The World's Windbag
Our view of the UN is that it is not a pretty place. It is hopelessly compromised, riddled with corruption, and not in any position to show moral leadership to anyone. So, when the even more compromised UN committee on human rights slams the Roman Catholic Church for its "record" on homosexuality (which it opposes and rejects as unChristian, immoral and condemned by God), abortion (an act of murder, to be opposed by all Christians and likewise condemned by God Himself) we could not repress a cynical laugh.
Really. So, maybe the great and glorious and oh-so-authoritative UN committee on human rights would disclose by what authority it asserts that the unborn child is inhuman or non-human. By what standard does the UN asserts that homosexuality is moral, and a human right. The only possible response the committee could make to such interrogation would be to claim that somewhere along the line, some UN body (possibly the committee itself) took a vote on the matter and decided by some sort of majority that "a" was ethical and "b" was not. To which we retort, any morality grounded on votes is not morality at all. It is mere relativist bumpkinism. It is nothing more than standover tactics by a majority against a minority.
On that basis, the Nazis could legitimately claim complete moral rectitude in their ultimate solution with respect to the Jewish people. For our part, we could not give a fig about "morality" according to the giant statue of Man. It is a foolish contradiction in terms.
There are two other things condemned by the UN Committee. The first is the Roman Catholic Church's view on contraception; the second is its position and handling of pederasty within the church. Since the Roman Catholic Church has condemned pederasty, the real criticisms are about tactics and procedures and processes. This has been a great scandal, and a cause of much anguish to all Christians. We grieve along with our Roman Catholic friends, and, we are persuaded, with the Roman Catholic Church itself. We suppose there is much work still to be done; we are thankful for progress made in recent years.
The matter of the Roman Catholic Church's view of contraception is where we part company, only insofar as we do not find this to be condemned or forbidden in Holy Scripture. Thus, we believe it it a human law, not grounded in God's law. The only contraceptions we find condemned (by good and necessary consequence) are those which involve the purposively caused death of the conceived, unborn child--a prohibition derived from the commandment, Thou shalt not murder.
But the issue at stake here is the authority or the foundation of morality and ethics. The Christian faith and the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ is grounded in God and His absolute, eternal law; the Church's axiology and morality are likewise grounded. The UN has no such authority, no such ground. Its moral judgements quiver on sinking sand, swamped by relativist liquefaction. It's moral judgements are not worth the paper they are written on. It has no ethical authority, no absolute standards, no firm ground--merely the prejudices of some faux majority on any given day.
For our part, we despise the idol gods of mammon. But there is a flip side to all this nonsense. The UN also claims to acknowledge and respect religious freedom. So with this judgement upon a particular church, is the UN now presuming to decide which religions and which religious principles and doctrines it finds tolerable? It appears that the UN has decided that it has the authority to discriminate against particular religions, or religious teachings. Which makes the UN even more of a mockery--a windbag, replete with gaseous hypocritical inanities.
No comments:
Post a Comment