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].
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire