No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 August 2021
Humanity's challenges have become more acute in recent decades. The international environment has been characterised by rapid change, uncertainty, increased complexity and new trends. Despite the seeming unanimity of the international community in accepting human dignity and human rights as the foundation of a just society, the gap between systems and reality is widening around the world, exacerbated at the same time by globalisation and a liberal, individualistic and consumerist model of democracy. This article seeks to identify a new humanism that can be seen in UNESCO's work in the multifaceted field of culture, with culture as an enabler of sustainable development, peace and economic progress. On the one hand, it examines the confrontation between the politics of recognition and the politics of resentment in dealing with the management of diversity in increasingly complex societies. On the other hand, it analyses the relevance of religion, and particularly the work of the Holy See and successive popes, in culture, public ethics and social cohesion.
The author is grateful to Yosra Hamdoun Bghiyel for translating the text of this article.
2 ‘UNESCO in 2011: towards a new humanism and globalization that rhymes with reconciliation’, (2011) 64:4 UNESCO Courier 2, <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000213061>, accessed 22 July 2020. Humanism is a concept with a long tradition in different cultures and religions, and with diverse philosophical interpretations based either on secular rationalism (Rousseau, Descartes, Kant, Comte, Hegel) or on atheism (Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Marx). In any case, the concept involves a whole metaphysics and correlatively an anthropological vision, as corroborated by the latest trends. Since the end of the twentieth century, new critical perspectives on these humanisms have emerged from feminism, ecologism and, more recently, transhumanism and posthumanism. First transhumanism and then posthumanism have increased the identification of people with their corporeal aspects, so that the human quality of a being and, consequently, the ownership of his or her rights is now based on scientific foundations, rooted in DNA. Recognising the finiteness and limitation of these corporeal aspects, they propose the enhancement of the species or its direct transformation into the divinised posthuman, capable of self-composing either through hybridisation with machines or through the transfer of its mind to one of them, in search of immortality and self-improvement, but not of moral perfection.
3 Bokova, I, ‘Editorial’, (2011) 64:4 UNESCO Courier 5Google Scholar.
4 Pepperell, R, The Posthuman Condition: consciousness beyond the brain (Bristol, 2003), p 170Google Scholar. He also defends the failure of humanism as a utopia: see Sloterdijk, P, Regeln für den Menschenpark. Ein Antwortschreiben zu Heideggers Brief über den Humanismus (Frankfurt, 1999)Google Scholar.
5 UNESCO, Rethinking Education: towards a global common good? (Paris, 2015), p 38, available at <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232555>, accessed 12 April 2021.
6 Ibid.
7 C Buarque, ‘Seven pointers for the future of mankind’, (2011) 64:4 UNESCO Courier 41–42, at 42.
8 I Bokova, ‘A new humanism for the 21st century’, 2010, doc ERI.2010/WS/1 (Rev), p 3, <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000189775>, accessed 12 July 2019.
9 See S Seth, ‘Where is humanism going?’, (2011) 64:4 UNESCO Courier 6–9 at 7. The author cites several writers who denounce this practice including: A Césaire, Discourse on colonialism, trans J Pinkham (New York, 2000), and F Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, trans C Farrington (London, 1963). See also B Santos, Epistemologies of the South: justice against epistemicide (Boulder, CO, 2014).
10 See J Habermas, ‘El concepto de dignidad humana y la utopía realista de los derechos humanos’, (2010) 55 Diánoia 3–25 at 10.
11 Ibid, p 19, emphasis added.
12 Ibid.
13 I have dealt with this issue in A Vega Gutiérrez, ‘Una razón común: presupuestos antropológicos y filosóficos de los derechos humanos’ in A Vega Gutiérrez (ed), La educación en derechos humanos en contextos culturales y geopolíticos diversos. Enfoques y estrategias para el desarrollo de competencias en la enseñanza universitaria (Valencia, 2020), pp 201–248.
14 The Punta del Este Declaration commemorates the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), celebrating its recognition of human dignity at the core of the panoply of human rights and recommitting to protecting it for everyone everywhere. The declaration was adopted at a conference convened in Punta del Este, Uruguay, December 2018, <https://www.dignityforeveryone.org/punta-del-este-declaration-2/>, accessed 30 January 2020.
15 The doctrine of the image of God in humanit, sustained by monotheisms, is contained in this Kantian principle. See A An-na'im, ‘Human rights in the Arab world: a regional perspective’, (2001) 23:3 Human Rights Quarterly 701–732; J Ratzinger (Benedict XVI), ‘La multiplicación de los derechos y la destrucción del concepto de derecho’ in Liberar la libertad. Fe y política en el tercer milenio (Madrid, 2018), p 5. The social doctrine of the Catholic Church formulates this principle in the following terms: ‘The person is at the centre of the political and social order because he is an end and not a means.’ International Theological Commission (ITC), In Search of a Universal Ethic: a new look at the natural law, 2009, n 84, <https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_en.html>, accessed 12 June 2019.
16 See Pope Francis, ‘Address of His Holiness Pope Francis to the members of the diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See’, 12 January 2015, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2015/january/documents/papa-francesco_20150112_corpo-diplomatico.html>, accessed 21 June 2019.
17 See P Deneen, Why Liberalism Failed (New Haven, CT, 2018).
18 See M Glendon, Rights talk: the impoverishment of political discourse (New York, 1993); J Finnis, Natural Law and Natural Rights (Oxford, 1980); R Spaeman, ‘Normas morales y orden jurídico’, (2000) 42 Persona y Derecho 109–129.
19 M Sandel, La tiranía del mérito ¿Qué ha sido del bien común? (Barcelona, 2020), p 291.
20 See A Vermeule, ‘Beyond originalism’, Atlantic, 31 March 2020, <https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/common-good-constitutionalism/609037/>, accessed 8 June 2021. Among the authors defending these theses, the following stand out: P Manent, Natural Law and Human Rights: toward a recovery of practical reason (Notre Dame, IN, 2020); A MacIntyre, After Virtue (Notre Dame, IN, 1981; third edition 2007); A MacIntyre, Whose Justice? Which Rationality? (Notre Dame, IN, 1988); Deneen, Why Liberalism Failed.
21 See Preamble to the Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), adopted in London on 16 November 1945.
22 Ibid.
23 See Second Meeting of the High Panel on Peace and Dialogue among Cultures, New York, 11 March 2011. The theme of the meeting was ‘Building peace: reconciliation through education, science, culture and communication’, UNESCO, Executive Board, 186th session, 11 May 2011 (doc 186 EX/INF.24).
24 This issue has been addressed in depth: P Meyer-Bisch, ‘Les droits culturels forment-ils une catégorie spécifique des droits de l'homme? Quelques difficultés logiques’ in P Meyer-Bisch (ed), Les droits culturels. Une catégorie sous-développée de droits de l'homme (Fribourg, 1993), pp 17–46; P Meyer-Bisch, ‘Diversité, sécurité et droits culturels’ in Diversité et droits culturels. Table ronde organisée en partenariat avec l'Institut Arabe des Droits de l'Homme et l'Organisation internationale de la Francophanie (Tunis, 21–23 septembre 2002) (Tunis, 2002), pp 37–40 ; E Decaux, ‘Comment la prise en compte des droits culturels interfère sur la compréhension des autres droits de l'homme?’ in Meyer-Bisch, Les droits culturels, pp 185–196; J Spinner-Halev, ‘The universal pretensions of cultural rights arguments’, (2001) 4:2 Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 1–25.
25 See B Wicht, ‘La diversité culturelle: l'ambiguïté d'une notion’ in M Borgui and P Meyer-Bisch (eds), La pierre angulaire. Le ‘flou crucial’ des droits culturels (Fribourg, 2001), pp 77–78.
26 See S Benhabib, ‘El otro generalizado y el otro concreto’ in S Benhabib and D Cornell, Teoría feminista y teoría crítica (Valencia, 1990) p 127; S Benhabib, ‘Nous et les autres: ¿el universalismo es etnocéntrico?’ in Las reivindicaciones de la cultura. Igualdad y diversidad en la era global (Buenos Aires, 2006), 59–94. See also M Zembylas, ‘The quest for cognitive justice: towards a pluriversal human rights education’, (2017) 15:4 Globalisation, Societies and Education 397–409 at 398.
27 See M Bidault, ‘Droits culturels et principe d’égalité: la pratique des Comités des Nations Unies’, in Borgui and Meyer-Bisch, La pierre angulaire, p 109.
28 See M Bossuyt, ‘L'interdiction de la discrimination dans le droit international des droits de l'homme’, PhD thesis, University of Geneva (1976), p 38 ; B Barry, Culture and Equality (Cambridge, 2011).
29 See F Fukuyama, Identidad. La demanda de dignidad y las políticas de resentimiento (Barcelona, 2019), pp 120–138; N Fraser, Justice interruptus: critical reflections on the ‘postsocialist’ condition (New York, 1997), p 2. This debate is mainly represented by M Walzer, Spheres of Justice: a defense of pluralism and equality (New York, 1983); M Young, La justicia y la política de la diferencia (Madrid, 2000); C Taylor, Multiculturalism and the politics of recognition (Princeton, NJ, 1992) and W Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: a liberal theory of minority rights (Oxford, 1995). For an interesting analysis of that debate, see S Benhabib, ‘¿De la redistribución al reconocimiento? El cambio de paradigma de la política actual’ in Las reivindicaciones de la cultura, pp 93–144.
30 See N Fraser, ‘Social justice in the age of identity politics: redistribution, recognition and participation’ in N Fraser and A Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition? A philosophical exchange (London, 2003), pp 7–109.
31 This is stated clearly in the Human Development Report 2004 of the United Nations Development Programme: Cultural Liberty in Today's Diverse World (2004), available at <http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2004>, accessed 8 June 2021.
32 Bokova, ‘Editorial’, p 5.
33 Here I follow the illustrative work of K Stenou, ‘L'UNESCO et la question de la diversité culturelle: bilan et stratégies, 1946–2000. Etude réalisée à partir d'un choix de documents officiels’, in Borgui and Meyer-Bisch, La pierre angulaire, pp 42–69.
34 Ibid, p 55.
35 A decade later, this definition appeared in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001), preamble, para 5.
36 See Stenou, ‘L'UNESCO et la question de la diversité culturelle’, p 61.
37 Ibid, p 65.
38 At the Millennium Summit, Secretary-General Kofi Annan presented the extensive major report entitled We the Peoples: the functions of the United Nations in the twenty-first century (UN Doc A/54/2000, 3 April 2000), focusing on the major challenges of the new century, such as globalisation and governance, a world free from want, a world free from fear and the challenge of a sustainable future, which went on to inspire the thrust of his report In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all (UN Doc A/59/2005, 21 March 2005).
39 United Nations Millennium Declaration, adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 55/2, 8 September 2000, para 5.
40 Ibid, paras 6 and 25.
41 See UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001); Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003); Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005). See also, UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ‘General comment no 21, Right of everyone to take part in cultural life’, 21 December 2009 (UN Doc E/C.12/GC/21).
42 Adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 56/6, 9 November 2001.
43 Adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 48/163, 21 December 1993.
44 Adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 67/104, December 2012. An action plan for the decade was adopted by UNESCO's Executive Board (194 EX/Decision 10) and endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 69/140.
45 The UNESCO General Conference adopted the Strategy on Human Rights at its 32nd session on 16 October 2003, in 32 C/Resolution 27. Among the results set for the strategy was ‘the strengthening of the protection of cultural diversity and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and the promotion of intercultural and interreligious dialogue’ (no 8). This strategy was in turn part of the Medium-term Strategy for 2002–2007 (31 C/4).
46 See Stenou, ‘L'UNESCO et la question de la diversité culturelle’, p 67.
47 See Fukuyama, Identidad, p 178.
48 M Lilla, ‘The end of identitarian liberalism’, New York Times, 18 November 2016, <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
49 See D Innerarity, Política para perplejos (Barcelona, 2018), p 139.
50 UNESCO, UNESCO World Report: investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. Executive summary (Paris, 2009), p 7 <https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/180090eng.pdf>, accessed 8 June 2021.
51 See M Hunter-Henin, ‘From Separation to Anti-Separatism: divides and divisiveness of the French vivre ensemble’, Berkley Forum, 13 May 2021, <https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/responses/from-separation-to-anti-separatism-divides-and-divisiveness-of-the-french-vivre-ensemble>, accessed 8 June 2021.
52 See P Portier, ‘Séparatisme et laïcité: le projet de loi réduira-t-il nos libertés?’, Ouest France, 15 May 2021, <https://www.ouest-france.fr/societe/separatisme-et-laicite-le-projet-de-loi-reduira-t-il-nos-libertes-1514685c-b4a2-11eb-b617-49ac21059b35>, accessed 8 June 2021.
53 See J Maritain, Humanismo integral (Buenos Aires, 1966), pp 11–12.
54 See M Hunter-Henin, Why Religious Freedom Matters for Democracy: comparative reflections from Britain and France for a democratic ‘vivre ensemble’ (London, 2020).
55 See, in this regard, UN General Assembly Resolution 58/128, 19 December 2003, on the promotion of religious and cultural understanding, harmony and cooperation; Resolution 59/23, 11 November 2004, on the promotion of interreligious dialogue; Resolution 61/221, 20 December 2006, on the promotion of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, understanding and co-operation for peace; and Resolution 62/90, 17 December 2007, on the promotion of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, understanding and co-operation for peace. See also M Gas-Aixendri, ‘Libertad religiosa y peace building: el papel de las religiones en la consolidación de la paz’ in F Pérez-Madrid (ed), Religión, libertad y seguridad (Valencia, 2017), pp 221–248.
56 See UN Doc A/70/674, para 36.
57 There are several authors who conclude that radical or violent movements within a religion correspond mostly to false interpretations of it: see, among others, M Gopin, Between Eden and Armageddon: the future of world religions, violence and peacebuilding (New York, 2000); M Abu-Nimer, Nonviolence and Peacebuilding in Islam: theory and practice (Gainsville, FL, 2003).
58 R Mokrosch, T Held and R Czada (eds), Religionen und Weltfrieden. Friedens- und Konfliktlösungspotenziale von Religionsgemeinschaften (Stuttgart, 2013), an analysis of peace taking into account the five major world religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, classified according to their historical origin. I have taken references from the bibliographic review of J Boada, ‘El papel actual de las religiones en la paz mundial’, (2015) Tendencias de las religiones. Revista electrónica de ciencia, tecnología, sociedad y cultura, <https://tendencias21.levante-emv.com/el-papel-actual-de-las-religiones-en-la-paz-mundial_a40365.html>, accessed 3 April 2021.
59 The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, on the Church in the modern world, echoes these coincidences, both to support the work of international organisations and to justify their presence in them: see Gaudium et Spes, paras 84 and 89, <https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html> accessed 8 June 2021.
60 John Paul II, ‘Address to UNESCO’, 2 June 1980, para 9, available at <https://inters.org/John-Paul-II-UNESCO-Culture>, accessed 4 June 2021.
61 Gaudium et Spes, paras 83–90, focuses on the building of the international community.
62 Benedict XVI, ‘Address to the Holy See's International Diplomats’, 18 March 2006, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/march/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060318_intern-organizations.html>, accessed 5 March 2021.
63 Benedict XVI, ‘Lecture by the Holy Father Benedict XVI at the University of Rome “La Sapienza”’, 17 January 2008, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2008/january/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080117_la-sapienza.html>, accessed 3 March 2021.
64 A Vega Gutiérrez, ‘La Santa Sede y la organización de las Naciones Unidas’, in M Martín, M Salido and J Vázquez García-Peñuela (eds), Iglesia católica y relaciones internacionales (Granada, 2008), pp 215–247; C Adeoussi, ‘Le fondement juridico-canonique de l'adhesion du Saint-Siège aux organisations internationales: una problématique recurrente’, (2001) 6 Rivista Teologica di Lugano 337–361 at 359–360.
65 On 30 September 1974, at the Vatican, Pope Paul VI awarded the John XXIII Peace Prize to UNESCO, represented by its director-general, Amadou-Mhtar M'Bow, for his valuable work in favour of peace and human rights.
66 The first explicit references to an exegesis of human rights in accordance with the Universal Declaration appear in the Encyclical Pacem in Terris, 11 April 1963, paras 9–34. The magisterial document also makes a positive evaluation of the UN (paras 142–145). L Taylor, Catholic Cosmopolitanism and Human Rights (Cambridge, 2020), pp 187–216, provides an engaging narrative on the integration of democratic and human rights norms into Catholicism, which in turn promoted those values through Christianity's global reach.
67 See Benedict XVI, ‘Inédito del santo padre Benedicto XVI publicado con ocasión del 50 aniversario de la apertura del Concilio Vaticano II’ (Castelgandolfo, 2 August 2012)’, (2014) 79–80 El Olivo. Documentación y estudios para el diálogo entre judíos y cristianos 23–28 at 25–26.
68 See UNESCO, Medium-term Strategy for 2008–2013 (34 C/4); UNESCO, Medium-term Strategy for 2014–2021 (37 C/4), strategic goals 6 and 2.
69 See Executive Board of the UNESCO, ‘UNESCO's role in promoting education as a tool to prevent violent extremism’, 197th session, Paris, 7 October 2015, (doc 197 EX/46). See this policy reflected in UNESCO, A Teacher's Guide on the Prevention of Violent Extremism (Paris, 2016); and UNESCO, Preventing Violent Extremism Through Education: a guide for policymakers (Paris, 2017).
70 See John Paul II, ‘Message for the celebration of the XXI World Day of Peace: religious freedom, condition for peace’, 1 January 1988; Benedict XVI, ‘Message for the celebration of the XLIV World Day for Peace, religious freedom, the path to peace’, 1 January 2011.
71 ITC, Subcommission for Religious Freedom, ‘Religious freedom for the good of all: theological approaches and contemporary challenges’, 21 March 2019, para 14, <https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20190426_liberta-religiosa_en.html>, accessed 8 June 2021. The document clarifies the origin of the Church's previous position in para 15.
72 See Dignitatis Humanae, paras 9–10, <https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
73 See Benedict XVI, ‘Address to the Roman Curia Offering Them His Christmas Greetings’, 22 December 2005. See also Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 24 November 2013, paras 26–30, <https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
74 ITC, ‘Religious freedom for the good of all’, para 62.
75 See Dignitatis Humanae, paras 4, 5 and 13b. See in this regard, the already established case law of the European Court of Human Rights in Folgerø v Norway, App no 15472/02 (ECtHR, 29 June 2007), para 84; Zengin v Turkey, App no 1448/04 (ECtHR, 9 October 2007), paras 47–55.
76 ITC, ‘Religious freedom for the good of all’, para 68.
77 Benedict XVI, ‘Inédito del santo padre Benedicto XVI’, pp 26–27. The matter brought up by the Pope was taken up years later by the ITC, ‘God the Trinity and the unity of humanity: Christian monotheism and its opposition to violence’, 2014, <https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20140117_monoteismo-cristiano_en.html>, accessed 5 June 2019.
78 See K Koch, ‘Cincuenta años de diálogo entre judíos y católicos’, (2014) 79–80 El Olivo. Documentación y estudios para el diálogo entre judíos y cristianos, 45–66 at 46.
79 Among other things, the Declaration was an unexpected occasion to lead the Church to modify its position on the collective responsibility of the Jews in the death of Christ and to revise the Christian teaching and liturgy on the Jews in order to eliminate distortions and prejudices about the Jews as a people. On the repercussions of these approaches on the elaboration of the Declaration, see T-M Andrevon, ‘Les Juifs et la préparation du texte conciliare Nostra Aetate’, (2013) 135 Nouvelle Revue Théologique 218–238.
80 However, as Rosen underlines, not only is Nostra Aetate a contextual product of European Christian guilt over the Shoah, but it also challenges Christian theologians to redefine theologically their relationship with Judaism and to rethink their Christology and ecclesiology in accordance with the idea of God's permanent covenant with the Jews. See D Rosen, ‘Nostra Aetate, cuarenta años después del Vaticano II: perspectivas presentes y futuras’, (2014) 79–80 El Olivo. Documentación y estudios para el diálogo entre judíos y cristianos, 93–110 at 97. Congar assumes that the ‘doctrinal anti-Semitism’ that inspired Christian theology for decades ‘is based on a whole set of theological theses concerning “others”, non-Christians, “heterodoxies”, anyone belonging to other religious groups and even pagans … These theses were the fruit of a world of entirely objectivist thought, animated by the conviction that Truth exists and that it alone has regular rights. Today we use other criteria when considering the demands of the Truth, in which we still believe; we have come to take into consideration the respect deserved from subjective or conscientious processes.’ Y Congar, ‘Los Cristianos y el antitisemismo’, (1961) 14:1 El Correo de la UNESCO 31–32, < https://www.biblioteca.org.ar/libros/322407.pdf>, accessed 10 April 2021. On this matter, see C Leal, ‘Un desacuerdo religioso: el diálogo judío cristiano en sus etapas’, (2019) 51 Scripta Theologica 367–394.
81 Acknowledged thus by Benedict XVI, ‘Inédito del santo padre Benedicto XVI’, p 26.
82 Pope Francis, Laudato Si, 2015, <http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html>, accessed 4 January 2021; Pope Francis, Fratelli Tutti, 2019,<http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20201003_enciclica-fratelli-tutti.html>, accessed 4 January 2021.
83 See Fratelli Tutti, paras 77–78.
84 Pope Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium on ecclesiastical universities and faculties, Rome, 2017, para 3, <http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_constitutions/documents/papa-francesco_costituzione-ap_20171208_veritatis-gaudium.html>, accessed 4 January 2021.
85 Pope Francis, ‘Meeting with Brazil's leaders of society’, Rio de Janeiro, 27 July 2013, <https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2013/july/documents/papa-francesco_20130727_gmg-classe-dirigente-rio.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
86 Fratelli Tutti, para 216.
87 See ibid, para 217.
88 Ibid, para 218.
89 Pope Francis, ‘Address of His Holiness Pope Francis to participants in the symposium sponsored by the Organization of American States and by the Institute for Interreligious Dialogue of Buenos Aires’, 8 September 2016, <https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2016/september/documents/papa-francesco_20160908_simposio-americas.html>, accessed 8 June 2021; Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 253.
90 Fratelli Tutti, para 215.
91 Ibid, para 232.
92 See Pope Francis, ‘Address of His Holiness Pope Francis’.
93 The Declaration was signed at the end of the Interfaith Meeting at the Founder's Memorial in Abu Dhabi, in the framework of Pope Francis’ Apostolic Journey to the United Arab Emirates, 3–5 February 2019. The ‘Document on human fraternity’ is available online at <http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html>, accessed 5 January 2021.
94 Fratelli Tutti, para 8.
95 According to the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church, ‘the relationship between God and man is reflected in the relational and social dimension of human nature … The human person is essentially a social being because God, who created humanity, willed it so’ (Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004), paras 110 and 149). The dichotomy between theism and authentic humanism held by some is therefore false. As St Thomas Aquinas pointed out, grace does not destroy nature, but brings its potentialities to fullness: ‘gratia non tollit naturam, sed perficit’ (Summa Theologiae, I, 1, 8 ad 2). Consequently, the anthropocentrism that characterises modernity can never be separated from a recognition of the full truth about humanity, which includes humans’ transcendent vocation.
96 Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, para 149, note 297.
97 Ibid, para 52; see also Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 178.
98 See Fratelli Tutti, para 106.
99 Ibid, para 107.
100 Ibid, para 111.
101 Ibid.
102 Ibid, para 115.
103 See R Hittinger, ‘The coherence of the four basic principles of Catholic social doctrine’, in M Archer and P Donati (eds), Pursuing the Common Good: how solidarity and subsidiarity can work together (Vatican City, 2008), pp 75–123 at pp 82–83.
104 See P Donati, Scoprire i beni relazionali. Per generare una nuova socialità (Soveria Mannelli, 2019), pp 55–57.
105 See Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, para 164.
106 Fratelli Tutti, para 112.
107 See Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitiae, 19 March 2016, para 70, <https://www.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf>, accessed 8 June 2021.
108 See Fratelli Tutti, paras 65–66 and 77.
109 Ibid, para 39.
110 Ibid, para 94.
111 Ibid, paras 89, 94, 95, 116 and 180.
112 See Ibid, paras 77–78, 99, 124–127, 157, 158, 170, 182.
113 Ibid, paras 11, 41, 100 (quotation), 133–136.
114 Ibid, paras 157–159.
115 Ibid, para 163.
116 Ibid, para 168.
117 Ibid, para 169.
118 Ibid.
119 Ibid, para 191.
120 Ibid, para 192.
121 Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 256.
122 Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in veritate, 29 June 2009, para 19, <https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
123 Fratelli Tutti, para 272.
124 Ibid, para 14.
125 ‘Document on human fraternity’; see also Fratelli Tutti, paras 281–283.
126 Fratelli Tutti, para 279.
127 See ibid, paras 271 and 284; ‘Document on human fraternity’.
128 Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 246.
129 UNESCO and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe have jointly developed a policy guide, Addressing anti-Semitism through Education: guidelines for policymakers, <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000263702>, accessed 10 June 2019, which was first presented to meeting of the 28 Ministers of Education at the Council of the European Union on 22 May 2018 and was launched on 4 June 2018 at UNESCO Headquarters.
130 UNESCO, The Rapprochement of Cultures: roadmap (Paris, 2016), p 15, <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000244334>, accessed 10 June 2019.
131 Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 251.
132 Congregation for Catholic Education (for Institutes of Study), Educating to Intercultural Dialogue in Catholic Schools Living in Harmony for a Civilization of Love, 28 October 2013, para 15, <https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20131028_dialogo-interculturale_en.html>, accessed 8 June 2021.
133 See Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, para 251.
134 See Final Declaration of the European Conference on The Religious Dimension of Intercultural Dialogue, San Marino, 23–24 April 2007; OSCE/ODIHR, Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools (Warsaw, 2007), p 20, < https://www.osce.org/odihr/29154>, accessed 4 June 2021; UNESCO Guidelines on Intercultural Education (Paris, 2006), p 1; Council of Europe, Dimension of Religions and Non-Religious Convictions within Intercultural Education (2009), <https://book.coe.int/en/legal-instruments/4189-dimension-of-religions-and-non-religious-convictions-within-intercultural-education-recommendation-cm-rec200812-and-explanatory-memorandum.html>, accessed 30 April 2021. See also the Recommendations of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe: 1720 on Education and Religion (2005); 1804 on State, Religion, Secularity and Human Rights (2007); 170 on Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue: Initiatives and Responsibilities of Local Authorities (2005); 1805 on Blasphemy, Religious Insults and Hate Speech against People Based on Religion (2007); and 1605 on European Muslim Communities confronted with Extremism (2008). See also Resolutions 1464 on Women and Religion in Europe (2005) and 1510 on Freedom of Expression and Respect for Religious Beliefs (2006).
135 See Council of Europe, Recommendation of the Parliamentary Assembly to the Committee of Ministers on religious tolerance in a democratic society, 2 February 1993; UNESCO, Declaration of Principles on Tolerance, (1995), para 1.4.
136 See J Leiva Olivencia, ‘Fundamentos pedagógicos de la educación intercultural: construyendo una cultura de la diversidad para una escuela humana e inclusiva’, (2011) 69:134 Miscelánea Comillas Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales 5–30.
137 See Martínez-Torrón, J, ‘Law and religion: the perspective of inter-religious dialogue. Some ideas and two experiences (Argentina and Spain)’ in Boele-Woelki, K and Arroyo, D Fernández (eds), Current Issues of Comparative Law – Questions actuelles de droit comparé (Berlin, 2019), pp 49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Instruction Erga migrantes caritas Christi (The love of Christ towards migrants), 3 May 2004, para 69, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/migrants/documents/rc_pc_migrants_doc_20040514_erga-migrantes-caritas-christi_en.html>, accessed 4 July 2019.
138 See UNESCO Guidelines on Intercultural Education, p 14.
139 See A Messara, ‘Explicar la diversidad religiosa … más allá de la diversidad’, (2009) 12 Cuadernos del Mediterráneo 262–264 at 263.
140 Ibid, p 264.
141 See Delors, J, Learning: the treasure within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission of Education, (Paris, 1996)Google Scholar; UNESCO, Rethinking Education: towards a global common good? (Paris, 2015), pp 39–40.
142 UNESCO, ‘Final statement of the Committee of Experts convened by UNESCO on Interrelations of Cultures: their contribution to international understanding’, 1953, cited in Bokova, ‘New humanism for the 21st century’.