The politics behind population control

Pope Against Population Control

In the lifesitenews.com, reporting on the above news caption of 13th December 2008, reporters; John-Henry Westen and Kathleen Gilbert wrote “In his message for the World Day of Peace Pope Benedict XVI stated the long unrecognized truth that increased population has proved an asset rather than a detriment in terms of development. "Poverty is often considered a consequence of demographic change".”
Maintaining the stand of the Pope, it is further stated that “"For this reason, there are international campaigns afoot to reduce birth-rates, sometimes using methods that respect neither the dignity of the woman, nor the right of parents to choose responsibly how many children to have; graver still, these methods often fail to respect even the right to life," he continued. "The extermination of millions of unborn children, in the name of the fight against poverty, actually constitutes the destruction of the poorest of all human beings."”

That the Catholic Church is against any act that threatens the dignity of the human person especially as it concerns bio-ethics and injustice is no longer news. The Church has at all times maintained her stand that the human person is that made in the image of God from whom in fact any definition of man must be based and without which, man becomes nothing else other than mere matter. However what is perhaps worrisome is the fact of the usually called great nations’ glaring, premeditated and systematic policies enunciated to perpetually keep the so called poor and third world (sorry, developing nations) from rising above any obstacles to greatness. One of such obstacles, according to reports, including the Pope’s speech, is reducing the growing population of these struggling nations. The great nations are at least considered Christian nations, if not catholic, more precisely, those in their helm of affairs profess Christianity.

It is then very obvious that what is actually behind such issues like abortion, birth control and the likes is not a question of people in real problem but a creation of selfishness, communicatively designed to convince people of the justification of such actions as the good of the one involved. This in communication is called framing, a topic this blog hopes to touch on. We are all being ‘framed’ into believing that human beings are so free to determine what is good for them at any time. In issues like this, one is concerned about the practice of our Christian faith. In the mid 80s, there was a strong campaign in Nigeria to implement the policy of one family, two children. The American agency behind it, through the then military government of Babangida drummed people with every enticement and there was a mass free distribution of condoms and all sorts of contraceptives. Expectedly some people fell for it. In the media, the ideal family is portrayed as a man with his wife and two children of one boy and a girl. It is also more worrisome when these things are done in the name of giving aid to growing nations. It is all politics of domination and it is done not by any other religion but by Christian religion. Religion and politics should be separate, yes, but American and European politics should be guided by good religious, Christian principles especially when they are dealing with those they claim to help.

Marching the Message with Action

Parishes offer practical, spiritual support for the unemployed

The Catholic News Service reports that in Washington, USA, “The impact of the wave of layoffs in firms, factories, financial companies and the automotive industry can be felt in parish halls or church basements across the country on any given weeknight. That's where many of the newly unemployed go for practical and sometimes spiritual advice.”
Going further, the report gave exact information on the exercise that “Just outside Detroit, at St. Andrew Parish in Rochester, a job support group began last year with about 20 participants. Now, at least 80 people attend the twice-monthly meetings, according to Betty Dobies, chair of St. Andrew's Career Mentoring Ministry, which has a partnership with 13 church groups in the Detroit area. ‘We started out thinking we'd review resumes and interview techniques, but we found that the main thing people really need is support,’ Dobies said.”

I wish to comment on the impact of the above report. We know that the Catholic Church is replete with documents, encyclicals, Episcopal letters that touch and actually state what local Churches and church organizations should do in terms of offering evangelisation that takes care not only of the spiritual needs of the faithful but also their corporal needs. We know also that we are engaged in charity works and in fact that each or many parishes have an outlet for taking care of the poor and these are doing wonderfully in most cases. But there is other aspect or approach to caring for the corporal need of the faithful, which I have observed in other Christian denominations, particularly the evangelicals – one on one attention given to their adherents, that in the present moment seems to be lacking amongst us.

Perhaps, it could be because of our number – we are always so many, thanks to God, but from my background, studying why the early missionaries had much success in eastern Nigeria, which is true also in many other parts of African countries was their resilience in forging a filial unity among the converts that all in way or the other feel responsible to each other. The evangelicals have continued this type of relationship, and in Nigeria, it is paying them much in winning members. We may argue theologically and others wise, but the truth is that people are much confident and can sustain their faith when they feel part of a community. The Church not only at St. Andrew’s Rochester, but also at any place must rediscover their kind of pastoral attention in the modern era evangelisation. It gives a view of a true family of God, which is what the Church is in reality. It gives a sense of interconnectedness, and by so doing, destroys the monster of isolation that many suffer as a result of our technological world. Places where this type of evangelisation is in place, a lively faith is known to be in place. I feel we need many of this kind of place.

Nagging Issues

Jews, Catholics Want Calm on Pius XII Issue

Not long ago, I posted an article on this blog concerning the Jewish connection in the course the canonization of Pope Pius XII. (See:- Between Silence and Action) today the Zenith News has it that a joint statement by the Catholic Church and Jewish religious leaders stated that “Exacerbating tensions regarding controversial issues is contrary to the desire of a panel of Jews and Catholics working for growing rapprochement between the two creeds”

The report went on to say that Cardinal Walter Kasper who is the president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, over seeing the Commission for Religious Relations With the Jews, and Rabbi David Rosen, the co-chairs of the committee, declared: "We reiterate our commitment to a relationship based on mutual respect and sensitivity. Disagreements between us which inevitably occur from time to time must always be expressed in a manner that reflects this spirit and not in language that only exacerbates tension."

One thing no person can deny of the Catholic Church is her effort to build bridges of relationship with those that either sharply or mildly disagrees with her beliefs and practices. In the present day society suffocating with polemics, the need for careful and intelligent dialogue cannot be over-emphasized. The reason is very simple or so it seems. We are already in a society that is unfortunately at variance with many hitherto shared moral values and concern. Every day, the world as a whole is being further polarized by thoughts, ideologies and culture that were before now unthinkable – for example gay marriages – not that these things were not around before, but at least, then, they were seen as aberrations, but now, they are being made to assume the status of a culture, mode of life, in which case, you cannot really condemn a certain mode of life willingly chosen by a person. The Jewish issue has become a one of such dicey areas where the Church must be obviously very careful. And Jews must not over sting the Church.

Sincere Nations?

Vatican official: No nation fully observes human rights declaration

According to Catholic News Service, sixty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the landmark U.N document still is not respected fully around the world.
Cardinal Renato Martino, who stated this lamented that even among countries that have embraced, promoted and highlighted the declaration. It could be recalled that on December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, issuing 30 articles that proclaim some fundamental human rights, with some universal or rather more appropriately, some international leanings.

But quite like the prelate has lamented, this carefully worded declaration makes little or no impact or sense even to the nations that super headed it. This actually calls for some reflective questions. Without at any least doubting the sincerity of the UN and especially, the so called world powers, to what extent does international treaties, laws and such other world alliances as that of the UN Human Rights have discernible influence on the States that unite to make and adopt them? Some nations are known to have grossly violated not only the Universal Human Rights – even as Cardinal Renato had cited: "Unfortunately nowhere in the world, even among (countries) that have embraced, promoted and highlighted this declaration." If such things do not have a binding force, it makes fun of what they preach to do.

Genuine respect for Human Rights all over the world should be a matter of priority. There must be concrete move to safe guard – universally and internationally – the rights of everyone and nations. If the whole world had gathered to enact codes of conduct to this regard, much effort must be expended to ensure its respected-ness. But the problem is much more, when the super nations who combined forces in giving birth to this ‘universal baby’ run foul of taking care of the baby, in this case, who will bell the cat? There is need for openness, honesty and moral rectitude.

Between Silence and Action

Pope may freeze Pius XII canonisation.

This morning on its website, the CathNews has the above caption. The very first sentence there says “Pope Benedict has told Jewish leaders he is "seriously considering" freezing the sainthood process of Pope Pius XII until historical archives can be opened, a Jewish leader says.”
I would not know how versed you are in the ‘power’ tussle; Political, Religious etc, concerning the canonisation of Pius XII and the protestations of Jewish authorities against that, but for the briefest clarification, this unfortunate (if you wouldn’t mind) Pope (Pius XII) had the unenviable burden of ruling the Church during the World War II, which was characterised by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi group exterminating the Jewish race. The accusation against him as articulated by Dr. Joseph L. Lichten in his memoir; A Question of Judgment: Pius XII & the Jews was “that as head of one of the most powerful moral forces on earth he committed an unspeakable sin of omission by not issuing a formal statement condemning the Nazis' genocidal slaughter of the Jews, and that his silence was motivated by reasons considered in modern times as base: political exigency, economic interests, and personal ambition.
Continuing, Lichten sums up the case for him; “ That in relation to the insane behavior of the Nazis, from overlords to self-styled cogs like Eichmann, he did everything humanly possible to save lives and alleviate suffering among the Jews; that a formal statement would have provoked the Nazis to brutal retaliation, and would substantially have thwarted further Catholic action on behalf of Jews. To the Sacred College of Cardinals Pius XII wrote on June 2, 1943: "Every word that We addressed to the responsible authorities and every one of Our public declarations had to be seriously weighed and considered in the interest of the persecuted themselves in order not to make their situation unwittingly even more difficult and unbearable."

Sampling one or two of the very bad cases against the Pope, the following might send you thinking:
In October 1941, the Assistant Chief of the U.S. delegation to the Vatican, Harold Tittman, asked the Pope to condemn the atrocities. The response came that the Holy See wanted to remain "neutral," and that condemning the atrocities would have a negative influence on Catholics in German-held lands.
On September 18, 1942, Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini, the future Pope Paul VI, wrote, "The massacres of the Jews reach frightening proportions and forms." Yet, that same month when Myron Taylor, U.S. representative to the Vatican, warned the Pope that his silence was endangering his moral prestige, the Secretary of State responded on the Pope's behalf that it was impossible to verify rumors about crimes committed against the Jews.”

But on the hand, there are also testimonies that argue for him. In one of their productions; Catholic Family #10,Autumn 1991, the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) had this: “Albrecht von Kessel, an official at the German Embassy to the Holy See during the war, wrote in 1963:
"We were convinced that a fiery protest by Pius XII against the persecution of the Jews ... would certainly not have saved the life of a single Jew. Hitler, like a trapped beast, would react to any menace that he felt directed at him, with cruel violence."”

The above is very much confirmed by a life witness of the horrors of Nazis. A former inmate of Dachau, Mgr Jean Bernard, and later Bishop of Luxembourg recounts his experiences as follows;
"The detained priests trembled every time news reached us of some protest by a religious authority, but particularly by the Vatican. We all had the impression that our warders made us atone heavily for the fury these protests evoked ... whenever the way we were treated became more brutal, the Protestant pastors among the prisoners used to vent their indignation on the Catholic priests: 'Again your big naive Pope and those simpletons, your bishops, are shooting their mouths off…Why don't they get the idea once and for all, and shut up. They play the heroes and we have to pay the bill.'"

The real question is, therefore, not what did the Pope say, but what did the Pope do? To this, it is on record that; “The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network, which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together.

Where it all Begins.

Holy See Urges European Youth: ‘Be Countercultural’

Where it all Begins.

According to Antonio Gaspari of the Zenit News Agency, “A Holy See representative is encouraging youth to clear away the clouds covering Europe, and reopen the continent to transcendent values.” The prelate Monsignor Aldo Giordano made the call at a Holy Mass marking the end of a contest organized by the Italian Movement for Life. The theme of the contest was “Europe and Human Rights: We Youth as Protagonists.”
In the contemporary world of today, the above call cannot be more urgent and necessary. The Church is obviously worried about the moral judgment of the secular world. The moral relativism of the modern society is a sure cause for worry. Yet this plague may not really be cured if families of the world do not imperatively and consciously fight societal moral denigration. Even as the Prelate has mentioned, one of the modern evils that plagues our society of today is materialism. An undue emphasis on what pleasure and the likes can offer is at the root of moral bankruptcy of the contemporary society. With it also goes the twin evil of unchecked liberalism and irresponsible freedom, all in the name of having one be master of oneself.
How does the family come here? In Europe and America, (also in some parts of Africa – Where modernity is being grossly misapplied), the upbringing of children has become some of sort of irresponsibility of love and adoration. I really mean that for the most part, many a parent do not take time to really identify and firmly uphold what is good for a their child. The maxim seems to be, the child must be given whatever it craves for. This, to me is a misrepresentation of responsible parent hood. The story is that many a child leads their parents, instead of vice versa. Moral education and character formation is the primary task of the parents. When parents, out of whatever norm cannot really bring their children (at least from their earliest days of life), there is bound to be lopsidedness of general morality. Government enactment has nothing to do with this.