The Holy See

Benedict XVI’s letter marking St. John Paul II’s birth centenary. 15.05.2020

.- Here is the full text of Pope emeritus Benedict XVI’s letter marking the centenary of the birth of St. John Paul IIThe English translation of this letter, dated May 4, was released May 15 by the Polish bishops’ conference:

100 years ago, on May 18th, Pope John Paul II was born in the small Polish town of Wadowice.

After having been divided for over 100 years by three neighboring major powers of Prussia, Russia, and Austria, Poland regained Her independence at the end of the First World War. It was a historic event that gave birth to great hope; but it also demanded much hardship as the new State, in the process of Her reorganization, continued to feel the pressure of the two Powers of Germany and Russia. In this situation of oppression, but above all in this situation marked by hope, young Karol Wojtyła grew up. He lost his mother and his brother quite early and, in the end, his father as well, from whom he gained deep and warm piety. The young Karol was particularly drawn by literature and theater. After passing his final secondary school exam, he chose to study these subjects.

“In order to avoid the deportation, in the fall of 1940 he went to work in a quarry of the Solvay chemical plant.” (cf. Gift and Mystery). “In the fall of 1942, he made the final decision to enter the Seminary of Kraków, which Kraków’s Archbishop Sapieha had secretly established in his residence. As a factory worker, Karol already started studying theology in old textbooks; and so, on 1 November 1946, he could be ordained a priest.” (cf. Ibid.) Of course, Karol not only studied theology in books but also through his experience of the difficult situation that he and his Country found itself in. This is somewhat a characteristic of his whole life and work. He studied books but the questions that they posed became the reality that he profoundly experienced and lived. As a young Bishop – as an Auxiliary Bishop since 1958 and then Archbishop of Kraków from 1964 – the Second Vatican Council became the school of his entire life and work. The important questions that appeared, especially in connection with the so-called Schema 13 which would subsequently become the Constitution Gaudium et Spes, were questions that were also his own. The answers developed by the Council would pave the way for his mission  as Bishop and, later, as Pope.

When Cardinal Wojtyła was elected Successor of St. Peter on 16 October 1978, the Church was in a dramatic situation. The deliberations of the Council had been presented to the public as a dispute over the Faith itself, which seemed to deprive the Council of its infallible and unwavering sureness. A Bavarian parish priest, for example, commented on the situation by saying, “In the end, we fell into the wrong faith.” This feeling that nothing was no longer certain, that everything was questioned, was kindled even more by the method of implementation of liturgical reform. In the end, it almost seemed that the liturgy could be created of itself. Paul VI brought the Council to an end with energy and determination, but after its conclusion, he faced ever more pressing problems that ultimately questioned the existence of the Church Herself. At that time, sociologists compared the Church’s situation to the situation of the Soviet Union under the rule of Gorbachev, during which the powerful structure of the Soviet State collapsed under the process of its reform.

Therefore, in essence, an almost impossible task was awaiting the new Pope. Yet, from the first moment on, John Paul II aroused new enthusiasm for Christ and his Church. His words from the sermon at the inauguration of his pontificate: “Do not be afraid! Open, open wide the doors for Christ!” This call and tone would characterize his entire pontificate and made him a liberating restorer of the Church. This was conditioned by the fact that the new Pope came from a country where the Council’s reception had been positive: one of a joyful renewal of everything rather than an attitude of doubt and uncertainty in all.

The Pope traveled the world, having made 104 pastoral voyages, proclaiming the Gospel wherever he went as a message of joy, explaining in this way the obligation to defend what is Good and to be for Christ.

In his 14 Encyclicals, he comprehensively presented the faith of the Church and its teaching in a human way. By doing this, he inevitably sparked contradiction in Church of the West, clouded by doubt and uncertainty.

It seems important today to define the true centre, from the perspective of which we can read the message contained in the various texts. We could have noticed it at the hour of his death. Pope John Paul II died in the first moments of the newly established Feast of Divine Mercy. Let me first add a brief personal remark that seems an important aspect of the Pope’s nature and work. From the very beginning, John Paul II was deeply touched by the message of Faustina Kowalska, a nun from Kraków, who emphasized Divine Mercy as an essential center of the Christian faith. She had hoped for the establishment of such a feast day. After consultation, the Pope chose the Second Sunday of Easter. However, before the final decision was made, he asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to express its view on the appropriateness of this date. We responded negatively because such an ancient, traditional and meaningful date like the Sunday “in Albis” concluding the Octave of Easter should not be burdened with modern ideas. It was certainly not easy for the Holy Father to accept our reply. Yet, he did so with great humility and accepted our negative response a second time. Finally, he formulated a proposal that left the Second Sunday of Easter in its historical form but included Divine Mercy in its original message. There have often been similar cases in which I was impressed by the humility of this great Pope, who abandoned ideas he cherished because he could not find the approval of the official organs that must be asked according established norms.

When John Paul II took his last breaths on this world, the prayer of the First Vespers of the Feast of Divine Mercy had just ended. This illuminated the hour of his death: the light of God’s mercy stands as a comforting message over his death. In his last book Memory and Identity, which was published on the eve of his death, the Pope once again summarized the message of Divine Mercy. He pointed out that Sister Faustina died before the horrors of the Second World War but already gave the Lord’s answer to all this unbearable strife. It was as if Christ wanted to say through Faustina: “Evil will not get the final victory. The mystery of Easter affirms that good will ultimately be victorious, that life will triumph over death, and that love will overcome hatred”.

Throughout his life, the Pope sought to subjectively appropriate the objective center of Christian faith, the doctrine of salvation, and to help others to make it theirs. Through the resurrected Christ, God’s mercy is intended for every individual. Although this center of Christian existence is given to us only in faith, it is also philosophically significant, because if God’s mercy were not a fact, then we would have to find our way in a world where the ultimate power of good against evil is not recognizable. It is finally, beyond this objective historical significance, indispensable for everyone to know that in the end God’s mercy is stronger than our weakness. Moreover, at this point, the inner unity of the message of John Paul II and the basic intentions of Pope Francis can also be found: John Paul II is not the moral rigorist as some have partially portrayed him. With the centrality of divine mercy, he gives us the opportunity to accept moral requirement for man, even if we can never fully meet it. Besides, our moral endeavors are made in the light of divine mercy, which proves to be a force that heals for our weakness.

While Pope John Paul II was dying, St. Peter’s Square was filled with people, especially many young people, who wanted to meet their Pope one last time. I cannot forget the moment when Archbishop Sandri announced the message of the Pope’s departure. Above all, the moment when the great bell of St. Peter’s took up this message remains unforgettable. On the day of his funeral, there were many posters with the words “Santo subito!” It was a cry that rose from the encounter with John Paul II from all sides. Not from the square but also in different intellectual circles the idea of giving John Paul II the title “the Great” was discussed.

The word “saint” indicates God’s sphere and the word “great” the human dimension. According to the Church’s standards, sanctity can be recognized by two criteria: heroic virtues and a miracle. These two standards are closely related. Since the word “heroic virtue” does not mean a kind of Olympic achievement but rather that something becomes visible in and through a person that is not his own but God’s work which becomes recognizable in and through him. This is not a kind of moral competition, but the result of renouncing one’s own greatness. The point is that a person lets God work on him, and so God’s work and power become visible through him.

The same applies to the criterion of the miracle: here too, what counts is not that something sensational happening but the visible revelation of God’s healing goodness, which transcends all merely human possibilities. A saint is the man who is open to God and permeated by God. A holy man is the one who leads away from himself and lets us see and recognize God. Checking this juridically, as far as possible, is the purpose of the two processes for beatification and canonization. In the case of John Paul II, both were carried out strictly according to the applicable rules. So, now he stands before us as the Father, who makes God’s mercy and kindness visible to us.

It is more difficult to correctly define the term “great.” In the course of the almost 2,000-year long history of the papacy, the title “the Great” has been maintained only for two popes: Leo I (440 – 461) and Gregory I (590 – 604). In the case of both, the word “great” has a political connotation, but precisely because something of the mystery of God himself becomes visible through their political success. Through dialog, Leo the Great was able to convince Attila, the Prince of Huns, to spare Rome – the city of the Apostolic Princes Peter and Paul. Without weapons, without military or political power, through the power of his conviction for his faith, he was able to convince the feared tyrant to spare Rome. In the struggle between the spirit and power, the spirit proved stronger.

Gregory I’s success was not as spectacular, but he was repeatedly able to protect Rome against the Lombard – here too, by opposing the spirit against power and winning the victory of the spirit.

If we compare both stories with that of John Paul II, the similarity is unmistakable. John Paul II also had no military or political power. During the discussion about the future shape of Europe and Germany in February 1945, it was said that the Pope’s reaction should also be taken into account. Stalin then asked: “How many divisions does the Pope have?” Well, he had no available division. However, the power of faith turned out to be a force that finally unhinged the Soviet power system in 1989 and made a new beginning possible. Undisputedly, the Pope’s faith was an essential element in the collapse of the powers. And so, the greatness that appeared in Leo I and Gregory I is certainly also visible here.

Let us leave open the question of whether the epithet “the great” will prevail or not. It is true that God’s power and goodness have become visible to all of us in John Paul II. In a time when the Church is again suffering from the oppression of evil, he is for us a sign of hope and confidence.

Dear Saint John Paul II, Pray for us!

Benedict XVI

Responding to the Pandemic, Lessons for Future Actions and Changing Priorities. Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

Responding to the Pandemic, Lessons for Future Actions and Changing Priorities

The Vatican, Casina Pio IV on March 20, 2020

A Statement by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences

In view of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Pontifical Academies of Sciences and of Social Sciences issue this communication. We note with great appreciation the tremendous services currently provided by health workers and medical professionals, including virologists and others. COVID-19 is a challenge for societies, their health systems, and economies, and especially for directly and indirectly affected people and their families. In the history of humanity, pandemics have always been tragic and have often been deadlier than wars. Today thanks to science, our knowledge is more advanced and can increasingly defend us against new forms of pandemics. Our statement intends to focus on science, science policy, and health policy actions in a broader societal context. We draw attention to the need for action, short- and long-term lessons, and future adjustments of priorities with these five points:
1.     Strengthening early action and early responses:

  1. Health systems need to be strengthened in all countries. The need for early warning and early response is a lesson learned so far from the COVID-19 crisis. It is vitally important to get ahead of the curve in dealing with such global crises. We emphasize that public health measures must be initiated instantaneously in every country to combat the continuing spread of this virus. The need for testing at scale must be recognized and acted upon, and people who test positive for COVID-19 must be quarantined, along with their close contacts.
  2. We received advance warning of the outbreak a few months before it hit us on a global scale. In the future we need to better coordinate efforts on both the political and health care fronts to prepare and protect the population.
  3. Governments, public institutions, science communities, and the media (incl. social media) failed to ensure responsible, transparent, and timely communication, which is crucial for appropriate action. International organisations like WHO and UNICEF, but also academies of sciences, need to be supported in their communication efforts so that their scientific evidence-based information can rise above the cacophony of unproven assumptions spreading all over the world.
  4. Civil society must be suitably empowered, because the resolution of the present threats requires not only global cooperation but also distributed actions that can only be undertaken satisfactorily by local communities. Given that pandemics render personal face-to-face contacts impossible, efforts need to be made to apply and to further improve communications technologies.

2.     Expanding support of science and actions by scientific communities:

  1. Strengthening basic research enhances the capacity to detect, to respond, and to ultimately prevent or at least mitigate catastrophes such as pandemics. Science needs better funding at a national and transnational level, so that scientists have the means to discover the right drugs and vaccines. Pharmaceutical companies have a key responsibility to produce those drugs at scale if possible.
  2. Scientists in all nations already tend to serve with a global perspective when generating preventions and cures. This humane attitude needs further support. Professional associations and science academies need to check whether they can serve better in cooperation with international agencies such as WHO and others, and how.
  3. An important research area is understanding the root causes and prevention of zoonotic diseases, i.e. infectious diseases caused by bacteria, viruses, or parasites that spread from animals to humans. Food-related animal production systems may need reshaping to reduce the risks of zoonotic breeding grounds. We also need to know more about the psychological foundations of human behavior in situations of collective stress, in order to decide on appropriate governance strategies in crises.

3.     Protecting poor and vulnerable people:

  1. COVID-19 is a common threat that may harm one country sooner than another but will eventually harm us all. Health workers fighting pandemics in the front lines need the best possible support and protection. Women, who are the majority of health workers and are often most at risk, still suffer the same injustices as in other areas of work. This must stop.
  2. We are concerned about the selfishness and shortsightedness of uncoordinated national responses. This is the time to prove that the “Family of Nations” (Paul VI and John Paul II) or the “Family of Peoples” (Pope Francis) are communities of values with a common origin and shared destiny.
  3. Broad-based policy action in the field of public health is essential in all countries to protect poor and vulnerable people from the virus. COVID-19 will also have an adverse impact on worldwide economies. Unless mitigated, the anticipated disrupting consequences on food production and supply, and numerous other systems, will hurt especially the poor.
  4. Pandemics represent a threat to the millions of refugees, migrants and forcibly displaced. We implore the global community to intensify efforts to protect the most vulnerable among us.
  5. The obligatory focus on keeping COVID-19 at bay can have large consequences on those suffering from other diseases. Complex ethical issues arise at the global, national, and local level in the health practice, when first-come-first-serve action rules may break down. This is a general issue, but during a crisis it deserves special  consideration as well as a joint scientific and ethical commitment.

4.     Shaping global interdependencies and help across and within nations:

  1. Decades of increasing interconnectedness have opened up the world to massive cross-border flows of goods, services, money, ideas, and people. Under normal circumstances these developments enhance the wellbeing and prosperity of large proportions of the world’s population. Under abnormal circumstances, however, we experience the adverse consequences and fragility of interconnectedness. The sheer scale and scope of the current globalism has made the world unprecedentedly interdependent – and thus vulnerable and dysfunctional during crises. For example, the COVID-19 outbreak is prompting demand for more national isolation. However, seeking protection through isolationism would be misguided and counterproductive. A trend worth backing would be a strong demand for greater global cooperation. Transnational and international organizations need to be equipped and supported to serve that purpose.
  2. Only governance based on sound scientific evidence and a solid basis of shared fundamental values can mitigate the consequences of such crises. Unless governments reduce their nationalistic interests, there is reason to expect a worsening of the health crisis and consequently a deep global recession, with profound and tragic implications especially for poor countries.
  3. Mitigation measures to curb the rapid spread of contagion sometimes require closing borders around affected hotspots. Nevertheless, national borders must not become barriers hindering help across nations. Human resources, equipment, knowledge about best practices, treatments, and supplies must be shared.
  4. Global problems such as pandemics or the less visible crises of global climate change and biodiversity loss demand global cooperative responses. We must take into account the relationships between human activities, global ecology and livelihoods. Once COVID-19 is under control, we cannot go back to business as usual. A thorough review of worldviews, lifestyles, and short-term economic valuations must be carried out to cope with the challenges of the Anthropocene. A more responsible, more sharing, more equalitarian, more caring and fairer society is required if we are to survive.
  5. We insist that global crises demand collective action. The prevention and containment of pandemics is a global public good (Laudato Si‘) and protecting it requires increased global coordination as well as temporary and adaptive decoupling. At a time when rule-based multilateralism is declining, the COVID-19  crisis should encourage efforts to bring about a new – in the sense of different – globalization model aimed at inclusive protection of all.

5.     Strengthening solidarity and compassion:

  1. Apart from a scientific, technical and health policy agenda, we must not forget social cohesion. Churches, as well as all faith- and value-based communities, are called to action.
  2. A lesson the virus is teaching us is that freedom cannot be enjoyed without responsibility and solidarity. Freedom divorced from solidarity breeds pure and destructive egoism. Nobody can succeed alone. The COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to become more conscious of how important good relationships are in our lives.
  3. Today’s paradox is that we realize that each person needs to cooperate with other people at the exact same time as it becomes necessary to isolate ourselves from everyone else for health reasons. However, this paradox is only apparent since the act of staying at home is an act of profound solidarity. It is to “love your neighbor as yourself”. The lesson the pandemic teaches us is that, without solidarity, freedom and equality are just empty words (Pope Francis).

Signed by

Joachim von Braun, President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS). University of Bonn, Germany

Stefano Zamagni, President of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS). University of Bologna, Italy

Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, Bishop Chancellor of the Pontifical Academies of Sciences (PAS) and of Social Sciences (PASS), Vatican City

Dario Edoardo Viganò, Vice Chancellor of the Pontifical Academies of Sciences (PAS) and of Social Sciences (PASS), Vatican City

Werner Arber, PAS Academician and Council Member, Former PAS President, Professor, Biozentrum, University of Basel, Nobel Laureate in Physiology, Switzerland

Frances Arnold, PAS Academician, Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA

Vanderlei Bagnato, PAS Academician and Council Member, Professor, Department of Physics and Materials Science, University of São Paulo and the Institute of Physics of São Carlos, Brazil

John D. Barrow, FRS, PAS Academician, Professor of Mathematical Sciences in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical, Director of the Millennium Mathematics Programme, Cambridge University, UK

Antonio M. Battro, MD, PhD, PAS Academician and Director of the International School on Mind, Brain and Education, Ettore Majorana Foundation and Centre for Scientific Culture, Erice. Member of the Academia Nacional de Educación, Argentina

Helen M. Blau, Ph.D., PAS Academician and Donald E. and Delia B. Baxter Foundation Professor, Director, Baxter Laboratory for Stem Cell Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford, USA

Rocco Buttiglione, PASS Academician, Istituto di Filosofia Edith Stein, Granada, Spain

Steven Chu, PAS Academician, William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Physics, Professor of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University, USA

Aaron Ciechanover, PAS Academician, The Rappaport Faculty of Medicine and Research Institute, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

Guy Consolmagno, PAS Academician Perdurante Munere, Specola Vaticana, Vatican City

Yves Coppens, PAS Academician, Collège de France, Paleoanthropologie et prehistoire, Paris, France

Paul Crutzen, PAS Academician and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry, Max-Planck-Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany

Partha Dasgupta, PASS Academician, Frank Ramsey Professor Emeritus of Economics, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge, UK

Francis L. Delmonico, M.D., PAS Academician and Council Member, Professor of Surgery Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital. Chair World Health Organization Task Force Donation and Transplantation of Organs and Tissues, USA

Edward M. De Robertis, PAS Academician and Distinguished Professor, Biological Chemistry, University of California, Los Angeles, USA

Pierpaolo Donati, PASS Academician and Council Member, Professor of Sociology, Dept. of Political and Social Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy

Gérard-François Dumont, PASS Academician, Rector, Professor at the Sorbonne, Paris, France

Christoph Engel, PASS Academician, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn, Germany

Elaine Fuchs, PAS Academician, Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Rebecca C. Lancefield Professor of the Rockefeller University, New York, USA

Takashi Gojobori, PAS Academician and Distinguished Professor, CBRC (Computational Bioscience Research Center), BESE (Biological and Environmental Sciences and Engineering), KAUST (King Abdullah University of Science and Technology), Thuwal, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Ana Marta González, PASS Academician and Scientific Coordinator, Institute for Culture and Society, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Navarra, Spain

Mohamed H.A. Hassan, PAS Academician, Sudanese National Academy of Sciences (SNAS), Khartoum North, Sudan

Michael Heller, PAS Academician, Pontifical Academy of Theology, Faculty of Philosophy, Kraków, Poland

Allen D. Hertzke, PASS Academician and David Ross Boyd Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Oklahoma, USA

Vittorio Hösle, PASS Academician and Council Member, Professor of Arts and Letters at the University of Notre Dame, USA

Niraja Gopal Jayal, PASS Academician and Professor, Centre for the Study of Law and Governance, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

Charles Kennel, Director and Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, USA

Nicole Le Douarin, PAS Academician and Council Member, Professeur Honoraire au Collège de France, Secrétaire Perpétuelle Honoraire de l’Académie des Sciences, France

Yuan Tseh Lee, PAS Academician, Academia Sinica, Institute of Atomic and Molecular Sciences, Taipei, Taiwan (ROC)

Jean-Marie Lehn, PAS Academician, Université Louis Pasteur, Laboratoire de Chimie Supramoléculaire ISIS-ULP, Strasbourg, France

Pierre Léna, PAS Academician and Professor Emeritus, Université Paris Diderot, France

Thomas E. Lovejoy, PhD, University Professor of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA Senior Fellow United Nations Foundation

John F. McEldowney, PASS Academician and Professor, School of Law, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

Marcia K. McNutt, President, National Academy of Sciences (signing in her personal capacity)

Yuri Manin, PAS Academician, Max Planck Institute of Mathematics, Bonn, Germany

Roland Minnerath, PASS Academician and Council Member, Archbishop of Dijon, Historian, France

Jürgen Mittelstrass, PAS Academician, Konstanzer Wissenschaftsforums, University of Constance, Germany

Mario Molina, PAS Academician, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA

Erna Möller, PAS Academician, Sweden;

Salvador Moncada, PAS Academician and Professor, MD, Research Domain Director for Cancer at the University of Manchester, UK and Honduras

Rudolf Muradyan, PAS Academician, USA

Ryoji Noyori, PAS Academician, Center for Research and Development Strategy (CRDS), Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Riken Fellow, University Professor, Nagoya University, Japan, Nobel laureate in Chemistry

Naomi Oreskes, Professor of the History of Science, Harvard University, USA

Cesare Pasini, PAS Academician Perdurante Munere and Prefect, Vatican Apostolic Library, Vatican City

Ingo Potrykus, PAS Academician, Switzerland

Veerabhadran Ramanathan, PAS Academician and Council Member, Professor, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, USA

Peter H. Raven, PAS Academician and President Emeritus, Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, USA

Martin Rees, PAS Academician and Council Member, former Astronomer Royal, and Trinity College Cambridge, and President of the Royal Society, UK

Gregory M. Reichberg, PASS Academician, Peace Research Institute of Oslo (PRIO), Oslo, Norway

Dani Rodrik, PASS Academician and Ford Foundation Professor of International Political Economy, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, USA

Louis Sabourin, PASS Academician, École Nationale d’Administration Publique (GERFI), Université du Québec, Canada

Jeffrey D. Sachs, University Professor and Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, Director of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development, and SDG Advocate under UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Michael Sela, PAS Academician, the Weizmann Institute of Science, Department of Immunology, Rehovot, Israel

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, PAS Academician, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam, Germany

Wolf Singer, PAS Academician and Council Member, Professor of Physiology at the Goethe University Frankfurt, and Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany

Marcelo M. Suárez-Orozco, PASS Academician and Council Member, Dean & Distinguished Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, USA

Govind Swarup, FRS, PAS Academician and former Centre Director NCRA & GMRT, Honorary Fellow of TIFR, India

Hans Tuppy, PAS Academician, University of Vienna, Institute of Biochemistry, Austria

Rafael Vicuña, PAS Academician, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Departamento de Génetica Molecular y Microbiología, Santiago, Chile

Wilfrido Villacorta, PASS Academician and Professor Emeritus, De La Salle University, Philippines

Edward Witten, PAS Academician, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton NJ, USA

Ada Yonath, PAS Academician, Director of the Helen and Milton A. Kimmelman Center for Biomolecular Structure and Assembly of the Weizmann Institute of Science. Nobel Laureate in Chemistry, Israel

Paulus Zulu, PASS Academician and Council Member, Professor, University of Kwa Zulu Natal, South Africa

Congregation for Catholic Education. “Male and female He created them”.






View the Document

Archbishop Bernardito Auza. The Moral and Ethical Responsibilities of Universities in Response to the Global Realities of Migrants and Refugees. 16.11.2018

Keynote Address by Archbishop Bernardito Auza
Apostolic Nuncio, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the
United Nations

The Moral and Ethical Responsibilities of Universities
in Response to the Global Realities of Migrants and Refugees

Manhattan College, New York City, 16 November 2018


View the Document

Address by Archbishop Gallagher at the Side Event entitled “Freedom from Persecution: Christian Religious Minorities, Religious Pluralism in Danger”. United Nations, New York, 28 September 2018

Address by H. E. Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher
Secretary for Relations with States,
Head of the Delegation of the Holy See

to the Seventy-third Session of the United Nations General Assembly,
at the Side Event entitled “Freedom from Persecution:
Christian Religious Minorities, Religious Pluralism in Danger”

United Nations, New York, 28 September 2018


To View the Document

Death Penalty: Poverty and the Right to Legal Representation. Statement of Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher. New York, 25 September 2018

Statement of H.E. Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher
Secretary for Relations with States of the Holy See,
Head of the Delegation of the Holy See

to the Seventy-Third Session of the United Nations General Assembly
at the High-Level Side Event on
“Death Penalty: Poverty and the Right to Legal Representation.”

New York, 25 September 2018


View the Document


download document