The Individual, The Family, and Catholic Corporate Society - Dr. John Rao
#41
"When several villages join efforts they form a state."

Are we really going to compare several villages joining efforts together to the modern nation state?  I've been constantly making the distinction between voluntary group efforts and involuntary.  The modern nation state is not a joint effort, but rather a coercive force that only benefits the people who hold power.  It steals and redistributes half my wages against my will for services I don't want.  It wages war in foreign lands that I don't want waged.  It can even kidnap and enslave me to fight these wars through conscription.  And if I merely want to opt out of this stupidity, I will be thrown in prison.  That is not a society any rational moral person wants to be a part of.     
Reply
#42
(10-12-2012, 01:42 AM)PeterII Wrote: "When several villages join efforts they form a state."

Are we really going to compare several villages joining efforts together to the modern nation state?  I've been constantly making the distinction between voluntary group efforts and involuntary.  The modern nation state is not a joint effort, but rather a coercive force that only benefits the people who hold power.  It steals and redistributes half my wages against my will for services I don't want.  It wages war in foreign lands that I don't want waged.  It can even kidnap and enslave me to fight these wars through conscription.  And if I merely want to opt out of this stupidity, I will be thrown in prison.  That is not a society any rational moral person wants to be a part of.     

Thank you for clarifying a few things. However, I still want to make sure that you believe that society and the state as such are natural. Also, you never really answered a few  questions I gave:

(1) Again, do you believe society and the state are natural?
(2) Do you believe in the Social Kingship of Christ?
(3) Do you believe in the Social Teachings of the Church? (e.g. Rerum Novarum, Quadragesimo Anno...)
(4) Can the Popes even speak on social questions?
(5) Do you believe, in principle, that the Church and State should be separated?

In addition:

(6) If the modern nation state is evil then what is the individual to do in response?
Reply
#43
Thank you for clarifying a few things. However, I still want to make sure that you believe that society and the state as such are natural. Also, you never really answered a few  questions I gave:

In addition:

(1) Again, do you believe society and the state are natural?
(2) Do you believe in the Social Kingship of Christ?
(3) Do you believe in the Social Teachings of the Church? (e.g. Rerum Novarum, Quadragesimo Anno...)
(4) Can the Popes even speak on social questions?
(5) Do you believe, in principle, that the Church and State should be separated?

(6) If the modern nation state is evil then what is the individual to do in response?

[/quote]

What do you mean by natural and why does it matter?  Question 1-5 are just platitudes these days.  What matters is how points of Catholic doctrine answer practical political questions of the day, and that's how we can tell whether people who advocate the "Social Kingship of Christ" know what they're really talking about. 

For question 6, the answer  -  economic education, self improvement, and participation in grey markets. 

Reply
#44
(10-12-2012, 09:55 AM)obscurus Wrote: (6) If the modern nation state is evil then what is the individual to do in response?

I've agreed with your positions throughout this thread, obscurus, but I wonder how you would answer this one. Do you think it is possible that the modern state is essentially different from the sort of political community being discussed in Aristotle and St. Thomas? Even if this is the case, the modern state does provide some level of order and so forth, so I don't think we would be justified in completely abandoning it or acting against it, but presumably our attitude would have to change to some extent if it tuned out that the modern state is not ordered toward the common good as premodern states were.
Reply
#45
(10-12-2012, 02:46 PM)PeterII Wrote: Thank you for clarifying a few things. However, I still want to make sure that you believe that society and the state as such are natural. Also, you never really answered a few  questions I gave:

In addition:

(1) Again, do you believe society and the state are natural?
(2) Do you believe in the Social Kingship of Christ?
(3) Do you believe in the Social Teachings of the Church? (e.g. Rerum Novarum, Quadragesimo Anno...)
(4) Can the Popes even speak on social questions?
(5) Do you believe, in principle, that the Church and State should be separated?

(6) If the modern nation state is evil then what is the individual to do in response?

What do you mean by natural and why does it matter?  Question 1-5 are just platitudes these days.  What matters is how points of Catholic doctrine answer practical political questions of the day, and that's how we can tell whether people who advocate the "Social Kingship of Christ" know what they're really talking about. 

For question 6, the answer  -  economic education, self improvement, and participation in grey markets.   


[/quote]

The questions proposed in 1-5 are precisely the questions Archbishop Lefebvre asked. I think an application of the social teachings of the Church can help tremendously in the mess we find ourselves in at the present moment. What did the Popes know anyway? I don't think they are mere platitudes but reflect the crux of the problem with the political situation as judged according to Catholic principles. To dismss them as mere platitudes is actually rather horrifying. Is Quas Primas irrelevant?

Question 6: sure those may help but fundamentally men must change their hearts and minds and not put blind trust in economics divorced from morality. More later...
Reply
#46
PeterII[ Wrote:But the strong arm of the state has been used to crush the Church more than defend it.  As I've pointed out before, why has the Church been relatively free to flourish in America compared to places where the vast majority of the population is Catholic, such as France, Spain, or Mexico - where it was violently persecuted in modern times. Everybody craves power, until it turns on them.

Well, taking power is not always the same as "craving" it or even seeking it.  Someone will take power in any case, if not you then someone else, maybe someone opposed to everything you stand for.  If you do take power, someone opposed to everything you stand for will most likely try to take it from you.  If they succeed, so much the worse for you, but if they don't even think it's worth trying, you're probably doing something wrong.

"Freedom to flourish" means those in power have granted that freedom to you.  It might seem like a good deal, but it could come at a price.  There's such a thing as killing with kindness.

Reply
#47
(10-12-2012, 03:18 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(10-12-2012, 09:55 AM)obscurus Wrote: (6) If the modern nation state is evil then what is the individual to do in response?

I've agreed with your positions throughout this thread, obscurus, but I wonder how you would answer this one. Do you think it is possible that the modern state is essentially different from the sort of political community being discussed in Aristotle and St. Thomas? Even if this is the case, the modern state does provide some level of order and so forth, so I don't think we would be justified in completely abandoning it or acting against it, but presumably our attitude would have to change to some extent if it tuned out that the modern state is not ordered toward the common good as premodern states were.

I actually agree with you. What I don't understand is Peter's nonchalant attitude towards the Social teachings of the Church.
Reply
#48
(10-12-2012, 06:19 PM)Cambrensis Wrote:
PeterII[ Wrote:But the strong arm of the state has been used to crush the Church more than defend it.  As I've pointed out before, why has the Church been relatively free to flourish in America compared to places where the vast majority of the population is Catholic, such as France, Spain, or Mexico - where it was violently persecuted in modern times. Everybody craves power, until it turns on them.

Well, taking power is not always the same as "craving" it or even seeking it.  Someone will take power in any case, if not you then someone else, maybe someone opposed to everything you stand for.  If you do take power, someone opposed to everything you stand for will most likely try to take it from you.  If they succeed, so much the worse for you, but if they don't even think it's worth trying, you're probably doing something wrong.

"Freedom to flourish" means those in power have granted that freedom to you.  It might seem like a good deal, but it could come at a price.  There's such a thing as killing with kindness.

And this is the fundamental flaw of the libertarian view. Because the Church flourishes under these "freedoms" then it is the ideal situation for the Church. Pope Leo XIII, while praising the Church in the United States, said the following in his encyclical Longinqu of 1895:

Quote:For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.
Reply
#49
obscurus Wrote:The questions proposed in 1-5 are precisely the questions Archbishop Lefebvre asked. I think an application of the social teachings of the Church can help tremendously in the mess we find ourselves in at the present moment. What did the Popes know anyway? I don't think they are mere platitudes but reflect the crux of the problem with the political situation as judged according to Catholic principles. To dismss them as mere platitudes is actually rather horrifying. Is Quas Primas irrelevant?

Question 6: sure those may help but fundamentally men must change their hearts and minds and not put blind trust in economics divorced from morality. More later...

What are the teachings of the Church in regards to Keynesian economics, fiat money versus free money/gold standard, business cycle theory, austerity measures etc.?  You keep mentioning Church teaching, but aren't teaching us anything. 
Reply
#50
(10-13-2012, 02:53 PM)PeterII Wrote:
obscurus Wrote:The questions proposed in 1-5 are precisely the questions Archbishop Lefebvre asked. I think an application of the social teachings of the Church can help tremendously in the mess we find ourselves in at the present moment. What did the Popes know anyway? I don't think they are mere platitudes but reflect the crux of the problem with the political situation as judged according to Catholic principles. To dismss them as mere platitudes is actually rather horrifying. Is Quas Primas irrelevant?

Question 6: sure those may help but fundamentally men must change their hearts and minds and not put blind trust in economics divorced from morality. More later...

What are the teachings of the Church in regards to Keynesian economics, fiat money versus free money/gold standard, business cycle theory, austerity measures etc.?  You keep mentioning Church teaching, but aren't teaching us anything. 

And you keep dodging my questions.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)