Contender Ministries

Posted:  May 20, 2002


A new International Criminal Court was officially instituted at the United Nations Headquarters on the 11th of April, 2002, without ratification from the United States.  President Clinton signed the treaty on his last day in office indicating the U.S. intent to seek ratification, however the treaty was never put to a vote before congress.  Deemed by many in the U.S. to be a threat to national sovereignty, the Bush administration has strenuously objected to the ICC and has reportedly sought means to "unsign" the treaty.

 The Rome Statute, launched in 1998, called for the establishment of this new International World Court to prosecute human rights abuses.  Objections from the United States are based on the fear that the court could bring politically motivated charges against U.S. presidents and military personnel, and deny U.S. citizens any rights afforded them under the U.S. constitution.  Americans - especially Christians, are right to fear this very real threat to our national sovereignty.  The Earth Charter, co-chaired by Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong, and one of the forums that tout global governance in the interest of sustainable development, warns of a critical moment in Earth's history where we must embrace the "one Earth community with a common destiny" and "move toward the destruction of national sovereignty". 

To fully understand the new World Court, one must go back to its conception.  When studied in the context of the reports and commissions that marked its beginning, its much broader implications become evident. 

The World Court's conception began as part of a much broader goal of reforming the United Nations, and was inspired by the belief that the end of the Cold War offered opportunities to build a more cooperative, safer and fairer world.  This utopian dream of a united world was explored and mapped out by the Commission on Global Governance (CGG). 

The CGG was established in 1992 with the full support of the U.N. Secretary General Boutros Ghali and with the goal of strengthening global cooperation, securing global peace, achieving sustainable development and universalizing democracy.  Chaired by Ingvar Carlson, the former Prime Minister of Sweden, and Shridath Ramphal, former Secretary General of the Commonwealth from Guyana, the commission is made up of 28 public figures from around the world, all of whom participated in or formally endorsed the Stockholm Initiative on Global Security and Governance.  You may recognize some of the names on the commissions membership list, such as Jimmy Carter of the U.S., Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, Boutros Boutros Ghali of Egypt and Maurice Strong of Canada.   

The Commission received funding from several governments including, Canada, Denmark, India, Indonesia, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.  Funds from Japan were also made available through two United Nations trust funds.  The Commission also received funds from the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development (Kuwait) and the World Humanity Action Trust (United Kingdom), as well as from the MacArthur Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and the Ford Foundation (all based in the United States).  Other countries also funded meetings and paid for travel costs and hotel accommodations. 

In 1995 the commission presented its proposals for improving the World's Governance to the United Nations in a report titled "Our Global Neighbourhood".  The book-length report centered principally on the United Nations, and suggested that the U.N. should be revitalized "so that it can better respond to the needs of a modern world".  It included the following proposals among others: 

1.  Reform the Security Council, so that it becomes more representative and maintains legitimacy and credibility.

2.  Set up an Economic Security Council to have more effective and more democratic oversight of the world economy.

3.  Establish a U.N. volunteer force.

4.  Vest the custody of the global commons in the Trusteeship Council, which has completed its original work.

5.  Treat the security of people and of the planet as being as important as the security of states.


7.  Give civil society a greater voice in governance.

8.  Explore ways to raise new funds for global purposes (e.g. the global tax you are now hearing about in the news). 

The Commission for Global Governance website states that their core values "call for a global neighbourhood ethic and commitment to core global values that can command respect across frontiers of race and religion".  Much like the Earth Charter, Our Global Neighbourhood speaks of global governance, cultural diversity, a one-world economy, the new world order, and a global rule of law.  All of these increasingly popular catch phrases send a chill down the spine of most Christians, and seem to suggest what most already suspect--the end times could very well be upon us. 

The Commission didn't stop there, however.  They also took up the politically correct topic of intolerance.  In the Milano Charter issued on April 4th, 1997, Ingvar Carlsson, co-chairman of the CGG, called for a world struggle against intolerance, asserting that "the new enemy is not another's civilization but simply intolerance".  The Milano Charter identifies "intolerance against the other's culture, civilization, religion and ethnicity" as "the very origin of the culture of violence."  Using this definition, Contender Ministries, by contending for our faith in Jesus Christ and sharing our beliefs, could be accused of promoting violence.  The logic of this statement, as does most of "The Global Neighborhood", follows the New Age belief that God is everything, and all beliefs are right, so to believe in one God or one religion over another is the only evil. 

In 1995, commission co-chair Ingvar Carlsson had formed a group of 16 heads of government from all regions of the world to promote global cooperation in the implementation of their proposed reforms.  In 1997, the group presented a statement to Secretary General Annan, urging their colleagues to give them their due attention.  They wrote in their statement "It is time to go from words to deeds, and for member states to take decisions on actual reforms and to ensure practical steps of implementation.  Let us empower the U.N. to confront through collective action, the global challenges of the 21st century."  In response to the commission's statement, Secretary General Annan proposed that the council should serve to link the U.N. and civil society in their collective trusteeship for the integrity of the Global environment and common areas.  With this new recognition, their next step was to address the wider issues of institutional reform and the need for changes to "improve the U.N.'s capacity to serve the world community in the new century".  These issues were addressed at the Millennium Assembly along with a Special Ministerial Commission that would be established to implement these changes. 

The tragic events of 9/11 served to speed up the implementation of "Our Global Neighborhood", by putting global security and global rule of law at the forefront of the globalization effort.  We are now seeing the fruits of their labor and the beginnings of their grand plan for a new world order of co-operation, tolerance and global interdependence.   

So what is this new World Court?  It is the first step in an attempt to implement the ideas presented to the U.N. in the form of "Our Global Neighborhood' and the "Earth Charter".  It comes from the work of those who plot the new world order at the Earth Dialogues and  who believe as the Earth Charter preamble states, "that in order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of the Earth Charter principals with an internationally and legally binding instrument of development."  To briefly address a future article, the preamble goes on to say that we must all "affirm faith in the inherent dignity of all human beings and the intellectual, artistic, ethical, and spiritual potential of humanity."  In other words, faith in man rather than faith in God. 

The successful establishment of an International Criminal Court that could potentially bring politically motivated charges against U.S. presidents and military personnel, and vaguely describes crimes against humanity as "injury to a population's mental health" brings us one step closer to the one world government predicted in Daniel 2.  It also emphasizes the urgency of God's call to his children to share his saving grace with as many people as we can.  One day sharing your faith, and certainly ministries like ours,  will be labeled intolerant by the global community, or worse yet, we will be guilty of injury to a person's mental health.  It's not a time to sit in your pew and just be saved.  The time is coming when many will be indoctrinated into a religion that places its faith in the spiritual potential of humanity and Earth and fears the intolerant Word of God.  Now is the time to share what you have in Christ with others.

 The next article in this series explores the concept of a unified global religion as described in the "Earth Charter" and "Our Global Neighbourhood."


Contender Ministries