\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
The Holy Father gave the following address to the Social Sciences Academy<\/a> which is led by Mary Ann Glendon. It is a rather important speech with regard to faith and reason and it deserves our serious attention. As supplementary readings you might re-read the Pope’s 2008 address to the United Nations<\/a> and an essay by Tracey Rowland, <\/span>“Natural Law: From Neo-Thomism to Nuptial Mysticism” in the journal Communio<\/span> 35 (Fall 2008). <\/span><\/p>\n As you gather for the fifteenth Plenary Session of the Pontifical After studying work, democracy, globalisation, solidarity The world’s great religions and philosophies have In the middle of the last century, after the vast suffering Human rights became the reference point of a shared Strictly speaking, these human rights are not truths of The Church’s action in promoting human rights is therefore This perspective draws attention to some of the most Dear friends, dear Academicians, in exhorting you in your research and deliberations to be credible and consistent witnesses tot he defence and promotion of these non-negotiable human rights which are founded in divine law, I most willingly impart to you my Apostolic Blessing.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Holy Father gave the following address to the Social Sciences Academy which is led by Mary Ann Glendon. It is a rather important speech with regard to faith and reason and it deserves our serious attention. As supplementary readings you might re-read the Pope’s 2008 address to the United Nations and an essay by … Continue reading Pope Benedict speaks to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences 2009<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[38,7],"tags":[1865,2082,2083,32081],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24607"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24607"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24607\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24607"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24607"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24607"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n
\nAcademy of Social Sciences, I am pleased to have this occasion to meet with you
\nand to express my encouragement for your mission of expounding and furthering
\nthe Church’s social doctrine in the areas of law, economy, politics and the
\nvarious other social sciences. Thanking Professor Mary Ann Glendon for her
\ncordial words of greeting, I assure you of my prayers that the fruit of your
\ndeliberations will continue to attest to the enduring pertinence of Catholic
\nsocial teaching in a rapidly changing world.
\nand subsidiarity in relation to the social teaching of the Church, your Academy
\nhas chosen to return to the central question of the dignity of the human person
\nand human rights, a point of encounter between the doctrine of the Church and
\ncontemporary society.
\nilluminated some aspects of these human rights, which are concisely expressed
\nin “the golden rule” found in the Gospel: “Do to others as you
\nwould have them do to you” (Lk<\/i><\/span> 6:31;
\ncf. Mt <\/i><\/span>7:12).
\nThe Church has always affirmed that fundamental rights, above and beyond the
\ndifferent ways in which they are formulated and the different degrees of
\nimportance they may have in various cultural contexts, are to be upheld and
\naccorded universal recognition because they are inherent in the very nature of
\nman, who is created in the image and likeness of God<\/span>. If all human beings are
\ncreated in the image and likeness of God, then they share a common nature that
\nbinds them together and calls for universal respect. The Church, assimilating
\nthe teaching of Christ, considers the person as “the worthiest of
\nnature”<\/span> (St. Thomas Aquinas, De potentia<\/i><\/span>, 9, 3) and has taught that the ethical
\nand political order that governs relationships between persons finds its origin
\nin the very structure of man’s being<\/span>. The discovery of America and the ensuing
\nanthropological debate in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Europe led to a
\nheightened awareness of human rights as such and of their universality (ius
\ngentium<\/i><\/span>). The modern
\nperiod helped shape the idea that the message of Christ – because it proclaims
\nthat God loves every man and woman and that every human being is called to love
\nGod freely<\/span> – demonstrates that everyone, independently of his or her social and
\ncultural condition, by nature deserves freedom<\/span>. At the same time, we must
\nalways remember that “freedom itself needs to be set free. It is Christ
\nwho sets it free<\/span>“<\/span> (Veritatis Splendor, <\/i><\/span>86).
\ncaused by two terrible world wars and the unspeakable crimes perpetrated by
\ntotalitarian ideologies, the international community acquired a new system of
\ninternational law based on human rights. In this, it appears to have acted in
\nconformity with the message that my predecessor Benedict XV proclaimed when he
\ncalled on the belligerents of the First World War to “transform the
\nmaterial force of arms into the moral force of law” (“Note to the
\nHeads of the Belligerent Peoples”, 1 August 1917).
\nuniversal ethos<\/i><\/span> –
\nat least at the level of aspiration – for most of humankind. These rights have
\nbeen ratified by almost every State in the world. The Second Vatican Council,
\nin the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae<\/i><\/span>, as well as my predecessors Paul VI and John Paul II,
\nforcefully referred to the right to life and the right to freedom of conscience
\nand religion as being at the centre of those rights that spring from human
\nnature itself<\/span>.
\nfaith, even though they are discoverable – and indeed come to full light – in
\nthe message of Christ who “reveals man to man himself”<\/span> (Gaudium et
\nSpes<\/i><\/span>, 22). They receive
\nfurther confirmation from faith. Yet it stands to reason that, living and
\nacting in the physical world as spiritual beings, men and women ascertain the
\npervading presence of a logos<\/i><\/span> which
\nenables them <\/i><\/span>to
\ndistinguish not only between true and false, but also good and evil, better and
\nworse, and justice and injustice. This ability to discern – this radical <\/span>agency<\/span><\/i><\/span> – renders every person capable of
\ngrasping the “natural law”, which is nothing other than a
\nparticipation in the eternal law: “<\/span>unde<\/span><\/i><\/span>…<\/span>lex naturalis nihil aliud est quam
\nparticipatio legis aeternae in rationali creatura<\/span><\/i><\/span>“<\/span> (St. Thomas Aquinas, ST<\/i><\/span> I-II, 91, 2). The natural law is a
\nuniversal guide recognizable to everyone, on the basis of which all people can
\nreciprocally understand and love each other<\/span>. Human rights, therefore, are ultimately
\nrooted in a participation of God<\/span><\/span><\/span>, who has created each human person with
\nintelligence and freedom. If this solid ethical and political basis is ignored,
\nhuman rights remain fragile since they are deprived of their sound foundation.
\nsupported by rational reflection, in such a way that these rights can be
\npresented to all people of good will, independently of any religious
\naffiliation they may have. Nevertheless, as I have observed in my Encyclicals,
\non the one hand, human reason must undergo constant purification by faith,
\ninsofar as it is always in danger of a certain ethical blindness caused by
\ndisordered passions and sin; and, on the other hand, insofar as human rights
\nneed to be re-appropriated by every generation and by each individual, and
\ninsofar as human freedom – which proceeds by a succession of free choices – is
\nalways fragile, the human person needs the unconditional hope and love that can
\nonly be found in God and that lead to participation in the justice and
\ngenerosity of God towards others<\/span> (cf. Deus Caritas Est, <\/i><\/span>18, and Spe Salvi, <\/i><\/span>24).
\ncritical social problems of recent decades, such as the growing awareness –
\nwhich has in part arisen with globalisation and the present economic crisis –
\nof a flagrant contrast between the equal attribution<\/i><\/span> of rights and the unequal access<\/i><\/span> to the means of attaining those
\nrights. For Christians who regularly ask God to “give us this day our
\ndaily bread”, it is a shameful tragedy that one-fifth of humanity still
\ngoes hungry<\/span>. Assuring an adequate food supply, like the protection of vital
\nresources such as water and energy<\/span>, requires all international leaders to
\ncollaborate in showing a readiness to work in good faith, respecting the
\nnatural law and promoting solidarity and subsidiarity with the weakest regions
\nand peoples of the planet as the most effective strategy for eliminating social
\ninequalities between countries and societies and for increasing global
\nsecurity.