Mr President Ladies and Gentlemen,
As I begin my address to this Assembly, I would first express to you, Mr President, my sincere gratitude for the kind words directed at me . My thanks go also to the Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for inviting me to visit the headquarters of the Organization and for the welcome he addressed to me. I greet the Ambassadors and Diplomats from the Member States and all those present through you, I greet the peoples who are represented here. They look to this institution to carry forward the inspiration that guided the foundation, that of a "center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends" of peace and development (cf. Charter of the United Nations , Art. 1.2-1.4). As Pope John Paul II said in 1995, the Organization should be "a moral center where all nations of the world feel at home and develop a shared awareness of being, so to speak, a 'family of nations'" ( to the General Assembly of the United Nations, the 50th anniversary of the founding , New York, October 5, 1995, 14).
Through the United Nations, Member States have established universal objectives which, although not coinciding with the total common good of the human family, undoubtedly represent a fundamental part of that good. The founding principles of the Organization - the desire for peace, the quest for justice, respect for the dignity of the person, humanitarian cooperation and assistance - express the just aspirations of the human spirit, and constitute the ideals which should underpin international relations. As my predecessors Paul VI and John Paul II have observed from this very podium, all this is something that the Catholic Church and the Holy See follow attentively and with interest, seeing in your activity as problems and conflicts concerning the world community can be subject to common regulation. The United Nations embodies the aspiration for a "greater degree of international ordering" (John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 43), inspired and governed by the principle of subsidiarity, and therefore capable of responding to the demands of the human family through binding international rules and through structures capable of harmonizing the daily unfolding of the lives of the people. This is all the more necessary at a time when we experience the obvious paradox of a multilateral consensus that continues to be in crisis because of its subordination to the decisions of a few, while the world's problems call for interventions in the form of collective action by the international community.
Indeed, questions of security, development goals, reduction of local and global inequalities, protection of the environment, resources and climate, require all international leaders to act jointly and to show a readiness to act in good faith, within the law and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the planet. I am thinking especially of those countries in Africa and other parts the world which remain on the margins of authentic integral development, and are therefore at risk of experiencing only the negative effects of globalization. In the context of international relations, it is necessary to recognize the higher role played by rules and structures that are intrinsically ordered to promote the common good, and therefore to safeguard human freedom. These regulations do not limit freedom, on the contrary, they promote it when they prohibit behavior and actions which work against the common good, curb its effective exercise and hence compromise the dignity of every human person. In the name of liberty must be a correlation between rights and duties, by which every person is called to assume responsibility for their choices, made as a result of entering into relations with others. Here our thoughts turn to how breakthroughs in scientific research and technological advances have sometimes been applied. Despite the enormous benefits that humanity can gain, some instances of this represent a clear violation of the order of creation, to the point where not only is the sacred character of life contradicted, but the human person and the family are robbed of their natural identity. Likewise, international action to preserve the environment and to protect various forms of life on earth must not only guarantee a rational use of technology and science, but must also rediscover the authentic image of creation. This never requires a choice to be made between science and ethics: rather it is adopting a scientific method that is truly respectful of ethical imperatives.
Recognition of the unity of the human family and the attention to the innate dignity of every man and woman, today find renewed emphasis in the principle of responsibility to protect. Only recently this principle has been defined, but it was already present implicitly at the origins of the United Nations and is now increasingly characteristic of its activity. Every State has the primary duty to protect its own population from grave and sustained violations of human rights, as well as from the consequences of humanitarian crises, whether natural or man-made. If States are unable to guarantee such protection, the international community must intervene with the juridical means provided in the Charter of the United Nations and other international instruments. The action of the international community and its institutions, provided that it respects the principles undergirding the international order, should never be interpreted as an unwarranted imposition or a limitation of sovereignty. On the contrary, it is indifference or failure to intervene that the real damage. What is needed is a deeper search for ways of preventing and managing conflicts by exploring every possible diplomatic avenue, and giving attention and encouragement to even the faintest sign of dialogue or desire for reconciliation.
The principle of "responsibility to protect" was considered by the ancient ius gentium as the foundation of every action taken by government with regard to the governed: at the time when the concept of national sovereign States was first developing, the friar Dominican Francisco de Vitoria, rightly considered as precursor of the United Nations, described this responsibility as an aspect of natural reason shared by all nations, and as the result of an international order whose task was to regulate relations between peoples. Now, as then, this principle has to invoke the idea of \u200b\u200bthe person as image of the Creator, the desire for the absolute and the essence of freedom. The founding of the United Nations, as we know, coincided with the profound upheavals that humanity experienced when he left the reference to the meaning of transcendence and natural reason, and consequently were grossly violated human freedom and dignity. When this happens, it threatens the objective foundations of the values \u200b\u200binspiring and governing the international order and it undermines the cogent and inviolable basis of those principles formulated and consolidated by the United Nations. When you are faced with new and insistent challenges, it is a mistake to fall back on a pragmatic approach, limited to determining "common ground", minimal in content and weak in its effects.
reference to human dignity, which is the foundation and goal of the responsibility to protect, leads us to the theme we are specifically focusing upon this year, which marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 'Men . The document was the result of a convergence of religious and cultural traditions, all motivated by the common desire to place the human person at the heart of institutions, laws and workings of society, and to consider the human person essential for the world of culture, religion and science. Human rights are increasingly being presented as a common language and the ethical substratum of international relations. At the same time, the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights all serve as guarantees safeguarding human dignity. It is clear, however, that the rights recognized and expounded in the Declaration apply to everyone by virtue of the common origin of the person, who remains the highest point of the God's creative design for the world and for history. They are based on the natural law inscribed on human hearts and present in different cultures and civilizations. Removing human rights from this context would mean restricting their range and yielding to a relativistic conception, according to which the meaning and interpretation of rights could vary and their universality would be denied in the name of different cultural, political, social and even religious . We must not allow such a wide variety of viewpoints to obscure the fact that not only rights are universal, but so is the human person, the subject of those rights.
The life of the community, both domestically and internationally, clearly demonstrates that respect for human rights and the guarantees that follow are measures of the common good that serve to evaluate the relationship between justice and injustice, development and poverty, security and conflict. The promotion of human rights remains the most effective strategy for eliminating inequalities between countries and social groups, as well as increasing security. Of course, the victims of hardship and despair, whose human dignity is violated with impunity, become easy prey to the call to violence and they can then become violators of peace. The common good that human rights help to accomplish can not be achieved merely by applying correct procedures, nor even less by achieving a balance between competing rights. The merit of the Universal Declaration is that it has enabled different cultures, juridical expressions and institutional models to converge around a fundamental nucleus of values, and hence of rights. Today, however, must redouble their efforts in the face of pressure to reinterpret the foundations of Declaration and to compromise its inner unity so as to facilitate a move away from the protection of human dignity towards the satisfaction of simple interests, often particular interests. The Declaration was adopted as a "common standard of achievement" (Preamble ) and can not be applied piecemeal, according to trends or selective choices that merely run the risk of contradicting the unity of the human person and thus the indivisibility of human rights.
Experience shows that legality often prevails over justice when the insistence upon rights makes them appear as the exclusive result of legislative enactments or normative decisions taken by the various agencies of those in power. When presented purely in terms of legality, rights risk becoming weak propositions divorced from the ethical and rational dimension which is their basis and purpose. In contrast, the Universal Declaration has reinforced the conviction that respect for human rights is principally rooted in unchanging justice, which is also based on the binding force of international proclamations. This aspect is often overlooked when the attempt to deprive rights of their true function in the name of a narrowly utilitarian perspective. Since rights and the resulting duties follow naturally from human interaction, it is easy to forget that they are the result of a shared sense of justice built primarily upon solidarity among the members of society and hence valid at all times and for all peoples . This intuition was expressed as early as the fifth century by Augustine of Hippo, one of the masters of our intellectual heritage, which had this to say about the Do unto others what you would not want done to yourself that this "can not in any way vary according to different understandings of these in the world "(De doctrina christiana , III, 14). Therefore, human rights must be respected as an expression of justice and not merely because they are enforceable through the will of the legislators.
Ladies and Gentlemen, As history proceeds, new situations arise and you try to link them to new rights. Discernment, the ability to distinguish good from evil, becomes even more crucial in the context of demands that concern the very lives and conduct of persons, communities and peoples. Addressing the issue of rights, since there are important situations and profound realities involved, discernment is both an indispensable and a fruitful virtue.
Discernment, then, shows that entrusting exclusively to individual States, with their laws and institutions, the ultimate responsibility to meet the aspirations of people, communities and entire peoples, can sometimes have consequences that exclude the possibility of a social order respectful of the dignity and rights the person. On the other hand, a vision of life firmly anchored in the religious dimension can help achieve this, since recognition of the transcendent value of every man and woman favors conversion of heart, which then leads to a commitment to resist violence , terrorism and war, and to promote justice and peace. This also provides the proper context for the interfaith dialogue that the United Nations are called to support, just as it supports dialogue in other fields of human activity. Dialogue should be recognized as the means by which the various components of society can articulate their point of view and build consensus around the truth concerning particular values \u200b\u200bor goals. It is the nature of religions, freely practiced, that they can autonomously conduct a dialogue of thought and life. If at this level, the religious sphere is kept separate from politics, then great benefits ensue for individuals and communities. On the other hand, the United Nations can count on the results of dialogue between religions and can draw fruit from the willingness of believers to place their experiences in serving the common good. Their task is to propose a vision of faith not in terms of intolerance, discrimination and conflict, but in terms of complete respect for truth, coexistence, rights and reconciliation.
human rights, of course, must include the right to religious freedom, understood as an expression of a dimension that is both individual and community, a vision that brings out the unity of the person while clearly distinguishing between the dimension of the citizen and that of the believer. The United Nations' activities in recent years has ensured that public debate gives space to viewpoints inspired by a religious vision in all its dimensions, including ritual, worship, education, dissemination of information, as well as the freedom to profess and choose religion. It is therefore inconceivable that believers should have to suppress a part of themselves - their faith - to be active citizens should never be necessary to deny God in order to enjoy their rights. The rights associated with religion are more in need of protection if they are considered to clash with a prevailing secular ideology or with majority religious positions of an exclusive nature. You can not restrict the full guarantee of religious freedom to the free exercise of worship, in contrast, has to give due consideration to the public dimension of religion, and hence the possibility of believers playing their part in building the social order. Indeed, already they are doing, for example through their influential and generous involvement in a vast network of initiatives which extend from Universities, scientific institutions and schools to health care agencies and charitable organizations in the service of the poorest and most marginalized. The refusal to recognize the contribution to society that is rooted in the religious dimension and in the quest - by its very nature, expressing communion between persons - would effectively privilege an individualistic approach, and would fragment the unity of the person.
My presence at this Assembly is a sign of esteem for the United Nations and is intended to express the hope that the Organization will increasingly serve as a sign of unity between States and an instrument of service to the entire human family. It also demonstrates the willingness of the Catholic Church to offer her proper contribution to building international relations in a way that allows every person and every people to feel they can make a difference. The Church also works for the realization of these goals through the international activity of the Holy See, in a manner consistent with her contribution in the ethical and moral sphere and the free activity of her faithful. Indeed, the Holy See has always had a place in the assemblies of the Nations, thereby manifesting its specific character as a subject in the international. As the United Nations recently confirmed, the Holy See thereby makes its contribution according to the provisions of international law, helps to define and refer to it.
The United Nations remains a privileged setting in which the Church is committed to contributing her experience "of humanity", developed over the centuries among peoples of every race and culture, and making it available to all members of the international community . This experience and activity, directed towards attaining freedom for every believer, seeks also to increase the protection given ai diritti della persona. Tali diritti sono basati e modellati sulla natura trascendente della persona, che permette a uomini e donne di percorrere il loro cammino di fede e la loro ricerca di Dio in questo mondo. Il riconoscimento di questa dimensione va rafforzato se vogliamo sostenere la speranza dell’umanità in un mondo migliore, e se vogliamo creare le condizioni per la pace, lo sviluppo, la cooperazione e la garanzia dei diritti delle generazioni future.
Nella mia recente Enciclica Spe salvi , ho sottolineato “che la sempre nuova faticosa ricerca di retti ordinamenti per le cose umane è compito di ogni generazione” (n. 25). Per i cristiani tale compito è motivated by the hope drawn from the saving work of Jesus Christ. That is why the Church is happy to be associated with the activity of this distinguished Organization, charged with the responsibility to promote peace and goodwill throughout the world. Dear friends, thank you for the opportunity to address you today and promise the support of my prayers as you pursue your noble task.
Before you leave from this distinguished Assembly, I extend my best wishes in the official languages, all nations are represented:
Peace and Prosperity with God's help!
Paix et prospérité, avec l'aide de Dieu!
Paz y prosperidad con la ayuda de Dios!
سلام وإزدهار بعون الله!
by God's help we would like to enjoy peace and prosperity!
Мира и благоденствия с помощью Боҗией!
Thank you very much!
