What the Holy See Is Telling the UN Rio+20

What the Holy See Is Telling the UN (Part 1)
Archbishop Chullikatt Explains Rio+20

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, JUNE 27, 2012 (Zenit.org).- Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, the permanent observer of the Holy See's Mission to the United Nations, participated last week in a major UN conference in Brazil, Rio+20.

He explained to us both the conference itself, and the message the Holy See tried to promote there.

Part 2 of this interview will be published Thursday.

ZENIT: What is Rio+20?

Archbishop Chullikatt: It is the short name for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20-22 June 2012. It marks the 20th Anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), which also was held in Rio de Janeiro (the so-called Earth Summit). The scope of Rio+20 was to foster truly sustainable social, economic and environmental development for our planet and for present and future generations.

ZENIT: How was it organized?

Archbishop Chullikatt: It was organized within the United Nations system pursuant to General Assembly Resolutions 64/236 and 66/197 and was envisaged as a UN Conference which would bring together world leaders along with thousands of participants from governments, with a view to reducing poverty, advancing social equity and ensuring environmental protection. The Conference was attended by many Heads of State/Government, several intergovernmental organizations, such as the European Union, the African Union, the Group of Latin American Countries, the private sector and numerous Non-Governmental Organizations. Also present at the Conference were a good number of Catholic non-governmental organizations active in civil society, both in Brazil and internationally, who support the Holy See and work at the grass-roots level with communities in need.

Prior to the commencement of the Conference, there were a series of three preparatory meetings and a number of informal meetings where the final Outcome Document was negotiated and ultimately agreed upon (A/CONF.216/L.1, dated 19 June 2012).

ZENIT: What is the nature and structure of the Outcome Document and what themes were discussed?

Archbishop Chullikatt: The Outcome Document was formally adopted by the Conference on Friday night, 22 June 2012. It is a non-binding document entitled “The Future We Want”. It is 49 pages long with 283 paragraphs divided into six parts. Part I: Our Common Vision; Part II: Renewing Political Commitment; Part III: Green Economy in the Context of Sustainable Development and Poverty eradication; Part IV: Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development; Part V: Framework for Action and Follow-up; VI Means of Implementation.

Rio+20 focused on issues mentioned above and various priority areas including, among others, decent jobs, energy, sustainable cities, food security and sustainable agriculture, water, oceans and disaster readiness.

ZENIT: What is the Holy See’s Position on these themes?

Archbishop Chullikatt: The Holy See underlined its key priorities for the Rio+ 20 Conference in two “Position Papers” which were presented to the first and third Preparatory Committees of the Conference for its consideration:

http://www.holyseemission.org/statements/statement.aspx?id=385;http://www.holyseemission.org/statements/statement.aspx?id=383

In addition, the Holy See further outlined its vision for sustainable development during a Side-Event held during the Conference and in its formal intervention to the Plenary of the Conference.

http://www.holyseemission.org/pdf/Remarks%20of%20Cardinal%20Scherer.pdf

http://www.holyseemission.org/statements/statement.aspx?id=385

Q: Which were the issues of particular concern raised by the Holy See?

Archbishop Chullikatt: The Centrality of Human Beings in Sustainable Development

The Holy See underscored the many threats to the human family and its earthly home. It emphasized that the human person stands at the centre of the created world, and therefore, at the centre of sustainable development. In this way, it reaffirmed the first principle of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.

The rights to water and sanitation, food, basic health care and education are intrinsically linked to the right to life, survival and development. These rights are at the service of the human person and the family.

The Need for a Profound and Farsighted Review of Development

From this perspective, the key principles which must permeate sustainable development policies include: responsibility, promotion and sharing in the common good, access to primary goods, universal solidarity capable of acknowledging the unity of the human family, protection of creation linked to intergenerational equity and solidarity, universal destination of goods as well as the fruits of human enterprise, and finally, subsidiarity, which enables public authorities from the local level to the highest institutions, to operate effectively for the enhancement of each person and family, the protection of resources and the promotion of the common good.

When such principles are applied at the international level, especially in relation to the transfer of technology to developing countries, the promotion of a more just global financial system and increasing aid-for-development, they should place inherent human dignity, integral human development, the family, the common good, the solidarity and safeguarding of the environment at the centre of economic activity.

The Need for an Integrally Human Model of Development with Ethical and Moral Dimensions

The ongoing economic and financial crisis must also take into consideration the moral and cultural crisis. Admittedly, it is a complex challenge to move from a merely technological model of development to an integrally human model, which takes as its point of departure the inherent dignity and worth of the human person and his/her fundamental social dimension which is the family. In the end, it is people who are charged with stewardship over nature; but as with everything human, this stewardship necessarily possesses an ethical dimension.

The Green Economy, Human Dignity, Integral Human Development and the Family

The Conference sought to place the notion of the so-called “green economy” primarily at the intersection between environment and development. A good number of the developing countries, especially from Africa, while sometimes suspicious of so-called “environment-friendly green economic policy” and the challenges it may place on developing countries which lack access to more environmentally friendly technologies and sources of energy, demanded that such a policy be accompanied by an enhanced and more coordinated support from the developed countries. These developing countries sought capacity building, technology transfer, funding and technical support, as well as closing of technology-gaps between developed and developing countries.

In the end, for a green economy to succeed it must be applied in an inclusive manner, directing it clearly to the promotion of the common good and the eradication of poverty on the local level, an element which is essential to the attainment of sustainable development. In other words, we need to forge an alliance between environment and development, which should benefit each and every human person. Therefore, in order to put this green economy in its right perspective, the Holy See emphasized that the “green economy” must be anchored in principles that are essential in effectively promoting respect for the inherent dignity of every human person, for integral human development and for the institution of the family, based on the marriage of one man and one woman, the natural and fundamental group unit of society (cf. UDHR, art. 16, ICCPR, art. 23, ICESCR, art. 10).

ZE12062807 - 2012-06-28
Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-35104?l=english

WHAT THE HOLY SEE IS TELLING THE UN (PART 2)

Archbishop Chullikatt Explains Rio+20

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, JUNE 28, 2012 (Zenit.org).- Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, the permanent observer of the Holy See's Mission to the United Nations, participated last week in a major UN conference in Brazil, Rio+20.

He explained to us both the conference itself, and the message the Holy See tried to promote there.

Part 1 of this interview was published on Wednesday

ZENIT: How is the Family relevant for sustainable development?

Archbishop Chullikatt: It is the family where life, survival and development begin, and where children are first educated to adopt a vocational and ethical attitude, which freely assumes responsibility, in genuine solidarity with one another and all of creation. The uniqueness of the institution of the family, the legal obligation to protect it, and its importance for sustainable development, poverty eradication and the green economy may be summarized as follows:

The family is a community of solidarity

The family is a community of love, harmony and solidarity, based on the enduring bond of communion between the husband and wife, which is uniquely suited by its nature to give birth to children, teach respect, distinction and complementarity between the two sexes and transmit the cultural, ethical, social, spiritual, and religious values, essential for the integral development and well-being of children, of extended family relations, and of society. (Preamble E, Charter on the Rights of the Family)

The family is a unique social institution

The family is an unrepeatable social institution that cultivates within its members a sense of their inherent dignity, from which rights and duties derive. It also develops each member’s sense of acquired dignity, which comes to fulfilment through a fully and harmonious developed personality, gradually formed and educated in authentic freedom and responsible life in society.

The family is enriched by inter/intra-generational relationships

The family is enriched and extended by inter-generational solidarity and inter/intra-generational transmission of values which assist members to grow in human wisdom to appreciate a sustainable comprehensive management of the environment, natural resources, and the universal destination of goods, while ensuring that the inherent dignity of the human person is not violated in attempts to preserve the environment.

The family is a principal agent of peace

The family is a principal agent of peace where the same love that nurtures its members, and builds and maintains unity and harmony in the family, is vital to the building of peace in society.

The family is an economic unit

The family is an economic unit which naturally produces and forms human capital and provides workers, consumers, and service providers, especially for its most vulnerable members.

It is deeply unfortunate that the aforementioned role of the family has not been fully recognized in the Outcome Document despite having been proposed many times by the delegation of the Holy See.

ZENIT: What are your key concerns regarding the Outcome document?

Archbishop Chullikatt: The Outcome Document is the result of a series of complex multilateral negotiations which lasted almost a year. It is not a perfect document. However, the international community, with the required political will and through strict implementation of the applicable measures, can render it fruitful.

The negotiations of the Outcome Document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development provided a unique opportunity for the Holy See and for all members of the Catholic community to gather in Rio to articulate a message for the international community, which moves from a charity or concern for our fellow brothers and sisters rooted in self-interest or sentimentality to one which fosters deep love and genuine solidarity for all our brothers and sisters around the world.

During negotiations, movement was slow on certain sections of the outcome document where deep tensions emerged on international economic and financial realities. Inequalities between regions, especially in Africa, put pressure on certain delegations, especially those of the developed world, to concretely demonstrate solidarity by realistically striving to eradicate poverty and hunger as the primary obstacles to development.

The Outcome Document should have adopted measures to transfer suitable technologies to the local level, to promote a more equitable and inclusive global market, to respect commitments made to provide aid-development, and to find new ways to put human dignity, the common good and the protection of creation at the center of economic life.

In addition, there is concern in regard to the meaning and application of certain concepts. While notions such as “green economy” could provide an opportunity to produce and create new avenues for greater care of the environment, we must recognize that technological solutions unaccompanied by just, ethical and responsible considerations and involvement of local communities will not assist the poor.

Those applying the Rio+20 Outcome Document must put the wellbeing of the human person at the center of concern of sustainable development. Such an approach will help to avoid, among other things, the risks of reductionist and sterile neo-malthusian approaches, which view human beings as obstacles to development, an inherently flawed vision which some delegations of developed nations attempted to weave into the Outcome Document.

There is no conflict between human beings and their development. In order to eradicate poverty and hunger we need to empower the human person. We must encourage peoples and nations to shape their own future, “a future they need”, in accordance with their dignity, religious beliefs, cultures and proven traditions.

Regrettably, some delegations promoted the dubious notion of "sexual and reproductive rights". Fortunately, this expression does not appear in the document. This approach to sustainable development would have undermined the First Principle of Rio, namely: that the human being is at the centre of sustainable development. The human being is always an end in himself, and sustainable development is the means which serves that end.  Any anti-life policy is anti-development. Any policy promoting abortion or abortifacients masquerading as contraceptives, fails in the same way by attacking the right to life in the safest sanctuary of the womb, and the health of the woman whose body created this home. In the end, such a policy is not at the service of health, children, their mothers or the family but amounts to violence against women and children and the family.

The Holy See gave a Statement of Position which takes issue with vague and ambiguous wording contained in the Outcome Document. For the Holy See, the term “sexual and reproductive health,” found in the document, should be applied to a holistic concept of health that embraces the person in the entirety of his or her personality, mind and body, and which fosters the achievement of personal maturity in sexuality and in the mutual love and decision making that characterizes the conjugal relationship in accordance with the norms of the natural moral order.

Moreover, unfortunately, the Outcome Document of this Conference neglected the fundamental role that religious organizations play in promoting sustainable development. Religious institutions, such as those of the Catholic Church, play a fundamental role in educating people on the need to love and care for the poor out of love and solidarity. In addition, these institutions provide education to millions of children around the world so that they can be productive and responsible members of society and future leaders of our countries. Moreover, religious organizations also play a vital role of living in solidarity with the most vulnerable persons in society and providing a voice to the voiceless. Failure to fully engage religious institutions in order to achieve a human centred sustainable development is a failure to recognize the true nature of the human person and recognize the innate spiritual dimension of individuals and society.

In addition, it is important to understand that the poor and developing countries arrived at the Conference with a lot of expectations. They sought assistance, solidarity and expertise, especially at the social, financial and economic levels from their brothers and sisters of developed nations. However, many felt disillusioned that the Outcome Document of this Conference failed to deliver for them.  Governments need to make good on their promises; otherwise a prosperous and better future will always remain a dream for the most vulnerable persons in the world.

In conclusion, new development models created or promoted as a result of this recently concluded Conference must be respectful of the human person and promote a more just and caring international community. Moreover, such models should be guided by the principles I mentioned earlier regarding the Holy See’s position on this issue. While political debate is necessary, willingness to live and work in solidarity with our brothers and sisters around the world is needed, otherwise sustainable development will forever remain a distant and unrealized dream. The world has changed a great deal since the first Rio Conference but despite the progress, far too many children go without food, far too many families see their homes and communities destroyed by man-made and environmental catastrophes, and far too many people are depressed, disappointed and disillusioned. Now is the time for governments to recognize that sustainable development starts with the human person and his/her family. This is the way to build “a future we need.” This is the way to true progress.

This is the way to a more just and equitable world for all.

Archbishop Tomasi's Address at the 20th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

Archbishop Tomasi's Address at the 20th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

"If Justice is Violated, Wealth and Debt Become Instruments of Exploitation"

GENEVA, Switzerland, JUNE 25, 2012 (Zenit.org).- Here is the text of the address given by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi, Permanent Observer to the United Nations in Geneva, at the 20th Regular Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council.
* * *
Madam President,

1. The Holy See strongly supports the Report’s assertion that human rights as well as the rules of justice and ethics apply to all economic and social relations, including foreign debt obligations. Human rights criteria for evaluating foreign debt can be an important tool for moving development from the narrow "economic" or material understanding to one based on integral human development, one that promotes "the development of each man and of the whole man"1. This recognizes the "right to development"2 grounded in the humanity of each and every person, from conception to natural death, regardless of their age, nationality, race, religion, ethnicity, sex and disability status. At the same time, we acknowledge the role that corruption has played and continues to play in aggravating the problem of debt obligations in many less developed countries.

2. A people-centered ethics is one that is grounded in a view of the human person which emphasizes human dignity, the basis of human rights, for human rights are those rights that spring from what it means to be human. All just economic activity respects this human dignity. Wealth and debt must serve the common good. If justice is violated, wealth and debt become instruments of exploitation, especially of the poor and marginalized. But unjust, and especially exploitative, economic transactions are invalid and must be made just, even if each party agreed to the legal terms of the exchange, as it may happen when the rich lend to the poor. For many years now all have come to recognize that "the heavy burden of external debt (…) compromises the economies of whole peoples and hinders their social and political progress."3

3. Foreign debt is just a symptom of the lack of justice in the flow of capital in the world4. "The debt question is part of a vaster problem: that of the persistence of poverty, sometimes even extreme, and the emergence of new inequalities which are accompanying the globalization process. If the aim is globalization without marginalization, we can no longer tolerate a world in which there live side by side the immensely rich and the miserably poor, the have-nots deprived even of essentials and people who thoughtlessly waste what others so desperately need. Such contrasts are an affront to the dignity of the human person."

Thus, in evaluating foreign loans consideration should be given to: (1) Reducing unethical loan practices and (2) Better aligning foreign loans with authentic human development. If both the loan process and the loan use have to respect human rights there is a much better chance that the money from the loan will promote development and the  necessary environment for the enjoyment of human rights. Many of the barriers to development arise because the human costs and benefits of economic activities are not given adequate, or any, weight in the decision making process. "Human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions always involve human costs"5 and the consequent violation of human rights.

4. While institutionalizing the inclusion of human rights into the cost and benefit calculations will present challenges, we would like to remind the Council that every past improvement in human rights and expansion of participation and inclusion faced the same challenge. In a few words, financial relationships that increase inequality and do not promote income convergence are "contrary to justice".6

5. Along with the Report, and most objective observers, the Holy See recognizes that loans to developing countries have at times promoted inequality and have become barriers to development rather than serving as tools to promote development. Often this is due to changes in outside economic circumstances which can turn a good and just loan arrangement into a barrier to development and a vehicle for exploitation. One such change in outside circumstances that the Report addresses and responds to relates to fluctuations in currency values.

6. The Holy See supports the new principle for transparency in foreign loans at all levels and by all actors (borrowers, lenders and international agencies) in order to lessen the chance of the grave mistakes that were made in the past, when corruption led to secret loans for dubious purposes, taken out by leaders not interested in the common good with the poor in developing countries bearing the burden. We support this reform and encourage efforts to correct the injustices of past loans with more aggressive debt forgiveness.
The Holy See hopes that "the process of debt cancellation and reduction for the poorest countries will be continued and accelerated. At the same time, these processes must not be made conditional upon structural adjustments that are detrimental to the most vulnerable populations."7 The Holy See supports the Human Rights Council’s call to end conditionality in debt forgiveness and renegotiation, and supports its call to respect the sovereignty and right of each country to independently plan its own development strategies and not be forced by outside agencies or governments to pursue policies which are more in the interest of the lending nations than the common good of the developing nations. Furthermore, programs for debt cancellation or relief should not result in insurmountable obstacles to future responsible borrowing that may be critically necessary for the long-term development and prosperity of the country at risk.

7. Greater transparency will also help in preventing the building up of unsustainable levels of debt by developing nations. In both developing and developed countries the lack of transparency in the accumulating of debt has added to economic uncertainty in the world financial system. The Guiding Principles on Foreign Debt and Human Rights  move in the direction of a concrete solution. Sovereign debt cannot be viewed as an exclusively economic problem. It affects future generations a well as the social conditions that allow the enjoyment of human rights of vast numbers of people entitled to the solidarity of the whole human family.
Thank you, Madam President.

__________________________________
1 Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n.14
2 General Assembly resolution 41/128 of 4 December 1986.
3 Pope John Paul II noted in his World Peace Day Message of 1998 WPD 1998, n.4.http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/peace/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_08121997_xxxi-world-day-for-peace_en.html
4 Idem
5 Pope Benedict XVI,  Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, n. 32.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
6 Cfr  Aquinas ST, II, II, QQ78.
7 From the Address of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See. Monday, 8 January 2007.

Holy See on Sustainable Development

"Human beings, in fact, come first. We need to be reminded of this"

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, JUNE 14, 2012 (Zenit.org).- Here is the text of a position paper from the permanent observer mission of the Holy See to the United Nations for the UN conference on sustainable development that is under way in Rio de Janeiro through Friday.
* * *
1.    INTRODUCTION
    The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20, represents an important step in a process which has contributed significantly to a better understanding of the concept of sustainable development and the interplay of the three acknowledged pillars of this concept: economic growth, environmental protection and the promotion of social welfare. The process, initiated at Stockholm in 1972, had two of its high points at Rio de Janeiro in 1992, with the so-called “Earth Summit”, and at Johannesburg in 2002.
    As part of this process, a unanimous consensus has emerged that protecting the environment means improving peoples’ lives and, vice versa, that environmental degradation and underdevelopment are closely interdependent issues needing to be approached together, responsibly and in a spirit of solidarity.
    At all these international occasions the Holy See has made its presence felt less by proposing specific technical solutions to the various issues under discussion as part of the effort to attain a correct process of sustainable development, than by its insistence that issues affecting the human dignity of individuals and peoples cannot be reduced to “technical” problems: the process of development cannot be left to purely technical solutions, for in this way it would lack ethical direction. The search for solutions to these issues cannot be separated from our understanding of human beings.
    Human beings, in fact, come first. We need to be reminded of this. At the centre of sustainable development is the human person. The human person, to whom the good stewardship of nature is entrusted, cannot be dominated by technology and become its object. A realization of this fact must lead States to reflect together on the short and medium term future of our planet, recognizing their responsibility for the life of each person and for the technologies which can help to improve its quality. Adopting and promoting in every situation a way of life which respects the dignity of each human being, and supporting research and the utilization of energy sources and technologies capable of safeguarding the patrimony of creation without proving dangerous for human beings: these need to be political and economic priorities. In this sense, our approach to nature clearly needs to be reviewed, for nature is the setting in which human beings are born and interact: it is their “home”.
    A changed mentality in this area and the duties which it would entail ought to make it possible quickly to discover an art of living together, one which respects that covenant between human beings and nature without which the human family risks dying out. This calls for serious reflection and the proposal of clear and sustainable solutions: a reflection which must not be muddied by blind partisan political, economic or ideological interests which shortsightedly put particular interests above solidarity. While it is true that technology has brought about more rapid globalization, the primacy of the human being over technology must be reaffirmed, for without this we risk existential confusion and the loss of life’s meaning. The fact that technology outstrips all else frequently means that reflection on why we do things systematically yields to the pressure of how we do things, leaving no time for patient discernment. It is urgent, then, to find a way of combining technical know-how with a solid ethical approach based on the dignity of the human person. (1)
    Along these lines, it must be emphasized that the dignity of the human person is closely linked to the right to development, the right to a healthy environment and the right to peace. These three rights shed light on how individuals, society and the environment are interrelated. This in turn results in a heightened sense of responsibility on the part of every human being for himself, for others, for creation and, ultimately, before God. Such responsibility calls for a careful analysis of the impact and consequences of our actions, with particular concern for the poor and for future generations.
2.    THE CENTRALITY OF HUMAN BEINGS IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
    It is therefore essential to base the reflection of Rio+20 on the first principle of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, adopted at the Rio de Janeiro Conference of June 1992, which acknowledges the centrality of the human being and declares that “human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature”.
    To put the welfare of human beings at the centre of concern for sustainable development is actually the surest way to attain such development and to help protect creation; as noted above, this results in a heightened sense of responsibility on the part of individuals for one another, for natural resources and for their wise use.
    Moreover, taking the centrality of the human person as a starting point helps to avoid the risks associated with adopting a reductionist and sterile neo-Malthusian approach which views human beings as an obstacle to sustainable development. There is no conflict between human beings and their environment, but rather a stable and inseparable covenant in which the environment conditions the life and development of human beings, while they in turn perfect and ennoble the environment by their creative, productive and responsible labour. It is this covenant which needs to be reinforced; a covenant which respects the dignity of the human being from his or her conception. Here too it is proper to reaffirm that the expression “gender equality” means the equal dignity of both men and women.
3.    THE NEED FOR A PROFOUND AND FARSIGHTED REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT
    In the last four decades significant changes have occurred in the international community. We need but think of the extraordinary progress made in technical and scientific knowledge, which has found application in strategic sectors of the economy and society like transportation, energy and communications. This extraordinary progress coexists however with the deviations and dramatic problems of development encountered by many countries, as well as the economic and financial crisis experienced by much of present-day society. These problems increasingly challenge the international community to a continued and deepened reflection on the meaning of the economy and its goals, as well as to a profound and farsighted review of the current model of development so as to correct its dysfunctions. Indeed, it is demanded by the earth’s state of ecological health, and above all by the cultural and moral crisis of humanity, the symptoms of which have been evident for some time throughout the world. (2)
    On the basis of these premises, the Holy See wishes, in the context of the Rio+20 process, to examine certain particular issues which have clear ethical and social repercussions for humanity as a whole.
    First, the definition of a new model of development, to which Rio+20 seeks to contribute, must be completely anchored in, and permeated by, those principles which are the basis for the effective protection of human dignity. These principles are fundamental for the correct implementation of a development marked by special concern for persons who are in most vulnerable situations, and thus they guarantee respect for the centrality of the human person. These principles call for:
•    responsibility, even when changes must be made to patterns of production and consumption in order to ensure that they reflect an appropriate lifestyle;
•    promoting and sharing in the common good;
•    access to primary goods, included such essential and fundamental goods as nutrition, education, security, peace and health; in this last case, it must always be noted that the right to health stems from the right to life: abortion and contraception are gravely opposed to life and can never be health issues. Health is about care and not mere services: this commodification of health care places technical concerns ahead of human concerns;
•    a universal solidarity capable of acknowledging the unity of the human family;
•    the protection of creation which in turn is linked to inter-generational equity; moreover, inter-generational solidarity requires taking into account the ability of future generations to discharge developmental burdens;
•    intra-generational equity, which is closely linked to social justice;
•    the universal destination not only of goods, but also of the fruits of human enterprise.
    These principles should be the glue holding together the shared vision which will light up the path of Rio+20 and post-Rio+20. For its part, Rio+20 could contribute significantly to the definition of a new model of development, to the extent that the discussions at the Conference serve to construct that model on the basis of the principles mentioned above.
4.    THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBSIDIARITY AND THE ROLE OF THE FAMILY
    Another fundamental principle is that of subsidiarity, as a consolidation of that international governance of sustainable developmentwhich is one of the principal subjects to be discussed at Rio+20. Nowadays the principle of subsidiarity, also in the international community, is increasingly considered a means of regulating social relations and thus concomitant with the definition of rules and institutional forms. A correct subsidiarity can enable public powers, from the local level to the highest international instances, to operate effectively for the enhancement of each person, the protection of resources and the promotion of the common good. Nonetheless, theprinciple of subsidiarity must be closely linked to the principle of solidarity and vice versa. For if subsidiarity without solidarity lapses into social privatism, it is likewise true that solidarity without subsidiarity lapses into a welfare mentality which is demeaning to those in need. (3)  This must be all the more clearly evident in reflections of an international character such as those of Rio+20, where the implementation of these two principles must result in the adoption of mechanisms aimed at combating the current inequities between and within States, and thus favouring the transfer of suitable technologies to the local level, the promotion of a more equitable and inclusive global market, respect for commitments made to provide aid for development, and finding new and innovative financial instruments which would put human dignity, the common good and the protection of creation at the centre of economic life.
    In the context of applying the principle of subsidiarity, it is also important to acknowledge and enhance the role of the family, the basic cell of our human society and “the natural and the fundamental group unit of society”, as mentioned in Art. 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In addition, it is the principle of subsidiarity’s last line of defence against totalitarianism. For it is in the family that the fundamental process of education and growth begins for every person, so that the principles mentioned above can be assimilated and passed on to future generations. For that matter, it is within the family that we receive our first, decisive notions about truth and goodness, where we learn what it means to love and to be loved, and so, in concrete, what it means to be a person. (4)
    Discussions on the international framework for sustainable development should therefore be grounded in a principle of subsidiarity which would fully enhance the role of the family, together with the principle of solidarity; they should include the fundamental concepts of respect for human dignity and the centrality of human beings.
5    SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
    A third issue to which the Holy See wishes to draw attention in the framework of the Rio+20 process is the linkage between sustainable development and integral human development. Together with material and social welfare, consideration must also be given to the ethical and spiritual values which guide and give meaning to economic decisions and consequently to technological progress,inasmuch as every economic decision has a moral consequence. The technical economic sphere is neither ethically neutral, nor by nature inhuman and antisocial. It pertains to human activity and, precisely as human, needs to be ethically structured and institutionalized. (5)
    Certainly this presents a complex challenge, yet emphasis must be placed on the importance of passing from a merely economic concept of development to a model of development that is integrally human in all its aspects: economic, social and environmental, (6) and based on the dignity of each person.
    This means further anchoring the three pillars of sustainable development in an ethical vision based precisely on human dignity. The challenge can be met concretely by launching the process of determining a series of sustainable development goals through the promotion of innovative efforts to fine-tune older and newer indicators of development in the short and medium term. These indicators should be capable of effectively verifying improvement or deterioration not only in the economic, social and environmental aspects of sustainable development, but also in its ethical aspects, taking into consideration resources and needs, and access to goods and services, be they material or immaterial.
6.    THE GREEN ECONOMY AND INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
    A fourth area of interest for the Holy See has to do with the green economy. As the debate which took place during the preparatory meetings for Rio+20 made clear, a great number of concerns exist about the transition to the “green economy”. This concept, which has yet to be clearly defined, has the potential to make an important contribution to the cause of peace and international solidarity. It is nonetheless essential that it be applied in an inclusive manner, directing it clearly to the promotion of the common good and the elimination of poverty on the local level, an element essential to the attainment of sustainable development. Care must also be taken lest the green economy give rise to new ways of “conditioning” commerce and international aid, and thus become a latent form of “green protectionism”. It is also important for the green economy to be principally focused on integral human development. From this standpoint, and in the light of the identification of suitable patterns of consumption and production, the green economy can become a significant tool for promoting decent work and prove capable of fostering an economic growth which respects not only the environment but also the dignity of the human person.
    The Holy See trusts that the outcome of Rio+20 will not only be successful but also, and above all, innovative and farsighted. In this way it will contribute to the material and spiritual welfare of every individual, family and community.
ENDNOTES
1.  Cf. POPE BENEDICT XVI, Address at the Collective Presentation of Credential Letters by Several Ambassadors (9 June 2011).
2.  Cf. BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, 32.
3.  Cf. ibid., 58.
4.  Cf. JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 39.
5.  Cf. BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, 36 and 37.
6.  Cf. Angelus Message of JOHN PAUL II for 25 August 2002, the Sunday before the opening of the Johannesburg Summit.

HOLY FATHER DENOUNCES HUMAN TRAFFICKING FOR SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND ORGAN HARVESTING

Vatican City, 23 April 2012 (VIS) - The Holy Father has written a message for the seventh world congress on the pastoral care of tourism, which begins today in the Mexican city of Cancun. The message is addressed to Cardinal Antonio Maria Veglio, president of the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant Peoples, and to Bishop Pedro Pablo Elizondo Cardenas L.C., prelate of Cancun-Chetumanl.

"Tourism", the Pope writes in the English-language version of his message, "like other human realities, is called to be enlightened and transformed by the Word of God. ... Tourism, together with vacations and free time, is a privileged occasion for physical and spiritual renewal; it facilitates the coming together of people from different cultural backgrounds and offers the opportunity of drawing close to nature and hence opening the way to listening and contemplation, tolerance and peace, dialogue and harmony in the midst of diversity.

"Travelling reflects our being as 'homo viator'; at the same time it evokes that other deeper and more meaningful journey that we are called to follow and which leads to our encounter with God. Travelling, which offers us the possibility of admiring the beauty of peoples, cultures and nature, can lead to God and be the occasion of an experience of faith, “for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator”.

"On the other hand tourism, like every human reality, is not exempt from dangers or negative dimensions. We refer to evils that must be dealt with urgently since they trample upon the rights of millions of men and women, especially among the poor, minors and handicapped. Sexual tourism is one of the most abject of these deviations that devastate morally, psychologically and physically the life of so many persons and families, and sometimes whole communities. The trafficking of human beings for sexual exploitation or organ harvesting as well as the exploitation of minors, abandoned into the hands of individuals without scruples and undergoing abuse and torture, sadly happen often in the context of tourism. This should bring all who are engaged for pastoral reasons or who work in the field of tourism, and the whole international community, to increase their vigilance and to foresee and oppose such aberrations".

"I would like to highlight three areas which should receive full attention from the pastoral care of tourism. Firstly, we need shed light on this reality using the social teaching of the Church and promote a culture of ethical and responsible tourism, in such a way that it will respect the dignity of persons and of peoples, be open to all, be just, sustainable and ecological. The enjoyment of free time and regular vacations are an opportunity as well as a right. The Church, within its own sphere of competence, is committed to continue offering its cooperation, so that this right will become a reality for all people, especially for less fortunate communities.

"Secondly, our pastoral action should never loose sight of the 'via pulchritudinis', “the way of beauty”. Many of the manifestations of the historical and cultural religious patrimony are “authentic ways to God, Supreme Beauty. ... It is important to welcome tourists and offer them well-organised visits, with due respect for sacred places and the liturgical action, for which many of these works came into being and which continues to be their main purpose.

"Thirdly, pastoral activity in the area of tourism should care for Christians as they enjoy their vacations and free time in such a way that these will contribute to their human and spiritual growth. Truly this is “an appropriate moment to let the body relax ... in order to grow in personal relationship with Christ”".

"The new evangelisation, to which all are called, requires us to keep in mind and to make good use of the many occasions that tourism offers us to put forward Christ as the supreme response to modern man’s fundamental questions".

For more information on Human Trafficking, visit http://www.usccb.org/about/human-trafficking/