Fr Lombardi: Note on UN, Holy See, Child Rights Committee
(Vatican Radio) Please find, below, Vatican Radio's translation of the full text of
Fr Federico Lombardi, SJ's Note containing some punctualizations on the UN, the Holy
See and the Committee on the Rights of the Child.
******************************
After
the large number of articles and comments that followed the publication of the recommendations
of the audit Committee of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, it seems useful
to make a few comments and clarifications.
It is not appropriate to speak of
confrontation “between the UN and the Vatican”. The United Nations is a reality that
is very important to humanity today.
The Holy See has always provided strong
moral support to the United Nations as a meeting place among all the nations, to foster
peace in the world and the growth of the community of peoples in harmony, mutual respect
and mutual enrichment. Countless documents and addresses of the Holy See at [the UN’s]
highest levels and the intense participation of the Holy See’s representatives in
the activities of many UN bodies attest to this.
The highest authorities of
the UN have ever been aware of the importance of the moral and religious support of
the Holy See for the growth of the community of nations: so they invited Popes to
visit the organization and direct their words to the General Assembly. In the footsteps
of Paul VI, John Paul II (twice) and Benedict XVI have done so. In short, the United
Nations, at the highest levels, appreciate and desire the support of the Holy See
and positive dialogue with it. So does the Holy See, for the good of the human family.
This is the perspective in which the present questions ought to be raised.
International
Conventions promoted by the United Nations are one of the ways in which the international
community seeks to promote the dynamic of the search for peace and the promotion of
the rights of the human person in specific fields. States are free to join. The Holy
See/Vatican City State has adhered to those it considers most important in the light
of its activities and its mission. (It should be noted that adherence to a Convention
entails a commitment to participation, reports, etc. , which require staff and resources
– for which reason the Holy See must choose [to adhere to] a limited number of Conventions,
commensurate with its possibilities for participation). Among these, in a timely manner,
the Holy See joined – among the first in the world – the Convention on the Rights
of the Child, in the light of the great work done in this field, in many different
forms ( educational, charitable , etc. . ) and for so long, by the Catholic community
in the world, and in light of the Magisterium of the Church in this area, inspired
by the behavior of Jesus described in the Gospels.
Naturally, the operations
of the UN are vast and complex, and like any large organization – and precisely because
of its international and as far as possible universal nature – embraces very different
persons, positions and voices. It is therefore no wonder that in the vast world of
the UN different visions shall encounter and even collide with each other. Therefore,
in order that the overall result be positive, a great willingness to be open to dialogue
is needed, along with attentive respect for essential rules and procedures, and in
preparing activities.
For the verification of the implementation of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child there is a committee based in Geneva, which holds two sessions
a year, and which receives the reports of the different Party States, studies them
and discusses them with the delegations sent by them, and formulates recommendations
for better implementation of the provisions of the Convention. The recommendations
made by the Committee are often quite sparse and of relative weight. It is not by
chance, that there is rarely heard a worldwide echo of the recommendations in the
international press, even in the case of countries where problems of human rights
and [problems regarding] children are known to be grave.
In the case of reports
submitted to the Committee by the Holy See in recent months on the implementation
of the Convention and the additional Protocols: ample written responses were given
to the questions subsequently formulated by the Committee, after which followed a
day for the hearing of a special delegation of the Holy See in Geneva on January 16.
Now there has come, on February 5, the publication of the Committee 's concluding
observations and recommendations . This [publication] has aroused extensive reaction
and response.
What is there to observe in this regard?
First, the Holy
See 's adherence to the Convention was motivated by a historical commitment of the
universal Church and the Holy See for the sake of the children. Anyone who does not
realize what this [commitment] represents for the sake of the children in the world
today, is simply unfamiliar with this dimension of reality. The Holy See, therefore,
as the Holy See’s Secretary of State, Archbishop Pietro Parolin has said, continues
its efforts to implement the Convention and to maintain an open, constructive and
engaged dialogue with the organs contained therein. [The Holy See] will take its further
positions and will give account of them, and so on, without trying to escape from
a genuine dialogue, from the established procedures, with openness to justified criticism
– but the Holy See will do so with courage and determination , without timidity.
At
the same time, one cannot fail to see that the latest recommendations issued by the
Committee appear to present – in the opinion of those who have followed well the process
that preceded them – grave limitations.
They have not taken adequate account
of the responses , both written and oral, given by the representatives of the Holy
See . Those who have read and heard these answers do not find proportionate reflections
of them in the document of the Committee, so as to suggest that it was practically
already written, or at least already in large part blocked out before the hearing.
In
particular, the [Observations’] lack of understanding of the specific nature of the
Holy See seem serious. It is true that the Holy See is a reality different from other
countries, and that this makes it less easy to understand the Holy See’s role and
responsibilities . [These particularities], however, have been explained in detail
many times in the Holy See’s twenty years and more of adherence to the Convention,
and [specifically addressed] in recent written responses. [Are we dealing with] an
inability to understand, or an unwillingness to understand? In either case, one is
entitled to amazement.
The way in which the objections [contained in the Concluding
Observations] were presented, as well as the insistence on diverse particular cases,
seem to suggest that a much greater attention was given to certain NGOs, the prejudices
of which against the Catholic Church and the Holy See are well known, rather than
to the positions of the Holy See itself, which were also available in a detailed dialogue
with the Committee.
A lack of desire to recognize all the Holy See and the
Church have done in recent years, [especially as regards] recognizing errors, renewing
the regulations, and developing educational and preventive measures, is in fact typical
of such organizations. Few, other organizations or institutions, if any, have done
as much. This, however, is definitely not what one understands by reading the document
in question.
Finally, and this is perhaps the most serious observation: the
Committee’s comments in several directions seem to go beyond its powers and to interfere
in the very moral and doctrinal positions of the Catholic Church, giving indications
involving moral evaluations of contraception, or abortion, or education in families,
or the vision of human sexuality, in light of [the Committee’s] own ideological vision
of sexuality itself. For this reason, in the official communique released Wednesday
morning there was talk of “an attempt to interfere in the teaching of the Catholic
Church on the dignity of the human person and in the exercise of religious freedom.”
Finally,
one cannot but observe that the tone, development, and the publicity given by the
Committee in its document are absolutely anomalous when compared to its normal progress
in relations with other States that are party to the Convention.
In sum: if
the Holy See was certainly the subject of an initiative and a media attention in our
view unfairly harmful, one needs to recognize that, in turn, the Committee has itself
attracted much serious and well-founded criticism. Without desiring to place [responsibility
for] what has transpired “[on] the United Nations”, it must be said that the UN carries
the brunt of the negative consequences in public opinion, for the actions of a Committee
that calls itself [by the UN name].
Let us try to find the correct plan of
commitment for the good of the children – even through the instrument of the Convention.
The Holy See will not allow its careful and reasoned responses to be lacking.