Mulling over LEE LOFASO to STEVE ASHER 29 Apr 2005

Hi Lee,

SA>The Parliament of the World's Religions "manifesto" I referred to
SA>in an earlier post was, of course, just something I made up on
SA>the fly, using the type of language found in manifestoes &
SA>declarations.

SA>The actual "Declaration Toward a Global Ethic" issued by the
SA>Council for a Parliament of the World's Religions can be found
SA>at... http://www.cpwr.org/resource/ethic.pdf

 LL> Thanks for the url.  I noticed that Hans Kung, who is a Swiss
 LL> theologian and dissident Catholic (not sure if he has been
 LL> excommunicated yet), wrote the original draft.  

No worries; you can see the sort of inclusive, "feel good", anti-Gospel
language in the Declaration, and how it can be used to deal with
"negative",
"separatist", "exclusivist" types, who reject
inclusiveness in favour of
(e.g.) Jesus Christ being the only name through people can be saved, by
unmerited grace through faith (etc).

"We affirm that a common set of core values is found in the teachings
of the religions, and that these form the basis of a global ethic."

"We declare: ..." "We take individual responsibility
..." "We must have
patience and acceptance." "We make a commitment ..."
"We shall not ..."
"We must strive ..." "We must speak ..." "No new
global order without
a new global ethic!" (and so on)

If you have worked for a large (and possibly not so large) employer,
you may have undergone a "corporate change" process, which made the
employees appear to be "empowered" to cut through the layers of
bureaucracy, flatter management structure (eliminating layers of
middle management); our people are our most valuable resource etc;
while the managers with the real power get golden parachutes if
they go, or even more power if they stay, and the company outsources
and off-shores its operations & sacks the "valuable resources"
(workers). For those malcontents (like me) who have no interest
in being part of a "new global order" with its "new global
ethic",
there will be the "sword of cleavage" or similar to send us to
a place where we won't get in the way.

 LL> Kung is the fellow who keeps telling folks that he should be the 
 LL> New Pope of a New Christianity.  This is what Kung said about the 
 LL> election of B16 -

 LL> "An enormous disappointment for all those who hoped for a reformist
 LL> and pastoral pope." - Hans Kung

 LL> Of course, the only "reformist and pastoral" pope Kung would like
 LL> is one who would renounce most, if not all, Catholic dogma and
 LL> doctrine. Meaning himself.  :)

Not necessarily, as the "enormous disappointment" sentence comes in
"The Result of the Papal Election" (by Hans Kung) where he also says:
"But we must wait and see.... " and talks about someone who enters
the conclave may emerge as the opposite ("progressive" or
"conservative")
of what he went in. ( http://www.logosjurnal.com/kung_special.htm )

Hans Kung in turn happens to be President of the Global Ethic Foundation
( http://www.weltethos.org/dat_enf/index_e.htm ), and played a major
role in the writing of the documents of Vatican II etc.

 LL> Anyway, after reading the "manifesto" I'll post a few comments
 LL> about it. 

Thanks, & thanks for connecting the dots to Hans Kung. Interesting times!

Cheers, Steve..

---