In an exciting leap towards a greener future, the European Union has wrapped its arms around a game-changing plan that’s all about giving us the gift of cleaner air. Picture this: a Europe where every breath is a gulp of fresh, clean air — sounds dreamy, right? Well, it’s not just a pipe dream anymore, thanks to a heartening handshake between the Council presidency and the European Parliament.
This isn’t just any agreement; it’s a promise to chase after a future where pollution is a tale of the past, aiming for a sparkling clean 2050. And who’s leading the cheers? None other than Alain Maron, a champion for the environment in the Brussels-Capital Region, who’s all in for making sure we can all breathe a little easier.
A Breath of Fresh Air: EU's Bold Move for Cleaner Skies 3
What’s the big deal, you ask? Imagine the air around us getting a major detox, with a special focus on cutting down the nasty bits like fine particles and nitrogen dioxide that love to crash our lung parties. By 2030, the EU plans to have these uninvited guests cut down to size, making our air not just fresher but healthier too.
But here’s the kicker: if some areas find it tough to clear the air by the deadline, they can ask for a bit more time. It’s like getting an extension on a tough homework assignment, but only if you really, really need it and promise to work hard on it. And to make sure everyone stays on track, there’ll be plans and updates shared all around, kind of like keeping a group project in check.
A Breath of Fresh Air: EU's Bold Move for Cleaner Skies 4
Now, every five years, the EU will do a health check on these air quality goals, making sure they’re still in line with the latest science and what the World Health Organization thinks is best. It’s like making sure your glasses prescription is up to date — you want to keep seeing clearly, right?
And here’s something really cool: if someone doesn’t play by the rules and our air gets dirty because of it, there are ways to call them out and even get compensated. It’s about making sure there’s fairness and that everyone has a say, from individuals to big groups who care about our planet.
So, what’s next? This plan needs a few more stamps of approval before it’s set in stone, but it’s on its way. It’s a big step in a journey that’s been going on for decades, making sure our air isn’t just something we have to live with, but something that helps us live better.
It’s a big, bold move for the EU, but it’s all about taking care of us and our home. Here’s to breathing easy and looking forward to brighter, cleaner days ahead!
Madrid. Santiago Cañamares Arribas, Professor of Ecclesiastical Law at the Complutense University of Madrid, delivered a thought-provoking analysis of religious freedom and equality in the European Union at the recent travelling seminar organized by the Association of Ecclesiastical Law Professors.
In this recent lecture Prof. Cañamares Arribas, a distinguished scholar in the field of religious freedom, shared his profound insights on the intricate relationship between religion and the legal framework of the European Union. The event, which marks a significant moment in the academic and personal convergence of Madrid’s universities and beyond, highlighted the evolving dynamics of religious freedom within the EU.
Prof. Cañamares Arribas began his address by expressing gratitude to the association for reigniting the tradition of such meaningful seminars, a practice once common when he was part of the Department of Ecclesiastical Law.
The crux of Prof. Cañamares Arribas’s presentation revolved around his recent research and publication on the role of religion in the European Union, a topic that has occupied his scholarly pursuits for years. He pointed out a paradox within the EU’s approach to religious freedom and equality. “While the EU legislator shows a commitment to religious freedom and equality through specific norms and exceptions for religious reasons, this commitment does not seem to be mirrored in the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU),” he observed.
Prof. Cañamares Arribas critically analyzed the CJEU’s restrictive interpretation of religious freedom, contrasting it with the broader allowances within EU legislation. He cited the recent “Commune d’Ans” case as a prime example, where a Belgian court’s question led to a ruling that has sparked further debate on the EU’s stance on religious symbols in employment settings.
The seminar delved into two major unresolved issues within EU law: the distinction (or lack thereof) between religion and personal convictions as objects of protection, and the autonomy of member states in defining their relationship with religious confessions. Prof. Cañamares Arribas highlighted the EU’s foundational economic focus but emphasized the importance of not overlooking the social and personal dimensions, including religious freedom and equality.
Furthermore, Prof. Cañamares Arribas critiqued the EU’s potential endorsement of laicism, questioning whether it aligns with the fundamental rights and values the Union purports to uphold. He referenced the “Refah Partisi v. Turkey” case by the European Court of Human Rights to illustrate the potential conflicts between certain models of state-religion relationships and the protection of fundamental rights.
Prof. Cañamares Arribas called for a more nuanced understanding and application of religious freedom and equality within the EU. He suggested that through mutual learning between the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the contributions of Advocates General, there is room for optimism and improvement in how the EU navigates the complex terrain of religion and law.
The seminar not only provided a platform for academic discussion but also shed light on the ongoing challenges and opportunities for enhancing religious freedom and equality in the European Union. As the EU continues to evolve, the insights shared by Prof. Santiago Cañamares Arribas will undoubtedly contribute to the broader conversation on how best to balance these fundamental rights within its legal framework.
Brussels, 20 February 2024 – The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), recognized as the EU’s nexus of organized civil society, has issued a dire warning about the escalating housing crisis in Europe, particularly affecting vulnerable groups and young individuals. During a high-level conference in Brussels, the EESC underscored the urgency of the situation, emphasizing the need for a coordinated EU-wide response to ensure access to decent and affordable housing for all.
The housing crisis, marked by a growing inability among Europeans to find affordable and adequate accommodation, is leading to a host of adverse outcomes including housing insecurity, health issues, and increased environmental damage. The EESC’s conference highlighted the multifaceted impact of the crisis, stressing that housing is not just a major expense for many households but also a critical determinant of social and territorial cohesion within the EU.
Recent studies, including one from Eurofound, reveal that the crisis disproportionately affects young people, delaying their transition to independent living and exacerbating intergenerational inequalities. Countries like Spain, Croatia, Italy, and others have seen significant increases in the number of young adults living with their parents, signaling a deepening of the crisis.
The EESC has long advocated for addressing the housing issues across the EU. In 2020, it called for a European action plan on housing, proposing measures to increase the supply of social and affordable housing and to combat homelessness. Despite housing policy being a national responsibility, the EESC’s recommendations aim to foster a collective European approach to the crisis.
Among the proposed measures are the organization of an annual EU summit on affordable housing, the establishment of a universal right to housing through specific regulation, and the creation of a European fund for investment in affordable housing. These proposals are intended to mobilize stakeholders at all levels, from local to EU-wide, to tackle the housing shortage effectively.
The conference featured remarks from high-level speakers, including EESC President Oliver Röpke, who emphasized the role of civil society organizations in promoting affordable housing policies. European Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, Nicolas Schmit, acknowledged the complexity of ensuring access to affordable housing but stressed its necessity for a strong Social Europe. MEP Estrella Durá Ferrandis called for an integrated EU strategy for social, public, and affordable housing, while Christophe Collignon, Wallonia’s Minister of Housing and Local Authorities, highlighted housing as a fundamental right essential for preventing homelessness and promoting social cohesion.
The EESC plans to compile its recommendations and present them at the upcoming Housing Ministerial Conference in Liège, aiming to place the housing crisis on the agenda of the new European Parliament and Commission for 2024-2029. This initiative seeks not only to address the immediate challenges but also to lay the groundwork for long-term solutions to ensure that access to quality and affordable housing becomes a reality for all Europeans.
In a significant step towards achieving climate neutrality by 2050, the European Commission has hailed the provisional agreement on the first EU-wide certification framework for carbon removals. This landmark decision, reached between the European Parliament and the Council, introduces a voluntary framework aimed at certifying high-quality carbon removals, encompassing both innovative technologies and carbon farming practices.
The new framework is poised to play a crucial role in the EU’s ambitious climate, environmental, and zero-pollution objectives, ensuring transparency and trust in carbon removal initiatives while simultaneously opening up new avenues for business and innovation. “Our efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will increasingly depend on technology and innovation in the future, and on making the best use of natural carbon sinks,” stated Maroš Šefčovič, Executive Vice-President for the European Green Deal, highlighting the importance of developing robust certification for carbon removal technologies and farming practices.
Under the provisional agreement, the certification rules will cover a wide range of activities, including carbon farming efforts like forest restoration, soil conservation, and innovative farming techniques, as well as industrial carbon removal processes such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Additionally, the framework will certify carbon bound in durable products and materials, promoting the use of sustainable building materials and practices.
A key aspect of the agreed regulation is its emphasis on ensuring that carbon removals are accurately quantified, stored for a minimum of 35 years, and contribute to broader sustainability goals, including biodiversity enhancement. An EU registry will be established to foster transparency regarding certified carbon removals, with implementation expected within four years.
Commissioner for Climate Action, Wopke Hoekstra, underscored the framework’s potential to unlock economic opportunities across various sectors, stating, “Carbon removals and carbon farming will be an important part of our efforts to reach climate neutrality by 2050.” He emphasized the framework’s role in fostering a sustainable future where innovation meets environmental responsibility.
The regulation also aims to stimulate financial support for carbon removal technologies through innovative financing models and public sector support, recognizing the commercial and environmental benefits of certified carbon removals. This initiative aligns with the EU’s broader climate and sustainability goals, including the European Green Deal and the European Climate Law, which mandates the EU to achieve a balance between greenhouse gas emissions and removals by 2050.
With the European Parliament and Council set to formally approve the agreement, the EU takes a decisive step towards implementing a comprehensive strategy for sustainable carbon cycles and climate neutrality. This framework not only supports the EU’s long-term climate targets but also paves the way for a sustainable and innovative business environment dedicated to high-quality carbon removals.
By Prof. A.P. Lopukhin, Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament
Chapter 13. 1-9. Exhortations to repentance. 10 – 17. Healing on Saturday. 18 – 21. Two parables about the kingdom of God. 22 – 30. Many may not enter the Kingdom of God. 31-35. Christ’s words concerning Herod’s plot against Him.
Luke 13:1. At the same time some came and told Him about the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices.
The calls to repentance that follow are found only in Luke the Evangelist. Also, he alone reports the occasion that gave the Lord occasion to address such exhortations to those around Him.
“At the same time”, ie. while the Lord was speaking His previous speech to the people, some of the newly arrived listeners told Christ important news. Some Galileans (their fate seems to be known to the readers, because the article τῶν precedes the word Γαλιλαίων) were killed by order of Pilate while they were offering sacrifice, and the blood of the slain even sprinkled the sacrificial animals. It is not known why Pilate allowed himself such cruel self-dealing in Jerusalem with King Herod’s subjects, but in those rather turbulent times the Roman procurator could indeed resort without serious investigation to the most severe measures, especially against the inhabitants of Galilee, who were generally were known for their wayward character and tendency to riot against the Romans.
Luke 13:2. Jesus answered them and said: Do you think that these Galileans were more sinful than all the Galileans, that they suffered thus?
The question of the Lord was probably dictated by the circumstance that those who brought Him the news of the destruction of the Galileans were inclined to see in this terrible destruction God’s punishment for some particular sin committed by those who perished.
“were” – it is more correct: they became (ἐγένοντο) or punished themselves precisely by their destruction.
Luke 13:3. No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish.
Christ took advantage of this occasion to exhort His hearers. The extermination of the Galileans, according to His prediction, foreshadows the destruction of the entire Jewish nation, in case, of course, the people remain unrepentant in their opposition to God, Who now requires them to accept Christ.
Luke 13:4. Or do you think that those eighteen people on whom the tower of Siloam fell and killed them were more guilty than all those living in Jerusalem?
It is not only the case of the Galileans that can strike the mind and the heart. The Lord points to another apparently very recent event, namely, the fall of the Tower of Siloam, which crushed eighteen men under its rubble. Were those who perished more sinful before God than the rest of the inhabitants of Jerusalem?
“The Tower of Siloam”. It is not known what this tower was. It is only clear that it stood in close proximity to the Spring of Siloam (ἐν τῷ Σιλωάμ), which flowed at the foot of Mount Zion, on the south side of Jerusalem.
Luke 13:5. No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish.
“all” is again an allusion to the possibility of the destruction of the entire nation.
It cannot be inferred from this that Christ rejected any connection between sin and punishment, “as a vulgar Jewish notion,” as Strauss puts it (“The Life of Jesus”). No, Christ recognized the connection between human suffering and sin (cf. Matt. 9:2), but did not recognize only the authority of men to establish this connection according to their own considerations in each individual case. He wanted to teach people that when they see the sufferings of others, they should strive to look into the condition of their own souls and see in the punishment that befalls their neighbor, the warning that God sends them. Yes, here the Lord is warning people against that cold complacency that is often manifested among Christians, who see the sufferings of their neighbor and pass them by indifferently with the words: “He deserved it…”.
Luke 13:6. And he said this parable: a man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came to look for fruit on it, but found none;
To show how necessary repentance is now for the Jewish people, the Lord tells the parable of the barren fig tree, from which the owner of the vineyard is still waiting for fruit, but – and this is the conclusion that can be drawn from what has been said – his patience may soon be exhausted. run out and he will cut her off.
“and said”, that is, Christ addresses the crowds standing around him (Luke 12:44).
“in his vineyard… a fig tree”. In Palestine figs and apples grow in the bread fields and vineyards where the soil permits (Trench, p. 295).
Luke 13:7. and he said to the vinedresser: behold, for three years I have been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree, and I have not found any; cut it down: why should it only deplete the earth?
“I’ve been coming for three years”. More precisely: “three years have passed since I began to come” (τρία ἔτη, ἀφ´ οὗ).
“why only deplete the earth”. Land in Palestine is very expensive, as it affords the opportunity to plant fruit trees on it. “Depletes” – takes away the strength of the earth – moisture (καταργεῖ).
Luke 13:8. But he answered him and said: master, leave it this year too, until I dig it up and fill it with manure,
“dig up and fill with fertilizer”. These were extreme measures to make the fig tree fertile (as it is still done with orange trees in southern Italy, – Trench, p. 300).
Luke 13:9. and if it bears fruit, good; if not, next year you will cut it off.
“if not, next year you will cut it off”. This translation is not entirely clear. Why should a fig tree that has turned out to be barren be cut down only “next year”? After all, the owner has told the vintner that she wastes the soil in vain, so he must get rid of her immediately after the last and final attempt to make it fertile. There is no reason to wait another year. Therefore, here it is better to accept the reading established by Tischendorf: “Perhaps it will bear fruit next year?”. (κἂν μὲν ποιήσῃ καρπόν εἰς τὸ μέλλον) If not, cut it down.” We must wait until next year, however, because this year the fig tree will still be fertilized.
In the parable of the barren fig tree, God wants to show the Jews that His appearance as the Messiah is the last attempt that God makes to call the Jewish people to repentance, and that after the failure of this attempt, the people have no choice but to expects an imminent end.
But besides this direct meaning of the parable, it also has a mysterious one. It is the barren fig tree that signifies “every” nation and “every” state and church that do not fulfill their God-given purpose and must therefore be removed from their place (cf. Rev. 2:5 to the angel of the Ephesian church: ” I will remove your lamp from its place if you do not repent”).
Moreover, in the intercession of the vinedresser for the fig tree, the fathers of the Church see the intercession of Christ for sinners, or the intercession of the Church for the world, or of the righteous members of the Church for the unrighteous.
As for the “three years” mentioned in the parable, some interpreters have seen in them a signification of the three periods of the Divine household – the law, the prophets and Christ; others have seen in them a signification of the three years’ ministry of Christ.
Luke 13:10. In one of the synagogues He taught on the Sabbath;
Only the evangelist Luke tells about the healing of the weak woman on Saturday. In the synagogue on the Sabbath, the Lord heals the stooped woman, and the head of the synagogue, although indirectly in His address to the people, blames Him for this action, because Christ broke the Sabbath rest.
Then Christ rebukes the hypocritical zealot for the law and his ilk, pointing out that even on the Sabbath the Jews made their cattle drink, thus violating their prescribed rest. This denunciation made the opponents of Christ ashamed, and the people began to rejoice at the miracles that Christ performed.
Luke 13:11. and here is a woman of infirm spirit for eighteen years; she was hunched over and couldn’t stand up at all.
“with feeble spirit” (πνεῦμα ἔχουσα ἀσθενείας), i.e. demon that weakened her muscles (see verse 16).
Luke 13:12. When Jesus saw her, he called her and said to her: woman, you are freed from your infirmity!
“you break free”. More precisely: “you are freed” (ἀπολέλυσαι), the impending event being represented as having already taken place.
Luke 13:13. And laid His hands upon her; and immediately she stood up and praised God.
Luke 13:14. At this the leader of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, spoke and said to the people: there are six days during which one must work; in them come and be healed, not on the Sabbath day.
“the ruler of the synagogue” (ἀρχισυνάγωγος). (cf. the interpretation of Matt. 4:23).
“being resentful that Jesus healed on the Sabbath.” (cf. the interpretation of Mark 3:2).
“said to the people”. He was afraid to turn directly to Christ because the people were clearly on the side of Christ (see v. 17).
Luke 13:15. The Lord answered him and said: hypocrite, does not each of you untie his ox or his donkey from the manger on the Sabbath and lead it to water?
“hypocrite”. According to the more accurate reading “hypocrites”. Thus the Lord calls the head of the synagogue and the other representatives of the church authorities who stand next to the head (Evthymius Zigaben), because under the pretext of observing exactly the Sabbath law, they actually wanted to shame Christ.
“doesn’t it lead?” According to the Talmud, it was also permitted to bathe animals on the Sabbath.
Luke 13:16. And this daughter of Abraham whom Satan has bound for eighteen years, should she not be freed from these bonds on the Sabbath day?
“that daughter of Abraham”. The Lord completes the thought expressed in the preceding verse. If for the animals the strictness of the Sabbath law can be violated, even more so for the woman descended from the great Abraham, it is possible to violate the Sabbath – in order to free her suffering from the disease that Satan caused her (Satan is represented as having bound her through some of her employees – the demons).
Luke 13:17. And when He spake this, all that were against Him were ashamed; and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious works which he did.
“for all the glorious works done by Him” (τοῖς γενομένοις), by which the works of Christ are signified as continuing.
Luke 13:18. And He said: what is the kingdom of God like, and what can I liken it to?
For an explanation of the parables of the mustard seed and leaven cf. the interpretation to Matt. 13:31-32; Mark 4:30-32; Matt. 13:33). According to the Gospel of Luke, these two parables were spoken in the synagogue, and here they are quite appropriate, since in verse 10 it is said that the Lord “taught” in the synagogue, but what His teaching consisted of – that is not what the evangelist says there and now compensates for this omission.
Luke 13:19. It is like a mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his garden; it grew and became a great tree, and the birds of the air made their nests in its branches.
“in his garden”, i.e. he keeps it under close supervision and constantly takes care of it (Matt.13:31: “in his fields”).
Luke 13:20. And again he said: to what shall I liken the kingdom of God?
Luke 13:21. It looks like leaven that a woman took and put in three measures of flour until it all soured.
Luke 13:22. And he passed through cities and villages, teaching and going to Jerusalem.
The evangelist again (cf. Luke 9:51 – 53) reminds his readers that the Lord, passing through towns and villages (most likely the evangelist is referring here to the towns and villages of Perea, the region beyond the Jordan, which is usually used for traveling from Galilee to Jerusalem), went to Jerusalem. He finds it necessary to recall here this purpose of the Lord’s journey because of the Lord’s predictions of the nearness of His death and of the judgment upon Israel, which, of course, are closely connected with the purpose of Christ’s journey.
Luke 13:23. And someone said to Him: Lord, are there few who are being saved? He said to them:
“someone” – a person who, in all probability, did not belong to the number of Christ’s disciples, but who came out of the crowd of people around Jesus. This is evident from the fact that in answering his question, the Lord addresses the crowd as a whole.
“are there few who are saved”. This question was not dictated by the strictness of Christ’s moral requirements, nor was it simply a question of curiosity, but, as is evident from Christ’s answer, it was based on the proud consciousness that the questioner belonged to those who would surely be saved . Salvation here is understood as deliverance from eternal destruction through acceptance into the glorious Kingdom of God (cf. 1 Cor. 1:18).
Luke 13:24. strive to enter through the narrow doors; for I tell you, many will seek to enter, and will not be able.
(cf. the interpretation of Matt. 7:13).
The evangelist Luke reinforces Matthew’s point because instead of “enter” he puts “strive to enter” (ἀγωνίζεσθε εἰσελθεῖν), implying the serious effort that will be required to enter the glorious Kingdom of God.
“many will seek to enter in” – when the time for the home building of salvation has already passed.
“they will not be able” because they did not repent in time.
Luke 13:25. After the master of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you who are left outside, start knocking at the door and crying: Lord, Lord, open to us! and when He opened you and said: I do not know you where you are from, –
Luke 13:26. then you will begin to say: we ate and drank before You, and in our streets You taught.
Luke 13:27. And He will say: I tell you, I do not know where you are from; depart from Me, all ye that work iniquity.
Announcing the judgment of the entire Jewish people, Christ represents God as the master of a house waiting for his friends to come to dinner. The hour comes when the doors of the house must be locked, and the master himself does this. But as soon as he locks the doors, the Jewish people (“you”), who have come too late, start asking to be admitted to the dinner and knocking on the door.
But then the householder, ie. God, will tell these tardy visitors that he does not know whence they come, ie. what family they are from (cf. John 7:27); in any case they do not belong to His house, but to some other, unknown to Him (cf. Matt. 25:11-12). Then the Jews will point out the fact that they ate and drank before Him, ie. that they are His close friends, that He taught in the streets of their cities (the speech clearly already passes into a picture of Christ’s relations with the Jewish people). But the Host will again tell them that they are strangers to Him, and therefore they must go away as unrighteous, i.e. wicked, stubborn unrepentant people (cf. Matt. 7:22 – 23). In Matthew these words mean false prophets.
Luke 13:28. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast out.
The conclusion of the preceding discourse depicts the sad condition of the rejected Jews, who, to their greatest chagrin, will see that access to the Kingdom of God is open to other nations (cf. Matt. 8:11-12).
“where” you will be banished.
Luke 13:29. And they will come from the east and the west, and the north and the south, and they will sit at the table in the kingdom of God.
Luke 13:30. And behold, there are last who shall be first, and there are first who shall be last.
“last”. These are the Gentiles whom the Jews did not consider worthy to be admitted to the kingdom of God, and the “first” are the Jewish people who were promised the kingdom of the Messiah (see Acts 10:45).
Luke 13:31. On the same day some Pharisees came and said to Him: get out and leave here, because Herod wants to kill You.
The Pharisees went to Christ to warn Him of the plans of Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee (see Luke 3:1). From the fact that later (v. 32) the Lord calls Herod a “fox”, i.e. cunning being, we can safely say that the Pharisees came by order of Herod himself, who was very displeased that Christ had been in his dominions for so long (Perea, where Christ was at that time, also belonged to the dominions of Herod). Herod was afraid to take any open measures against Christ because of the respect with which the people received him. Therefore Herod ordered the Pharisees to suggest to Christ that he was in danger from the tetrarch in Perea. The Pharisees thought it best to persuade Christ to go quickly to Jerusalem, where, as they knew, He would certainly not be pardoned.
Luke 13:32. And he said to them: go and say to that fox: behold, I cast out demons, and I heal today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will finish;
The Lord answers the Pharisees: “Go, tell this fox” who sent you, i.e. of Herod.
“today”. This expression signifies a definite time known to Christ, during which He would remain in Perea, in spite of all the plans and threats of Herod.
“I will finish”, (τελειοῦμαι, which is everywhere in the New Testament used as a passive participle), or – I will come to the end. But what “end” does Christ mean here? Is this not His death? Some teachers of the Church and ecclesiastical writers (the blessed Theophylact, Euthymius Zigaben) and many Western scholars have understood the expression in this sense. But, in our opinion, the Lord here undoubtedly speaks of the end of His present activity, which consists in casting out demons from men and healing diseases, and which takes place here in Perea. After that, another activity will begin – in Jerusalem.
Luke 13:33. but I must go to-day, to-morrow, and other days, for a prophet should not perish outside Jerusalem.
“I have to go”. This verse is very difficult to understand because it is not clear, first, what “walking” the Lord is referring to, and, second, it is not clear what this has to do with the fact that prophets were usually killed in Jerusalem. Therefore, some of the more recent commentators consider this verse to be structurally incorrect and suggest the following reading: “Today and tomorrow I must walk (i.e. perform healings here), but the next day I must go on a journey further away , because it does not happen that a prophet perishes outside of Jerusalem” (J. Weiss). But this text does not give us any reason to think that Christ decided to depart from Perea: there is no expression “from here”, nor any hint of a change in Christ’s activity. That is why B. Weiss offers a better interpretation: “Certainly, however, it is necessary for Christ to continue his journey as Herod wishes. But this does not in the least depend on Herod’s treacherous designs: Christ must, as before, go from one place to another (v. 22) at a fixed time. The purpose of His journey is not to escape; on the contrary, it is Jerusalem, for He knows that as a prophet He can and must die only there.”
As for the remark about all the prophets perishing in Jerusalem, this is of course hyperbole, as not all prophets met their death in Jerusalem (e.g. John the Baptist was executed at Mahera). The Lord spoke these words in bitterness because of the attitude of the capital of David towards God’s messengers.
Luke 13:34. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you! How many times have I wanted to gather your children as a hen gathers it’s chickens under her wings, and you didn’t cry! (Cf. the interpretation of Matt. 23:37-39).
In Matthew this statement about Jerusalem is the conclusion of the rebuke against the Pharisees, but here it has a greater connection with the previous speech of Christ than in Matthew. In the Gospel of Luke, Christ addresses Jerusalem from a distance. It is probably during the last words (of verse 33) that He turns His face toward Jerusalem and makes this mournful address to the center of the theocracy.
Luke 13:35. Behold, your home is left to you desolate. And I tell you that you will not see Me until the time comes for you to say: blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!
“I tell you”. In the evangelist Matthew: “because I say to you”. The difference between the two expressions is as follows: in Matthew the Lord predicts the desolation of Jerusalem as a consequence of His departure from the city, while in Luke the Lord says that in this state of rejection in which Jerusalem will find itself, He will not come to its aid , as the inhabitants of Jerusalem might expect: “However sad your situation may be, I will not come to protect you until …” etc. – i.e. until the whole nation repents of its unbelief in Christ and turns to Him, which will happen before His Second Coming (cf. Rom. 11:25ff.).
Brussels, February 19, 2024 – The European Sikh Organization has issued a strong condemnation following reports of excessive force used by Indian security forces against farmers protesting in India since February 13, 2024. The farmers, who have been demanding the implementation of Minimum Support Prices (MSP) for their crops, reminiscent of the widespread 2020–2021 Indian farmers’ agitation, have reportedly faced severe and violent crackdowns.
In a distressing turn of events, it has been reported that the use of pellet guns by Indian forces has resulted in severe injuries among the protestors, with at least three farmers being blinded. This method of crowd control, previously seen in the contentious regions of Kashmir, marks a troubling use of lethal force against civilians voicing their dissent.
The European Sikh Organization, representing the Sikh community in Europe, has taken swift action by bringing this issue to the forefront of the European Parliament. The organization plans to engage with Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to highlight the severity of the situation and advocate for the rights of the Indian farmers within the broader framework of the European Union’s commitment to human rights.
Expressing solidarity with the farmers, the European Sikh Organization emphasized the stark contrast between the handling of farmer protests in Europe and India. In Europe, farmers’ rights to protest and advocate for their interests are often met with dialogue and negotiation, rather than violence and suppression. This disparity highlights a significant concern over the treatment of Indian farmers and the need for international attention to ensure their fundamental rights are protected.
The support from the farming community in Belgium towards their Indian counterparts is a testament to the global nature of the issue, underscoring the universal right to peaceful protest and the importance of government accountability in addressing citizens’ grievances.
As the situation develops, the European Sikh Organization’s efforts to bring international scrutiny to the use of force against Indian farmers are a crucial step in advocating for justice and human rights. The organization’s call to action within the European Union represents a broader plea for global solidarity with those fighting for their livelihoods and rights, against disproportionate use of force and suppression.
Brussels, Belgium – In a significant move to safeguard digital rights and user safety, the European Commission has initiated formal proceedings against the social media giant, TikTok, to investigate potential breaches of the Digital Services Act (DSA). This action underscores the EU’s commitment to enforcing its groundbreaking legislation aimed at regulating the digital space, particularly in areas concerning the protection of minors, advertising transparency, data access for researchers, and the management of content that could be deemed harmful or addictive.
Following a preliminary investigation, which included a detailed analysis of TikTok’s risk assessment report submitted in September 2023 and the company’s responses to the Commission’s formal Requests for Information, the Commission has identified several areas of concern. These include TikTok‘s compliance with DSA obligations related to systemic risks, such as the potential for algorithmic systems to foster behavioral addictions or lead users down harmful ‘rabbit hole effects.’ The investigation will also scrutinize TikTok’s measures to protect minors, including the effectiveness of its age verification tools and default privacy settings, as well as the platform’s transparency in advertising and data accessibility for research purposes.
If TikTok is found to have failed in these areas, it would constitute infringements of multiple articles within the DSA, signaling a breach of the obligations set forth for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOP). TikTok, which declared having 135.9 million monthly active users in the EU as of April 2023, falls under this category and is therefore subject to stringent compliance requirements under the DSA.
The formal proceedings mark a critical phase in the Commission’s enforcement of the DSA, empowering it to take further actions, including interim measures and non-compliance decisions. The Commission may also accept any commitments made by TikTok to address the issues under investigation. It’s important to note that the opening of these proceedings does not imply a predetermined outcome, nor does it limit the Commission’s ability to investigate other potential infringements under the DSA or other regulatory frameworks.
As the investigation progresses, the Commission will continue to gather evidence, potentially conducting interviews, inspections, and sending additional requests for information to TikTok. The duration of this in-depth investigation will depend on various factors, including the complexity of the case and the extent of TikTok’s cooperation.
This action by the European Commission is a clear demonstration of the EU’s resolve to ensure that digital platforms operate in a manner that protects users’ rights and safety, particularly those of minors. It also highlights the comprehensive nature of the DSA, which applies to all online intermediaries operating within the EU, setting a global benchmark for digital regulation. As the proceedings unfold, the digital community and TikTok users will be keenly watching for the outcome and its implications for the future of digital services regulation in Europe and beyond.
In a decisive move, the European Union has once again voiced its firm backing for the Belarusian people’s aspirations for democracy, sovereignty, and human rights. The Council’s latest conclusions underscore a deep commitment to a Belarus that is free, democratic, and an integral part of a peaceful and prosperous Europe.
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, emphasized that Belarus remains a priority for the EU, condemning the Lukashenka regime’s ongoing human rights violations and repression, especially in the lead-up to the parliamentary and local elections set for 25 February 2024. “Those responsible will be held to account. We stand in solidarity with the Belarusian people and remain determined to mobilise all tools to support their quest for peace and democracy,” Borrell stated.
The Council’s conclusions express grave concerns over the deteriorating human rights conditions in Belarus, strongly denouncing the regime’s persecution, intimidation, and efforts to undermine the fairness and legitimacy of the upcoming elections. The Lukashenka regime’s actions, which threaten the national identity of Belarus by suppressing the Belarusian language and culture, were also highlighted as areas of deep concern.
In addition to domestic repression, the Council condemned Belarus’s support for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the regime’s hybrid attacks at the EU’s external borders, including the instrumentalization of migrants. These actions not only exacerbate regional tensions but also violate international obligations.
In response to these actions, the EU has implemented targeted sanctions against the Lukashenka regime and stands ready to impose further measures should the authorities continue their oppressive actions. These sanctions aim to hold the regime accountable and support the Belarusian people’s pursuit of democratic freedoms.
Support for Belarusian civil society remains a cornerstone of the EU’s strategy, with the establishment of the EU Consultative Group with Belarusian democratic forces and civil society being a notable step forward. This group serves as a platform for dialogue and support for those fighting for democracy in Belarus.
Moreover, the EU has pledged a comprehensive economic support package worth €3 billion to a future democratic Belarus. This plan aims to foster resilience, promote democratic reforms, create jobs, and improve living standards, signaling the EU’s long-term commitment to Belarus’s integration into the European family.
The Council’s conclusions are a clear indication of the EU’s unwavering support for the Belarusian people’s democratic aspirations and its readiness to stand against any form of repression. As Belarus approaches critical elections, the international community watches closely, hoping for a peaceful transition towards democracy and respect for human rights.
European Parliament from EU, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
In a significant address at the conference on “The Future of EU Enlargement: Judiciary and Fundamental Rights,” Olivér Várhelyi, highlighted the European Union’s steadfast commitment to its enlargement policy, emphasizing its role as a geostrategic investment in the continent’s long-term peace, stability, and security.
“I am glad to address today’s conference, which focuses on respecting and protecting Judiciary and Fundamental Rights in the framework of the EU’s Enlargement process,” Várhelyi stated, expressing his gratitude towards Minister Malenica and the Croatian Ministry of Justice and Public Administration for their pivotal role in organizing the event.
The conference comes at a crucial time, following the historic decisions by the European Council in December 2023, which Várhelyi sees as a response to “the call of our history to complete our Union.” He drew inspiration from Croatia’s journey towards EU membership, particularly highlighting the country’s experience in negotiating Chapters 23 and 24, which deal with Judiciary and Fundamental Rights, as a beacon for other countries aspiring to join the EU.
Várhelyi underscored the importance of democratic development through the advancement of Rule of Law chapters, stating, “Advancing on the objectives of these Rule of Law chapters are essential for democratic development. Namely, to ensure an independent and accountable judiciary providing an effective protection of fundamental rights.”
The Commissioner reassured continuous support from the Commission for reform efforts in all enlargement countries, emphasizing that the process remains merit-based. “The new enlargement methodology that we adopted in 2020 is valid. Fundamentals are at the centre of the accession process, and the pace of negotiations depends on the progress of reforms in our partners,” he elaborated.
Várhelyi also touched upon the critical link between the rule of law and economic development, pointing out that a “well-functioning independent judicial system attracts international investments and fosters economic growth.” He highlighted the necessity for predictability and a corruption-free environment for economic operators to invest confidently.
In his concluding remarks, Várhelyi stressed the paramount importance of protecting and promoting fundamental rights, from freedom of expression to the rights of persons belonging to minorities. “Every constructive action towards these goals brings us closer to a stable and peaceful Europe,” he affirmed.
The conference, as Várhelyi’s address suggests, is not just a discussion on the technical aspects of EU enlargement but a reaffirmation of the EU’s dedication to upholding the principles of democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental human rights in its quest to expand and strengthen the Union.
In a statement that has sent ripples across the international community, the European Union has expressed its profound outrage over the death of Alexei Navalny, a prominent Russian opposition figure. The EU holds Russian President Vladimir Putin and the country’s authorities “ultimately responsible” for Navalny‘s demise.
“The European Union is outraged by the death of the Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny, for which the ultimate responsibility lies with President Putin and the Russian authorities,” said the High Representative on behalf of the EU. The statement was made following a meeting at the Foreign Affairs Council, where deep condolences were extended to Navalny’s wife, Yulia Navalnaya, their children, family, friends, and all who collaborated with him for the betterment of Russia.
The EU has demanded that Russia permit “an independent and transparent international investigation into the circumstances of his sudden death.” It has vowed to coordinate closely with its partners to hold Russia’s political leadership accountable, hinting at the imposition of further sanctions as a consequence of their actions.
Navalny’s death has sparked a global outpouring of grief, with tributes being paid worldwide. However, in Russia, authorities have attempted to stifle these memorials, detaining several hundred individuals in the process. The EU has called for their immediate release.
Navalny’s return to Russia after surviving an assassination attempt involving the nerve agent “Novichok” — a substance banned under the Chemical Weapons Convention — marked him as a figure of immense bravery. Despite facing politically motivated charges and being isolated in a Siberian penal colony, Navalny continued his work, with his access to family severely restricted and his lawyers facing harassment.
The EU has consistently condemned Navalny’s poisoning and the politically motivated judgments against him, demanding his immediate and unconditional release and calling on Russia to ensure his safety and health.
“Throughout his life, Mr. Navalny demonstrated incredible courage, dedication to his country and his fellow citizens, and determination with his anti-corruption work across Russia,” the statement highlighted. It underscored the fear Navalny instilled in Putin and his regime, especially amidst Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and the upcoming Russian Presidential elections in March.
Navalny’s death is seen as a “shocking” testament to the “accelerating and systematic repression in Russia.” The EU reiterated its call for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Russia, including Yuri Dmitriev, Vladimir Kara-Murza, Ilya Yashin, Alexei Gorinov, Lilia Chanysheva, Ksenia Fadeeva, Alexandra Skochilenko, and Ivan Safronov.
This statement marks a significant moment in EU-Russian relations, reflecting the EU’s stance on human rights violations and its readiness to take action against those deemed responsible.
