Talk:Document on Human Fraternity

Summary

I have added a little summary page, with the big points from the document, the key phrases of the document's own summary.

I think it is very important to have actual quotes, in this regard, because I find that most material on the WWW is picking up on strange sectarian and controversial angles: indeed, I find it hard to believe that most of the writers of these articles have ever read the document, certainly never tried to understand it.

Indeed, the old Wiki page had only material on controversy, and absolutely nothing about what the actual document said. In this, I think the Wiki article positively contributed to mis-information about the declaration.

(For Protestant editors, who may be alarmed at the phase "to rediscover the values of peace, justice, goodness, beauty, human fraternity and coexistence in order to confirm the importance of these values as anchors of salvation for all, and to promote them everywhere" the Pope is not claiming that peace, justice, etc are a source of salvation: the idea is that someone who pushes war, retribution, realpolitiik, tribalism etc (all the opposites) is hardly capable of repenting: when someone sees that they have seriously fallen short in whatever (peace, justice, etc) they are in a position to repent. That is what I understand the Catholic interpretation of his statement is: when we see good, we not only get an intution of God, we also become aware of far short we are, which leads to humility, repentence and service... in Catholic terms, this is the doctrine of analogia entis which underlies most Catholic thinking.)

I will also make a minor change, adding the Sheik's name as the author. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 03:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Excessive bibliography

Unless I am mistaken, numerous references have been added to a bibliography, but all relating to the one, anti-papal, perspective. This seems to me to violate NPOV, by swamping. An article in which dissent is treated in elaborate and find-combed detail, while the original article has only general treatment of its subject, seems out of balance in some way.

Rick Jelliffe (talk) 13:47, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Rick Jelliffe: As a sidenote, it appears User:Tobias Epos, who has been indefinitely blocked, does not really approve of this declaration, and made sure to inform the reader of how unecceptable some find the document or parts of it. Veverve (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)