The Address of John Paul II to the General Assembly of the United Nations. New York, 2 October 1979

Last update: 2022-04-22 09:50:29

Mr President, I desire to express my gratitude to the distinguished General Assembly of the United Nations, which I am permitted today to participate in and to address. My thanks go in the first place to the Secretary General of the United Nations Organisation, Kurt Waldheim. Last autumn, soon after my election to the chair of St. Peter, he invited me to make this visit and he renewed the invitation in the course of our meeting in Rome last May. From the first moment I felt greatly honoured and deeply obliged. And today, before this so distinguished Assembly, I also thank you Mr. President, who have so kindly welcomed me and invited me to speak. The formal reason for my address today is without any question the special bond of co-operation that links the Apostolic See with the United Nations Organisation, as is shown by the presence of the Holy See's Permanent Observer to this organisation. The existence of this bond, which is held in high esteem by the Holy See, rests on the sovereignty with which the Apostolic See has been endowed for many centuries. The territorial extent of that sovereignty is limited to the small State of the Vatican City but the sovereignty itself is warranted by the need of the Papacy to exercise its mission in full freedom and to be able to deal with any interlocutor, whether a government or an international organisation, without dependence on other sovereignties. Of course the nature and aims of the spiritual mission of the Apostolic See and the Church make their participation in the tasks and activities of the United Nations Organisation very different from that of the States which are communities in the political and temporal sense. Besides attaching great importance to its collaboration with the United Nations Organisation, the Apostolic See has always since the foundation of your organisation expressed its esteem and its agreement with the historic significance of this supreme forum for the international life of humanity today. It also never ceases to support your organisation's function and initiatives which are aimed at peaceful coexistence and cooperation between nations. There are many proofs of this. In the more than thirty years of the existence of the United Nations Organisation, it has received much attention in papal messages and encyclicals, in documents of the Catholic episcopate, and similarly in the Second Vatican Council. Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI looked with confidence on your important institution as an eloquent and promising sign of our times. He who is now addressing you has since the first months of his pontificate several times expressed the same confidence and conviction as his predecessors. This confidence and conviction on the part of the Apostolic See is the result, as I have said, not of purely political reasons but of the religious and moral character of the mission of the Roman Catholic Church. As a universal community embracing faithful belonging to almost all countries and continents, nations, peoples, races, languages and cultures, the Church is deeply interested in the existence and activity of the organisation whose very name tells us that it unites and associates nations and States. It unites and associates, it does not divide and oppose. It seeks out the ways for understanding and peaceful cooperation and endeavours with the means at its disposal and the methods in its power to exclude war, division and mutual destruction within the great family of humanity today. This is the real reason, the essential reason, for my presence among you and I wish to thank this distinguished assembly for giving consideration to this reason which can make my presence among you in some way useful. It is certainly a highly significant fact that among the representatives of the States whose raison d'être is the sovereignty of powers linked with territory and people, there is also today the representative of the Apostolic See and the Catholic Church. This Church is the Church of Jesus Christ who declared before the tribunal of the Roman judge Pilate that he was a king but with a kingdom not of this world [cf. Jn 18:36-7]. When he was then asked about the reason for the existence of his kingdom among men he explained 'For this I was born and for this I have come into the world: to bear witness to the truth' [cf. Jn 18:37]. Here before the representatives of the States I wish not only to thank you but also to offer my special congratulations, since the invitation extended to the Pope to speak in your assembly shows that the United Nations Organisation accepts and respects the religious and moral dimension of those human problems that the Church attends to in view of the message of truth and love that it is her duty to bring to the world. The questions that concern your functions and receive your attention as is indicated by the vast and overall complex of institutions and activities that are part of the United Nations or work with it, in particular in the fields of culture, health, food, labour and the powerful uses of nuclear energy certainly make it essential for us to meet in the name of man in his wholeness, in all the fullness and manifold riches of his spiritual and material existence, as I stated in my encyclical Redemptor Hominis, the first of my pontificate. Now availing myself of the solemn occasion of my meeting with the representatives of the nations of the earth, I wish above all to send my greetings to all the men and women living on this planet. To every man and every woman without an exception whatever. Every human being living on earth is a member of a civil society, of a nation, many of which are represented here. Each one of you distinguished ladies and gentlemen represents a particular State, system and political structure but what you represent above all are individual human beings, you are all representatives of men and women of practically all the people of the world, individual men and women, communities and peoples who are living the present stage of their own history and who are also part of the history of humanity in the world. Each of them is a subject endowed with dignity as a human person, with his or her own culture, experiences and aspirations, tensions and sufferings and legitimate expectations. This relationship is what provides the reason for all political activity, whether national or international, for in the final analysis this activity comes from man, is exercised by man and for man. And if this political activity is cut off from this fundamental relationship and finality it becomes in a way its own end and it loses much of its reason to exist. Even more it can also give rise to a specific alteration, it can become extraneous to man, it can come to contradict humanity itself. In reality, what justifies the existence of any political activity is service to man, concerned and responsible attention to the essential problems and duties of his earthly existence, in its social dimension and significance, on which also the good of each person depends. I apologise, most distinguished ladies and gentlemen, for speaking of questions that are certainly self-evident to you. But it does not seem pointless to speak of them since the most frequent pitfall for human activities is the possibility of losing sight while performing them of the clearest truths, the most elementary principles. I would like to express the wish that in view of its universal character, the United Nations Organisation will never cease to be that 'forum', that high tribune, from which all man's problems are apprised in truth and justice. It was in the name of this inspiration, it was through this historic stimulation, that on 26 June 1945, towards the end of the terrible Second World War, the Charter of the United Nations was signed and on the following 24 October your organisation began its life. Soon after, on 10 December, came its fundamental document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the rights of man as a concrete individual and of man in his universal value. This document is a milestone on the long and difficult path of the human race. The progress of humanity must be measured not only by the progress of science and technology, from which emerges all of man's uniqueness with regard to nature, but also and chiefly by the primacy given to spiritual values and by the progress of moral life. In this field is manifested the full dominion of reason, through truth, in the behaviour of the individual and of society, and also reason's dominion over nature and thus the quiet triumph of the human conscience, as was expressed in the ancient saying 'Genus humanum arte et ratione vivit.' It was when technology was being directed in its one-sided progress towards goals of war, hegemony and conquest so that man may kill man and nation may destroy nation by depriving it of its liberty and the right to exist and I still have before my mind the image of the Second World War in Europe, which began forty years ago on 1 September 1939 with the invasion of Poland and ended on 9 May 1945 it was precisely then that the United Nations Organisation arose. And three years later this document appeared, which as I have said must be considered a real milestone on the path of the moral progress of humanity the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The governments and the States of the world have understood that if they are not to attack and destroy each other, they must unite. The full way, the fundamental way, to this is through each human being, through the definition and recognition of, and respect for, the inalienable rights of individuals and of the communities of peoples. Today, forty years after the outbreak of the Second World War, I wish to recall the whole of the experiences of individuals and nations that was sustained by a generation that is largely still alive. I had occasion not long ago to reflect again on some of those experiences in one of the places that are most distressing and overflowing with contempt for man and his fundamental rights the extermination camp of Oswiecim (Auschwitz) which I visited during my pilgrimage to Poland last June. This infamous place is unfortunately only one of the many scattered over the continent of Europe. But the memory of even one should be a warning sign on the path of humanity today, in order that every kind of concentration camp anywhere on earth may once and for all be done away with. And everything that recalls those horrible experiences should also disappear for ever from the lives of nations and States, everything that is a continuation of those experiences under different forms, namely the various kinds of torture and oppression, either physical or moral, carried out under any system in any land. This phenomenon is all the more distressing if it occurs under the pretext of internal 'security' or the need to preserve an apparent peace. You will forgive me, ladies and gentlemen, for evoking this memory. But I would be untrue to the history of this century, I would be dishonest with regard to the great cause of man which we all wish to serve, if I were to keep silent. I who come from the country on whose living body Oswiecim was at one time constructed. But my purpose in evoking this memory is above all to show what painful experiences and sufferings by millions of people gave rise to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was placed as the basic inspiration and cornerstone of the United Nations Organisation. This Declaration was paid for by millions of our brothers and sisters at the cost of their suffering and sacrifice brought about by the brutalisation that darkened and made insensitive the human consciences of their oppressors and of those who carried out a real genocide. This price cannot have been paid in vain! The Universal Declaration of Human Rights with its train of many declarations and conventions on highly important aspects of human rights, in favour of children, of women, of equality between races and especially the two international covenants on economic, social and cultural rights and on civil and political rights must remain the basic value in the United Nations Organisation with which the consciences of its members must be confronted and from which they must draw continual inspiration. If the truths and principles contained in this document were to be forgotten or ignored, and were thus to lose the genuine self-evidence that distinguished them at the time that they were brought painfully to birth, then the noble purpose of the United Nations Organisation could be faced with the threat of a new destruction. This is what could happen if the simple but powerful eloquence of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were decisively subjugated by what is wrongly called political interest but often really means no more than one-sided gain and advantage to the detriment of others or a thirst for power regardless of the needs of others everything which by its nature is opposed to the spirit of the Declaration. 'Political interest' understood in this sense, if you will forgive me ladies and gentlemen, dishonours the noble and difficult mission of your service for the good of your countries and of all humanity. Fourteen years ago my great predecessor Pope Paul VI spoke from this podium. He spoke memorable words which I desire to repeat today. "No more war! War never again! And never one against the other or one above the other but always on every occasion with each other." Paul VI was a tireless servant of the cause of peace. I wish to follow him with all my strength and continue his service. The Catholic Church in every place on earth proclaims a message of peace, prays for peace, educates for peace. This purpose is also shared by the representatives and followers of other Churches and communities and of other religions of the world, and they have pledged themselves to it. In union with efforts by all people of good will this work is currently bearing fruit. Nevertheless we are continually troubled by the armed conflicts that break out from time to time. How grateful we are to the Lord when a direct intervention succeeds in avoiding such a conflict, as in the case of the tension that last year threatened Argentina and Chile. It is my fervent hope that a solution also to the Middle East crisis will draw nearer. While being prepared to recognise the value of any concrete step or attempt made to settle the conflict, I want to recall that it would have no value if it did not truly represent the first stone of a general overall peace in the area. A peace which, being necessarily based on equitable recognition of the rights of all, cannot fail to include the consideration and just settlement of the Palestinian question. Connected with this question is that of the tranquillity, independence and territorial integrity of the Lebanon within the formula that has made it an example of peaceful and mutually fruitful coexistence between distinct communities a formula that I hope will in the common interest be maintained, with the adjustments required by the developments of the situation. I also hope for a special statute that, under international guarantees as my predecessor Paul VI indicated would respect the particular nature of Jerusalem, a heritage sacred to the veneration of millions of believers of the three great monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. We are troubled also by reports of the development of weaponry exceeding in quality and size the means of war and destruction even known before. In this field also we applaud the decisions and agreements aimed at reducing the arms race. Nevertheless, the life of humanity today is seriously endangered by the threat of destruction and by the risk arising even from accepting certain tranquilising reports. And the resistance to actual concrete proposals of real disarmament such as those called for by this assembly in a special session last year, shows that together with the will for peace that all profess and that most desire, there is also in existence perhaps in latent or conditional form but nonetheless real the contrary and the negation of this will. The continual preparations for war demonstrated by the production of ever more numerous, powerful and sophisticated weapons in various countries show that there is a desire to be ready for war and being ready means being able to start it. It also means taking the risk that sometime, somewhere, somehow, someone can set in motion the terrible mechanism of general destruction. It is therefore necessary to make a continuing and even more energetic effort to do away with the very possibility of provoking war and to make such catastrophes impossible by influencing the attitudes and convictions, the very intentions and aspirations of governments and peoples. This duty kept constantly in mind by the United Nations Organisation and each of its institutions must also be a duty for every society, every regime. This task is currently served by initiatives aimed at international cooperation for the fostering of development. As Paul VI said at the end of his encyclical Populorum Progressio: 'If the new name for peace is development who would not wish to labour for it with all his powers?' However, this task must also be served by constant reflection and activity aimed at recovering the very roots of hatred, destructiveness and contempt the roots of everything that produces the temptation to war, not so much in the hearts of the nations as in the inner determination of the systems that decide the history of whole societies. In this titanic labour of building up the peaceful future of our planet, the United Nations Organisation has undoubtedly a key function and guiding role for which it must refer to the just ideals contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For this Declaration has struck a real blow against the many deep roots of war since the spirit of war in its basic primordial meaning springs up and grows to maturity when the inalienable rights of man are violated. This is a new and deeply relevant vision of the cause of peace, one that goes deeper and is more radical. It is a vision that sees the genesis and in a sense the substance of war in the more complex forms emanating from injustice viewed in all its various aspects. This injustice first attacks human rights and thereby destroys the organic unity of the social order and it then affects the whole system of international relations. Within the Church's doctrine, the encyclical Pacem in Terris by John XXIII provides in synthetic form a view of this matter that is very close to the ideological foundations of the United Nations Organisation. This must therefore form the basis to which one must loyally and perseveringly adhere in order to establish true 'peace on earth'. By applying this criterion we must diligently examine which principal tensions in connection with the inalienable rights of man can weaken the construction of this peace which we all desire so ardently and which is the essential goal of the United Nations Organisation. It is not easy but it must be done. Anyone who undertakes it must take up a totally objective position and be guided by sincerity, readiness to acknowledge one's prejudices and mistakes and readiness even to renounce one's own particular interests including political interests. It is by sacrificing these interests for the sake of peace that we serve them best. After all, in whose political interest can it ever be to have another war? Every analysis must necessarily start from the premise that although each person lives in a particular concrete social and historical context every human being is endowed with a dignity that must never be lessened, impaired or destroyed but must instead be respected and safeguarded if peace is really to be built up. In a movement that one hopes will be progressive and continuous, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the other international and national juridical instruments are endeavouring to create general awareness of the dignity of the human being and to define at least some of the inalienable rights of man. Permit me to enumerate some of the most important human rights that are universally recognised: the right to life, liberty and security of person, the right to food, clothing, housing, sufficient health care, rest and leisure, the right to freedom of expression, education and culture, the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and the right to manifest one's religion either individually or in community in public or in private, the right to choose a state of life to found a family and to enjoy all conditions necessary for family life, the right to property and work, to adequate working conditions and a just wage, the right of assembly and association, the right to freedom of movement, to internal and external migration, the right to nationality and residence, the right to political participation and the right to participate in the free choice of the political systems of the people to which one belongs. All these human rights taken together are in keeping with the substance of the dignity of the human being understood in his entirety, not as reduced to one dimension only. These rights concern the satisfaction of man's essential needs, the exercise of his freedoms and his relationships with others, but always and everywhere they concern man, they concern man's full human dimension. Man lives at the same time both in the world of material values and in that of spiritual values. For the individual living and hoping man, his needs, freedoms and relationships with others never concern one sphere of values alone but belong to both. Material and spiritual realities may be viewed separately in order to understand better that in the concrete human being they are inseparable and to see that any threat to human rights, whether in the field of material realities or in that spiritual realities, is equally dangerous for peace since in every instance it concerns man in his entirety. Permit me, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, to recall a constant rule of the history of humanity, a rule that is implicitly contained in all that I have said with regard to integral development and human rights. The rule is based on the relationship between spiritual values that are pre-eminent both on account of the nature of those values and also for reasons concerning the good of man. The pre-eminence of the values of the spirit define the proper sense of earthly material goods and the way to use them. This pre-eminence is therefore at the basis of a just peace. It is also a contributing factor to ensuring that material development, technical development and the development of civilisation are at the service of what constitutes man. This means enabling man to have full access to truth, to moral development and to the complete possibility of enjoying the goods of culture which he has inherited and of increasing them by his own activity. It is easy to see that material goods do not have unlimited capacity for satisfying the needs of man. They are not in themselves easily distributed and in the relationship between those who possess and enjoy them and those who are without them, they give rise to tension, dissension and division that will often even turn into open conflict. Spiritual values, on the other hand, are open to unlimited enjoyment by many at the same time, without diminution of the goods themselves. Indeed, the more people share in such goods, the more they are enjoyed and drawn upon, the more then do these goods show their indestructible and immortal worth. This truth is confirmed, for example, by the works of thought, poetry, music, and the figurative arts, the fruits of man's spirit. A critical analysis of our modern civilisation shows that in the last hundred years it has contributed as never before to the development of material goods but that is has also given rise both in theory and still more in practice to a series of attitudes in which sensitivity to the spiritual dimension of human existence has diminished to a lesser or a greater extent as a result of certain premises which reduce the meaning of human life chiefly to the many different material and economic factors I mean to the demands of production, the market, consumption, the accumulation of riches or of the growing bureaucracy with which an attempt is made to regulate those very processes. Is this not the result of having subordinated man to one single conception and sphere of values? What is the link between these reflections and the cause of peace and war? Since, as I have already stated, material goods by their very nature provoke conditionings and divisions, the struggle to obtain these goods becomes inevitable in the history of humanity. If we cultivate this one-sided subordination of man to material goods alone we shall be incapable of overcoming this state of need. We shall be able to attenuate it and avoid it in particular cases but we shall not succeed in eliminating it systematically and radically unless we emphasise more and pay greater honour before everyone's eyes in the sight of every society to the second dimension of the goods of man, the dimension that does not divide people but puts them into communication with one another, associates them and unites them. I consider that the famous opening words of the Charter of the United Nations in which the principles of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war solemnly reaffirmed faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women, and of nations large and small, are meant to stress this dimension. Indeed, the fight against incipient wars cannot be carried out on a merely superficial level by treating the symptoms. It must de done in a radical way by attacking the causes. The reason I have called attention to the dimension constituted by spiritual realities is my concern for the cause of peace which is built up by men and women uniting around what is most fully and profoundly human, around what rises them up above the world about them and determines their indestructible grandeur indestructible in spite of the death to which everyone on the earth is subject. I would like to add that the Catholic Church, and I think I can say the whole of Christianity, sees in this very domain its own particular task. The Second Vatican Council helped to establish what the Christian faith has in common with the various non-Christian religions in this aspiration. The Church is therefore grateful to all who show respect and good will with regard to this mission of hers and do not impede it or make it difficult. An analysis of the history of mankind especially in its present stage shows how important is the duty of revealing more fully the range of the goods that are linked with the spiritual dimension of human existence. It shows how important this task is for building peace and how serious is any threat to human rights. Any violation of them even in a peace situation is a form of warfare against humanity. It seems that in the modern world that there are two main threats. Both concern human rights in the field of international relations and human rights within individual States or societies. The first of these systematic threats against human rights is linked in an overall sense with the distribution of material goods. This distribution is frequently unjust both within individual societies and on the planet as a whole. Everyone knows that these goods are given to man not only as nature's bounty; they are enjoyed by him chiefly as the fruit of his many activities ranging from the simplest manual and physical labour to the most complicated forms of industrial production and to the highly qualified and specialised research and study. Various forms of inequality in the possession of material goods and in the enjoyment of them can often be explained by different historical and cultural causes and circumstances. But while these circumstances can diminish the moral responsibility of people today, they do not prevent the situations of inequalities from being marked by injustice and social injury. People must become aware that economic tensions within countries and in the relationships between States and even between entire continents contain within themselves substantial elements that restrict or violate human rights. Such elements are the exploitation of labour and many other abuses that affect the dignity of the human person. It follows that the fundamental criterion for comparing social, economic and political systems is not, and cannot be, the criterion of hegemony and imperialism; it can be, and indeed it must be, the humanistic criterion, namely the measure in which each system is totally capable of reducing, restraining and eliminating, as far as possible, the various forms of exploitation of man and of ensuring for him, through work, not only the just distribution of the indispensable material goods but also a participation in keeping with his dignity in the whole process of production and in the social life that grows up around that process. Let us not forget that although man depends on the resources of the material world for his life, he cannot be their slave but he must be their master. The words of the Book of Genesis, 'till the earth and subdue it' [Gen 1:28] are in a sense a primary and essential directive in the field of economy and of labour policy. Humanity as a whole and the individual nations have certainly made remarkable progress in this field during the last hundred years. But it is a field in which there is never any lack of systematic threats and violations of human rights. Disturbing factors are frequently present in the form of the frightful disparities between excessively rich individuals and groups on the one hand, and on the other the majority made up of the poor and indeed of the destitute who lack food and opportunities for work and education and in great numbers are condemned to hunger and disease. And concern is also at times caused by the radical separation of work from property by man's indifference to the production enterprise, to which he is linked only by a work obligation without feeling that he is working for a good that will be his or for himself. It is no secret that the abyss separating the minority of the excessively rich from the multitude of the destitute is a very grave symptom of the life of every society. This must also be said with even greater insistence with regard to the abyss separating countries and nations of the earth. Surely the only way to overcome this serious disparity between areas of fullness and areas of hunger and depression is through coordinated cooperation by all countries. This requires above all else a unity inspired by an authentic perspective of peace. Everything will depend on whether these differences and contrasts in the sphere of the possession of goods will be systematically reduced through truly effective means or whether the belts of hunger, malnutrition, destitution, under-development, disease and illiteracy will disappear from the economic map of the earth and on whether peaceful cooperation will avoid imposing conditions of exploitation and economic or political dependence which would only be a form of neo-colonialism. I would now like to draw attention to a second systematic threat to man in his inalienable rights in the modern world, a threat which constitutes no less a danger than the first to the cause of peace. I refer to the various forms of injustice in the field of the spirit. Man can indeed be wounded in his inner relationship with truth in his conscience, in his most personal beliefs, in his view of the world, in his religious faith and in the sphere of what are known as civil liberties. Decisive for these last is equality of rights without discrimination on grounds of origin, race, sex, nationality, religion, political convictions and the like. Equality of rights means the exclusion of the various forms of privilege for some and discrimination against others, whether they are people born in the same country or people from different backgrounds of history, nationality, race and ideology. For centuries, the thrust of civilisation has been in one direction, that of giving the life of individual political societies a form in which there can be fully safeguarded the objective rights of the spirit of human conscience and of human creativity, including man's relationship with God. Yet in spite of this we still see in this field recurring threats and violations often with no possibility of appealing to a higher authority or of obtaining an effective remedy. Besides the acceptance of legal formulas in safeguarding the principle of the freedoms of the human spirit such as freedom of thought and expression, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, structures of social life often exist in which the practical exercise of these freedoms condemns man in fact if not formally to become a second-class or third-class citizen, to see compromised his chances of social advancement or his access to certain posts of responsibility, and to lose even the possibility of educating his children freely. It is a question of the highest importance that in internal social life, as well as in international life, all human beings in every nation and country should be able to effectively enjoy their full rights under any political regime or system. Only the safeguarding of the real completeness of rights for every human being without discrimination can ensure peace at its very roots. With regard to religious freedom which I as Pope am bound to have particularly at heart precisely with a view to safeguarding peace, I would like to repeat here as a contribution to respect for man's spiritual dimension some principles contained in the Second Vatican Council's Declaration Dignitatis Humanae: 'in accordance with their dignity all human beings because they are persons, that is beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore bearing personal responsibility, are both impelled by their nature and bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth once they come to know it and to direct their whole lives in accordance with its demands.' [1,2] 'The practice of religion, of its very nature, consists primarily of those voluntary and free internal acts by which a human being distinctly sets his course towards God. No merely human power can either command or prohibit acts of this kind. But man's social nature itself requires that he give external expression to his internal acts of religion that he communicates with others in religious matters and that he profess his religion in community' [1, 3]. These words touch the very substance of the question. They also show how even the confrontation between the religious view of the world and the agnostic or even atheistic view which is one of the signs of the times of the present age could preserve honest and respectful human dimensions without violating the essential rights of conscience of any man or woman living on earth. Respect for the dignity of the human person would seem to demand that when the exact tenor of the exercise of religious freedom is being discussed or determined with a view to national laws or international conventions, the institutions that are by their nature at the service of religion should also be brought in. If this participation is omitted there is a danger of imposing in so intimate a field of man's life rules or regulations that are opposed to his true religious needs. The United Nations Organisation has proclaimed 1979 the Year of the Child. In the presence of the representatives of so many nations of the world gathered here, I wish to express the joy that we all find in children, the springtime of life, the anticipation of the future history of each of our present earthly homelands. No country on earth, no political system, can think of its own future otherwise than through the image of these new generations that will receive from their parents the manifold heritage of values, duties, and aspirations of the nation to which they belong and of the whole human family. Concern for the child even before birth from the first moment of conception and the throughout the years of infancy and youth is the primary and fundamental test of the relationship of one human being to another. And so what better wish can I express for every nation and the whole of mankind and for all the children of the world than a better future in which respect for human rights will become a complete reality throughout the third millennium which is drawing near? But in this perspective we must ask ourselves whether there will continue to accumulate over the heads of this new generation of children the threat of common extermination for which the means are in the hands of the modern States, especially the major world powers. Are children to receive the arms race from us as a necessary inheritance? How are we to explain this unbridled race? The ancients said 'si vis pacem, para bellum'. But can our age still really believe that the breathtaking spiral of armaments is at the service of world peace? In alleging the threat of a potential enemy is it not really rather the intention to keep for oneself a means of threat in order to get the upper hand with the aid of one's own arsenal of destruction? Here, too, it is the human dimension of peace that tends to vanish in favour of ever new possible forms of imperialism. It must be our solemn wish here for our children, for the children of all the nations of the earth, that this point will never be reached. And for that reason I do not cease to pray to God each day so that in His mercy he may save us from so terrible a day. At the close of this address I wish to express once more before all the high representatives of the States who are present a word of esteem and deep love for all the peoples, all the nations, of the earth, for all human communities. Each one has its own history and culture. I hope that they will live and grow in the freedom and truth of their own history. For that is the measure of the common good of each one of them. I hope that each person will live and grow strong with the moral force of the community that forms its members and citizens. I hope that the State authorities, while respecting the just rights of each citizen, will enjoy the confidence of all for the common good. I hope that all the nations, even those that do not yet enjoy full sovereignty and those that have been forcibly robbed of it, will meet in full equality with the others in the United Nations Organisation. I hope that the United Nations will ever remain the supreme forum of peace and justice, the authentic seat of freedom of peoples and individuals in their longing for a better future. ©Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 00120 Vatican City