As a matter of fact, you have deficiencies in all religions, but you have truth in all religions.
However, if the religions in essence merely repeat statements from the United Nations Human Rights Declaration, such a Declaration becomes superfluous; an ethic is more than rights.
It is an absolutely unique success of the church community to have introduced such an epoch-making change, in just a few years, without having a serious division.
But I have to add – and this answers your other question – this catholicity in time and in space is only meaningful for me if there is, at the same time, a concentration on the Gospel.
At the same time we are aware that our various religions and ethical traditions often offer very different bases for what is helpful and what is unhelpful for men and women, what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil.
The Epistle to the Romans is an extremely important synthesis of the whole theology of St. Paul.
I like the catholicity in time: our tradition is one of 2,000 years.
Second, we also got a more authentic liturgy of the people of God, in the vernacular language.
I remember the Curia said, that’s up to the American bishops, not up to Rome.
Humanity today possesses sufficient economic, cultural and spiritual resources to introduce a better global order.
If priests were allowed to marry, if this would be an optional thing, and if he could have wife and children, he would certainly have less temptation to satisfy certain sexual impulses with minors.
Religion often is misused for purely power-political goals, including war.
We are convinced of the fundamental unity of the human family.
That is the Roman way: to give favors to the favorites.
The Gospel has to be the norm.