lundi 8 octobre 2007

“Which of the North American Dominican justice priorities do you consider immoral?”

THE PROMOTERS 2007

“DOMINICAN CALL TO ACTION”

In a letter directed to the members of the Lay Provincial Council of the Western Dominican Province on June 23, 2007, the Boise, Idaho Blessed Margaret of Castello, OP, Chapter of the lay Order of Preachers submitted a paper [“Boise Paper”] on the current situation in the Dominican Order relative to Social Justice issues.

The Boise Paper addressed that many Dominican religious websites found on the Internet are involved in many legitimately religious and righteous issues. Conversely, however, the Boise Paper also documented that the Dominican websites were mixed up in very liberal and extremely political—in contrast to biblical, gospel, or natural law-principled—issues. [For purposes of your review of this document, please note that any references to websites are cited in the endnotes below].

On September 6, 2007, the Promoter of Peace, Justice and Care of Creation for the lay members of the Western Dominican Province responded to the Boise Paper, and in that document, the Promoter posited a question, “Which of the North American Dominican justice priorities do you consider immoral?”[1] Although the Boise Paper never stated that any of the websites or issues surveyed was “immoral,” the question presented an interesting challenge.

The object of this paper is to review two of the priorities and issues listed at the applicable website(s) of the North American Dominican justice promoters, entitled Dominicans Act on behalf of Justice, Peace and Care of Creation.”[2] This review is not exhaustive.

Let me remind the gentle reader, that as stated in the “Boise Paper,” On Social Justice Issues,[3] it seems reasonable that to the extent that the lay members of the Lay Fraternities of St. Dominic are involved in Peace, Justice, and Care of Creation issues, the lay members of the Order of Preachers should responsibly review issues carefully in light of the Faith before championing any issue or cause.

Let me also prompt the gentle reader, that the Promoters are engaged in many legitimate and noble concerns in which Dominicans at all levels—whether friar, religious, or lay—should be involved.

To recap, a number of the subjects of concern at the Dominican websites as described in the Boise Paper, are not grounded upon biblical, natural law or religious principles but are a mere guise for politically and worldly-based initiatives.

The North American Promoters of Justice, Peace, and Care of Creation have issued a variety of statements over the last five years entitled the North American Dominican Call to Action seeking to address key world-wide issues.

These include the “2002 North American Dominican Call to Action; North American Promoters of Justice, Peace and Care of Creation, 7/21/02.”[4] One year later was the “Dominican Call to Action 2003-2006 that met in Elkins Park, Pennsylvania from June 29 – July 3, 2003.[5]

More recently, the Promoters gathered for an update on the Dominican Call to Action 2005 – 2006,[6] and again in 2007.

The current year Dominican Call to Justice: 2007” [7] website lists the following issues, including but not limited, to: (1) Global warming, (2) death penalty, (3) disarmament, (4) Iraq, (5) Israel/Palestine, (6) Africa, (7) Columbia, (8) Migration/Immigration, (9) Human Trafficking, and (10) the United Nations.

Although the following is not listed as one of the priority subjects, the 2007 website states, “The care of creation is the context out of which flows all that we do as Dominican Justice Promoters,” and encourages web surfers to read the “Earth Charter.”[8]

The focus here is limited to two immoral aspects of the Promoter’s issues, or references related thereto, as cited above.

This paper does not tackle every allegedly immoral issue in the “Dominican Call to Action: 2007”, or those issues from the question of whether positions taken by the Promoters are reasonable or of good judgment, or a prudent action in the resolution of serious social problems. That is a different topic for a different time.[9]

The first moral concern is in reference to the “Earth Charter,”[10] which as noted above appears on the Dominican Call to Action website.

A casual review of the “Earth Charter” reveals an aggregate of ostensibly good and noble objectives and views towards a “better” world society, based upon a global perspective and purposes. Yet an attentive and careful review of the manifesto reveals wide-ranging problems, including but not limited to a “global” perspective, expressing a secular, political and social vision for the world without reference to Christ or His principles, ignoring the nature of Original Sin and its impact upon humankind and its fallen nature. Without God, it will be an utter failure.

The “Earth Charter” seeks to resolve humankind’s seemingly irresolvable problems. Here are some quotes:

We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. [Preamble] …. Affirm faith in the inherent dignity of all human beings and in the intellectual artistic, ethical, and spiritual potential of humanity. … Affirm that with increased freedom, knowledge, and power comes increased responsibility to promote the common good. … Promote social and economic justice, enabling all to achieve a secure and meaningful livelihood that is ecologically responsible. . [Principles].

After the initial review of the Earth Charter, it is apparent it has problems,[11] including the following quotation under chapter heading, “Ecological Integrity.” The Charter proposes to,

“Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction.” (Emphasis here). One of the meanings for “reproductive health” [or “reproductive rights”] includes access to a ‘safe’ abortion.[12]

The term “reproductive health” [and “reproductive rights”] has no precise definition, but because it is ambiguous, it can be easily, but not earnestly, contended that the term does not include access to abortion.

These two sources demonstrate the point. The first is on the World Health Organization [WHO] website. WHO is an arm of the United Nations. [U.N.] http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/index.htm. The website describes as a health problem, “unsafe abortions.” [The irony is two-fold, that the U.N. is involved in this deception and the reality that all abortions are “unsafe.”] The second is the Center for Reproductive Rights [CRR], which is a non-governmental organization [NGO] at the U.N. http://www.reproductiverights.org/ww_issues.html. The CRR website states, “[a]t the core of reproductive rights is the principle that a woman has the right to decide whether and when to have a child.”

This type of “health care” includes access to abortion and birth control. These principles are unmistakably opposed to Catholic teaching.

In addition to the moral principle involved, greater good and charity will be done by the active members of the Order of Preachers when they stand by Catholic moral principles—and engage their God-given charism of Preaching.

This standard, bolstered by the Grace of God, will positively influence people and organizations. In turn, ‘global’ documents will reflect the legitimacy of the Order’s moral input and standards.

If authentic justice and peace are to reign among humankind, the struggle must be well guarded and fortified with the eternal truth.

Another moral issue the Promoters press as a social justice priority involves the United Nations.[13] As it states at the Dominican Life website on the United Nations:

The Order of Preachers (Dominicans) around the world has a permanent presence at the United Nations in New York through the Dominican Leadership Conference, and in Geneva through Dominicans for Justice and Peace. Our presence at the UN is part of our mission of collaboration in preaching the Gospel… the gospel of peace. […] We pledge to: Encourage participation of Dominicans in the UN and connect with our representatives in Geneva and New York; Participate in UN activities and educational opportunities;
Encourage the U.S. to honor its international agreements and cooperate in the international community.
[14]

Obviously a noble purpose is involved. This opportunity allows the Dominicans to spread the Gospel including the Gospel of Peace. At the site presently, is a reference to a document entitled, “UN Study Reveals Scale of Violence against Children.”[15]

This is a difficult issue to tackle. It involves children. And like all children, whether born or unborn, great care must be taken regarding their well-being.

At the surface of such a document, it is commendable that the United Nations tackles violence against any person, especially children! The study examines violence against children and how to protect children from violence including the forms of sexual abuse and assault and battery, as well as sexual trafficking of children. Unfortunately, the document tackles the legitimate discipline of children by parents.

In 2001, the General Assembly of the United Nations commissioned the Secretary-General to, “conduct an in-depth study on the question of violence against children and to put forward recommendations for consideration by Member States [Nations] for appropriate action.” Report of the Independent Expert for the United Nations Study on Violence Against Children [hereinafter Report], at p. 6. The scope of the study was to examine “violence against children within different settings: the family, schools, alternative care institutions and detention facilities, [etc.]” Report, at p. 6. In a bold statement, the author of the Report states that,


both children and perpetrators may accept physical, sexual, and psychological violence as inevitable and normal. Discipline through physical and humiliating punishment, bullying and sexual harassment is frequently perceived as normal, particularly when no ‘visible’ or lasting physical injury results. The lack of an explicit legal prohibition of corporal punishment reflects this.

Report, at p. 10. The term, “physical” or “corporal” punishment has been defined in the Report referenced at the Dominican website as,

any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light. Most involves hitting (“smacking”, “slapping”, “spanking”) children, with the hand or with an implement - a whip, stick, belt, shoe, wooden spoon, etc. In the view of the Committee, corporal punishment is invariably degrading. In addition, there are other non-physical forms of punishment that are also cruel and degrading and thus incompatible with the Convention. These include, for example, punishment which belittles, humiliates, denigrates, scapegoats, threatens, scares or ridicules the child.[16]

(Emphasis here). The Report states that discipline of children including any form of appropriate and reasonable spanking is a form of violence. It also recommends that, “all forms of violence against children, in all settings, including corporal punishment,” should be prohibited. Report, at p. 33.

Make no mistake about it, any true violence against children in any setting whatsoever tolerated, including the willful burning, torturing, or killing of children, as well as early and forced marriages, mutilation, “honor crimes,” human trafficking for criminal and sentient purposes, and any other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment cannot be tolerated in law or in fact.

On the other hand, any abuse of a legitimate act is not a reasonable argument against its rightful use. In other words, abuse of the parental right to use corporal punishment does not justify its absolute prohibition. Such a proposition may be position of the sophisticate or the cosmopolitan but is contrary to the rights and responsibilities of a loving parent.

In other words, parents have the right to xpunish their children in a loving manner in accord with Biblical concepts and Catholic principles.

This is a weighty parental responsibility—a right and responsibility that no government, international commission, or the United Nations can deprive licitly from responsible and loving Christian loving parents! The Catechism of the Catholic Church expresses at paragraph 2223:

Parents have the first responsibility for the education of their children. [Parents] bear witness to this responsibility first by creating a home where tenderness, forgiveness, respect, fidelity, and disinterested service are the rule. The home is well suited for education in the virtues. This requires an apprenticeship in self-denial, sound judgment, and self-mastery -- the preconditions of all true freedom. Parents should teach their children to subordinate the "material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones." Parents have a grave responsibility to give good example to their children. By knowing how to acknowledge their own failings to their children, parents will be better able to guide and correct them… .

Relevant to this discussion as quoted in the Catechism is the biblical standard: “He who loves his son will not spare the rod … He who disciplines his son will profit by him.” Sirach 30:1-2; [See, also, Proverbs 13:24]. The ‘rod of discipline’ is not necessarily reasonable physical punishment but more often the Shepherd’s rod and guidance of a loving parent.

Contrary to the Report’s invalid claim, appropriate discipline of a child is not a form of violence. A loving parent will consider the purpose of discipline to help the children control and guide her or his heart and mind toward good, will investigate before inflicting discipline, will only apply appropriate discipline, and will be loving and consistent in its application—for the sole purpose of correction.

When the United Nations’ Report lumps all forms of parental and prudent discipline of on a child as a form of violence, and portrays parents as “perpetrators,” it assaults the fundamental unite of society, the family institution. If sustained by national law, it will take away the rights and responsibilities from the family unit and its appropriate disciplinary options.

The Report demonstrates contempt for parents and the souls, minds, and hearts of children in the discipline and development of their character. This Report is immoral, revealing, and overambitious by declaring appropriate discipline “however light” as violence.

In sum, this is an example where the lay Promoters of Justice and Peace should consult with members of the Order of Preachers, including the provincial laity, and that such review should be grounded in Catholic, biblical and moral principles before engaging in key issues. It further demonstrates where the Order or Preachers will make a difference by use of its charism—the preaching of Christian precepts to parents and children about right conduct, clear thinking, and rights and responsibilities.

John Keenan, O.P.L., J.D., Formation Director of the Blessed Margaret of Castello, OP Chapter, Idaho Lay Dominicans, Boise, Idaho. Saturday, October 20, 2007.



[1] Joyce Calagos, O.P.L., M.Div., Justice and Peace Promoter, Western Dominican Province, letter to Members of the Western Dominican Lay Provincial Council, dated September 6, 2007. See, letter mentioned hereinabove at the Idaho Lay Dominicans website, at the “Social Justice” page. [Click here]. The website address of that letter is:

http://www.dominicanidaho.org/social%20justice/Letter.Calagos.Joyce.response.htm

[2] Dominicans Act on behalf of Justice, Peace and Care of Creation.”

http://www.domlife.org/Justice/UN/JusticeIndex.htm

[3] On Social Justice Issues, [“Boise Chapter Paper”], by John Keenan, O.P.L., J.D., Formation Director of the Blessed Margaret of Castello Chapter, [Idaho Lay Dominicans], Boise, Idaho, unanimously approved by the Boise Chapter and presented to members of the Western Lay Provincial Council on June 23, 2007. See that document by clicking here.

[4] 2002 North American Dominican Call to Action; North American Promoters of Justice, Peace and Care of Creation, 7/21/02. Here is the website: http://www.grdominicans.org/november/570/. The website does not list or cite the involvement of any Lay Dominicans or Lay Promoters.

[5] Dominican Call to Action 2003-2006; meeting in Elkins Park, PA; June 29 – July 3, 2003:

http://www.grdominicans.org/september/522/ The website lists the names of Lay Promoters.

[6] Another recent Call to Action document can be found at the Dominican Life website, entitled: Dominicans Act on behalf of Justice, Peace and Care of Creation, located at the following website: http://www.domlife.org/Justice/UN/JusticeIndex.htm. Look on the left hand column for the link entitled “Dominican Call to Justice.”

[7] Dominican Call to Justice: 2007. This more recent document is located at http://www.domlife.org/Justice/index.html, [a similar website as cited in footnote 5, supra] with a link on that page entitled “Dominican Call to Justice.”

[9] For example, some of the issues and concerns expressed in the “Dominican Call to Action” need to be reviewed regarding clarity and purpose when considering a Biblical or principled analysis.

[11] This paper will not exhaustively discuss these problems. However, the Promoters involved the Earth Charter document on the websites of the Order of Preachers, which demonstrates the need for collaborative effort from the Laity at the Provincial level grounded on Catholic and biblical principles. Here is an example. The Earth Charter reads at paragraph 10, another principle that it should, “Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations.” [Earth Charter, para. 10]. Sustained and equitable distribution of goods and services among all peoples is a noble goal. However, how is that equity to be established? There are two options. If the equity is done by a free market economy grounded on individual rights and responsibilities, and political and economic freedom, and aided by a limited government to help the poorest among us, then it may be the right choice. However, if the equitable distribution of goods and services is to be accomplished by the force of government through coercive taxation or the unjust taking and redistribution of private property, then such equitable distribution is unjust.

[12] Among other sources, note this World Health Organization [WHO] which is an arm of the United Nations where it euphemistically uses the term “unsafe abortion”: http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/index.htm. [Get real; explain a “safe” abortion in view of the reality that there is a mother and a baby involved].

http://www.domlife.org/Justice/United%20Nations/UNDocuments/violence_children2006.pdf

[16] The right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia),” at p.4. The document is located here on the internet at the United Nations:
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6545c032cb57bff5c12571fc002e834d?Open document. (Emphasis added).

A Response to the Promoter

Monday, September 10, 2007

Ms. Joyce Calagos, OPL

Peace and Justice Promoter

Lay Provincial Council

Western Dominican Province

Dear Joyce:

This purpose of this letter is to clarify some of the issues raised in your letter as a response to the Boise Chapter’s letter on Social Justice. First, you are in my prayers that you find yourself in good health soon!

With regard to your letter, I believe you missed the point. The original letter from the Boise Chapter was a call to discuss this matter as a Province. There are patently obvious problems with the social justice efforts that have failed to be seriously guided by Gospel principles or in consultation with members at the chapter level. The criteria mentioned in your letter used to pick social justice issues are not based upon any standards or virtues essential to the Gospel, and the criteria also ignore many issues pertinent to the local chapter membership and embrace many subjects on which the membership either has a differing reasonable opinion or for which the membership feels no identity. Further, many of the issues are political--not religious. If the Social Justice effort is to reflect Gospel values and be relevant among the membership of the Dominican Lay people—as well as the institutions the Order is attempting to influence—these legitimate and timely concerns must be faced and not rejected in total. Our Chapter has been, and continues to be, in prayer about this fundamental problem.

Please review the letter again.

I authored the letter. The Blessed Margaret of Castello, OP Chapter in the Boise area unanimously approved the letter. It was written carefully in the effort to be equally charitable yet truthful about the problem with the social justice movement within the Order that represents the lay people. It was not intended to insult or provoke.

With regard to your note, you have confused the term liberal in its more traditional meaning with the contemporary political and social meaning of liberal that is often used on a more permissive and unprincipled basis. Certainly, Our Lord liberated all of us from sin, but he is no more a liberal in the political sense than he was a conservative.

Of course, you should be proud of your education. I am too. A lot of hard work goes into the effort. However, the matter at issue is not the education level of anyone, but the fact that many ordinary Dominicans feet that the Justice and Peace groups of the Order are irrelevant and/or out of step with the membership as noted above. These groups cannot deny this reality. To continue to ignore the lay membership only adds to their insignificance and irrelevance. For the Social Justice effort to be effective, these folks must become relevant, and therefore must come to terms with the actual and vital issues, and the members of the lay people in the Order of Preachers—a democratic tradition laid down hundred of years ago.

Finally, if you read the letter carefully, you will note I used abortion only as an example. It is certainly not the only issue out there, yet it should not be ignored as it is largely being done presently.

Members of the Lay Provincial Council are encouraged to conscientiously consider these concerns as set down in the letter from the Boise Chapter, and to establish criteria based upon Gospel standards and Provincial concerns. The Boise letter is not the final say in the matter. It only begs that the men and women of the lay Order of Preachers of good will ponder these valid concerns.

Thank you kindly.

In our father, St. Dominic,


John C. Keenan, J.D., O.P.L.

Formation Director

Blessed Margaret of Castello, OP Chapter


Response from Western Dominican Lay Promoter of Justice, Peace, and Care of Creation

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Dear Members of the Western Dominican Lay Provincial Council,

I apologize for taking so long to reply to the documents sent by the Boise Lay Dominican Chapter. However, I've been caught up in health issues, both of my mother’s, and now, of my own.

After lengthy periods of prayer, the ideas below express my response.

1. As Dominicans working for Justice and Peace, we ARE preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus could be considered a radical, a liberal, in His culture too. When I think of the word “liberal,” I immediately connected to the word “liberate.” I checked the definition of the words "liberal" and "liberate" in Webster's New World Dictionary. "Liberal- 1. giving freely; generous, 2 more than enough or than might be expected; large 3. open to new ideas; broadminded; tolerant, 4 broad in range; not limited to one subject or field of study, 5 in favor of reform or progress in politics, religion, etc." "Liberate - to see free." Christ freely and generously, liberated, set people free, from sin and evil. Christ was also compassionate and went around doing good; preaching, teaching, healing, forgiving, and bringing people back from death to life. And, St. Dominic was also noted for his generous compassion, selling his books to give to the poor. As followers of St. Dominic, we are also called to compassion. I invite you to read, or, to reread the contents at http://www.op.org/curia/JPC/jpeng.html which starts out "Since 1977, all the General Chapters of the Order have underlined the importance of the option for the poor, of the concern to promote justice and peace as an essential dimension of the gospel which lies at the heart of our life and preaching."

Along the same vein as the word, "liberal," Catholics are not limited to just abortion issues. We engage in the entire Paschal Mystery; the birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. Recall images of the Baby Jesus, Christ on the cross, and, the resurrected Christ. Can you picture Christ’s hands in those photos? Aren’t His hands extended out, as if to embrace the entire world and everything in it? As Christ’s disciples, we are challenged to extend our love and concern to all in all areas of life, from womb to tomb. We aren’t limited to abortion issues.

2. I refer to websites that I think are connected to our North American Dominican priorities. The organizations who maintain different websites may, or, may not be working on other issues.

3. Truth and Moral formation was mentioned in the document from the Idaho chapter. Paragraphs 1776 through 1802 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church address Moral Conscience. Which of the North American Dominican justice priorities do you consider immoral? My I remind you of the criteria for choosing the North American Dominican justice priorities as was published in Volume 13 Issue 1 of Christ in the World! (either CIW! July-Aug. 2001, or, Sept,-Oct. 2001). “a) there is a Dominican Family connection -- for example, we have Dominican sisters and friars in Iraq; b) the issue has to be timely -- for instance, we should not call a congressperson regarding a legislative bill that was already voted on; c) the issue has to be related to topics at the United Nations -- we have Dominican representatives at the UN, both in Geneva, Switzerland and in New York, d) the issues come from the grassroots -- for instance, we had a Dominican sister from Colombia who spoke about the conditions in Colombia, who recommended courses of action that we can take; e) the issue has to have a universal impact -- in other words, we can't choose an issue that pertains just to one country; it has to be applicable to all nations.”

I hope the above reply answers the core concerns of the document from the Dominican Laity Idaho Chapter.

Additionally, as a proud graduate of the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology, I invite you to take courses on Moral Theology, Biblical Studies, Christology, etc. at our Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology in Berkeley, CA. Check www.dspt.edu for further information about courses and applications to enroll for classes. Study at DSPT can lead us to know Truth so that Truth can set us free, and set others free.

Sincerely in Christ, in St. Dominic, and in St. Catherine of Siena,

Joyce Calagos, O.P.L. M.Div. (Master of Divinity)

Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology, Class of 1994

Western Dominican Provincial Lay Promoter of Justice and Peace

A CHALLENGE TO THE DOMINICANS AT THE UNITED NATIONS

To the Dominicans at the United Nations: a Challenge.

In a prior note posted entitled, “On Social Justice Issues,” an example was given regarding the Dominican Order at the United Nations.

As stated in that small tome, the website at www.un.op.org was reviewed carefully. Also stated as an example in that paper was the issue of abortion.

The current and archived documents at that website were reviewed. There was no mention with regard to the issue of abortion or like issues at the United Nations. This example does not discount other appropriate issues that the Dominicans at the United Nations may involve themselves. If the Dominicans at that level are involved in the issue of abortion, then I tip my hat. However, there is little evidence at their website of any such action or position.

As you know, abortion is the prominent issue of our day. If a Christian is to stand up for any issue—this is the one especially in a political arena like the United Nations.

However, right now at the international level, there is a dynamic issue involving abortion.

And, the Dominicans at the United Nations can make a difference.

The Idaho Lay Dominicans are asking the social justice promoter or her designee, to bring this challenge to the appropriate authority of the Order.

Last October, the Nicaraguan national Parliament passed a law unanimously modified its penal code to ban all abortions.

Prior to that vote, United Nations officials and representatives, including officials from UNICEF and the UN Population Fund tried to persuade the Nicaraguan government from voting on that issue.

That letter came from officials including European Union officials, the UN Development Program and others mentioned above hinting that foreign aid monies would be withheld if the abortion restrictions were passed by the Parliament.

In February of this year, Marc Litvine, a European Union [EU] liaison to Nicaragua was trying to pressure Nicaragua to reverse that law. Litvine had noted that the EU was “worried” about the criminalization of abortion and that the EU saw the law in Nicaragua as a backward step.

Most recently, Bert Koenders, minister of foreign affairs for the Netherlands threatened to withhold foreign aid to Nicaragua unless the nation reversed its law.

As reported by FreeRepublic, “Koenders wants the United Nations and the EU to both crack down on pro-life countries and ‘put women’s rights higher on the agenda.’” Nicaragua has been threatened before by other members states of the EU.

It is apparent that there is little respect for the sovereignty of Nicaragua by these member states.

The faith in Europe is dying. The population is as well. As noted by Raimundo Rojas, Hispanic outreach director for National Right to Life has said, “[T]he EU is bulling lesser developed nations into accepting their failed policies on abortion, … Europe is dying, many European nations are at a negative birth rate—they have in fact aborted themselves into this position.”

Americas for Human Rights Watch, a New York-based organization, has taken the new law to court in Nicaragua. That Nation’s highest Court will rule on that issue soon.

If the pro-choice people lose the Nicaraguan claim in court, then they will likely turn to the UN Human Rights Commission in New York or an autonomous organ of the Organization of American States known as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for political and juridical appeal.

This is where the Dominicans at the United Nations can step in. There are existing organizations at the United Nations that need help with pro-life help. These include the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. (See link below).

The Dominicans could intervene legally, make a plea to the various UN commissions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and make a loud plea to the General Assembly to end this extortion of Nicaragua, and violations of its sovereignty, and rights as a nation.

Other concrete actions that could be taken by the Dominicans at the United Nations is to step alongside other international pro-life groups, write documents, intercede by prayerful intercession, as well as oral statements at the various UN committees and commissions and challenge the thinking that is so deeply rooted at the UN.

If the Order of Preaches picks up this banner in this day and age, and stands rightly in principle against any form of murder, mayhem, slavery, or other type of human rights violation, then we can and will make a difference.

Sources:

1. www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858126/posts

2. www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07020902.htm

3. www.euro-fam.org/scripts/spop/articleINT.php?&XMLCODE=2007-02-17-1207&LG=EN

4. http://www.c-fam.org/ (Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute).

5. copy of UN/EU/Canada letter to Nicaragua regarding reversal of the law (in Spanish):

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007_docs/UNEuCanadalettertoNicaragua. pdf

Return to Social Justice page.

Return to Home page.


ON DOMINICANS AND SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES

On Social Justice Issues

In Vol. 18, No. 5 [4], p. 6 of the March-April (2007) issue of Christ In the World edition, the article on Peace and Justice was interesting. The article had a timely and well-formed comment on Lenten fasting, forgiveness, and almsgiving. At the forefront of the article, a Dominican student friar’s reflection was quoted stating that the “North American Dominican Justice Promoters are too political.” The source of that statement is unknown, but it is a general concern that should be addressed. That observation should be of concern.

In the article, the authoritative “Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life,” dated November 22, 2002, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the time Pope Benedict XVI was prefect of that congregation, was quoted, which follows:

By fulfilling their civic duties, guided by a Christian conscience, in conformity with its values, the lay faithful exercise their proper task of infusing the temporal order with Christian values.

Article I. 1, Para. 3. This document encourages participation in the political order, but sheds further light on the nature and priority of certain issues—and the centrality of the human person in the discussion involving key issues, where the document further explains,

The consequence of this fundamental teaching of the Second Vatican Council is that the lay faithful are never to relinquish their participation in ‘public life’, that is, in the many different economic, social, legislative, administrative and cultural areas, which are intended to promote organically and institutionally the common good». This would include the promotion and defence [sic] of goods such as public order and peace, freedom and equality, respect for human life and for the environment, justice and solidarity.

Article I, 1, Para. 3 (footnotes omitted). Guadiam et Spes was also quoted where the Council stated, “Since [the laity] have an active role to play in the whole life of the Church, laymen are not only bound to penetrate the world with a Christian spirit, but are also called to be witnesses to Christ in all things in the midst of human society.” Guadiam et Spes, No. 43 (emphasis added). This is true.

Of course, lay people involved in the formal institutes of the Order are not simply lay folk acting alone or with civil private associations, political parties, or societies. Lay people are encouraged, if not admonished, to be involved in culture, society, and politics individually and in free association with other individuals; however, the Order’s organized committees—as well as all lay members—in the lay Order of Preachers, face an entirely different issue. When speaking on behalf of lay Dominicans, we belong to a province and an institute, a lay religious institute of the Lay Fraternities of St. Dominic, that bears the mantle and authority of the Order itself, as well as the Church and her Magisterium—not the endeavors of private persons or private associations.

It seems reasonable that this fact alone would lead us, as lay members of a lay ecclesial institute to responsibly review each social and political issue very carefully so that it reflects the moral order, conscience, issues and efforts so dear and close to the Church--not the whim of ideology and political ideas that benefit from currency or fancy.

This is a heavy responsibility.

When certain worldly issues are confronted by members of the lay Fraternities of the Order of Preachers, certain guideposts exist outside of political agendas or social causes celebre. These guideposts include with certainty the Holy Scriptures and Tradition. Also, encyclicals and other documents are authoritative. John Paul II said, “It is the special function of the laity to seek the kingdom of God in dealing with temporal affairs and ordering them as God wishes.” John Paul II, Religious and Human Promotion, April 1978, no. 28 (emphasis here).

To amplify this point further, as taught by the Vatican Council II, “Laymen should also know that it is generally the function of their well-formed Christian conscience to see that the divine law is inscribed in the life of the earthly city….” ” Guadiam et Spes, No. 43 (emphasis here).

It is appropriate here to expound on the main point with clarity. Upon review of the materials from the lay, religious, and general Dominican websites, Dominican links, including other Orders, and religious and other links, as well as national websites concerning peace and justice, it cannot be ignored the prominent peace and social justice issues at both at the national and at the international level, are largely liberal in nature and often are not based upon natural law or supernatural principles.

It cannot be denied that there are legitimate issues that the promoters, religious, and others are thankfully pursuing at national and international levels. However, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the social justice movement has been deeply impacted by a liberal agenda. As Dominicans we must be truthful in our review of this material.

This conclusion may shock or cause reactions of guffaws. As Dominicans who seek the Truth, it cannot be ignored. The social justice movement cannot move in a new direction whether to the right, middle, left, or with a new ideology. The real move must not be grounded in a political or social ideology. Any social justice action must be based on natural and supernatural principles, Godly in its origin and in its faith and practice and on “divine law [that] is inscribed in the life of the earthly city.” Guadiam et Spes, No. 43. As Dominicans, especially as members of the Lay Dominican Family of the Order of Preachers, we need to preach the Gospel. At home. At school. At work. In the town square. At all levels of government. At the courtrooms, the hallways of Congress, the halls of academia, at businesses, corporations, and the like, we need to preach the Gospel. It is the Church that teaches, that preaches, that is the source and fountain of eternal life through its Head, Jesus Christ.

Some examples of concern are appropriate at this point.

Before detailing any examples, among the examples below, there are legitimate issues that should be dealt with by honest men and women of good will who seek the truth who may necessarily come from opposing political views. However, one point is simple: these views often represent a political point of view, not necessarily a religious viewpoint.

Below are words and phrases gleaned from various religious and laity Dominican internet websites. These websites mention these terms. These terms were “lifted” from the websites and inserted below between quotation marks. The phrases listed here are in no particular order:

The “environmental and ecology,” “environmental sustainability,” “HIV-AIDs in Africa,” “eco-feminism,” “feminism,” “greenhouse gases,” “militarism,” “sexism,” “globalism,” “anti-racism,” “global warming,” “death penalty,” “universal health care,” “public dissent in the civic and ecclesial arenas,” “School of the Americas,” “disarmament,” “Earth Charter,” “Columbia,” “partnering with planet earth,” “reverencing the earth,” “collaborating for systemic change,” “disarmament,” “the war in Iraq,” “earth is sacred and interconnected,” “human dignity,” “the conflict in Israel and Palestine,” “human trafficking,” “heresies of local and global domination,” “ravage earth,” “ecological crisis,” “ecologically sustainable design models,” “multicultural and biological diversity,” “non-violent peacemaking,” “right relationships with Earth community,” “social service agencies,” “helping the poor,” “people of Columbia,” “Iraq,” “genetically engineered food,” “land ethic,” “heresy of dualism,” “commit to actions that safeguard Earth,” “unjust structures,” “world water day,” “UN Millennium Declaration,” “Dominican Ecology Project,” “economic globalization,” “Dominicans at the United Nations,” “pledge of non-violence,” “wrap the world in prayer for peace,” “alternative investments,” “immigration and migration,” “labor,” “fair trade,” “United Nations,” “human trafficking,” “Darfur,” “Zimbabwe,” “biodiversity,” “globalization,” “reality of limit,” “new cosmology,” “listen to Earth, and to rethink cosmology,” “human rights,” “homosexual rights,” “nuclear weapons,” “nuclear power,” “nuclear disarmament,” and on and on.[1]

[Bibliography].

Among the various Dominican websites, there were links to secular “women’s spiritualism,” “feminist theology,” “political websites,” environmental websites such as Public Citizen on the issue of socialized water, Sierra Club, and the Women’s Environmental Institute, and “peace and justice” sites and linked to a common thread of issues that are included above.

The list cited above is not exhaustive. It is simply a general sampling of what was discovered on the internet involving religious and lay Dominican sites and links listed on those sites.

It should be clarified that the purpose here is not to accuse but to expand the horizons and open the minds of many of the Dominicans when it comes to these issues. The issues listed above have a tendency to be from a liberal perspective, and there are legitimate opposing points of view from other men and women that can be expressed from a moral perspective. It is not all one sided. There are other voices that are not being expressed.

This general tendency in our Order of Preachers is alarming—and should be to any Dominican. As Catholics, we should not be controlled by any political issue from either a liberal or a conservative basis or other single political perspective. We should be concerned about social justice issues that reflect on the faith and morals of Catholic teaching.

One may argue that the ‘liberal’ issues are the important issues. Also equally so, another person could argue that the ‘conservative issues are the important issues. Of course, that cannot be from a Catholic perspective—and that is precisely the problem that is confronting the social justice movement presently.

This point requires discernment and honesty. It is for that reason that the Lay Provincial Council and each provincial chapter should seriously consider the direction these issues have taken over time and face the reality that many of the issues and actions taken have missed the true mark of a genuine religious concern. This problem cannot be ignored without causing great harm not only to the Province but to the whole Order.

Many of the issues stated above have little to do with primary Catholic moral and social teachings about domestic family life, life issues, just laws, faith and morals, and the like, but have more to do with socialist solutions to social problems as well as a liberal ideology and related political ‘doctrine’.

As Dominicans, what should we do?

We gather first as Dominicans. While many of us may be politically involved, and may respectively be socialists, Republicans, Democrats, libertarians, progressive, capitalists, and on and on, our present business together involves the Order of Preachers and not worldly politics. If we participate individually in secular social movements, it is responsible that we take good moral positions. However, as Dominican people, we should focus on vital ecclesial issues which rely upon a crucial moral and theological foundation.

To do so requires the lay Dominicans to face tough contemporary issues that will form the World in His image. Anything less, the World will form the Order in the its image.

As an illustration, let’s examine the tragic issue of abortion.

This issue is primary. The social justice issues mentioned at large often reflect on a disenfranchised, a deprived, a weak and a poor constituency. Yet, nowhere in the world is there a more weak, choice-less, poor, blind, and voiceless constituency than the preborn child. Outside a brief oblique reference at a few Dominican websites, there was no mention of this modern savagery of killing innocent children.

On the other hand, an issue widely mentioned at Dominican websites is the death penalty. Pope John Paul II voiced a growing social opposition to the death penalty. The reality is that modern social systems have an alternative to the death penalty. [2] However, the issue is not that the death penalty is always morally wrong, but where society has an alternative to protect the public, the better option is to avoid the death penalty. See, footnote ii. Appropriately, John Paul II gave a strong admonition especially in modern societies against imposing the death penalty. However, when it comes to killing innocent life, the Commandment against murder is invoked. [3] “In effect, the absolute inviolability of innocent human life is a moral truth clearly taught by Sacred Scripture, constantly upheld in the Church's Tradition and consistently proposed by her Magisterium.” Evangelium Vitae, para. 57. As Pope John Paul II taught in his famous encyclical, “I confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is always gravely immoral.”

After reviewing the issue of life, it is clear that the killing of all innocent life—whether a child in the womb or not—is gravely immoral. However, the Church has long understood that the death penalty is the state’s right to defend society, but when it can provide for a just punishment without further taking of life, then the dignity of the human person requires that the death penalty be avoided.

Where Evangelium Vitae and the Catechism do not forbid the death penalty outright, this matter is a relative and secondary obligation, while in contrast defending the life of an innocent person is an absolute and therefore a prior responsibility.

There is a dearth of information on the killing of innocent persons on the Dominican websites quoted above, that includes the killing of children in the womb.

It is difficult to say that men and women of good will are able to debate in truth the moral rightness of abortion. There is no right to commit an abortion. That is a political proposition—not a religious or moral principle. Many persons believe and are full of hope, that if society can be corrected about abortion, many ills of society will be righted.

There are other issues that could be included in this discussion. These issues include married life, religious freedom, euthanasia, pornography, and moral theology. [4]

As lay members of the Order of Preachers, what great good can be done! We can teach children about moral conduct, about sex, fulfilling promises, working, family life, and marriage. We can preach to young and old alike about a Godly life.

This includes the teaching of children by lay people and religious about moral and right conduct, about sex, fulfilling promises, working, family life, marriage, and about preaching to young and old adults alike about right living and moral conduct—a Godly life.

These are not political issues. These are moral standards that are pillars of right conduct that can change forever the hearts and minds of men and women.

The irony is that all the political and social activity in the world, if not based on Christ and on right living and morals, is only that: busy activity. This is precisely where the magnificence of the Order of Preachers steps in and is so desperately needed at the pulpit and on the streets today: we need to preach the Gospel of Truth with the power of God. The Gospel helps people to live rightly, which promotes a culture of life, and helps people to make right decisions at every level of society including the family, community, and national levels.

As lay folk in the Order of Preachers, we have a duty to uphold and preach the natural law in contra to our contemporary society that upholds the “decadence and disintegration of reason and the principles of the natural moral law.” Often politics and its culture brings with it a legitimacy of pluralistic ethics where tolerance of wrongs and rights becomes a civic virtue, where “citizens claim complete autonomy with regard to their moral choices, and lawmakers maintain that they are respecting this freedom of choice by enacting laws which ignore the principles of natural ethics” and yield to temporal cultural and moral trends as if every outlook was of equal value. The Participation of Catholics in the Moral Life, para. II.2., Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect, (2002)(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).

Where people are taught right from wrong; they will do right at a personal, social, and governmental level. Critical to this mission are education and preaching that leads to changed hearts.

The final point is simply this. We are lay people in a Catholic religious order. We are not social or political leaders (unless otherwise in our private lives). As members of the Lay Fraternities of the Order of Preachers, we are to preach the Gospel in and to our various secular areas but not to proclaim the particular political and temporal ideologies themselves. To change the world, we need to preach the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, not the ‘good’ news of political agendas.

The Idaho Lay Dominicans kindly ask that the Lay Provincial Council to carefully review the issues raised in this letter. We believe they are of genuine concern. Our Dominican lives need a renewal based on the documents of Vatican Council II, where we are urged to return to the original charisms of our founding father, St. Dominic, where preaching, study, and prayer are fundamental to our mission of salvation and the changing of the hearts and minds of people.

In this way, we truly speak to God and of God and reflect on Him through our preaching charism. As you know, Christ focused on humankind, not the social and governmental structures of the world. When men and women convert and change their personal lives and reform their minds, they will change the world.

John C. Keenan, J.D., O.P.L.; Formation Director, Blessed Margaret of Castello Chapter, Order of Preachers, Boise, Idaho, United States of America.

Saturday, June 09, 2007, The Idaho Lay Dominicans. www.dominicanidaho.org [Presented to the Lay Provincial Council, Western Province; Saturday, June 23, 2007.]

____________________________

[1] See, attached Bibliography. The list of websites on the bibliography is not exhaustive.

[2] Evangelium Vitae, Para. 27. "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person". Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2267.

[3] Evangelium Vitae, Para. 57. “If such great care must be taken to respect every life, even that of criminals and unjust aggressors, the commandment ‘You shall not kill’ has absolute value when it refers to the innocent person.”

[4] Other vital issues include not only moral theology but the rights and wrongs involving marriage and domestic life in general; sexual mores; private property and the respect for it at a personal and social level; economic and political freedom; legal plunder; the economic and social mechanisms for helping the poor to be fed, clothed, educated, and raised in dignity, and other issues.

Additional issues involve the United Nations. The “Dominicans at the United Nations” website shows that the Order of Preachers is involved in many vital issues, including the issue of human trafficking, the war in Iraq, the war in Darfur, etc. However, at that website [www.un.op.org], there was no reference or mention with regard to the international abortion rights movement. There are valid questions, complaints and observations about the United Nations, its legitimacy and its bureaucracy. From a review of the documents at that website, it appears that at the United Nations, the Dominicans have failed to challenge the pro-abortion structures at the United Nations as well as the UN’s and NGOs’ (nongovernmental organizations’) complicity with that issue. Most recently, in the name of women’s rights, it was noted by the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) (an NGO at the United Nations) and displayed at their website, that “the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health has made a dedicated effort to show governments that reproductive and sexual rights are fundamental elements of the right to health.” As you know, “reproductive and sexual rights” are nothing less than a euphemism for abortion rights. [www.reproductiverights.org/worldwide.htm]. While many Dominicans have focused on the nation of Columbia and the war on drugs, international groups such as the CRR have been promoting abortion rights in the United Nations and internationally, and most recently with legal success in the City of Mexico.

In a recent seminal decision, the Columbia Supreme Court quoted resolutions made under cover of the UN in legalizing limited abortions. Did the Dominicans at the United Nations help pro-life forces to confront this travesty? This is unknown. However if the website at www.un.op.org is reviewed, it does not appear as there was any such involvement.

Another issue mentioned on the websites list on page 4 above is “universal health care.” This is socialized medicine whereby the state takes control of health care, including price controls, health care delivery, and the payment of health care through a state-sponsored tax. There is much honest and legitimate debate over the efficacy of government-sponsored medicine. Men and women of good will on all sides of this issue should debate this issue in truth and reason.

The key issue is whether universal health care is the proper vehicle for change in the health care industry and for providing health care. That is why it is improper for members on behalf of the Order within the context as lay members or religious, to promote or endorse universal health care because there are legitimate and opposing sides to this debate. For many, universal health care would be disastrous for the poor in particular and society at large. There is a wealth of economic, political, and social evidence that universal health care is a worldwide and profound failure, and that governments should deregulate the health care marketplace rather than take it over.