practical effects. On the contrary, we are talking about freeing oneself from a delusion in order to base oneself squarely on the Gospel and its power of realization. ...
[...]
~ Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (nka Pope Benedict XVI) August 6, 1984
“Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic.” ~ Pope Benedict XVI
“...After all, every normal person wants to help the poor and needy, but helping them at the end of a gun, as the left always want us to do, renders any spiritual benefit inoperative for both parties. .... What we hear from Obama is the eternal mantra of the socialists; America is broken, millions have no health care, families cannot afford necessities, the rich are evil, we are selfish, we are unhappy, unfulfilled, without hope, desperate, poverty stricken, morally desolate, corrupt and racist. This nihilism is the lifeblood of all the democrat candidates, even ‘hope you can believe in’ performers like Obama. When Michelle Obama claims she is only newly proud of her country, she does not exaggerate. In her world as in Obama’s, they believe we are a mess, a land filled with the ignorant and unenlightened, filled with despair” ..." (Fairchok).
“Obama is evil based on abortion alone and having political power to want it.”
Obama is an agnostic who may or may not know better. Your American heresiarchs are committing wilfull and knowing heresy or they are so theologically ingnorant that they should be removed as presenting a present danger to the souls of the laity. Frankly, as an Orthodox Christian I am far more concerned about shrieking heretics in the Latin Church than an agnostic secularist acting like an agnostic secularist on the question of abortion.
Which heresy(ies) are they guilty of?
So, opposing Notre Dame's invitation to a man who supports the wholesale murder of millions of children and even opposing the murder itself is a "silly, and frankly embarrassing political game"?
When Pope Pius XII worked to save Jews from the Nazi Holocaust was that also a "silly, and frankly embarrassing political game"?
“Just to clarify, there is no primacy given among Church dogma to that dogma which seeks to end genocide? Hardly believable, especially inasmuch as the Pope again has enumerated this, as well as the freedom of conscience, among the “Non-Negotiable Human Rights.””
That’s right. It is heresy to say that any one dogma, and by the way, no council ever declared that anti-abortionism was a dogmatic position binding on all members of The Church, is more important than another.
“Yes, there is primacy given to enumerated Human Rights of the Church; and one needs to speak with Godly Authority when suggesting that the dogma of stopping genocide be relegated to equal-to or less-than-equal-to other considerations - and back it up with the Word.”
That’s heresy.
You've got to be kidding!
“So, opposing Notre Dame’s invitation to a man who supports the wholesale murder of millions of children and even opposing the murder itself is a “silly, and frankly embarrassing political game”?”
Interfering in another bishop’s diocese violates the canons. That it is being done for cheap politcal gain makes it silly...and given the response its getting, rather pathetic.
“When Pope Pius XII worked to save Jews from the Nazi Holocaust was that also a “silly, and frankly embarrassing political game”?”
I must have missed +Pius XII’s head exploding in public during a rant against Hitler....
“You’ve got to be kidding!”
No. I’m quite serious. Do you claim he is better catechised by the Latin Church than a majority of your own laity?
Bishop D'Arcy certainly seems to welcome the support, this is hardly "interference".
Obama is an agnostic who may or may not know better.He claims to be a baptized Christian. Why do you make the claim he is an agnostic?
So, you believe that you can credibly claim that Obama is unaware of the Church's position on abortion?
“So, you believe that you can credibly claim that Obama is unaware of the Church’s position on abortion?”
I assume he is likely almost as aware of the Latin Church’s position on abortion as the average American Catholic is. Obama isn’t a Roman Catholic. He isn’t a Catholic of any sort. Aside from political considerations, which frankly seem to militate towards him and not towards the American heresiarchs, why would he care, from a religious pov, what some apparently failed bishops are saying? He may well be laughing at them the same way some of their fellow bishops are.
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.