|
Post by cato on Nov 10, 2017 23:24:12 GMT
Although, since nuclear weapons can't NOT be used against civilians, I do wonder if there is something to be said for this. (Not that I think disarmament is a runner.) Nukes come in all shapes and sizes. Some tactical bombs are intended to be used against tanks and armies. Similarly the Russians and Chinese plan to use nuclear weapons against the various US carrier fleets in the event of war. It is conceivable to use nuclear weapons solely against military targets provided there are no pesky civilians living nearby. However once nuclear weapons start being fired then it it is likely all hell would break out rapidly. That said the bulk of nuclear arms are currentlydeliberately targeted at civilian cities which is morally unacceptable. I really don't see how we can achieve nuclear disarmament unless we abolish all national rivalries,dictatorships and potential agressors too. I would love to abolish nuclear weapons but don't see how it is possible.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Jan 28, 2018 17:25:42 GMT
Fr Gerard Deighton of St Kevin's Harrington Rd gave a witty orthodox and charitable sermon about the papacy and the attitude of traddie catholics towards Pope Francis this morning. He admitted there were many disturbing things coming from Rome rather than simply ignore the elephant in the room.
He also said hatred of the Pope was wrong and we were obliged to pray for and love the bishop of Rome.He pointed out there are strict limits to papal infallibility and catholics may respectfully disagree with prudential or novel teachings of a particular pope.
He adressed the issue of when it was a sin to criticise a pope which he said was a question he first encountered in his parish around 5 years ago. It's a pity it wasn't recorded for wider use
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 16, 2018 18:05:41 GMT
Fr Gerard Deighton of St Kevin's Harrington Rd gave a witty orthodox and charitable sermon about the papacy and the attitude of traddie catholics towards Pope Francis this morning. He admitted there were many disturbing things coming from Rome rather than simply ignore the elephant in the room. He also said hatred of the Pope was wrong and we were obliged to pray for and love the bishop of Rome.He pointed out there are strict limits to papal infallibility and catholics may respectfully disagree with prudential or novel teachings of a particular pope. He adressed the issue of when it was a sin to criticise a pope which he said was a question he first encountered in his parish around 5 years ago. It's a pity it wasn't recorded for wider use I've been reading the Pope's latest apostolic exhortation on holiness and finding it a very beautiful and inspiring document (with some reservations about the usual critique of rules and legalism). This pontificate has been very difficult for those (such as me) who have drawn inspiration from JPII and Benedict XVI and been shaped by their pontificates. Nearly every week Pope Francis does or says something that upsets me or causes me anxiety. And yet, I also feel guilty at the way I've spoken and written about the Holy Father at times. Sarcasm and invective are entirely out of place and, to my shame, I have lapsed into these on occasion, often on this forum. We see our faults in the faults of others, perhaps. On Twitter and Facebook, there seems to be a strong contingent of Pope Francis critics who would take exception if he said that snow was white or that a square has four sides. It has well and truly gone beyond the bounds of respectful criticism and I'm sorry for my part in it.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Apr 17, 2018 10:02:08 GMT
Francis is the most anti conservative pope ever. Now this may or may not be a good thing for catholicism but it is a very bad thing for cultural social conservatives if the catholic church veers to the far left.
This is not hyperbole. The pope wants open borders . He twists the Benedictine charism of welcoming strangers to the monastery in the new document to advocacy of mass emigration. The visitors never came to live full time in the monastery! Close papal aides describe marxist China as the best example of catholic social teaching!!! He belittles and humilates catholic conservatives on almost a daily basis. He even has a swipe at Cardinal Sarah in his new document. They way he treats his perceived opponents is vindictive and petty which is hardly an example of loving enemies let alone brothers in christ. His treatment of abuse victims on Chile was a disgrace which he only belatedly apologised for.
There are bits of Gaudete et Exsultate that are good but he ruins it by indulging in silly attacks on Novel definitions of Gnosticism and Pelegianism which bear no actual resemblence to the actual heresies themselves .
His desire is for catholics to create a mess. Sounds pretty revolutionary to me. The papal office is there to teach and hand on the faith not to undermine it. The pope has created divisions deliberately and has targeted orthodox catholics for abuse. The last major counter cultural body in the world is capitulating to its critics.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 17, 2018 13:46:58 GMT
The visitors never came to live full time in the monastery! Indeed! The thing about the "neopalagianism" that gets me is that, I can see that legalism and an obsession with rules is a danger. But is it the problem today? Is a free-for-all not rather the problem? There might be a minority of "neopalagians", but the vast majority of the Catholic population (and I am in no way judging them or giving myself airs) surely lean the other way?
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 17, 2018 14:14:41 GMT
My own instinct is anti-immigration, since I don't like the idea of cultural dilution and globalization, and because I'm a cultural nationalist.
But I'm quite conflicted about this, since it's not just Pope Francis...Pope JPII and Benedict XVI were also (as far as I can see it) very pro-immigration. The Catholic Church, at least in our day, seems to have little regard for borders when it comes to the movement of people. I'm tired of always being in disagreement with my Church on this point.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Apr 17, 2018 14:20:08 GMT
Discernment in criticism is surely necessary all the time... (and so very tricky in practice!) Agreed that these problems mentioned by Cato are serious concerns indeed, not least the reported advices for selling out faithful to the Chinese State church, while there could be cause for alarm in several cases it is no doubt also necessary to take in the facts that much dubious "lobbying" probably goes on from all sides of the Holy Father. It is not clear who are acting for what. Since no one here wants to be negative so hopefully things turn out not as bad at it often seems in the media landscapes.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Apr 17, 2018 14:25:41 GMT
My own instinct is anti-immigration, since I don't like the idea of cultural dilution and globalization, and because I'm a cultural nationalist. But I'm quite conflicted about this, since it's not just Pope Francis...Pope JPII and Benedict XVI were also (as far as I can see it) very pro-immigration. The Catholic Church, at least in our day, seems to have little regard for borders when it comes to the movement of people. I'm tired of always being in disagreement with my Church on this point. Personal views is one thing. No one should have to change his ideas because they be off the track of the current times. Yet to see how the Church hierarchy acts makes one question many things even in those matters. Maybe both are right in their own right! (Sound odd perhaps but maybe it is most a difference from different perspectives?)
|
|
|
Post by cato on Apr 17, 2018 18:15:43 GMT
I wonder are we writing off the various countries that migrants come from ? It seems we are happy to take those who have the money or desperation to get to the west but ignore the root cause of the problems in the first place.
Dysfunctional states need to be helped to recover. The neo con experiment at exporting democracy seems to have failed but surely we have some sort of role in ensuring people live , as far as humanly possible in law abiding places where they can access a decent minimum standard of living. This should be a task for the UN and it would demand great effort and expense.
I am always surprised when you see how many third world medical staff work here . The irish doctors go to work in the US and rich arab states. And who stays in the third world to care for the sick? Why is our western system based on exploiting 3rd world staff who are needed at home?
Many of those who flee here are educated, the natural leaders who are lost to societies who cannot afford to lose them. Perhaps church leaders should address this issue instead of dealing exclusively with the results of failure.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Apr 17, 2018 18:50:32 GMT
I do worry about the divorce (if it proves to be a permanent paradigm shift to use the jargon) between the papacy and a traditional conservative world view . Conservatism needs catholicism or at least the fruits of a judeo christian culture. If the church embraces secular modernity then conservatism is dead. Any revival in a traditional vision of humanity that is not violent or oppressive needs the leaven of the gospel to preserve genuine human rights and values.
I was reading Harold Blooms book on the literary Canon and he strangely predicts the end of humanism and a new theocratic age. I haven't finished the book yet but I can't see a liberal catholicism fill that role, if such an age does remerge. Islam seems to offer the real alternative to the void.
Lest it be thought I am a dyed in the wool reactionary I do believe there are radical steps the church can and maybe should embrace in order to re connect and evangelise without abandoning core doctrines. I ll post a few ideas later.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 17, 2018 19:06:12 GMT
I don't think conservatism could ever die completely since the liberal-conservative spectrum seems to be watermarked into the human experience. But certainly, it will be very far away from any kind of Burkean, traditionalist conservatism if the Catholic Church goes full leftist...it will simply be a RELATIVE conservatism in that case. It's very depressing.
It's exhausting, trying to hold onto the idea of a national culture, or the idea of tradition as a good in itself, when so few other people seem interested. You have people on the left talking about civic values and people on the right talking about white babies. Neither of which interests me....the first not very much, the second not at all.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 17, 2018 19:28:41 GMT
When it comes to immigration, people like the Pope so often fail to distinguish POLICY from PEOPLE.
How many people would be nasty or cold to actual immigrants in everyday life? Thinking your country should have more restrictive policies is one thing, but once somebody is HERE, I think most critics of mass immigration would be perfectly friendly to them on a human level. There always seems to some neo-Nazi bovver boy in the mind of people like Pope Francis.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Apr 17, 2018 21:19:24 GMT
When it comes to immigration, people like the Pope so often fail to distinguish POLICY from PEOPLE. How many people would be nasty or cold to actual immigrants in everyday life? Thinking your country should have more restrictive policies is one thing, but once somebody is HERE, I think most critics of mass immigration would be perfectly friendly to them on a human level. There always seems to some neo-Nazi bovver boy in the mind of people like Pope Francis. There are also not so few instances of real nastiness towards immigrants already here unfortunately. However much is needed to mark that as a major problem may be discussable and my guess is that Ireland is far better off in that respect, and then more because of her remaining Catholicism than the less numbers coming (than Sweden).
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Apr 17, 2018 21:26:31 GMT
When it comes to immigration, people like the Pope so often fail to distinguish POLICY from PEOPLE. How many people would be nasty or cold to actual immigrants in everyday life? Thinking your country should have more restrictive policies is one thing, but once somebody is HERE, I think most critics of mass immigration would be perfectly friendly to them on a human level. There always seems to some neo-Nazi bovver boy in the mind of people like Pope Francis. There are also not so few instances of real nastiness towards immigrants already here unfortunately. However much is needed to mark that as a major problem may be discussable and my guess is that Ireland is far better off in that respect, and then more because of her remaining Catholicism than the less numbers coming (than Sweden). Yes, but do the people who are "really nasty" care what the Pope says about immigrants, one way or the other?
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Apr 17, 2018 21:31:58 GMT
There are also not so few instances of real nastiness towards immigrants already here unfortunately. However much is needed to mark that as a major problem may be discussable and my guess is that Ireland is far better off in that respect, and then more because of her remaining Catholicism than the less numbers coming (than Sweden). Yes, but do the people who are "really nasty" care what the Pope says about immigrants, one way or the other? No they certainly don´t. But I am inclined to think that this might be a reason he, and his predecessors, has insisted on speaking for openness. To perhaps try to turn the tide of public opinion against pure (or the opposite rather) racism. Just guesses naturally but hard to find many other good reasons for it...
|
|