This begs what is, to me, the crucial question: is a super-state the right vehicle for creating a global family? I think that is a very dangerous path to follow and would, as Benedict rightly fears, close the door to a Christian world. For far too many the secular state, and political activity generally, has become an alternative to religion.
Good afternoon, Bubba,This begs what is, to me, the crucial question: is a super-state the right vehicle for creating a global family? I think that is a very dangerous path to follow and would, as Benedict rightly fears, close the door to a Christian world. For far too many the secular state, and political activity generally, has become an alternative to religion.
Some say that free market ideals idolize the economy or money. But I think it’s far more accurate to say that the concept of a super-state is an idolization of politics and legal process.
Good morning, Abyssinia,Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV comments on the document:
youtube.com/watch?v=bx5Y6H2KCAY&feature=feedu
Throughout this fairly rapid decline, progressive Catholicism’s distinctive cultural marker has been its skepticism about the teaching authority of the Church: whether that teaching authority was formally and authoritatively addressing the ethics of human love, the suitability of women for Holy Orders, the uniqueness of Christ as universal savior, or the intrinsic evils of abortion and euthanasia. Thus it was another sign of the increasing incoherence of progressive Catholicism when several of its American paladins mounted a raucous defense of a “Note” — a kind of Vatican white paper — on international financial reform issued by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (PCJP) on October 24. It was an extraordinary exercise: The progressives depicted Benedict XVI as a senior chaplain to Occupy Wall Street, described the Note in such overwrought terms that the gullible might have thought this white paper shared in the charism of papal infallibility, and darkly suggested that those who disagreed with the Note’s prescriptions were cafeteria Catholics, picking and choosing their doctrines to fit preexisting political tastes.
nationalreview.com/articles/281654/desperate-churchmice-george-weigelThe irony of men such as the former editor of America, Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J., Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne Jr., and National Catholic Reporter blogger Michael Sean Winters promoting a notion of papal teaching authority more expansive than any imagined by the most wild-eyed traditionalist will not be lost on cognoscenti of ecclesiastical intrigue. This new notion of PCJP infallibility does, however, raise interesting questions — about the nature and modalities of Catholic teaching authority, about the organization of the Holy See, and about the state of Catholic progressivism in America.
Either the document “calls for the same thing”, and is therefore redundant, or it calls for something more specific and/or different, and is perhaps innovative but not authoritative.Here’s the critical point. As been quoted in this thread numerous times, the papal encyclical Caritas in Veritate explicitly calls for such a body and even quotes Blessed John XXIII who calls for the same thing. I personally don’t have a stake in the issue, however if one criticizes what this vatican statement contains, one must also criticize some of the ideas in caritas in veritate. If so, then many more things in papal and vatican ii documents outside of faith and morals are up to debate.
I suggested early on that the vatican could address issues where morality and technicality are intertwined in partnership with people who are more technically proficient. It turns out that they did invite at least one such person to the drafting of this document, Professor Leonardo Becchetti who is, apparently, well known for his socialist leanings and who, it is now suspected, was probably responsible for much of the recommendations. I think a broader representation of economics and financially competent Catholics would have been a better arrangement…assuming that the outcome had not been pre-decided.This begs the question, why doesn’t the church stay out of technical answers then and stick to philosophical guidelines.
Right. All the document is calling for is a UN that has morality and helps the world more.Here’s the critical point. As been quoted in this thread numerous times, the papal encyclical Caritas in Veritate explicitly calls for such a body and even quotes Blessed John XXIII who calls for the same thing. I personally don’t have a stake in the issue, however if one criticizes what this vatican statement contains, one must also criticize some of the ideas in caritas in veritate. If so, then many more things in papal and vatican ii documents outside of faith and morals are up to debate.
This begs the question, why doesn’t the church stay out of technical answers then and stick to philosophical guidelines.
Good morning, I Samuel18,The Church wants a different government to solve the problems created by government?!?
One thing that troubles me – among a few other things – about this recommendation is that it demonstrates a dangerous ignorance in the field of economics and sociology.
I recommend that men of the cloth should study economics before they talk about economics. They should start with the von Mises institute. Otherwise, what they are doing with such absurd recommendations is going back to the days of flat-earth terra-centric science.
The economic problems we currently face are caused by government legal tender laws, taxation and the printing of money ALL DONE BY GOVERNMENT.
To strike the root of the economic crisis, the Church must condemn state central banking and fractional reserve banking. Otherwise, the Church will only contribute to the problem by giving evil greedy money-grabbers more potential for abuse.
Eurozone is a good thing too. It allowed countries like Germany to sell their products and so create employment for many, very expensive workers. Secondly, everyone knew what was going on with Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. The Germans went ahead anyway.Take a hard look at what has gone on in the Eurozone and most people will conclude that nationalism and self-protection financially are still necessary. Otherwise the no-goodniks will just eat up everything and leave the workers to bail themselves out. Greece is the classic example. A small country of about 11 million pillaged banks and now doesn’t want to do whatever is necessary to repay their debts. As a result finances in the US and Europe are in disarray. If the beancounters in Brussels couldn’t handle the matters before them, why would any other bunch of bureaucrats do any better?
You have a good handle on the bad policies of the USA regarding job loss, causing loss of taxable income from both business and individuals.Eurozone is a good thing too. It allowed countries like Germany to sell their products and so create employment for many, very expensive workers. Secondly, everyone knew what was going on with Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. The Germans went ahead anyway.
The finances in the USA are not in a disarray because of the Eurozone crisis. They’re in disarray because of local problems. People ‘create’ wealth not by producing goods or services but by selling debt, short selling shares, insider trading etc. You’re also buying too many Chinese and Chinese made products in the USA, while China refuses to reciprocate and buy more of your products. You’re outsourcing to China and other cheaper places too, moving jobs offshore.
Good evening, Tenofovir,Eurozone is a good thing too. It allowed countries like Germany to sell their products and so create employment for many, very expensive workers. Secondly, everyone knew what was going on with Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. The Germans went ahead anyway.
The finances in the USA are not in a disarray because of the Eurozone crisis. They’re in disarray because of local problems. People ‘create’ wealth not by producing goods or services but by selling debt, short selling shares, insider trading etc. You’re also buying too many Chinese and Chinese made products in the USA, while China refuses to reciprocate and buy more of your products. You’re outsourcing to China and other cheaper places too, moving jobs offshore.