Liberalism isn't Anti Religion, Freedom of Religion is part of the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. Secular Authoritarianism is Anti Religion generally because they tend to be fascist.
I don't see how someone can go on talking as though Catholic social teachings have any kind of implicite defense of the modern welfare state or any kind of social democratic politics. If you just contemplate the idea of subsidiarity, the idea of a limited government as found in classical liberal views is strongly suggested.
Catholics have a duty to profess the Christian truth in public and private, therefore, they should petition the state to use viloence and coercion to get things done. What about loving our neighbor? HOlding a gun to my next door neighbor's head, asking him to follow rules and regulations I whimmed up, doens't sound quite to Christian to me.
Stop disgracing the name of Catholicism by acting like a neo-conservative prick! I'm a fucking devout Catholic, go to Mass daily, an extremely spiritual person, and hold a firm pro-rights philosophy... The fact is that most social possitions forced upon us by MEN in the Church (in America, specifically) are either completely worthless (civil marriage) or unattainable goals (abortions) *SUPREME COURT, WE HAVE NO VOTE* Sorry, son. You failed. Those who support economic equality are all liberal
You comment has nothing to do with this video. Nothing. We are talking about the economic school know as classical liberalism, popularly referred to as the Austrian School. This post was in no way dealing (at least directly) with cultural matters, or even the conservative/liberal distinction.
Neoconservatives hate my guts... so do many Republicans. At any rate, you were way off on this one.
I do still find your politcs fascinating Paleo. and i give you thumbs up on that. As for now i seem to incline to the ron paul libertarianism. Is there any flaw in his arguments? And i want to learn more on distributism, but i dont seem to understand it well so it ends up sounding quite weak in terms of the capitalism that ron paul is always preaching about.
@TheEcumenator I voted for Ron Paul, but that isn't actually saying much. He holds many things I believe to be quite compatible with Catholic Social Teaching. The problem is that he is a child of the Enlightenment. His view of human liberty borders license. His view of the state is radically at odds with the Church. But he makes no claim to being consistently Catholic in his views regarding man and the political economy.
@TheEcumenator I plan to make some videos on Catholic Social Teaching very soon. I used to contribute regularly to The Distributist Review. I was a founding member of the Society for Distributism. And my radio program dealt with Catholic Social Teaching on a regular basis. I may be doing a video on subsidiarity in the near future. I wrote a blog on it that was consider quite noteworthy by notable distributists and Catholic social theorists. I may send you a message with some links to my work.
does the layman have no authority for interpretation of scriptures? or do they just have to wait around to have the pope tell them what to do? do catholics not believe in the new testament concept of the word being revealed to the believer throught the Spirit? catholicism is so confusing...you have to hear from the hierarchy to know what to do but even when they do speak regular peoplee could hardly even understand it. u r telling me all the poor masses in brazil and mexico understand all this?
They have the ability to interpret Scriptures, but when a dispute over matters of grave importance are brought up and are unable to be settled by the people, it then goes to the hierarchy.
If the Spirit has revealed truths to Protestants, and each would claim he has, then He is rather dysfunctional. Different dogmas, different authorities, different interpretations and applications, different fundamentals... different religions, united by concept only.
The same applies to Catholics, of course. You guys just all agree to let one guy settle it for you. I gaurantee you 50% of the Catholics in the world don't even know when the Pope issues another whaddayacallit, an even smaller number even read it when they know one has been issued and an infinitely small amount understand it once they read it. Oh and who resolves disputes amongst layment about the interpretations of the Pope's statements? All very confusing to me.
One says 'the pope meant this'. one says 'the pope meant that'. will they then go back up through the hierarchy for revelation of what the pope meant? and then what if the hierarchy can't agree? will the pope issue a clarification?
It is only confusing to you because of your lack of literacy on the subject. If you had done even a small amount of study on the matter (preferably Catholics on Catholicism), you would hesitate to make such outlandish remarks.
The assumptions made in your other comment are derived from the heretical doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Even if we were to use Scripture, you and a million others could disagree. Then disagree over that. Then over that. Then over that. Until you get to denominationalism!
I think paleocrat is talking to Catholics only. The inference I took away from this talk is people do not have free will once they choose to be Catholics, they have to delegate all important matters to the church and the Pope, who after all has just one brain like the rest of us. And that is alright, some people choose to live that way. Many will have issues with accepting self-claimed authority over everything by some person they never met.
I don't claim to know every verse of scripture, but this authority does sound self-proclaimed. I mean I don't what passage of scripture is even interpreted to mean that one man (the pope) has absolute authority in these matters.
The Church's Social Doctrine deals primarily with principles, though occasionally with specific matters and activities. It pertains to what is being done, what shouldn't be done, what could be done, what must be done, and occasionally how it may be done. It embodies the difference between freedom and license.
we need to know what rarum novarum says for this to make any sense. constant equilibrium between truth and justice? these aren't one in the same? you have to have some truth and some justice b/c 100% truth wouldn't be 100% justice?! What you want is ancient Rome where the Pope was head of state. Or kind of like what we have going in Iran right now, but with a little bit more consolidation of power. The Pope sounds like a dictator...they are self proclaimed authoritarians.
The issue is regarding Catholics specifically, though it would apply in principle across the board.
He is speaking of true in an epistemological sense and just in an ethical sense. Distinguish.
No, I do not want the Pope to head the state. If you knew even the A-B-Cs of my beliefs, you wouldn't have made such an absurd remark. The Popes have written plenty on the function of the Church and State, and it looks nothing like the bogeymen you described. Read, familiarize yourself, then write.
Liberalism isn't Anti Religion, Freedom of Religion is part of the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. Secular Authoritarianism is Anti Religion generally because they tend to be fascist.
FRSFreeState 10 months ago
I don't see how someone can go on talking as though Catholic social teachings have any kind of implicite defense of the modern welfare state or any kind of social democratic politics. If you just contemplate the idea of subsidiarity, the idea of a limited government as found in classical liberal views is strongly suggested.
VictorLepanto 1 year ago
Catholics have a duty to profess the Christian truth in public and private, therefore, they should petition the state to use viloence and coercion to get things done. What about loving our neighbor? HOlding a gun to my next door neighbor's head, asking him to follow rules and regulations I whimmed up, doens't sound quite to Christian to me.
tyrantslayer999 1 year ago
alot of Liberals tend to use Humanism and political correctness as they're authority and grid in making decisions.
CreedChrist 3 years ago
Stop disgracing the name of Catholicism by acting like a neo-conservative prick! I'm a fucking devout Catholic, go to Mass daily, an extremely spiritual person, and hold a firm pro-rights philosophy... The fact is that most social possitions forced upon us by MEN in the Church (in America, specifically) are either completely worthless (civil marriage) or unattainable goals (abortions) *SUPREME COURT, WE HAVE NO VOTE* Sorry, son. You failed. Those who support economic equality are all liberal
hotcatholicdude 3 years ago
You comment has nothing to do with this video. Nothing. We are talking about the economic school know as classical liberalism, popularly referred to as the Austrian School. This post was in no way dealing (at least directly) with cultural matters, or even the conservative/liberal distinction.
Neoconservatives hate my guts... so do many Republicans. At any rate, you were way off on this one.
paleocrat 3 years ago
@paleocrat
Were do you incline in?
I do still find your politcs fascinating Paleo. and i give you thumbs up on that. As for now i seem to incline to the ron paul libertarianism. Is there any flaw in his arguments? And i want to learn more on distributism, but i dont seem to understand it well so it ends up sounding quite weak in terms of the capitalism that ron paul is always preaching about.
TheEcumenator 1 year ago
@TheEcumenator I voted for Ron Paul, but that isn't actually saying much. He holds many things I believe to be quite compatible with Catholic Social Teaching. The problem is that he is a child of the Enlightenment. His view of human liberty borders license. His view of the state is radically at odds with the Church. But he makes no claim to being consistently Catholic in his views regarding man and the political economy.
paleocrat 1 year ago
@TheEcumenator I plan to make some videos on Catholic Social Teaching very soon. I used to contribute regularly to The Distributist Review. I was a founding member of the Society for Distributism. And my radio program dealt with Catholic Social Teaching on a regular basis. I may be doing a video on subsidiarity in the near future. I wrote a blog on it that was consider quite noteworthy by notable distributists and Catholic social theorists. I may send you a message with some links to my work.
paleocrat 1 year ago
Well done on proving yourself to be a clueless idiot.
If you knew anything, you'd realise that neo-conservatives actually agree with the bulk of ideas in classical liberalism.
TheAkraticConspiracy 2 years ago
does the layman have no authority for interpretation of scriptures? or do they just have to wait around to have the pope tell them what to do? do catholics not believe in the new testament concept of the word being revealed to the believer throught the Spirit? catholicism is so confusing...you have to hear from the hierarchy to know what to do but even when they do speak regular peoplee could hardly even understand it. u r telling me all the poor masses in brazil and mexico understand all this?
johnebii 3 years ago
They have the ability to interpret Scriptures, but when a dispute over matters of grave importance are brought up and are unable to be settled by the people, it then goes to the hierarchy.
If the Spirit has revealed truths to Protestants, and each would claim he has, then He is rather dysfunctional. Different dogmas, different authorities, different interpretations and applications, different fundamentals... different religions, united by concept only.
paleocrat 3 years ago
The same applies to Catholics, of course. You guys just all agree to let one guy settle it for you. I gaurantee you 50% of the Catholics in the world don't even know when the Pope issues another whaddayacallit, an even smaller number even read it when they know one has been issued and an infinitely small amount understand it once they read it. Oh and who resolves disputes amongst layment about the interpretations of the Pope's statements? All very confusing to me.
johnebii 3 years ago
One says 'the pope meant this'. one says 'the pope meant that'. will they then go back up through the hierarchy for revelation of what the pope meant? and then what if the hierarchy can't agree? will the pope issue a clarification?
johnebii 3 years ago
It is only confusing to you because of your lack of literacy on the subject. If you had done even a small amount of study on the matter (preferably Catholics on Catholicism), you would hesitate to make such outlandish remarks.
The assumptions made in your other comment are derived from the heretical doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Even if we were to use Scripture, you and a million others could disagree. Then disagree over that. Then over that. Then over that. Until you get to denominationalism!
paleocrat 3 years ago
I think paleocrat is talking to Catholics only. The inference I took away from this talk is people do not have free will once they choose to be Catholics, they have to delegate all important matters to the church and the Pope, who after all has just one brain like the rest of us. And that is alright, some people choose to live that way. Many will have issues with accepting self-claimed authority over everything by some person they never met.
utubehayter 3 years ago
I don't claim to know every verse of scripture, but this authority does sound self-proclaimed. I mean I don't what passage of scripture is even interpreted to mean that one man (the pope) has absolute authority in these matters.
johnebii 3 years ago
The Church's Social Doctrine deals primarily with principles, though occasionally with specific matters and activities. It pertains to what is being done, what shouldn't be done, what could be done, what must be done, and occasionally how it may be done. It embodies the difference between freedom and license.
paleocrat 3 years ago
we need to know what rarum novarum says for this to make any sense. constant equilibrium between truth and justice? these aren't one in the same? you have to have some truth and some justice b/c 100% truth wouldn't be 100% justice?! What you want is ancient Rome where the Pope was head of state. Or kind of like what we have going in Iran right now, but with a little bit more consolidation of power. The Pope sounds like a dictator...they are self proclaimed authoritarians.
johnebii 3 years ago
The issue is regarding Catholics specifically, though it would apply in principle across the board.
He is speaking of true in an epistemological sense and just in an ethical sense. Distinguish.
No, I do not want the Pope to head the state. If you knew even the A-B-Cs of my beliefs, you wouldn't have made such an absurd remark. The Popes have written plenty on the function of the Church and State, and it looks nothing like the bogeymen you described. Read, familiarize yourself, then write.
paleocrat 3 years ago
Another day, another hat.
GoodfellaJohnny 3 years ago