Religion and Theology

Douglas Farrow in his article Charity and Unity viewed Pope Benedict XVIs vision of an ideal world government in the Popes encyclical Caritas in Veritate as impossible, ambitious and complicated. Farrow explained that the Popes vision of a world government (Farrow, 2009), could be an invitation or a warning to the reading public so it must be carefully analyzed. According to Farrows analysis, Benedict XVI shares the same vision as the previous popes that world government is an authority to effectively operate on a global scope, even engaged also in the juridical and political aspects of governance. This raised the question, according to Farrow, on what could be the purpose of Benedict XVIs reinstatement of the issue on globalization. This has led to confusion on whether the church will engage in politics perhaps because it viewed this age of globalization as timely for evangelization.

Benedict XVI defined globalization as a consequence of divine design, more than as a consequence of technology or a fruit of history. He views it not just as a mere accident but something that is bound to happen and already written in history but he emphasized that while progress offers new possibilities for good, it also opens up appalling possibilities for evil which originally did not exist. Technical progress must have the corresponding progress in mans ethical formation. Otherwise, it will be a threat for man and for the world and globalization will fail without God.

Farrow criticized the entire encyclical with much flaws because it introduces unclear godliness and questionable judgments. Also, Farrow says it just appears to be a call to conversion to create a civilization of love that is unclear. Moreover, the pope failed to explain how or when this goal will be achieved and whether that global governance he is referring to will actually materialize in this dispensation. He just said that the people must and can not refuse it.

While Farrow recognized the popes right to the idea of world government, he argued that this is however perilous and undeniably tainted with hidden impracticality. Benedict XVI himself pleaded to the separation of religion and the state because it is only by the love of God and kinship with Christ that nations can be united. But according to Farrow, even Christendom failed to attain this. He concluded that Christians cannot help the world toward global governance which they themselves cannot achieve.

Furthermore, Benedict XVI ignored to assure whether a world government is possible. His only guarantee was that God is above all and in the end is the reign of Christ and simply implied that the church must be embraced because mankinds conversion to Christ is the only possible and real. Thus, nothing is left for todays project of global governance but a wicked future. Yet the pope still insisted that Christians must pursue global governance because this is the will of God in Christ and this is the only way to achieve the unity of mankind.

Thus, Benedict XVI introduced the work of evangelization as the priority before world authority. A social and political order must conform to the moral order. With this, he gave an evangelical mandate which eventually questioned the mandate of an entity such as the United Nations. Benedict XVI emphasized our responsibility not to reject the human impulse to unity. This is to infuse the knowledge of Christ above all into our efforts at unity.

Benedict XVI agreed with Paul VIs observation that not all progress is genuine and not all development is true. This is true even within the Church. Due to these premises, Farrow concluded that Benedicts encyclical is indeed ambitious and incoherent and may be considered as  a strong delusion which might be a threat to lead humanity to reject charity and truth, towards a nasty unity that is only for the usurpers purpose.

I share with the authors view that the encyclical is ambitious and impossible especially in our dispensation. We are living in the age where everything is in chaos. Yet, if we study the accounts of creation, especially in the Bible, God has put everything in its proper place. So I  would not blame the Pope for his vision of an ideal world, of what he calls a civilization of love under the power of God, because the God of the Bible is not the God of confusion and chaos, but the God of order. But of course, being realistic as Farrow, I say that it is truly impossible to achieve global unity, even if there is a universal authority or a world government to operate. Everything has been destroyed. The environment has been abused by rapid globalization.

Everything happens with a purpose from God and I say globalization is indeed part of Gods plan. Mans progress is destined to happen supposedly for the better. But since God has given man the free will, he uses this free will to do what is against Gods purpose. Globalization should have been good if man had known the way of God.

In the article, Farrow criticized Benedict XVI for not giving his assurance that world unity and governance can be achieved. Perhaps Benedict cannot assure himself also. I agree to his solution that mankind should be converted to Christianity. This was his idea perhaps because he believed that when a person is indoctrinated by the morals and values of the Gospel and live by them, he will become a good citizen. A world that consists of good citizens is a world in order, in unity and can have an ideal government. But in this situation where the world is already devastated and the mind of the people is already corrupted, this is impossible. At this point, I agree with Farrow. This might be the reason why he said that Benedicts claim is indeed ambitious, unclear and incoherent.

As I understand Farrow, he also criticized the Popes attempt to involve in politics specifically by his discussion of issues concerning globalization. Well, they say that the separation of the Church and the State must be advocated at all cost because the aim of the former is spiritual while the latter is material. Still, in the Biblical sense, the spirit is superior over the material. This is practiced in the true Church in the Bible. But this is not the case in our dispensation. Not all people in this world are Catholics. We cannot define Christianity as Catholicism, because there are Christians who are not Catholics so the encyclical surely is a Catholic point of view, and the church it refers to is the Catholic Church.

In summary, Farrow could have taken Popes letter as addressed to the Catholic community. Perhaps Benedicts vision can be achieved in the Catholic world but when and how is their concern. This does not apply to the entire humanity because we people differ in faith and in culture. Sadly, these differences will lead to chaos and misunderstanding which now forms the world we live in.

If only we share the same faith, in the same God, we will achieve that global or world government in peace and unity, the world that is governed by the God Almighty. There is actually no conflict between the state and church because the Supreme authority over the state should be God. So when the state plans for globalization in accordance to the will of God, surely it will lead us to good and not to a perverse end.