Pontiff Praises Promoter of Faith-Reason Dialogue
Polish Priest Wins Templeton Prize
VATICAN CITY, MAY 7, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI is congratulating a Polish priest and cosmologist who won the Templeton Prize for his contribution to the dialogue between religion and science.
In a message sent through Archbishop Fernando Filoni, "sostituto" for general affairs at the Vatican Secretariat of State, the Pope congratulated Monsignor Michael Heller, a professor of theoretical physics, cosmology and philosophy of science at the Pontifical Academy of Theology.
The message said, "The Holy Father was pleased to learn that you have been awarded the Templeton Prize in recognition of your outstanding contribution to the dialogue between science and religion, and he sends you his warmest congratulations and good wishes."
Citing the encyclical "Fides et Ratio," the note continued, "As you know, His Holiness has repeatedly underlined the importance of a fruitful encounter between faith and reason, the two wings on which the human spirit rises to contemplation of the truth, and he wishes to encourage all those who devote their lives to exploring the profound insights to be gained from scientific research in the context of religious belief."
Referring to Psalm 18, the papal message added: "He prays that your work in the fields of cosmology and philosophy will help to make known the message that "the heavens proclaim the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth the work of his hands.
"As this prestigious award is conferred upon you in London on May 7, 2008, the Holy Father will remember you particularly in his prayers. Invoking upon you and all those whose work serves to promote a deeper understanding of the relationship between religion and science, His Holiness cordially imparts his apostolic blessing."
The writings of Monsignor Heller, 72, "have evoked new and important consideration of some of humankind's most profound concepts," the Templeton Foundation said. "Heller's examination of fundamental questions such as 'does the universe need to have a cause?' engages a wide range of sources who might otherwise find little in common.
"By drawing together mathematicians, philosophers, cosmologists and theologians who pursue these topics, he also allows each to share insights that may edify the other without any violence to their respective methodologies."
The Templeton Prize honors a living person considered to have made an exceptional contribution to affirming life's spiritual dimension, whether through insight, discovery or practical works.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Zenit: Pontiff Praises Promoter of Faith-Reason Dialogue
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Monday, May 05, 2008
Zenit: Cardinal Cordes on "Deus Caritas Est"
Cardinal Cordes on "Deus Caritas Est"
"Jesus Shows God as He Who Loves"
LEEDS, England, MAY 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the text of the April 7 address given by Cardinal Paul Cordes, president of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, to the spring meeting of the bishops' council of England and Wales.
* * *
President of the Vatican's Human and Christian Development council speaks to bishops of England and Wales.
At the invitation of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes, President of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, joined the Bishops of England and Wales at their spring meeting in Leeds to talk about Pope Benedict's first Encyclical Letter Deus Caritas Est (God is Love).
"Anyone looking at society today can only be filled with joy that Christ's commandment to love one's neighbour finds concrete expression in extensive charitable outreach. On the other hand, the global popularisation of an idea also unfortunately often leads to its dilution. Inflation goes hand-in-hand with a reduction in value. For this reason, it falls still today to Christians, and, in a special way the Church's Pastors, to be attentive." Cardinal Cordes
Paul Josef Cardinal Cordes
Bishops of England & Wales Plenary
Hinsley Hall, Leeds
President, Pontifical Council Cor Unum
7 April 2008
Deus Caritas Est
THE SPLENDOUR OF CHARITY
Your Eminence, Your Excellencies,
My Dear Brother Bishops,
As you well know, Cor Unum, my Dicastery at the Vatican is entrusted by the Holy Father with giving concrete signs of love and charity. It was a great joy for us then that Pope Benedict XVI chose for his first Encyclical the theme, "Deus caritas est." In this, he gave decisive direction for his Pontificate. At the same time, he describes Cor Unum as "the agency of the Holy See responsible for orienting and coordinating the organisations and charitable activities promoted by the Catholic Church" (n. 32).
The Catholic Church in Britain has a long history of charitable outreach. Secular historians refer to the "nationalisation" of charity some 400 years ago through the Charitable Uses Act of 1601, but the Church much before and still today has recognised and fostered this virtue in word and deed through a plethora of initiatives - schools, hospitals, care homes for the elderly and dying, and prison outreach, to cite just a few examples. Many of these have gained a national reputation for the excellence achieved and the modern state has sought to emulate them. Even though Britain boasts of a national welfare system, this is no safety net for the very poor. In future years, their numbers are likely to increase, given the large influx of migrants coming to these shores.
I cannot forget the plea of Mother Teresa to Margaret Thatcher to help Londoners sleeping out in the bitter cold beneath railway arches in what she chillingly described as "little cardboard coffins."
My personal presence among you provides the opportunity to express the Pope's encouragement and gratitude to those numerous witnesses of charity in this land who provide for our brothers and sisters in need: those agencies directly sponsored by the Bishops, and also religious institutes and associations, entities for human development and missionary service, groups involved in the civil sphere, and organisations for social, educational and cultural work.
I. HELPING: A SIGN OF THE TIMES
The charitable spirit of the British people is impressive. It is claimed that in the United Kingdom alone, there are almost 200,000 charities, diffusing over 25 billion pounds in charitable aid each year. In terms of giving as a percentage of gross domestic product, Britain ranks second only to the people of the United States. Each year, individuals generously donate billions to charitable causes - 9.5 billion pounds in 2006.
To this, we must add the extensive hours spent in voluntary service. Some 20 million citizens in England and Wales are said to volunteer either formally or informally at least once a month, equivalent to 25 billion pounds of work hours. Recent years, I am told, have seen a significant increase in charitable giving to religious causes. 16 percent of all money donated to charity in 2006-07 was given to religious groups, the highest figure after medical research (17 percent).
It is clear then, also from my experience worldwide, that the willingness of people to alleviate misery has become a "sign of our times." A few years ago, as I arrived at the airport of Saigon, one of the largest cities of the still communist country of Vietnam, I saw a huge, brightly illuminated billboard with the headline, "Charity." I was pleasantly surprised. Even in a Communist country, "charity" is trendy. In some Western nations, the Caritas confederation has grown into an impressive service industry. Caritas Germany, for example, employs an incredible 500,000 professional staff, making it the second largest employer in Germany after the State. In 2006, the annual working budget for assistance to underdeveloped nations of Catholic Relief Services - the U.S. Bishops agency for international outreach - exceeded US$400 million.
In a word: charity has expanded on virtually every level of society. Certainly, one cannot but rejoice over this development. Pope Benedict does so in Deus caritas est. But the Holy Father also cautions us: in the face of growth, "it is very important," he says, "that the Church's charitable activity maintains all of its splendour and does not become just another form of social assistance" (n. 31). It seems to me that this advice is especially significant for a nation such as yours, given its rapidly changing social and religious fabric. The Servant of God Pope John Paul II underlined precisely this challenge for you in his address at your last ad limina visit: "England and Wales, despite being steeped in a rich Christian tradition, today face the pervasive advance of secularism. At the root of this situation is the attempt to promote a vision of humanity apart from God and removed from Christ ... The faithful look to you, the Bishops, with great expectation to preach and teach the Gospel which dispels the darkness and illuminates the way of life" (23 October 2003).
II. CHRIST: THE MODEL OF CHARITY
Dear brothers in Christ: I give thanks to God for the opportunity today to reflect with you on the charitable mission of the Church. I am grateful to His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor for his kind invitation. For some time, I have considered it important to meet with the Pastors of England and Wales. Your bearing on the whole English-speaking world is significant. How pleased I am that the first Encyclical of Pope Benedict has made real this intention!
Our moment of communion and dialogue has been preceded by similar encounters with other Episcopal conferences, including Spain, the Ukraine, Austria, Russia and Poland, the Fourth General Assembly of the Bishops of Latin America and the Caribbean last May in Aparecida, and most recently the Catholic Bishops Conference of India. In the coming months, I shall travel to the Philippines, Australia and France. Encouraged by the Holy Father himself, my wish has been to give Deus caritas est the echo it rightly deserves as the first doctrinal letter ever written specifically on the theme of love and charity.
The Church's responsibility to fight against all kinds of misery is given to us by the Lord Himself. Jesus instituted love of neighbour as the first commandment for behaviour among His disciples, acting Himself as a witness of this love. The Acts of the Apostles spoke of Him thus: "He went about doing good and healing all those oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him" (Acts 10:38). This is His unmistakable description.
For this reason, the young Christian community made its own the mission and example of Jesus. In various places in the New Testament, we find concrete instances of help (cf. Acts 2:45; 4:32; 6:1; Rom 12:13; Jam 1:27; Mt 25:36). But not only material ones. The attentive reader of Sacred Scripture clearly sees that the charitable gestures of Jesus and the compassion of the first Christians were always intended to point to the loving-kindness of the heavenly Father. The multiplication of loaves and healing of the sick, the expelling of demons and raising the dead were always Christianity's way to move people to believe in Jesus, the Messiah and the Servant of Yahweh. The Gospel of John then, does not even speak of "miracles," but has another concept: it calls Jesus' healing deeds semeia, that is, signs, pointers to something else. This indication is
significant. The Church should never underplay the sense of good works that point to God. A double purpose of engagement must always remain impressed at least in our consciousness: the concrete action and the meaning beyond it.
III. PROTECTING THE HERITAGE
As I indicated earlier, anyone looking at society today can only be filled with joy that Christ's commandment to love one's neighbour finds concrete expression in extensive charitable outreach. On the other hand, the global popularisation of an idea also unfortunately often leads to its dilution. Inflation goes hand-in-hand with a reduction in value. For this reason, it falls still today to Christians, and, in a special way the Church's Pastors, to be attentive. In other words: Catholic charitable organisations should be careful not to forget the meaning of their activity, influenced perhaps by the present climate or excessive reliance on public funds. The question is one of fostering the Christian roots of the Church's activity and so preserving the "splendour" of our identity as Catholic charitable institutions.
This is especially important for a nation where the secular national welfare system has become pervasive and predominant. For centuries, care for the poor through charitable works was seen as a complement to the primary task of winning souls for God.
This was a natural progression from the early Church, where both the preaching of the Word and caritas remained tied together. In this country, the Catholic Church guaranteed this essentially through religious men and women; other denominations through the establishment of a specific charitable organization such as Barnardo's, born from the Church of Ireland, with its provision of education for the very poorest, or the Salvation Army, whose determining factor for charitable outreach was signified in its very name.
But with the growing view since the start of the 20th century that government needed to supplant the charitable efforts of organisations through the provision of welfare, even among Christian groups concern for earthly improvement of the poor began to take first place over the previously primary task of proclaiming the Gospel. When the Welfare State was created after the Second World War, the role of charity was thrown into crisis, further deepened by the decline of the religious orders. The philosophy of organisations such as Greenpeace and Oxfam, born in the 1960's with politically driven mandates, sometimes infiltrated Church-sponsored agencies. Today, there is yet another challenge.
In order to remain "competitive" in the provision of services, the Church's charitable organisations have become more and more dependent upon government funding. While, as you well know, their good works are usually welcomed - and almost always needed - often their faith and beliefs are rejected by the authorities.
As Bishops of England and Wales, you are certainly aware of this question. You have faced challenges to the faith-identity of our agencies from government legislation that impinges on the provision of services, such as adoption or education. Even in the case of some so-called "Catholic" institutions, primarily in healthcare, that do not uphold moral teaching, you have been called to speak out courageously and decisively as prophets in the desert of secularism.
This, in part, is linked to the question of funding. In Britain, the largest source of income for charities in general comes from the public sector (37 percent). For Church run organisations, this is a sea change from the support of charitable works largely through religious congregations in previous centuries. Reliance on public funding invariably means external supervision and regulations, and necessitates bureaucratic procedures that can give charitable organisations a certain modus operandi in such areas as the employment of personnel, work contracts and the type of projects that can be funded.
This movement can have consequences on the motivation for charitable helpers: if what counts is the efficiency of the action, one can easily forget that for Christians the action should carry a deeper meaning as a sign not only of human compassion but also of God's goodness. Where the bishops do not exercise oversight, Catholic agencies, little by little, can become indistinguishable from secular organisations, such as the Red Cross or Oxfam.
This rooting of the Church's engagement in God was undoubtedly one of the deepest motivations that led Benedict XVI to write as his first official doctrinal work the Encyclical Deus caritas est. I do not need to repeat the surprising commentaries all over the world that accompanied the text - the fact that the "Panzer Cardinal" would choose "love" as the subject of his first major teaching. Perhaps the history of the text's writing is less familiar to you. It shows clearly what was of most importance to the Pope.
Since Cor Unum is directly concerned with the praxis of the Church's love for our fellow human beings, Pope John Paul II had asked that I prepare for him a preliminary draft of a papal writing on charity. My intention was to begin with an inductive presentation: reflections on the general willingness of people to provide help today, followed by a description of Christian initiatives that exist, moving in the end to the rooting of love of neighbour in God. The former Cardinal Ratzinger was aware of my writings. When he was elected Pope, he decided to publish an Encyclical on charity, but he totally reversed my intended order. His starting point is Revelation's central message:
"God is love." He initiates the Encyclical with a drumbeat, proclaiming the absolute precedence of Him "Who has first loved us" (1Jn 4:10), both in the order of time and in the scale of values.
IV. CHANGE OF PARADIGM
In my conversations on Deus caritas est with other Episcopal Conferences, the Pastors and those responsible for Caritas have been predominantly or exclusively interested in the second part of the Encyclical, "The Practice of Love by the Church as a ‘Community of Love'." This section is important for offering structural and practical guidelines for the Church's charitable engagement, which are based on global experience and call for an observance of the papal teaching. When one delves into the details of this section, however, one discovers an important change of perspective. Namely, the Encyclical seems to present in this section a new message. Until now, the Church's teaching on the struggle against misery - like the social encyclicals - dealt with public defects, goals and programs; they addressed factual problems and they insisted on concrete changes outside of oneself. Besides all this, Deus caritas est turns now decisively to committed persons: the Pope wishes to shape the life of the actors through a "formation of the heart" (n. 31a). So, for the first time, he formulates basic guidelines for a "spirituality" of those working in help-agencies.
Clearly the first preoccupation of Caritas cannot intend to change society and unjust structures. It is the human heart that makes the structures. Therefore, the essential requirement for action - as the Pope says - is to "be persons moved by Christ's love, persons whose hearts Christ has conquered with his love, awakening them with a love of neighbour" (n. 33). This is the new "standard" that Jesus proclaims in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Mt 5-7). It is the justice of love that surpasses the political and social dimensions without negating them. We cannot then reduce or collapse charity into "social justice"; to do so would be to rob charity of its specificity and splendour. God certainly requires the actualisation of justice in societal relationships, as the Old Testament prophets repeatedly remind us: "Make justice your aim," Isaiah affirms, "redress the
wronged, hear the orphan's plea, defend the widow" (Is 1:16ff). But ultimately this comes through conversion in the heart of the human person, whose self-giving example and source is the charity of Christ. As St. Paul affirms: Caritas Christi urget nos (2 Cor 5:14)!
Service to our neighbours, therefore, has not only its universally recognized technical and practical side; it also makes demands of the heart, not primarily in the emotional sense, but in the very rational decision to desire the best for the other person, even at the price of self-abnegation. Whoever dedicates himself to diakonia thus takes on the opposite of reputation, power, and rank that leaders and political entities claim for themselves. Benedict encourages us: "My deep personal sharing in the needs and sufferings of others becomes a sharing of my very self with them: if my gift is not to prove a source of humiliation, I must give to others not only something that is not my own, but my very self; I must be personally present in my gift" (n. 34). In the gift, the giver provides his material contribution; in loving service, his self-dedication. Diakonia is the antithesis of the egocentric society; Jesus with his self-oblation for the "ransom of
many" is its model and prototype.
The source for this "spirituality of diakonia" is prayer. It is telling that, in this relatively short Encyclical, two quite detailed paragraphs are dedicated to prayer as the motor for charitable action. In a culture as frenetic as Britain or Germany, the Pope points to the need for prayer, not action alone: "People who pray are not wasting their time even though the situation seems desperate and calls for action alone." And he offers concrete advice for those countries and people with an excessively "economic" mindset: "It is time to reaffirm the importance of prayer in the face of activism and the growing secularism of many Christians engaged in charitable work" (n. 37).
You have a wonderful example of what Pope Benedict describes in Saint Thomas More. Allow me to quote from the famous biography written on him, "The King's Good Servant but God's First" (James Monti, p. 77):
More's love of God found expression not only in his prayer life but also in his fulfilment of Christ's command, "Love one another; even as I have loved you" (Jn 13:34). The poor were regularly welcome guests at his table; he would also go to them himself, visiting indigent families and bring them financial support as needed ... The infirm and the elderly were particularly singled out for his favours; for these he provided a special home in his own parish of Chelsea where they could be lodged and cared for at his expense. To widows and orphans he provided his legal services gratis; a widow named Paula who had exhausted all her savings in the courts he took into his family and sustained as if she were his kinswoman.
V. THE PRIMARY ROLE OF THE PASTORS
There is no doubt that Deus caritas est directs itself to various groups in the Church. Nevertheless, the main burden of responsibility for its implementation in dioceses and parishes is placed squarely on the shoulders of the Bishops. It is not only the pastoral realism of the Pope, but also theological reasons that make the ordained Pastors the principle target group for the Encyclical.
Ever since her foundation, a threefold mission has been entrusted to the Church: she must proclaim Redemption through Christ; she must bear witness to this in her good deeds toward humanity; and she must celebrate the salvation offered through Christ in the Liturgy. Martyria, Diakonia and Leitourgia are therefore the three basic functions of the Church that express her deepest nature. In Deus caritas est, the Pope declares strongly:
"The Church cannot neglect the service of charity any more than she can neglect the sacraments and the word" (n. 22). Indeed, the three are inextricably linked. Good deeds as the expression of the evangelical love proclaimed in the Word and celebrated in the sacraments, most especially the Eucharist, occupy a central place in the evangelising mission of the Church. This connection may well warrant further reflection, given the declining numbers of indigenous Catholics in our pews. As numerous saints have shown us, most recently Mother Teresa, in the witness of love a seed of belief can be sown in the fallen away, non-Christians and even the most sceptical.
In terms of the mission of diakonia, Benedict speaks emphatically in the Encyclical of the Bishop's overriding responsibility. He reminds these of the Rite of the Sacrament of Episcopal Ordination, in which the Bishop receives, through the imposition of hands, the full authority of the Spirit for the government of the Church. Prior to the act of Consecration itself, the candidate must respond to a series of questions posed by the presiding Bishop, which, as the Pope writes, "express the essential elements of his office and recall the duties of his future ministry." So the candidate is asked to pledge his special responsibility for individual services. He is called to promise "expressly to be, in the Lord's name, welcoming and merciful to the poor and to all those in need of consolation and assistance." Of course, this obligation incumbent on the Bishop does not prevent him from seeking assistance from others in his charitable mission, but he cannot set aside his ultimate responsibility for this essential service, placing it simply on others' shoulders. Neither can those who practice the service of charity, either individually or institutionally, disregard the Bishop's burden of leadership and this ultimate responsibility that belongs to him. Some Catholic aid agencies actively avoid acknowledging this fact and sometimes Bishops themselves fail to exercise their legitimate and necessary oversight, leading to approaches that are predominantly political or economic to the neglect of revealing through love of neighbour the love of the God of Jesus Christ.
The importance that Pope Benedict attaches to this responsibility of the Bishops may be further gauged by the gentle criticism he makes in Deus caritas est of the Code of Canon Law. The Encyclical remarks that in the canons on the ministry of the Bishop, the Code "does not expressly mention charity as a specific sector of Episcopal activity" (n. 32), implying that it lacks precision on this point. Indeed, we should remain surprised - as does the Pope - that Canon Law devotes many paragraphs to the Bishop's role in martyria and leitourgia, but nothing regarding diakonia. Clearly, Deus caritas est envisages a need for clarification in this important area.
VI. THE QUESTION OF GOD
In speaking about the Encyclical, it is not seldom that the administrative concern leads many responsibles of charitable agencies to focus principally or even perhaps exclusively on the second part. Such a focus would be to grossly ignore the fundamental vision of the author. It is not by accident that Pope Benedict, through this fantastic text about God as the source, lays down the foundation for the incontestable criteria of all charitable love. What is more: clearly, in the cultural context, he would like to establish the strongly felt love of neighbour as a way to bring contemporary man closer again to the love of God. In his preaching, hardly an occasion goes by that he does not attempt to reach his listeners through proclaiming this love for God, the Father of Jesus Christ. Just a few weeks ago on Palm Sunday, I was in St. Peter's Square when the Pope
made exactly this point in his homily. He spoke of how Jesus entered Jerusalem and cleansed the Temple atrium, where the pagans gathered, of the animal vendors and moneychangers who had occupied the place of prayer with their own business. From this episode, Pope Benedict draws a parallel with the atria of faith today where non-Christians look for an answer to the deepest longings of their hearts. "Is our faith pure and open enough," he asks, "so that on this basis even the ‘pagans,' the people who today are seeking and questioning, can glimpse the light of the one God, join in our prayer in the atria of faith, and through their questioning, perhaps, become worshipers themselves? Are we aware of how greed and idolatry affect even our own hearts and way of life?" And then the Pope turns yet again to Jesus' saving deeds, good works that infallibly point to God even when everything else seems hopeless. "Immediately after Jesus' words about
the house of prayer for all peoples, the evangelist [Matthew] continues in this way: ‘The blind and the lame approached him in the temple area, and he cured them.' To the selling of animals and the business of the moneychangers, Jesus opposes his own healing goodness. This is the true purification of the temple ... Jesus comes with the gift of healing. He dedicates himself to those who because of their infirmity are driven to the extremes of their life and to the margin of society. Jesus shows God as He who loves, and His power as the power of love."
Thank you very much.
Zenit: Cardinal Toppo on a Proposed Marian Dogma
Cardinal Toppo on a Proposed Marian Dogma
A Look at What It Could Mean for Dialogue
RANCHI, India, MAY 5, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Proclaiming Mary as the Spiritual Mother of All Humanity would benefit ecumenical and interreligious dialogue because it would help non-Catholics to understand many things about the Mother of God, says Cardinal Telesphore Toppo.
The archbishop of Ranchi and former president of the episcopal conference of India is one of the five cardinal co-sponsors of the 2005 International Symposium on Marian Co-redemption, held in Fatima, who are asking Benedict XVI to declare a fifth Marian dogma.
The petition urges the Pope to proclaim Mary "the Spiritual Mother of All Humanity, the co-redemptrix with Jesus the redeemer, mediatrix of all graces with Jesus the one mediator, and advocate with Jesus Christ on behalf of the human race."
In this interview with ZENIT, Cardinal Toppo discusses his views in favor of the proposed dogma.
Q: Previously this year, you and four other cardinals sent out a letter to the world's cardinals and bishops, inviting them to join in your petition for a new dogma of the spiritual motherhood of Mary. How did they respond?
Cardinal Toppo: Although the majority of cardinals and bishops sent their letters of support for the fifth Marian dogma directly to the Holy Father, we also received numerous copies of enthusiastic letters of support for this dogma from cardinals and bishops from all five continents. Many of the letters spoke of the need for the dogma and Our Lady's greatest possible intercession for the troubled situation for the world today, including the rampant war and terrorism, religious persecution, moral depravity, family breakdown and even natural disasters.
The general consensus of the letters from my brother cardinals and bishops is that now is the time for this fifth Marian dogma as a remedy for the unique difficulties facing the world. As she did in the Upper Room and in the early Church, Our Lady can intercede like no one else for a new release of the Holy Spirit to bring new grace, peace and protection for the Church and for the world.
Q: Have you spoken directly to Benedict XVI regarding the petition for the fifth Marian dogma?
Cardinal Toppo: On June 3, 2006, on the eve of Pentecost, I was privileged to have a private audience with His Holiness, during which I presented the Holy Father the "acta" of theological presentations from the 2005 Fatima symposium on Mary as the co-redemptrix. I also presented him with the Latin "votum" -- or petition -- for the solemn papal definition of Our Lady as the spiritual mother of all peoples, co-redemptrix, mediatrix of all graces and advocate, which already at that time was signed by a significant number of cardinals, archbishops and bishops.
During our 15-minute audience, the Holy Father received the acta and votum with keen interest. He was surprised that so many cardinals and bishops had already signed the votum. He then stated that he would read the acta of theological presentations on the co-redemptrix. In the last few months, he has received still many more petitions for this Marian dogma from the present College of Cardinals and bishops.
Q: A principal objection posed against the proclamation of a new Marian dogma is that it would be counterproductive to the Church's mission of ecumenism and interreligious dialogue. And yet, in the presentations submitted to Benedict XVI, your own presentation was titled "Mary Co-redemptrix as a Help in the Pursuit of Interreligious Dialogue." Can you explain why you believe this dogma could actually help ecumenism and dialogue with other faiths?
Cardinal Toppo: In interreligious dialogue, it is of the utmost importance that both sides come to know each other's faith position as accurately as possible. Now it is my contention that a Catholic's presentation and explanation of Mary's title as co-redemptrix would greatly help his or her dialogue partner to understand correctly some basics of the Church's teaching.
The title co-redemptrix would naturally provide the occasion to present our doctrine concerning the redeemer and the mystery of redemption, the primacy of God's initiative, and the absolutely uncontestable role of the uniqueness of Jesus as the divine redeemer.
That being the true position, the question will surely be raised as to how then we can speak of Mary as co-redemptrix. This truth concerning Redemption is to be complemented with the indispensable need for the cooperation of the human beneficiary. Humans can sin by themselves, but they cannot save by themselves.
In other words, cooperation is required, for each one according to the freely designed and chosen plan of God. This being the case, we can help our partners in dialogue understand many things about Mary: her cooperation with and submission to the plan of God, leading her to become the Mother of Jesus; her closeness to Jesus at the crucifixion as co-redemptrix; her intercessory advocacy and influence with Jesus on our behalf; her being Mother of the Church, Queen of Heaven and Mediatrix of All Graces.
Mary's cooperation helps all Christians and even non-Christians to understand our own required cooperation with Jesus and with his grace for our salvation.
Q: How do you think non-Catholic Christians would respond to a dogma of Mary's spiritual motherhood of all peoples, and what do you think would be the response of the large Hindu population within your region?
Cardinal Toppo: I have no doubt that non-Catholic Christians participating in ecumenical dialogue, either will find this position acceptable or at least will have no valid or convincing argument against it.
For example, this is what happened in the past to a Lutheran tribal girl of Ranchi in 1890 when she discovered that Catholics actually do not worship Mary as a goddess, though they honor her because of her being the mother of Jesus. She -- Ruth Kispotta -- joined the Catholic Church and founded our first indigenous congregation: the Daughters of St. Anne, Ranchi.
Adherents and followers of non-Christian faiths readily understand our position in this matter. This would also explain how it is that so many non-Christians flock to shrines of Our Lady all over the world, including within the vast continent of Asia. They felt drawn to Mary because of her proximity to Jesus.
There is an Indian shrine in honor of "Dhori Ma," also known as the Lady of the Mines, based on a statue discovered by Hindu coal miners at Dhori. Today this statue of Our Lady is venerated by tens of thousands: Christians, Hindus, Muslims. All appreciate the Mother who takes care of her children and who is entirely at their service.
Q: How do you think a new Marian dogma would affect our present relationship with the Muslim community and our dialogue with them?
Cardinal Toppo: A presentation of Mary as co-redemptrix would be especially appreciated in dialogue with Muslims, for the simple reason that Mary is already well known to them from the Quran itself. Muslims revere Mary as the "greatest of women," sinless and ever virgin. She is a woman of great dignity and her role and significance is acknowledged in the Quran, in the Hadith and in the piety of daily Muslim life.
One can say, without hesitation, that Mary has been, is and remains a true role model for both Muslims and Christians. She is a wonderful help in our interreligious dialogue. The correct presentation of Mary co-redemptrix provides a smooth path to the discovery of Catholic truth and encourages all sincere persons to cooperate with the initiatives of the loving and attractive God whose mercy is from age to age.
Zenit: Papal Address to Social Sciences Academy
Papal Address to Social Sciences Academy
"The Heavenly and Earthly Cities Interpenetrate"
VATICAN CITY, MAY 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the text of the address Benedict XVI gave Saturday to the participants in the plenary session of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. The meeting is focused on "Pursuing the Common Good: How Solidarity and Subsidiarity Can Work Together." It began Friday and continues through Tuesday.
* * *
Dear Brothers in the Episcopate and the Priesthood,
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am pleased to have this occasion to meet with you as you gather for the fourteenth Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Over the last two decades, the Academy has offered a valuable contribution to the deepening and development of the Church's social doctrine and its application in the areas of law, economics, politics and the various other social sciences. I thank Professor Margaret Archer for her kind words of greeting, and I express my sincere appreciation to all of you for your commitment to research, dialogue and teaching, so that the Gospel of Jesus Christ may continue to shed light on the complex situations arising in a rapidly changing world.
In choosing the theme Pursuing the Common Good: How Solidarity and Subsidiarity Can Work Together, you have decided to examine the interrelationships between four fundamental principles of Catholic social teaching: the dignity of the human person, the common good, subsidiarity and solidarity (cf. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 160-163). These key realities, which emerge from the living contact between the Gospel and concrete social circumstances, offer a framework for viewing and addressing the imperatives facing mankind at the dawn of the twenty-first century, such as reducing inequalities in the distribution of goods, expanding opportunities for education, fostering sustainable growth and development, and protecting the environment.
How can solidarity and subsidiarity work together in the pursuit of the common good in a way that not only respects human dignity, but allows it to flourish? This is the heart of the matter which concerns you. As your preliminary discussions have already revealed, a satisfactory answer can only surface after careful examination of the meaning of the terms (cf. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Chapter 4). Human dignity is the intrinsic value of a person created in the image and likeness of God and redeemed by Christ. The totality of social conditions allowing persons to achieve their communal and individual fulfilment is known as the common good. Solidarity refers to the virtue enabling the human family to share fully the treasure of material and spiritual goods, and subsidiarity is the coordination of society's activities in a way that supports the internal life of the local communities.
Yet definitions are only the beginning. What is more, these definitions are adequately grasped only when linked organically to one another and seen as mutually supportive of one another. We can initially sketch the interconnections between these four principles by placing the dignity of the person at the intersection of two axes: one horizontal, representing "solidarity" and "subsidiarity", and one vertical, representing the "common good". This creates a field upon which we can plot the various points of Catholic social teaching that give shape to the common good.
Though this graphic analogy gives us a rudimentary picture of how these fundamental principles imply one another and are necessarily interwoven, we know that the reality is much more complex. Indeed, the unfathomable depths of the human person and mankind's marvellous capacity for spiritual communion - realities which are fully disclosed only through divine revelation - far exceed the capacity of schematic representation. The solidarity that binds the human family, and the subsidiary levels reinforcing it from within, must however always be placed within the horizon of the mysterious life of the Triune God (cf. Jn 5:26; 6:57), in whom we perceive an ineffable love shared by equal, though nonetheless distinct, persons (cf. Summa Theologiae, I, q. 42).
My friends, I invite you to allow this fundamental truth to permeate your reflections: not only in the sense that the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity are undoubtedly enriched by our belief in the Trinity, but particularly in the sense that these principles have the potential to place men and women on the path to discovering their definitive, supernatural destiny. The natural human inclination to live in community is confirmed and transformed by the "oneness of Spirit" which God has bestowed upon his adopted sons and daughters (cf. Eph 4:3; 1 Pet 3:8). Consequently, the responsibility of Christians to work for peace and justice, their irrevocable commitment to build up the common good, is inseparable from their mission to proclaim the gift of eternal life to which God has called every man and woman. In this regard, the tranquillitas ordinis of which Saint Augustine speaks refers to "all things": that is to say both "civil peace", which is a "concord among citizens", and the "peace of the heavenly city", which is the "perfectly ordered and harmonious enjoyment of God, and of one another in God" (De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13).
The eyes of faith permit us to see that the heavenly and earthly cities interpenetrate and are intrinsically ordered to one another, inasmuch as they both belong to God the Father, who is "above all and through all and in all" (Eph 4:6). At the same time, faith places into sharper focus the due autonomy of earthly affairs, insofar as they are "endowed with their own stability, truth, goodness, proper laws and order" (Gaudium et Spes, 36). Hence, you can be assured that your discussions will be of service to all people of good will, while simultaneously inspiring Christians to embrace more readily their obligation to enhance solidarity with and among their fellow citizens, and to act upon the principle of subsidiarity by promoting family life, voluntary associations, private initiative, and a public order that facilitates the healthy functioning of society's most basic communities (cf. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 187).
When we examine the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity in the light of the Gospel, we realize that they are not simply "horizontal": they both have an essentially vertical dimension. Jesus commands us to do unto others as we would have them do unto us (cf. Lk 6:31); to love our neighbour as ourselves (cf. Mat 22:35). These laws are inscribed by the Creator in man's very nature (cf. Deus Caritas Est, 31). Jesus teaches that this love calls us to lay down our lives for the good of others (cf. Jn 15:12-13). In this sense, true solidarity - though it begins with an acknowledgment of the equal worth of the other - comes to fulfilment only when I willingly place my life at the service of the other (cf. Eph 6:21). Herein lies the "vertical" dimension of solidarity: I am moved to make myself less than the other so as to minister to his or her needs (cf. Jn 13:14-15), just as Jesus "humbled himself" so as to give men and women a share in his divine life with the Father and the Spirit (cf. Phil 2:8; Mat 23:12).
Similarly, subsidiarity - insofar as it encourages men and women to enter freely into life-giving relationships with those to whom they are most closely connected and upon whom they most immediately depend, and demands of higher authorities respect for these relationships - manifests a "vertical" dimension pointing towards the Creator of the social order (cf. Rom 12:16, 18). A society that honours the principle of subsidiarity liberates people from a sense of despondency and hopelessness, granting them the freedom to engage with one another in the spheres of commerce, politics and culture (cf. Quadragesimo Anno, 80). When those responsible for the public good attune themselves to the natural human desire for self-governance based on subsidiarity, they leave space for individual responsibility and initiative, but most importantly, they leave space for love (cf. Rom 13:8; Deus Caritas Est, 28), which always remains "the most excellent way" (cf. 1 Cor 12:31).
In revealing the Father's love, Jesus has taught us not only how to live as brothers and sisters here on earth; he has shown us that he himself is the way to perfect communion with one another and with God in the world to come, since it is through him that "we have access in one Spirit to the Father" (cf. Eph 2:18). As you strive to articulate the ways in which men and women can best promote the common good, I encourage you to survey both the "vertical" and "horizontal" dimensions of solidarity and subsidiarity. In this way, you will be able to propose more effective ways of resolving the manifold problems besetting mankind at the threshold of the third millennium, while also bearing witness to the primacy of love, which transcends and fulfils justice as it draws mankind into the very life of God (cf. Message for the 2004 World Day of Peace).
With these sentiments, I assure you of my prayers, and I cordially extend my Apostolic Blessing to you and your loved ones as a pledge of peace and joy in the Risen Lord.
© Copyright 2008 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Patrick Beeman reviews The Philosophy of Medicine Reborn
From First Things--
The Philosophy of Medicine Reborn Thursday, May 1, 2008, 6:56 AMWhere is the profession of medicine going? Has it become simply applied biology, another “job” among equally good ways of earning a living? What kind of person should the physician be? What about bioethics? Is patient autonomy the only viable moral absolute? Oh, and—who is Dr. Edmund Pellegrino?
In The Philosophy of Medicine Reborn: A Pellegrino Reader, Tristram Engelhardt, a bellwether of bioethics, and Fabrice Jotterand, who holds a dual appointment within the University of Texas system as assistant professor of philosophy and “psychiatry and clinical sciences,” have answered these questions by offering nineteen selections from Edmund Pellegrino’s six hundred articles and twenty-four books.
At one time or another, Pellegrino was director of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics; president of the Catholic University of America; professor of medicine at Yale University; president and chairman of the board of directors at Yale–New Haven Medical Center; and dean of the School of Medicine at the State University of New York, Stony Brook. He was the founding editor of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy and has seen patients and taught junior clinicians throughout his career.
Pellegrino currently chairs the President’s Council on Bioethics and is Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Medical Ethics at the Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University Medical Center. (In the foreword of the Pellegrino Reader, “Apologia for a Medical Truant,” he admits to be being “a trespasser in the olive groves of Academia.”)
In sixty years as a physician, his pursuits, though seemingly disparate, are yet of a piece, contributing to the articulation of a theory of medicine that ends in a praxis oriented toward the patient’s good. Engelhardt and Jotterand’s collection traces the elaboration of this theory over twenty-five years of published writing. The collection is divided into four sections. Essays on “The Philosophical Foundations of Medicine” and “The Medical Profession” comprise part one. The “Physician-Patient Relationship” is discussed next. “Virtue in Medical Practice” considers the importance and relevance of a physician’s character to his work. There is an interesting essay here: “The Physician’s Conscience, Conscience Clauses, and Religious Belief: A Catholic Perspective.” One only wishes the folks at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists had read it before drafting their recent Ethics opinion. (See Christopher Kaczor’s First Things Daily Article, “Pro-Life Doctors: A New Oxymoron?”)
Finally, “Humanism and Hippocrates: Facing the Future” treats the humanities and the Hippocratic tradition. In “Bioethics at Century’s Turn: Can Normative Ethics Be Retrieved?” Pellegrino provocatively asks how much “ethics” is left in the field of “bioethics.” The answer will be “not much” unless bioethics does some serious soul-searching. He states, “The first item on the agenda of the bioethicist for the next century will be to decide whether bioethics will be authentically an enterprise of ethics, or, instead, it will become an amorphous expanding universe of preferences, opinions, feelings, or value choices filled with exquisite detail but enfeebled by a lack of normative content.”
Pellegrino reminds us that etymologically norm comes from the Latin norma, a carpenter’s square. Whatever it is, a carpenter’s square that cannot approximate a ninety-degree angle is simply not a carpenter’s square. In a similar manner, to be normative, the prescriptions and proscriptions of bioethics must be judged against—and pass the muster of—some standard. Without a foundation, bioethics will only guide medicine and human lives to a deleterious end. Thus, “if society is to avoid a teratological species of morality, some recovery of stable moral truths is mandatory.” Accordingly, the philosophy of medicine takes on great importance, and not simply of the academic kind.
Naturally, a book about the philosophy of medicine should state the nature of its subject. In “What the Philosophy of Medicine Is,” Pellegrino observes, “The philosophy of medicine consists in a critical reflection on the matter of medicine—on the content, method, concepts, and presuppositions peculiar to medicine as medicine.” But how is this any different from what goes on in medical schools?
Pellegrino maintains that medicine is not simply applied biology; rather, it “embraces activities beyond those inherent in the pursuit of scientific knowledge.” For example, whereas scientists study the epidemiology, histology, and pathophysiology of squamous cell carcinoma, such knowledge, though used by medicine, is not proper to it until that cancer is placed in the context of the effects, manifestations, and outcomes on a given patient—in short, until it is oriented toward the practical end which medicine serves: “the health and healing of human beings.”
“Medicine qua medicine,” writes Pellegrino, “comes into existence in the clinical encounter or in public health when the knowledge of the sciences basic to medicine is employed for a specific end, i.e. for the cure, containment, amelioration, or prevention of human illness in individuals and societies. Medicine qua medicine, therefore, is shaped not just by the ends and purposes of the sciences. Medicine uses scientific knowledge for its own specific ends, which are healing, helping, curing, and preventing illness and disease and promoting health.” This is the concern of the medical-school classroom or clinic.
The philosophy of medicine, on the other hand, is occupied by “concepts and conceptions like healing, helping, curing, health, illness, disease, care, the good of the patient, and the moral claims of the sick on the well, on society, and on the health professions.” It operates on a level above medicine as it studies “the nature and phenomena of the clinical encounter.” The philosophy of medicine discerns what should or should not be pursued within medicine, whether something comports with the nature of medicine or not. Consequently, it is necessary both to ground the norms of bioethics and to define the nature of medicine.
Pellegrino accomplishes this by elaborating an ethics “internal” to medicine. This “internal morality” arises out of the “kind of activity medicine is—one based in the healing relationship and one founded in the phenomena of that relationship as well as competence in knowledge and skill appropriate to a healing relationship.” The first principle of the internal morality is “the good of the patient.” Its pursuit defines the “end of medicine.” Actions accord with the internal morality when they further the quadripartite good of the patient: the biomedical good, the patient’s perception of the good, the good for the patient as a person, and the spiritual good.
Thus, competence is enjoined on the physician because it is necessary for achieving the biomedical good—for example, should a fluoroquinolone or penicillin antibiotic be used here? Paternalism is rejected because beneficence excludes violating the patient’s own plan for life, his own view of what is good, as well as his good as a human person who possesses the ability to choose. For example, if the competent patient decides to leave a hospital against medical advice in order to attend his daughter’s wedding, a surreptitious dose of general anesthetic is not the morally acceptable solution. Finally, and most important, the physician must serve the “spiritual good” of the patient. Pellegrino gives as one example blood transfusion and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. A transfusion might be medically indicated, but how could it be a healing act if it were for that patient tantamount to bloodshed?
What may strike some as frustrating about Pellegrino’s conception is the way the philosophy of medicine takes ontological priority over questions of “value”—for example, the liceity of abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research. After all, these are the questions impinging on the public square and straining the very meaning of medicine. Yet, as Aristotle and St. Thomas remind us, a small error in the beginning leads to a great error in the end. Pellegrino’s approach is to find the incontestable moral truths and to seek, in the nature of medicine, a first principle on which the various parties in our pluralistic medical and social milieu can agree. An elaboration of convincing, defensible, and agreeable answers to substantive questions is sure to follow the discovery of such a foundation.
Moreover, the internal morality of medicine is meant to be just that: internal. It is a limited thing. Pellegrino admits that this internal morality “is not intended to be a complete morality for all the ways medical knowledge can be used.” The internal morality of medicine may not be able on its own—or at least not yet?—to resolve many of the dilemmas that occupy our attention, such as whether it would be acceptable or not to use embryonic stem cells in treating a particular patient. Nevertheless, in the limited circumstance of professional ethics, it forbids some actions arising from the clinical encounter—for example, because the patient is vulnerable. This is the unconscionable “moral Machiavellianism” that would permit “dumping” the patient who is unable to pay or encourage the physician to become “society’s fiscal agent.” On the physician’s part, the internal morality of medicine entails some effacement of self-interest.
This is not to say the “content questions” of bioethics are unimportant. Indeed, Pellegrino consistently sides with the Catholic position on these matters in a manner decidedly unlike, say, Frances Kissling or Mario Cuomo. It is just that the internal morality is presently incapable of solving these problems due to the erosion of the Hippocratic tradition and visceral disagreements internal to medicine. Further reflection on the nature of medicine may well lead to agreement among physicians about the incompatibility of abortion or embryonic stem cell research with their profession. But meeting these issues by this route will take time.
For Pellegrino, medicine is “the most humane of sciences, the most empiric of arts, and the most scientific of humanities.” Pellegrino observes that “all problems of human life—alienation, affection, social and cultural relationships, and even salvation—come to a focus in the existential laboratories we call hospitals. Every humanistic question takes on poignancy when embedded in the concrete situation: to discuss the value of life when deciding whether or not to abort, to relieve pain, to desist from overtreatment in hopeless situations.”
This practical bent of the healer’s life—choosing one treatment over another, weighing both the existential and economic costs of a particular action, and so on—demands a moral framework within which conflicting ideas about what is good may be resolved and that may guide the actions of the physician in the unique encounter with the patient before him. The Philosophy of Medicine Reborn does much to lay a foundation on which such a moral framework might be built. In fine, Pellegrino’s thought gives hope that at least some of the ethics in bioethics will indeed be retrieved.
Patrick C. Beeman was formerly a lecturer in philosophy at Cleveland State University. He is currently the president of the Catholic Medical Students Association and a Pellegrino Fellow at the Georgetown University Center for Clinical Bioethics. He is also a second-year medical student at the University of Toledo College of Medicine.
References
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Zenit: Vatican Greetings to Buddhists for Vesakh
Vatican Greetings to Buddhists for Vesakh
"We Continue to Work Together to Build a Better World"
VATICAN CITY, APRIL 29, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the message Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, sent to Buddhists on the occasion of the festival of Vesakh. The note is titled "Christians and Buddhists: Caring for the Planet Earth."
* * *
Dear Buddhist Friends,
1. On the occasion of the festival of Vesakh, I am writing to you and your communities worldwide to convey my own warm greetings, as well as those of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.
2. It gives me much joy to recall the positive relationships that Catholics and Buddhists have enjoyed for many years. I am confident that this foundation will serve to strengthen and deepen our understanding of each other as we continue to work together to build a better world not only for ourselves but also for the entire human family. Experience teaches us that dialogue fosters the desire within the person and the community to share the goodwill and harmony which already exists, and indeed to reach out ever more courageously to others, ready to embrace the challenges and difficulties that may arise.
3. Pope Benedict XVI, in his 2008 Message for the World Day of Peace, observed: "For the human family, this home is the earth, the environment that God the Creator has given us to inhabit with creativity and responsibility. We need to care for the environment: it has been entrusted to men and women to be protected and cultivated with responsible freedom, with the good of all as a constant guiding criterion" (no. 7). The United Nations General Assembly has declared 2008 as The International Year of Planet Earth. As inhabitants of the earth and believers, Christians and Buddhists respect the same creation and have a common concern to promote care for the environment which we all share.
4. Preservation of the environment, promotion of sustainable development and particular attention to climate change are matters of grave concern for everyone. Many governments, NGOs, multi-national companies, and research and tertiary institutes, in recognizing the ethical implications present in all economic and social development, are investing financial resources as well as sharing expertise on biodiversity, climate change, environmental protection and conservation. Religious leaders, too, are contributing to the public debate. This contribution is of course not just a reaction to the more recent pressing threats associated with global warming. Christianity and Buddhism have always upheld a great respect for nature and taught that we should be grateful stewards of the earth. Indeed it is only through a profound reflection on the relationship between the divine Creator, creation and creatures that attempts to address environmental concerns will not be marred by individual greed or hampered by the interests of particular groups.
5. On a practical level can we Christians and Buddhists not do more to collaborate in projects which confirm the responsibility that falls to each and everyone of us? Recycling, energy conservation, the prevention of indiscriminate destruction of plant and animal life, and the protection of waterways all speak of careful stewardship and indeed foster goodwill and promote cordial relations among peoples. In this way Christians and Buddhists together can be harbingers of hope for a clean, safe and harmonious world.
6. Dear Friends, I trust that we can promote this message within our respective communities through public education and our good example in respecting nature and acting responsibly towards our one common planet Earth. Once again let me renew my heartfelt greetings and wish you a Happy Feast of Vesakh.
Jean-Louis Cardinal Tauran
President
Archbishop Pier Luigi Celata
Secretary
Monday, April 28, 2008
The so-called freedom celebrated today by so many of our opinion-shaping elites in education, entertainment, and the media is simply the license to do whatever one pleases. This false conception of freedom shackles those in its grip no less powerfully than did the chattel slavery of old. Counterfeit freedom is worse than fraudulent. It is the mortal enemy of the real thing …
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Zenit: Holy See on Changing Perspectives Regarding Development
Holy See on Changing Perspectives Regarding Development
"Common Good ... Needs to Be the Primary Objective"
ACCRA, Ghana, APRIL 24, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is an excerpt of the note for discussion sent Thursday by the Secretariat of State to the 12th U.N. Conference on Trade and Development in Accra, which ends today.
The entire text can be found on ZENIT's Web page: http://www.zenit.org/article-22414?l=english
* * *
A change in perspective: the common good as the goal for development
It must be clear that development is not only about the growth of the economy in general; it is about the development of the human being with his/her capabilities and relationships with intermediary social groups (family, social, political, cultural groups etc.) within which he/she lives. This requires a change in perspective that recognises peoples as united by a common factor, their humanity being created with the imprint of the common God creator. Only by starting from this premise can we aim, within pluralist institutions, toward the achievement of the common good, which needs to be the primary objective of any society. The common good is neither an abstract goal nor a simple list of targets. It is simply the realisation of the primary needs of the person: the need of truth, love, and justice. These needs cannot be completely fulfilled but, by nature, the human being tends to support the tension of aiming toward their fulfilment.
As the world’s bishops stated in the Vatican II Council document, “Gaudium et Spes”: “Because of the increasingly close interdependence which is gradually extending to the entire world, we are today witnessing an extension of the role of the common good, which is the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily. The resulting rights and obligations are consequently the concern of the entire human race. Every group must take into account the needs and legitimate aspirations of every other group, and even those of the human family as a whole” (n. 26).
This is the essence of development, and it is something that concerns every person, rich and poor, because every man is always in development. In fact, development is not a target to reach; it is rather a path to follow: we can say that there is true development when persons are put in a position to follow their most important desires and needs. Following this premise, it is clear that the tension toward the common good finds its fulfilment within the relationships that human beings establish among each other. The common good, therefore, is fulfilled within belonging, within a people. As stated by His Holiness John Paul II: “Man, in keeping with the openness of his spirit within and also with the many diverse needs of his body and his existence in time, writes this personal history of his through numerous bonds, contacts, situations, and social structures linking him with other men, beginning to do so from the first moment of his existence on earth, from the moment of his conception and birth” (Redemptor Hominis, n. 14).
How can we design international rules and international institutions so that different paths for development of different peoples can be sustained and not hampered? Through two principles: solidarity and subsidiarity.
Solidarity is the responsibility of developed nations to favour economic growth in LDCs by helping less fortunate individuals to create their opportunities for development. Solidarity should be the guiding principle, not only in the definition of foreign aid, but also in the economic relationship between developed and developing countries and within regional or multilateral agreements. At present, the principle of solidarity is acknowledged by multilateral institutions in several frameworks; the generalised system of preferences designed within the WTO and other trade-related initiatives (AGOA, EBA, Aid for Trade etc.) are examples of this. However, as stressed above, there is room for extending the system of preferences to other areas such as rules of origin, non tariff barriers and intellectual property rights in order to give a real different opportunity for development to least developed countries.
While solidarity should be the spark that generates the definition of development-oriented policies both at national and at international level, subsidiarity should be the guiding principle in their design and implementation.
As stated above, development-oriented and aid policies by advanced economies and multilateral institutions mainly have been designed in accord with the principle of solidarity. However, when implemented, too may of them have failed to comply with the principle of subsidiarity. This has resulted in a marginal involvement of civil society and of its intermediate bodies, with a primary role given to the central government as recipient and manager of aid flows. This also could be a possible explanation for the fact that, at macroeconomic level, aid policies delivered far less to LDCs than was expected.
Subsidiarity not only preserves and promotes originality in the development of social life, but also implies an act of freedom by individuals who try to follow their vocations. In fact, “the characteristic implication of subsidiarity is participation, which is expressed essentially in a series of activities by means of which the citizen, either as an individual or in association with others, whether directly or through representation, contributes to the cultural, economic, political and social life of the civil community to which he belongs. Participation is a duty to be fulfilled consciously by all, with responsibility and with a view to the common good.”[3] Once the conditions are created, individuals are called to act in order to pursue their vocations.
In other words, at international level, solidarity and subsidiarity imply a double responsibility: by developed countries in helping LDCs to find their path for development and by least developed countries in implementing all the necessary policies that would allow them to take the opportunities that are offered.
In this framework, the policy space could be an instrument for the implementation of subsidiarity by allowing policy actions to be diversified according to the different needs of the society. Moreover if the policy space is extended following the principle of subsidiarity the contradictions discussed above between individual policies and the rules of multilateral institutions disappear as the former are implemented in an original tension towards the common good.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
From The New Atlantis:
Fall 2007--
Ghosts in the Evolutionary Machinery
Debating Digital Organisms
Some biologists believe they can learn fundamental truths about life by creating computerized models that supposedly “compete for resources” and even “evolve.” In the last issue of The New Atlantis, contributing editor Steve Talbott argued that these “digital organisms” aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. Now, a leading proponent has his say, and Talbott replies.
Fall 2007--
Ghosts in the Evolutionary Machinery
Steve Talbott on digital organisms and disembodied science
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Zenit: Pope's Homily Durning Mass at St. Patrick's
Pope's Homily Durning Mass at St. Patrick's
"Communicate the Joy Born of Faith and the Experience of God’s Love"
NEW YORK, APRIL 19, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the homily Benedict XVI gave today during a Mass he said in St. Patrick's Cathedral for clergy and religious.
* * *
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
With great affection in the Lord, I greet all of you, who represent the Bishops, priests and deacons, the men and women in consecrated life, and the seminarians of the United States. I thank Cardinal Egan for his warm welcome and the good wishes which he has expressed in your name as I begin the fourth year of my papal ministry. I am happy to celebrate this Mass with you, who have been chosen by the Lord, who have answered his call, and who devote your lives to the pursuit of holiness, the spread of the Gospel and the building up of the Church in faith, hope and love.
Gathered as we are in this historic cathedral, how can we not think of the countless men and women who have gone before us, who labored for the growth of the Church in the United States, and left us a lasting legacy of faith and good works? In today’s first reading we saw how, in the power of the Holy Spirit, the Apostles went forth from the Upper Room to proclaim God’s mighty works to people of every nation and tongue. In this country, the Church’s mission has always involved drawing people "from every nation under heaven" (cf. Acts 2:5) into spiritual unity, and enriching the Body of Christ by the variety of their gifts. As we give thanks for past blessings, and look to the challenges of the future, let us implore from God the grace of a new Pentecost for the Church in America. May tongues of fire, combining burning love of God and neighbor with zeal for the spread of Christ’s Kingdom, descend on all present!
In this morning’s second reading, Saint Paul reminds us that spiritual unity -- the unity which reconciles and enriches diversity -- has its origin and supreme model in the life of the triune God. As a communion of pure love and infinite freedom, the Blessed Trinity constantly brings forth new life in the work of creation and redemption. The Church, as "a people made one by the unity of the Father, the Son and the Spirit" (cf. Lumen Gentium, 4), is called to proclaim the gift of life, to serve life, and to promote a culture of life. Here in this cathedral, our thoughts turn naturally to the heroic witness to the Gospel of life borne by the late Cardinals Cooke and O’Connor. The proclamation of life, life in abundance, must be the heart of the new evangelization. For true life -- our salvation -- can only be found in the reconciliation, freedom and love which are God’s gracious gift.
This is the message of hope we are called to proclaim and embody in a world where self-centeredness, greed, violence, and cynicism so often seem to choke the fragile growth of grace in people’s hearts. Saint Irenaeus, with great insight, understood that the command which Moses enjoined upon the people of Israel: "Choose life!" (Dt 30:19) was the ultimate reason for our obedience to all God’s commandments (cf. Adv. Haer. IV, 16, 2-5). Perhaps we have lost sight of this: in a society where the Church seems legalistic and "institutional" to many people, our most urgent challenge is to communicate the joy born of faith and the experience of God’s love.
I am particularly happy that we have gathered in Saint Patrick’s Cathedral. Perhaps more than any other church in the United States, this place is known and loved as "a house of prayer for all peoples" (cf. Is 56:7; Mk 11:17). Each day thousands of men, women and children enter its doors and find peace within its walls. Archbishop John Hughes, who -- as Cardinal Egan has reminded us -- was responsible for building this venerable edifice, wished it to rise in pure Gothic style. He wanted this cathedral to remind the young Church in America of the great spiritual tradition to which it was heir, and to inspire it to bring the best of that heritage to the building up of Christ’s body in this land. I would like to draw your attention to a few aspects of this beautiful structure which I think can serve as a starting point for a reflection on our particular vocations within the unity of the Mystical Body.
The first has to do with the stained glass windows, which flood the interior with mystic light. From the outside, those windows are dark, heavy, even dreary. But once one enters the church, they suddenly come alive; reflecting the light passing through them, they reveal all their splendor. Many writers -- here in America we can think of Nathaniel Hawthorne -- have used the image of stained glass to illustrate the mystery of the Church herself. It is only from the inside, from the experience of faith and ecclesial life, that we see the Church as she truly is: flooded with grace, resplendent in beauty, adorned by the manifold gifts of the Spirit. It follows that we, who live the life of grace within the Church’s communion, are called to draw all people into this mystery of light.
This is no easy task in a world which can tend to look at the Church, like those stained glass windows, "from the outside": a world which deeply senses a need for spirituality, yet finds it difficult to "enter into" the mystery of the Church. Even for those of us within, the light of faith can be dimmed by routine, and the splendor of the Church obscured by the sins and weaknesses of her members. It can be dimmed too, by the obstacles encountered in a society which sometimes seems to have forgotten God and to resent even the most elementary demands of Christian morality. You, who have devoted your lives to bearing witness to the love of Christ and the building up of his Body, know from your daily contact with the world around us how tempting it is at times to give way to frustration, disappointment and even pessimism about the future. In a word, it is not always easy to see the light of the Spirit all about us, the splendor of the Risen Lord illuminating our lives and instilling renewed hope in his victory over the world (cf. Jn 16:33).
Yet the word of God reminds us that, in faith, we see the heavens opened, and the grace of the Holy Spirit lighting up the Church and bringing sure hope to our world. "O Lord, my God," the Psalmist sings, "when you send forth your spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the earth" (Ps 104:30). These words evoke the first creation, when the Spirit of God hovered over the deep (cf. Gen 1:2). And they look forward to the new creation, at Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and established the Church as the first fruits of a redeemed humanity (cf. Jn 20:22-23). These words summon us to ever deeper faith in God’s infinite power to transform every human situation, to create life from death, and to light up even the darkest night. And they make us think of another magnificent phrase of Saint Irenaeus: "where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace" (Adv. Haer. III, 24, 1).
This leads me to a further reflection about the architecture of this church. Like all Gothic cathedrals, it is a highly complex structure, whose exact and harmonious proportions symbolize the unity of God’s creation. Medieval artists often portrayed Christ, the creative Word of God, as a heavenly "geometer", compass in hand, who orders the cosmos with infinite wisdom and purpose. Does this not bring to mind our need to see all things with the eyes of faith, and thus to grasp them in their truest perspective, in the unity of God’s eternal plan? This requires, as we know, constant conversion, and a commitment to acquiring "a fresh, spiritual way of thinking" (cf. Eph 4:23). It also calls for the cultivation of those virtues which enable each of us to grow in holiness and to bear spiritual fruit within our particular state of life. Is not this ongoing "intellectual" conversion as necessary as "moral" conversion for our own growth in faith, our discernment of the signs of the times, and our personal contribution to the Church’s life and mission?
For all of us, I think, one of the great disappointments which followed the Second Vatican Council, with its call for a greater engagement in the Church’s mission to the world, has been the experience of division between different groups, different generations, different members of the same religious family. We can only move forward if we turn our gaze together to Christ! In the light of faith, we will then discover the wisdom and strength needed to open ourselves to points of view which may not necessarily conform to our own ideas or assumptions. Thus we can value the perspectives of others, be they younger or older than ourselves, and ultimately hear "what the Spirit is saying" to us and to the Church (cf. Rev 2:7). In this way, we will move together towards that true spiritual renewal desired by the Council, a renewal which can only strengthen the Church in that holiness and unity indispensable for the effective proclamation of the Gospel in today’s world.
Was not this unity of vision and purpose -- rooted in faith and a spirit of constant conversion and self-sacrifice -- the secret of the impressive growth of the Church in this country? We need but think of the remarkable accomplishment of that exemplary American priest, the Venerable Michael McGivney, whose vision and zeal led to the establishment of the Knights of Columbus, or of the legacy of the generations of religious and priests who quietly devoted their lives to serving the People of God in countless schools, hospitals and parishes.
Here, within the context of our need for the perspective given by faith, and for unity and cooperation in the work of building up the Church, I would like say a word about the sexual abuse that has caused so much suffering. I have already had occasion to speak of this, and of the resulting damage to the community of the faithful. Here I simply wish to assure you, dear priests and religious, of my spiritual closeness as you strive to respond with Christian hope to the continuing challenges that this situation presents. I join you in praying that this will be a time of purification for each and every particular Church and religious community, and a time for healing. I also encourage you to cooperate with your Bishops who continue to work effectively to resolve this issue. May our Lord Jesus Christ grant the Church in America a renewed sense of unity and purpose, as all -- Bishops, clergy, religious and laity -- move forward in hope, in love for the truth and for one another.
Dear friends, these considerations lead me to a final observation about this great cathedral in which we find ourselves. The unity of a Gothic cathedral, we know, is not the static unity of a classical temple, but a unity born of the dynamic tension of diverse forces which impel the architecture upward, pointing it to heaven. Here too, we can see a symbol of the Church’s unity, which is the unity -- as Saint Paul has told us -- of a living body composed of many different members, each with its own role and purpose. Here too we see our need to acknowledge and reverence the gifts of each and every member of the body as "manifestations of the Spirit given for the good of all" (1 Cor 12:7). Certainly within the Church’s divinely-willed structure there is a distinction to be made between hierarchical and charismatic gifts (cf. Lumen Gentium, 4). Yet the very variety and richness of the graces bestowed by the Spirit invite us constantly to discern how these gifts are to be rightly ordered in the service of the Church’s mission. You, dear priests, by sacramental ordination have been configured to Christ, the Head of the Body. You, dear deacons, have been ordained for the service of that Body.
You, dear men and women religious, both contemplative and apostolic, have devoted your lives to following the divine Master in generous love and complete devotion to his Gospel. All of you, who fill this cathedral today, as wells as your retired, elderly and infirm brothers and sisters, who unite their prayers and sacrifices to your labors, are called to be forces of unity within Christ’s Body. By your personal witness, and your fidelity to the ministry or apostolate entrusted to you, you prepare a path for the Spirit. For the Spirit never ceases to pour out his abundant gifts, to awaken new vocations and missions, and to guide the Church, as our Lord promised in this morning’s Gospel, into the fullness of truth (cf. Jn 16:13).
So let us lift our gaze upward! And with great humility and confidence, let us ask the Spirit to enable us each day to grow in the holiness that will make us living stones in the temple which he is even now raising up in the midst of our world. If we are to be true forces of unity, let us be the first to seek inner reconciliation through penance. Let us forgive the wrongs we have suffered and put aside all anger and contention. Let us be the first to demonstrate the humility and purity of heart which are required to approach the splendor of God’s truth. In fidelity to the deposit of faith entrusted to the Apostles (cf. 1 Tim 6:20), let us be joyful witnesses of the transforming power of the Gospel!
Dear brothers and sisters, in the finest traditions of the Church in this country, may you also be the first friend of the poor, the homeless, the stranger, the sick and all who suffer. Act as beacons of hope, casting the light of Christ upon the world, and encouraging young people to discover the beauty of a life given completely to the Lord and his Church. I make this plea in a particular way to the many seminarians and young religious present. All of you have a special place in my heart. Never forget that you are called to carry on, with all the enthusiasm and joy that the Spirit has given you, a work that others have begun, a legacy that one day you too will have to pass on to a new generation. Work generously and joyfully, for he whom you serve is the Lord!
The spires of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral are dwarfed by the skyscrapers of the Manhattan skyline, yet in the heart of this busy metropolis, they are a vivid reminder of the constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God. As we celebrate this Eucharist, let us thank the Lord for allowing us to know him in the communion of the Church, to cooperate in building up his Mystical Body, and in bringing his saving word as good news to the men and women of our time. And when we leave this great church, let us go forth as heralds of hope in the midst of this city, and all those places where God’s grace has placed us. In this way, the Church in America will know a new springtime in the Spirit, and point the way to that other, greater city, the new Jerusalem, whose light is the Lamb (Rev 21:23). For there God is even now preparing for all people a banquet of unending joy and life. Amen.
© Copyright 2008 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Zenit: Pontiff's Address at Ecumenical Prayer Service
Pontiff's Address at Ecumenical Prayer Service
"A Faithful Witness to the Gospel Is As Urgent As Ever"
NEW YORK, APRIL 19, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the address Benedict XVI delivered Friday at an ecumenical prayer service at St. Joseph's Parish.
* * *
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
My heart abounds with gratitude to Almighty God -- “the Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph 4:6) -- for this blessed opportunity to gather with you this evening in prayer. I thank Bishop Dennis Sullivan for his cordial welcome, and I warmly greet all those in attendance representing Christian communities throughout the United States. May the peace of our Lord and Savior be with you all!
Through you, I express my sincere appreciation for the invaluable work of all those engaged in ecumenism: the National Council of Churches, Christian Churches Together, the Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, and many others. The contribution of Christians in the United States to the ecumenical movement is felt throughout the world. I encourage all of you to persevere, always relying on the grace of the risen Christ whom we strive to serve by bringing about “the obedience of faith for the sake of his name” (Rom 1:5).
We have just listened to the scriptural passage in which Paul -- a “prisoner for the Lord” -- delivers his ardent appeal to the members of the Christian community at Ephesus. “I beg you,” he writes, “to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called … eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:1-3). Then, after his impassioned litany of unity, Paul reminds his hearers that Jesus, having ascended into heaven, has bestowed upon men and women all the gifts necessary for building up the Body of Christ (cf. Eph 4:11-13).
Paul’s exhortation resounds with no less vigor today. His words instill in us the confidence that the Lord will never abandon us in our quest for unity. They also call us to live in a way that bears witness to the “one heart and mind” (Acts 4:32), which has always been the distinguishing trait of Christian koinonia (cf. Acts 2:42), and the force drawing others to join the community of believers so that they too might come to share in the “unsearchable riches of Christ” (Eph 3:8; cf. Acts 2:47; 5:14).
Globalization has humanity poised between two poles. On the one hand, there is a growing sense of interconnectedness and interdependency between peoples even when -- geographically and culturally speaking -- they are far apart. This new situation offers the potential for enhancing a sense of global solidarity and shared responsibility for the well-being of mankind. On the other hand, we cannot deny that the rapid changes occurring in our world also present some disturbing signs of fragmentation and a retreat into individualism. The expanding use of electronic communications has in some cases paradoxically resulted in greater isolation. Many people -- including the young -- are seeking therefore more authentic forms of community. Also of grave concern is the spread of a secularist ideology that undermines or even rejects transcendent truth. The very possibility of divine revelation, and therefore of Christian faith, is often placed into question by cultural trends widely present in academia, the mass media and public debate. For these reasons, a faithful witness to the Gospel is as urgent as ever. Christians are challenged to give a clear account of the hope that they hold (cf. 1 Pet 3:15).
Too often those who are not Christians, as they observe the splintering of Christian communities, are understandably confused about the Gospel message itself. Fundamental Christian beliefs and practices are sometimes changed within communities by so-called “prophetic actions” that are based on a hermeneutic not always consonant with the datum of Scripture and Tradition. Communities consequently give up the attempt to act as a unified body, choosing instead to function according to the idea of “local options”. Somewhere in this process the need for diachronic koinonia -- communion with the Church in every age -- is lost, just at the time when the world is losing its bearings and needs a persuasive common witness to the saving power of the Gospel (cf. Rom 1:18-23).
Faced with these difficulties, we must first recall that the unity of the Church flows from the perfect oneness of the Trinitarian God. In John’s Gospel, we are told that Jesus prayed to his Father that his disciples might be one, “just as you are in me and I am in you” (Jn 17:21). This passage reflects the unwavering conviction of the early Christian community that its unity was both caused by, and is reflective of, the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This, in turn, suggests that the internal cohesion of believers was based on the sound integrity of their doctrinal confession (cf. 1 Tim 1:3-11). Throughout the New Testament, we find that the Apostles were repeatedly called to give an account for their faith to both Gentiles (cf. Acts 17:16-34) and Jews (cf. Acts 4:5-22; 5:27-42).
The core of their argument was always the historical fact of Jesus’s bodily resurrection from the tomb (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30). The ultimate effectiveness of their preaching did not depend on “lofty words” or “human wisdom” (1 Cor 2:13), but rather on the work of the Spirit (Eph 3:5) who confirmed the authoritative witness of the Apostles (cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11). The nucleus of Paul’s preaching and that of the early Church was none other than Jesus Christ, and “him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2). But this proclamation had to be guaranteed by the purity of normative doctrine expressed in creedal formulae -- symbola -- which articulated the essence of the Christian faith and constituted the foundation for the unity of the baptized (cf. 1 Cor 15:3-5; Gal 1:6-9; "Unitatis Redintegratio," 2).
My dear friends, the power of the kerygma has lost none of its internal dynamism. Yet we must ask ourselves whether its full force has not been attenuated by a relativistic approach to Christian doctrine similar to that found in secular ideologies, which, in alleging that science alone is “objective”, relegate religion entirely to the subjective sphere of individual feeling. Scientific discoveries, and their application through human ingenuity, undoubtedly offer new possibilities for the betterment of humankind. This does not mean, however, that the “knowable” is limited to the empirically verifiable, nor religion restricted to the shifting realm of “personal experience”.
For Christians to accept this faulty line of reasoning would lead to the notion that there is little need to emphasize objective truth in the presentation of the Christian faith, for one need but follow his or her own conscience and choose a community that best suits his or her individual tastes. The result is seen in the continual proliferation of communities which often eschew institutional structures and minimize the importance of doctrinal content for Christian living.
Even within the ecumenical movement, Christians may be reluctant to assert the role of doctrine for fear that it would only exacerbate rather than heal the wounds of division. Yet a clear, convincing testimony to the salvation wrought for us in Christ Jesus has to be based upon the notion of normative apostolic teaching: a teaching which indeed underlies the inspired word of God and sustains the sacramental life of Christians today.
Only by “holding fast” to sound teaching (2 Thess 2:15; cf. Rev 2:12-29) will we be able to respond to the challenges that confront us in an evolving world. Only in this way will we give unambiguous testimony to the truth of the Gospel and its moral teaching. This is the message which the world is waiting to hear from us. Like the early Christians, we have a responsibility to give transparent witness to the “reasons for our hope”, so that the eyes of all men and women of goodwill may be opened to see that God has shown us his face (cf. 2 Cor 3:12-18) and granted us access to his divine life through Jesus Christ. He alone is our hope! God has revealed his love for all peoples through the mystery of his Son’s passion and death, and has called us to proclaim that he is indeed risen, has taken his place at the right hand of the Father, and “will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead” (Nicene Creed).
May the word of God we have heard this evening inflame our hearts with hope on the path to unity (cf. Lk 24:32). May this prayer service exemplify the centrality of prayer in the ecumenical movement (cf. "Unitatis Redintegratio," 8); for without it, ecumenical structures, institutions and programs would be deprived of their heart and soul. Let us give thanks to Almighty God for the progress that has been made through the work of his Spirit, as we acknowledge with gratitude the personal sacrifices made by so many present and by those who have gone before us.
By following in their footsteps, and by placing our trust in God alone, I am confident that -- to borrow the words of Father Paul Wattson -- we will achieve the “oneness of hope, oneness of faith, and oneness of love” that alone will convince the world that Jesus Christ is the one sent by the Father for the salvation of all.
I thank you all.
© Copyright 2008 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)