Father De La Kale and the bishops in Papua New Guinea are wrong. It may not be a perfect solution, but declaring in your national constitution dedication to Christianity and the Holy Trinity is always a good step, even by the fact that a nation is officially giving glory to God. If a friend wants to convert to Catholicism, proclaiming dedication to the Holy Trinity, I do not need him to suddenly change all his sinful habits for him to enter the Church. He will likely be more successful after becoming Christan then if he has to do everything right before becoming Christian and proclaiming his dedication to the Holy Trinity..
Although it refers to Catholic faith specifically, the words of Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Immortale Dei relate well to the situation in PNG and therefore the actions of the PNG government should be applauded: "All who rule, therefore, would hold in honor the holy name of God and one of their chief duties must be to favor religion, to protect it, to shield it under the credit and sanction of the laws, and neither to organize nor enact any measure that may compromise its safety."
I agree. I could understand skepticism about the sincerity of such an move and a challenge to the leaders of Papua New Guinea to lead in accord with this new preamble. But opposition? I am not sure what that does except give reason for Protestant neighbors to build a claim often lodged in the States that Catholics are not Christian. Why not argue something like “We laud our leaders efforts to put Christ at the center of our culture. We now challenge them to remove these specific forms of corruption and implement policies to improve the lives our people they serve as Jesus exhorts us to do.” That sounds conciliatory (or dare I say synodal).
I had hoped that bishops in other parts of the world were more politically savvy than the pontiff and some American bishops but it appears the self-righteous finger wagging has extended to the far corners of the Church.
I can see the concerns of the Catholic leadership, who know their country far better than we do. Fr. Licini said, “For us, it’s not necessary, we know the Christian principles are there from the very beginning; they are in the constitution already.” So the law of the land already does what Immortale Dei advocates.
I lived as a lay missionary with the Salesians in East New Britain, PNG and the reality is Parliament has no bearing on the lives of the people.
Port Moresby cannot even project authority within the city- much less the cities and villages further away. Until the people can find consensus amidst the pressures Fr. Licini identified between ancestral heritage, Western influence, and modernization, the state only serves as a vector for corruption. Whether or not the language is laudable, it's scandalous and an affront to the dignity of the words to hear them from that particular group.
Thank you for your perspective--it's always much better to hear from someone with first-hand knowledge. For Thomas to declare that the Catholic leadership is wrong and make reference to "self-righteous finger-wagging," presumes a certain wisdom not based on actual knowledge.
I still say that proclaiming a country in its Constitution to be dedicated to the Trinitarian God is good, no matter how corrupt it is, because it is something that will outlast the corrupt government in PNG. The European governments are corrupt baby killers, perversion lovers who are removing God from their constitutions, while the corrupt PNG government is inserting God into there constitution. What is better?Yet the bishops in Europe are not appalled even privately, while the Church criticizes the PNG government publicly for the only good thing they may have done, even if only for popularity.
I'm not a theologian, but is that even a correct way to refer to the Trinity? "God, the Father; Jesus Christ, the Son; and Holy Spirit" seems, at first glance, to emphasize the three separate persons while downplaying the single Divine Nature. Shouldn't it say something like "God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"? Maybe I am reading too much into the semicolons.
I also noticed this, although was encouraged by the singular nature of "as our Creator and Sustainer" . It would have been bad if Creator and Sustainer had been plural.
Father De La Kale and the bishops in Papua New Guinea are wrong. It may not be a perfect solution, but declaring in your national constitution dedication to Christianity and the Holy Trinity is always a good step, even by the fact that a nation is officially giving glory to God. If a friend wants to convert to Catholicism, proclaiming dedication to the Holy Trinity, I do not need him to suddenly change all his sinful habits for him to enter the Church. He will likely be more successful after becoming Christan then if he has to do everything right before becoming Christian and proclaiming his dedication to the Holy Trinity..
Although it refers to Catholic faith specifically, the words of Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Immortale Dei relate well to the situation in PNG and therefore the actions of the PNG government should be applauded: "All who rule, therefore, would hold in honor the holy name of God and one of their chief duties must be to favor religion, to protect it, to shield it under the credit and sanction of the laws, and neither to organize nor enact any measure that may compromise its safety."
I agree. I could understand skepticism about the sincerity of such an move and a challenge to the leaders of Papua New Guinea to lead in accord with this new preamble. But opposition? I am not sure what that does except give reason for Protestant neighbors to build a claim often lodged in the States that Catholics are not Christian. Why not argue something like “We laud our leaders efforts to put Christ at the center of our culture. We now challenge them to remove these specific forms of corruption and implement policies to improve the lives our people they serve as Jesus exhorts us to do.” That sounds conciliatory (or dare I say synodal).
I had hoped that bishops in other parts of the world were more politically savvy than the pontiff and some American bishops but it appears the self-righteous finger wagging has extended to the far corners of the Church.
I can see the concerns of the Catholic leadership, who know their country far better than we do. Fr. Licini said, “For us, it’s not necessary, we know the Christian principles are there from the very beginning; they are in the constitution already.” So the law of the land already does what Immortale Dei advocates.
I lived as a lay missionary with the Salesians in East New Britain, PNG and the reality is Parliament has no bearing on the lives of the people.
Port Moresby cannot even project authority within the city- much less the cities and villages further away. Until the people can find consensus amidst the pressures Fr. Licini identified between ancestral heritage, Western influence, and modernization, the state only serves as a vector for corruption. Whether or not the language is laudable, it's scandalous and an affront to the dignity of the words to hear them from that particular group.
Thank you for your perspective--it's always much better to hear from someone with first-hand knowledge. For Thomas to declare that the Catholic leadership is wrong and make reference to "self-righteous finger-wagging," presumes a certain wisdom not based on actual knowledge.
I still say that proclaiming a country in its Constitution to be dedicated to the Trinitarian God is good, no matter how corrupt it is, because it is something that will outlast the corrupt government in PNG. The European governments are corrupt baby killers, perversion lovers who are removing God from their constitutions, while the corrupt PNG government is inserting God into there constitution. What is better?Yet the bishops in Europe are not appalled even privately, while the Church criticizes the PNG government publicly for the only good thing they may have done, even if only for popularity.
I'm not a theologian, but is that even a correct way to refer to the Trinity? "God, the Father; Jesus Christ, the Son; and Holy Spirit" seems, at first glance, to emphasize the three separate persons while downplaying the single Divine Nature. Shouldn't it say something like "God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"? Maybe I am reading too much into the semicolons.
You might not be. You can get some very odd trinitarian variances among Protestant churches, especially the Pentecostal varieties.
I also noticed this, although was encouraged by the singular nature of "as our Creator and Sustainer" . It would have been bad if Creator and Sustainer had been plural.