THE conclusion of the series on The New Paganism is a rather sobering one. A false environmentalism, ultimately organized and promoted by the United Nations, is leading the world down the path toward an increasingly godless “new world order.” So why, you might be asking, is Pope Francis supporting the UN? Why have other popes echoed their goals? Shouldn’t the Church have nothing to do with this rapidly emerging globalization?
Actually, Jesus was a “globalist.” He prayed that the nations would…
…hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10:16)
Pope Leo XIII stated that this, too, was the goal of St. Peter’s successors—a goal aimed at not only the Christian but the civil order:
We have attempted and persistently carried out during a long pontificate towards two chief ends: in the first place, towards the restoration, both in rulers and peoples, of the principles of the Christian life in civil and domestic society, since there is no true life for men except from Christ; and, secondly, to promote the reunion of those who have fallen away from the Catholic Church either by heresy or by schism, since it is most undoubtedly the will of Christ that all should be united in one flock under one Shepherd. —Divinum Illud Munus, n. 10
The first speech that St. Pius X gave from the throne of St. Peter was a prophetic heralding of the imminence of this “restoration” by declaring that which precedes it—the Antichrist or “Son of Perdition” whom he said, “may be already in the world.” Widespread violence had made “it seem as though strife were universal” and thus:
The desire for peace is certainly harbored in every breast, and there is no one who does not ardently invoke it. But to want peace without God is an absurdity, seeing that where God is absent thence too justice flies, and when justice is taken away it is vain to cherish the hope of peace. “Peace is the work of justice” (Is. 22:17). —E Supremi, October 4th, 1903
And thus St. Pius X had brought the phrases “justice and peace” or “peace and development” into the 20th century. This cry for divine restoration became that much more urgent in his successor when, a decade later, the first World War broke out.
“And they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd”… May God… shortly bring to fulfillment His prophecy by transforming this consoling vision of the future into a present reality… The Pope, no matter who he shall be, will always repeat the words: “I think thoughts of peace not of affliction” (Jeremiah 29:11), thoughts of a true peace which is founded on justice and which permit him truthfully to say: “Justice and Peace have kissed.” (Psalms 84:11) …When it does arrive, it will turn out to be a solemn hour, one big with consequences not only for the restoration of the Kingdom of Christ, but for the pacification of Italy and the world as well. We pray most fervently, and ask others likewise to pray for this much-desired pacification of society… —POPE PIUS XI, Ubi Arcani dei Consilioi “On the Peace of Christ in his Kingdom”, December 23, 1922
Tragically, World War II ensued leaving nations divided, mistrustful, and in hot pursuit of more lethal weapons of destruction. It was on the immediate heels of that global catastrophe that the United Nations was born in 1945 with aims of forming “international cooperation in solving economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems around the world.” History.com It was presided over by President Franklin Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin. All three were Freemasons.
Now, to all appearances at least, it was not only the Church but another “universal” organization working toward “world peace.”
Paul VI clearly understood that the social question had become worldwide and he grasped the interconnection between the impetus towards the unification of humanity, and the Christian ideal of a single family of peoples in solidarity and fraternity. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n. 13
Entire nations had collided, not only through war, but mass communication. Print, radio, the cinema, television… and eventually the Internet, would shrink the vast world into a “global village” within a matter of decades. Suddenly, nations on opposite ends of the planet found themselves as neighbours, or perhaps, new enemies.
After all this scientific and technical progress, and even because of it, the problem remains: how to build up a new order of society based on a more balanced human relationship between political communities on a national and international level? —POPE ST. JOHN XXIII, Mater et Magistra, Encyclical Letter, n. 212
It was a question the Church almost seemed unprepared for.
The principal new feature has been the explosion of worldwide interdependence, commonly known as globalization. Paul VI had partially foreseen it, but the ferocious pace at which it has evolved could not have been anticipated. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n. 33
Still, he observed, “As society becomes ever more globalized, it makes us neighbours but does not make us brothers.”POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n. 19 Globalization was inevitable, but not necessarily evil.
Globalization, a priori, is neither good nor bad. It will be what people make of it. —POPE ST. JOHN PAUL II, Address to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, April 27th, 2001
By the time St. John Paul II had ascended Peter’s throne, the United Nations was firmly established as a global arbiter, mainly through peace-keeping missions. But with new global awareness of violations of human dignity taking place on our television screens, the notion of universal “human rights” quickly evolved. And here is where the vision of “justice and peace,” as understood by the United Nations versus that of the Church, began to diverge.
Most notably was the UN’s demand that member nations recognize the “universal right to reproductive health.” This was a euphemism for the “right” to abortion and contraception. St. John Paul II (and faithful Catholics involved with the UN) vigorously opposed this. He lamented the derisible contradiction that, the very process which led to the idea of “human rights,” was now being trampled upon “especially at the more significant moments of existence: the moment of birth and the moment of death.” The future Saint issued a prophetic warning to world leaders:
This is what is happening also at the level of politics and government: the original and inalienable right to life is questioned or denied on the basis of a parliamentary vote or the will of one part of the people—even if it is the majority. This is the sinister result of a relativism which reigns unopposed: the “right” ceases to be such, because it is no longer firmly founded on the inviolable dignity of the person, but is made subject to the will of the stronger part. In this way democracy, contradicting its own principles, effectively moves towards a form of totalitarianism. —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Evangelium Vitae, n. 18, 20
Still, “reproductive health care” was not the United Nations’ only goal. They also aimed to end poverty and hunger and promote universal access to water, sanitation and reliable energy. Without question, these are goals that converge with the Church’s own mission to minister to Christ in the “least of the brethren.” Matt 25:40 The question here, though, is not so much one of praxis but underlying philosophy. Put more succinctly, “even Satan masquerades as an angel of light.” 2 Corinthians 11:14 While still a cardinal, Benedict XVI targeted this fundamental concern over the United Nations’ progressive agenda.
…efforts to build the future have been made by attempts that draw more or less profoundly from the source of liberal tradition. Under the title New World Order, these efforts take on a configuration; they increasingly relate to the U.N. and its international conferences… that transparently reveal a philosophy of the new man and of the new world… —Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (POPE BENEDICT XVI), The Gospel: Confronting World Disorder, by Msgr. Michel Schooyans, 1997
Indeed, can such contrary goals coexist? How can one promote the right of a child to a clean cup of water while at the same time promoting the right to destroy that child before it emerges from the womb?
UNITED HUMANITY VS. GLOBAL FAMILY
The Magisterium’s answer has been to promote the good they see in the UN while carefully denouncing the evil. I suppose that’s what Mother Church does with each of us as individuals, encouraging and exhorting us in the good, but calling us to repentance and conversion where we are not. Still, John Paul II was not naive to the potential for large scale evil as the United Nations’ influence grew.
Is this not the time for all to work together for a new constitutional organization of the human family, truly capable of ensuring peace and harmony between peoples, as well as their integral development? But let there be no misunderstanding. This does not mean writing the constitution of a global super-State. —Message for the World Day of Peace, 2003; vatican.va
Hence, many Catholics and Evangelical Christians were alarmed when Pope Benedict seemed to promote the very idea of a “global super-State.” Here’s what he said in his encyclical letter:
In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n.67
Benedict was calling for no such thing, of course, rather a “reform” of the present-day United Nations so that the “family of nations” can actually function between each other in true justice and peace. No structure, however small (be it the family) or large (a community of nations) can function together without a moral consensus that at the same time holds its members accountable. That’s just common sense.
Also significant (and prophetic) was Benedict’s call for the reform of the entire global economic framework (which is largely controlled by Freemasons and their international bankers). Clearly, Benedict knew which teeth were harmful and which weren’t. While recognizing how globalization had the potential for continuing to help underdeveloped countries, he cautioned in apocalyptic language (see Capitalism and the Beast and The New Beast Rising):
…without the guidance of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and create new divisions within the human family… humanity runs new risks of enslavement and manipulation. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n.33, 26
The Book of Revelation includes among the great sins of Babylon – the symbol of the world’s great irreligious cities – the fact that it trades with bodies and souls and treats them as commodities (cf. Rev 18:13)… —POPE BENEDICT XVI, On the occasion of Christmas Greetings, December 20th, 2010; http://www.vatican.va/
More importantly, Benedict was not promoting the idea of an overarching international body interfering in regional issues but rather the Catholic social doctrine of “subsidiarity”: that every level of society should be responsible for that which it can be.
In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels that can work together. Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way, if it is not to infringe upon freedom... —Caritas in Veritate, n.57
Thus, the popes had consistently affirmed that at the center of this new organization of society must be the dignity and inherent rights of the human person. Hence, it is charity, not control, at the heart of the Catholic vision of “global unity” and thus God himself, because “God is love.”
A humanism which excludes God is an inhuman humanism. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n. 78
If the popes till then seemed cautious and irresolute toward the UN’s objectives, what about their successor, Pope Francis?
TO BE CONTINUED… read Part II.
The Now Word is a full-time ministry that
continues by your support.
Bless you, and thank you.
To journey with Mark in The Now Word,
click on the banner below to subscribe.
Your email will not be shared with anyone.