Warning: Video contains some use of taboo speech
The Permanent Diaconate did not surface again for more than a thousand years. At the height of World War II, a group of Catholic men imprisoned at the Nazi concentration camp at Dachau buried the remains of hundreds of people who were murdered in the infamous gas chambers. In the midst of this dehumanizing environment of pain and cruelty, these men prayed for the courage to believe. They offered support and encouragement to all the nameless and voiceless ones around them. Somehow they kept faith alive, sustained hope, and witnessed to God's unconditional love.
Through not ordained and, totally unaware that what they were accomplishing would have worldwide significance, these men in Dachau became the restorers of the modern permanent diaconate. They were true "servants in the image of Jesus." After the war ended, these men continued to meet and work for the awakening in every Christian of a commitment to justice through service and stewardship. They were called, "the Deacon Circle."
In the years that followed, additional groups emerged throughout Germany, France, and Eastern European countries. These "Deacon Circles" were the first role models for an emerging lay apostolate which Pope Pius XII urged each diocesan church to nurture as a way of transforming every aspect of society.
In 1959, an International Diaconate Circle was organized. This organization prepared the way for the eventual restoration of the diaconate by drafting a petition asking that the diaconate be restored and, that it be opened to both married and single men. The Vatican received the final petition from the International Diaconate Circle in 1962. From there several of the Council Fathers, mostly from Germany, went on to develop a compilation of thirty-nine essays, called Diakonia in Christo, which addressed various aspects of ministry which could be carried out by a modernized permanent diaconate as well as the enormous value of such an ordained ministry to the Church.
In the course of the Vatican II discussions that followed, the permanent diaconate was restored by a majority vote of the Council on October 30, 1963. The restoration of the diaconate was promulgated as part of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church which was released on November 21, 1964.
Why sex and foreign policy aren’t as different as you might think
Would you believe that having sex can provide you with a better guide to effective foreign policy than any political theory out there? In fact, if our policy makers spent more time nurturing their sex lives, they could find themselves more attuned to the most effective tools of statecraft. This should come as no surprise and I’ll tell you why.
In order to have sex, you have three options. You can buy it, i.e. prostitution; you can take it by force, i.e. rape; or you can seduce it, i.e. the art of romance. Buying sex is usually only a temporary fix and an expensive one at that; most prostitutes don’t offer blue-light specials. Furthermore, it might not be the most desirable experience unless a dingy motel room, cheap champagne, and the incessant glow of neon lights is your idea of a romantic getaway. Forcing sex might be desirable for some but for most it simply isn’t worth the likely consequences, i.e. spending the rest of your life behind bars in an orange jump suit contemplating escape with a spoon and a bed spring.
How then, do you use seduction to get sex? You first need to possess certain elements of attraction such as good looks, an appealing personality, and some sort of alluring feature that compels your intended companion to get a little frisky with you; generally a few sprays of cologne will turn the trick. Second, you need to have a strategy; sex on first contact isn’t usually the rule but rather the exception. You need to take the time to get to know your companion, i.e. enduring a few awkward dates, engaging in conversation more enlightening than the weather, and actually noticing little things like eye color and the type of shoes your companion is wearing; observing bust size doesn’t qualify! Finally, you have to set the mood; a few candles and some sultry music will do. A little tender, loving, care can go a long way so don’t be afraid to sharpen your massage skills. What’s more, when the deed is done, you can’t just fall asleep or abruptly leave. It pays to cuddle and stay around for breakfast. While it might take a bit longer and require more finesse, if executed skillfully seduction can result in quality, long lasting, and meaningful sex, without the messy consequences of prostitution or rape.
So why is sex similar to foreign policy? If it isn’t already apparent, nations have three options when deciding how to achieve a particular foreign policy objective. Like sex, they can buy it, i.e. with bribery or economic sanctions; they can take it, i.e. with military force; or they can seduce it, i.e. creating an allure via soft power. The first two options are hard power methods frequently used to coerce or compel an adversary to succumb to your will, tangible instruments that clearly indicate a nation’s desire to alter behavior or gain the advantage in a given scenario. However, these options can have dire consequences. Economic sanctions, bribery, and war can be costly, extremely risky, and lacking in quality assurance. Moreover, military force and the careless use of economic sanctions can produce damaging ripple effects that can be difficult to suppress. One only needs to look at the situation in Iraq to ascertain that the friction and uncertainty of war can create more problems than solutions, and the case of Cuba to realize that buying your objectives doesn’t necessarily work.
The seduction of soft power attempts to alleviate some of the pains associated with the misuse of hard power by using public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy to persuade an adversary rather than coerce it. This implies confidence in one’s ideals and principles, and a willingness and ability to export them. For the United States, this means accentuating our most appealing qualities such as democracy, the rule of law, plurality, and freedom. It also means tapping into the alluring features of culture such as music and art. These elements can potentially convince an adversary to view the U.S. in a more positive light; a nation that finds us attractive is more likely to emulate our behavior and subsequently comply with our demands. Like a seductress, however, the purveyor of soft power must be patient and willing to invest in a little TLC.
So maybe the hippie mantra “Make Love, Not War!” has a point. If we take the time to seduce our target and tap into the softer side of foreign policy, we have a greater chance of securing our foreign policy objectives in a manner that ensures lasting relationships. Like a good lover, the U.S. must be willing to sustain its soft power initiatives over time by not abandoning these initiatives when the deed is done and sticking around for a little cuddle time.
Colin Parks is a graduate student at The Institute of World Politics in Washington where he studies the elements of statecraft in national security and foreign affairs. He can be contacted at email@example.com,
British Olympic chiefs are to force athletes to sign a contract promising not to speak out about China's appalling human rights record – or face being banned from traveling to Beijing.
The move – which raises the specter of the order given to the England football team to give a Nazi salute in Berlin in 1938 – immediately provoked a storm of protest....
From the moment they sign up, the competitors – likely to include the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips and world record holder Paula Radcliffe – will be effectively gagged from commenting on China's politics, human rights abuses or illegal occupation of Tibet.
Prince Charles has already let it be known that he will not be going to China, even if he is invited by Games organizers.
His views on the Communist dictatorship are well known, after this newspaper revealed how he described China's leaders as “appalling old waxworks” in a journal written after he attended the handover of Hong Kong. The Prince is also a long-time supporter of the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader....
The [British Olympic Association] took the decision even though other countries – including the United States, Canada, Finland, and Australia – have pledged that their athletes would be free to speak about any issue concerning China.
To date, only New Zealand and Belgium have banned their athletes from giving political opinions while competing at the Games....
However, human rights campaigner Lord David Alton condemned the move as “making a mockery” of the right to free speech.
The controversial decision to award the Olympics to Beijing means this year's Games have the potential to be the most politically charged since 1936.
Adolf Hitler used the Munich Games that year to glorify his Nazi regime, although his claims of Aryan superiority were undermined by black American athlete Jesse Owens winning four gold medals.
More recently, there was a mass boycott of the 1980 Games in Moscow in protest at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan....
Former Olympic rowing champion Matthew Pinsent has already criticized the Chinese authorities over the training methods used on children, which he regarded as tantamount to abuse. Young gymnasts told him they were repeatedly beaten during training sessions....
Lord Alton said: “It is extraordinary to bar athletes from expressing an opinion about China's human-rights record. About the only justification for participating in the Beijing Games is that it offers an opportunity to encourage more awareness about human rights.
“Imposing compulsory vows of silence is an affront to our athletes, and in China it will be viewed as acquiescence.
“Each year 8,000 executions take place in China, political and religious opinion is repressed, journalists are jailed and the internet and overseas broadcasts are heavily censored.
“For our athletes to be told that they may not make any comment makes a mockery of our own country's belief in free speech.”