I often read conservative American Catholics decrying something by the name of "globalism" and speaking in favour of populist nationalism or economic patriotism. Every time I see this, I get somewhat confused because they are members of a supranational church that was born within a transnational empire - that of Rome. During the Early Modern Period in the seventeenth century, Protestant states waged war in the name of nationalistic movements against the supranational authority of the Holy Roman Empire, the Spanish Habsburg Dynasty. Back then, Catholic states and Princes were the defenders of an established cosmopolitan, international order overseen by the Emperor and Pope. Nationalism - distinct from "civic patriotism" or normal love of patria (country) - is in fact a kind of heresy that arose in its contemporary form from the Lutheran and Anglican Reformations in the 1500s. When the English Reformation started in 1534, King Henry VIII passed the Acts of Supremacy making him “supreme head in earth of the Church of England” and repealing any “usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign authority”. The foreign authority, of course, was the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. At the time, church law was ultimately under the jurisdiction of Rome and was universally binding throughout Christendom. The modern form of this ideology - known as "Westphalian Sovereignty," emerged following Protestant successes (aided by France) at the end of the Thirty Years War. The Treaty of Westphalia was condemned by the papacy as void and heretical. And yet American Catholics seem to be emphatic believers in Westphalian "national sovereignty". This concept was staunchly condemned by Venerable Pope Pius XII in 1944 and 1957 respectively: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12XMAS.HTM Democracy and a Lasting Peace 1944 Christmas Message of His Holiness Pope Pius XII NATURE AND CONDITIONS OF AN EFFECTIVE PEACE SETTLEMENT UNITY OF MANKIND AND SOCIETY OF PEOPLES 53. But how far will the representatives and pioneers of democracy be inspired in their deliberations by the conviction that the absolute order of beings and purposes, of which We have repeatedly spoken, comprises also, as a moral necessity and the crowning of social development, the unity of mankind and of the family of peoples? 54. On the recognition of this principle hangs the future of the peace. No world reform, no peace guarantee can abstract from it without being weakened and without being untrue to itself. If, on the other hand, this same moral necessity were to find its realization in a society of peoples which succeeded in eliminating the structural defects and shortcomings of former systems, then the majesty of that order would regulate and inspire equally the deliberations of that society and the use of its instruments of sanction. 56. For this reason, too, one understands why the authority of such a society must be real and effective over the member states... FORMATION OF A COMMON MEANS TO MAINTAIN PEACE ...An essential point in any future international arrangement would be the formation of an organ for the maintenance of peace, of an organ invested by common consent with supreme power to whose office it would also pertain to smother in its germinal state any threat of isolated or collective aggression. https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-...ii_spe_19571104_comunita-carbone-acciaio.html ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE PIUS PP. XII THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL - C.E.C.A. * Monday, November 4, 1957 It is a pleasure to receive you, gentlemen, and to greet you as the first and, at present, the only duly constituted European parliamentary institution representing different States. Everyone knows with what interest We have followed the attempts at federation which have been going on since the end of World War II, and particularly the project which was to end in the setting up of this European Coal and Steel Community, armed with true legislative powers in its own domain. The movement was launched in the month of May, 1950, in a spirit that was both daring and realistic, and in 1951 a treaty signed by the six countries you represent gave it expression. This treaty became effective on July 25, 1952, and its first economic results were soon felt in a favorable way. An event such as the meeting of your legislative assembly in Rome, will, We feel sure, create greater public interest in the benefits to be derived from a unity that is broader than that of a nation as understood in the traditional sense. Men will not fail to be struck by the increased production of coal and steel; by the lower prices resulting from the elimination of customs barriers and restrictive measures ; and by the professional readaptation of workers and the free circulation of manpower which, very fortunately, have recently been put into effect... A vital economic necessity obliges modern states of lesser power to form a close alliance if they wish to pursue the scientific, industrial, and commercial activities which condition their prosperity, their true liberty, and their cultural growth. A whole set of reasons urges the nations of Europe today to federate in an effective way. The material and moral ruins caused by the last World War have given a better insight into the futility of narrow nationalistic politics. Europe, battered and humbled, feels the need of uniting and of putting an end to worldly rivalries...Finally, she senses, and so does the entire world with her, that all men are brothers and are called to work together in assuming responsibility for all the miseries of mankind and in putting an end to the scandal of famine and ignorance. How can the nations of Europe dare again to confine themselves to a shortsighted protectionism when experience has proven that such measures ultimately stifle economic expansion and diminish the resources that are available for the improvement of the lot of humanity?... To enter into a larger community always entails sacrifices, but it is urgently necessary to understand their inescapable and ultimately beneficial character. We note, incidentally, a happy change in public opinion in this regard, an opinion now better informed, thanks to the facility of travel and the abundance of written and audio-visual documentation from which everyone can profit at little expense. This is a beginning, and to speed it on its way the contribution of a long Christian tradition will secure for you, with God's help, that degree of unselfishness without which there cannot be profound and durable union... The results thus far obtained augur well for the future, and We express the most sincere wishes for the work of your assembly. The countries of Europe which have agreed to the principle of delegating a part of their sovereignty to a supranational organism have embarked, We believe, on a salutary way which can produce, for them and for Europe, a new life in all domains, an enrichment not only economic and cultural but also spiritual and religious. And so We call down on your assembly light and strength from on high, and as a pledge of these We grant with all Our heart Our Apostolic Blessing to you, to all who are dear to you and whom you desire to recommend to Our prayers. (Continued....)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-...s/hf_p-xii_spe_19570613_congresso-europa.html ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE PIUS PP. XII, TO THE CONGRESS OF EUROPE * Thursday, June 13, 1957 It gives Us great pleasure to welcome you, gentlemen, on the occasion of the Congress of Europe, which was called by the Italian Council for the European movement. It has been your wish that your work help strengthen the spirit of cooperation between organizations and political forces in order that European unity might be established more quickly... Your congress has kept a sharp eye on the future, and you have, before anything else, examined the decisive point upon which depends the formation of any community worthy of the name : the formation of a European political authority which will have sufficient responsibility to be felt. From this point of view, the European Economic Community is less successful than the Coal and Steel Community, whose High Authority has powers which are relatively broad and which, except in certain determined cases, do not depend upon any Council of Ministers... You have already looked into the question of an external political community and you have learned that, for such a situation to be successful and produce results, it does not necessarily presuppose an already existing economic integration. A single external political community in Europe, though it will allow for the differences arising from varying interests, will also base itself on the common economic, spiritual, and cultural interests of its members. Such a community is becoming more and more indispensable in a world which, more and more, is splitting up into small groups... You have already ventured to pass beyond the realities of the present, and are beginning to select the stones necessary for tomorrow's building. We are happy to see such a spirit, persuaded that it comes from generous and upright motives. Your aim is to secure for Europe, which has so often been torn asunder and bloodstained, a lasting unity which will enable her to continue her mission in history. If it is true that for Europe the message of Christianity was like the leaven in dough, always working and causing the whole mass to rise, it is no less true that this same message remains, today as yesterday, the most valuable of the treasures with which she has been charged. With the concept and exercise of the fundamental liberties of the human person, this message can maintain the vigor and integrity of the operations of family and national society and, in a supra-national community, can guarantee respect for cultural differences and a spirit of conciliation and cooperation, along with an acceptance of the sacrifices which it will entail and the dedication which it will demand. Consider Luigi Taparelli D’Azeglio (1793–1862), who was a Jesuit priest, celebrated theologian and political philosopher of the nineteenth century. He coined the terms "Social Justice", "solidarity" and "subsidiarity" that have since been widely employed in a wide variety of magisterial documents; incorporated into EU treaty law, official UN declarations and which also feature in the discourse of politicians up till this day across the world. To this end, he cofounded the journal Civiltà Cattolica in 1850 and wrote for it for twelve years. Taparelli was particularly concerned with the problems arising from the industrial revolution. He was a proponent of reviving the philosophical school of Thomism, and his social teachings directly influenced Pope Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical, Rerum novarum (On the Condition of the Working Classes). For this reason and not without justification he is often remembered as the "Father of Catholic Social Teaching". Taparelli had indisputably great foresight, and he identified natural tendencies towards the unification of nations, which he believed would ultimately coalesce into a saggio cosmopolitanismo or Universal Society of Nations, a supranational association of all hitherto sovereign states. As a Jesuit, he had faith that this is the (as he saw it) expressed will of God that should therefore irresistibly come to pass, based upon natural law and order. Here are a set of paragraphs from Fr. Taparelli's rather wordy treatise on this issue. He describes the reasons why he regards International Authority as desirable, necessary and inevitable; before proceeding to speculate somewhat on the nature of the envisioned Authority: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...QaM-YD4Cg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false The Catholic Tradition of the Law of Nations By John Eppstein Taparelli D'Azeglio. 'Essai Théorique de Droit Naturel,' Book VI, Chap. V. Article 11. Form of International Societies: their end, their duties and their rights: 1363. After having established the origin of international societies we must now study their forms and their laws. First we see a grouping of intelligent beings who work together in pursuit of their common good... The international ethnarchic society must therefore posses an authority. It must be governed and guided in all that is necessary to its existence, its perfection and the attainment of its end. How could there exist a Law of Nations, that is to say a body of laws binding upon all nations, if there were not a real authority capable of laying down those laws?... Nature of International Authority: 1365. Assuming the free consent of the nations, the international society naturally takes the form of a polyarchy...The international authority will ordinarily and naturally be polyarchic; even when it appears to be administered by one man, it belongs in reality to all the associated peoples. 1366. But in whom then is this international authority to reside? To answer that question let us restate the foundation upon which all International Law is based. The nations are independent societies, their association is in itself a perfectly voluntary association. Thus authority resides, as of right, in the common accord of the associated nations and it is for the members of the association to determine under what form this authority is to be exercised. Since the decline of the German Empire and of the quasi-theocratic power of the Popes, the international authority has, among European peoples, revealed itself in the agreements between the different sovereigns, expressed in treaties, alliances, congresses, confederations, etc. But as we have observed (in the origin of human society) the polyarchy of brothers, equal in rights, emancipated from the father's control, giving to their common authority certain forms, in order that it may be more effective and more lasting, so we see modern nations, now that they are freed from the guardianship of the Holy Roman Empire and the protection of the Popes, feeling more and more in need of an international authority which is regular, perfectly determined in all its aspects, an authority which is strong, which is respected by all, and which can ensure the rights of the weak shall no longer be at the mercy of the strong. Herein lies the interests of the majority. But when interest itself is at one one with the requirements of justice, it becomes all powerful and infallibly determines the forms which accord most harmoniously with the needs of human societies. And so, I believe, we shall gradually see arising in the world a kind of universal federal tribunal which will replace alliances, congresses and treaties, just as these have temporarily replaced today the supreme authority of the Emperor and the patriarchical government of the Popes. I do not see how this stage can fail to come, though it be reached but slowly, for the life of nations can be reckoned in centuries as the life of men is counted in years. Special confederations between small States seem to be a prelude to the organization of the international authority, just as, in the Middle Ages, the evolution of the Commune led, little by little, to a complete state of civil equality and the unity of the political authority. 1367. But let us leave to the passage of time, the art of politics and the march of events - blind instruments of Divine Providence - the gradual development of the political forms of international society, so as to achieve the welfare of the nations, in the same as the civic forms of the State must insensibly intend to the attainment of happiness for the families and individuals that compose it. We can now conclude from all that has been said, that the peoples form among themselves a society of equals; that in consequence of the authority necessary to direct them resides in common accord, or at least in the majority of the nations associated; that in their common interest they cannot refuse to acknowledge that authority without, at the same time, snapping the social relations which unite them together; and that this authority must have the power and the strength to maintain order within the international association... So to conclude: Why are so many American Catholics refusing to accept the Church's teaching on the desirability of supranational political union? To link this in with prophecy, the expectation of an "era of peace" inaugurated by a Holy Pontiff and Great Monarch presupposes the rebirth of an international, supranational community - like a modern version of the Holy Roman Empire but grander and more politically advanced (i.e. democratic).
So to conclude: Why are so many American Catholics refusing to accept the Church's teaching on the desirability of supranational political union? To link this in with prophecy, the expectation of an "era of peace" inaugurated by a Holy Pontiff and Great Monarch presupposes the rebirth of an international, supranational community - like a modern version of the Holy Roman Empire but grander and more politically advanced (i.e. democratic).[/QUOTE] Because it stands for abortion, cultural suicide, the widespread raping of our daughters, satanism, led by the anti-god left such as the pope's buddy George Soros and the editor of the Italian paper The Republicca, the impotent and worthless United Nations, euthanasia, religious indifference, Geez, I could go on and on.
Isn't that treating "globalism" like its a sum-zero game? Notice I put it in brackets. Do you think that Pope Pius XII would have supported the form of globalism you depict in such stark terms above? No, obviously not. Yet he did endorse, in principle, supranational "globalism" - including the founding treaties of the present European Union. And this was before Vatican II, of course. He did not support unlimited state sovereignty, indeed he believed in the need for establishing a political order above the level of the nation. How would you respond to Pope Pius and Luigi Taparelli's statements?
Your ideas were just that, idealism. After the wholesale raping of our children, the days of pray, pay, and obey are over. Today is a different world. And I'm sorry, to trust in the current left-wing papacy would be utter madness. That is how I would respond. And how do you think Pope Pius XII would respond to this pope?
Or perhaps, some people have lost the ability to conceive of anything positive in respect of the future? And they aren't my ideas. I see nothing utopian or excessively idealistic in what Pope Pius XII said. Your words about the priesthood are just awful (I assume you are referring to them but hope I am woefully wrong and misread you). You dishonour the majority of excellent ministers of the Gospel because of the infiltration of a minority of devils. The Magisterium is still the Magisterium, with the teaching authority of the Apostles. Would you have us be in schism from the one true faith? There are just far too many attacks made upon the Holy Father and other members of the hierarchy from America these days - motivated, one can only assume, by barely concealed partisanship. No wonder few priests frequent these supposedly Catholic forums any longer. The anticlericalism among the American laity seems to have reached a fever pitch I haven't witnessed before- indeed it's worse than anything cooked up by John Calvin or Martin Luther.
But wait a minute, not only did you not answer my question, aren't the hierarchy thinking about putting a statue of Martin Luther in the Vatican? Don't be a hypocrite now. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a...atican-and-a-new-papal-definition-of-lukewarm
Since you won't answer my question, I will. Pope Pius XII says, 1. "I thought we condemned communism, why is Pope Francis a communist/liberation theologian? 2. How can the pope allow catholics living together receive holy communion? 3. How can Pope Francis allow two same-sex couples receive holy communion? 4. Why does Pope Francis say "who am I to judge" when talking about sodomy? ...and then why does he think he can "judge President Trump"? 5. Why has Pope Francis belittled and bullied practicing catholics during his four years? I could go on, but I think you get the picture. I wish the hierarchy would "lay off " priests who have a traditional bent. What about them? Do you want some stories?
Vouthon, The answer to your question is simple: examine any present international community in existence today and you will see that the treasure and cornerstone of Christianity has been rejected as outdated and trivial. Thanks to the fruit of the French Revolution any attempt to build a supranational organization has been founded on a man-centered, not a God-centered, worldview. The Church has a duty to call the nations to a God-centered vision, but the hope for such a reality waits upon the conversion of humanity to Jesus Christ and His Church. Safe in the Barque of Peter!
The Europe of Pope Pius X11's time was a different place than the Europe of today. The Church of his time was different too. Many of us are hanging on by a thread. We are likely to be the last generation of Catholics in "post-Christian" countries to hold on to the faith of our fathers despite priests, bishops and the reigning Pope. Sad to say that I believe Pope Francis and his inner circle don't want us in his Church, otherwise he wouldn't use every opportunity to mock and denigrate any Catholic who believes what the Church taught before his papacy. What makes you think that priests avoid websites where Catholics aren't banned for expressing disappointment in the hierarchy or fears that the Pope may have lost his faith? We are led to believe that such Catholics are a tiny minority so perhaps those priests are busy conversing with the "Pope Francis Catholics". Then again, they could be busy brushing up on the virtues of people like Martin Luther and Emma Bonino. Or maybe they are planning their weddings. Anything is possible in a Church where anything goes. Thank God that there are American Catholics with enough love for the Faith to speak up for it even if their voices are being drowned out by those who treat the truth as hate speech.
Bottom line is that the globalism type organisations, e.g. UN and EU, that you get nowadays are massively atheistic and are sucking the political power out of nation states which are in many cases happy to acknowledge the existence of God, e.g. US, modern Russia, UK to a degree.
To my understanding the problem is not globalism per se, but rather the way it is being implemented (i.e. taking God out of the equation) by the big 'globalist' powers. Pope Benedict XVI talks about this in Caritas in Veritate, which is well worth reading. One thing he says: "Globalisation [to my understanding, the process by which 'globalism' comes about?] is a multifaceted and complex phenomenon which must be grasped in all the diversity and unity of all its different dimensions, including the theological dimension. In this way it will be possible to experience and to steer the globalisation of humanity in relational terms, in terms of communion and the sharing of goods" (p 49).
