Pope Francis Takes On Capitalism And Inequality

[mfbukowski]

I wouldn't get heated about a thing like this now. You can't change history...

This is about where I am about this.  Now is the time for action - dead generations are dead- we just need to make it better for our kids, and unfortunately everyone disagrees about what that means, but everyone agrees it's essential.

 

Sigh.

[mfbukowski]

In my experience this appears to be true of US saints, but certainly not true of the rest of us (the majority).

In my ward I think the "conservative" label could be accurately applied to less than 10% of the membership.

Commie pinkos!!

 

[mfbukowski]

Very good...

 

This is the problem that Traditional Catholics like me have with the ambiguous and verbose documents of Vatican II. Worse yet, after documents like these are adopted they are freely misinterpreted against the meaning of the Authors. Concern to maintain the intent of the authors is lost.

 

But if the documents are ambiguous, it is hard to tell what their intention was, I would think.  Therein lies the problem methinks.

Edited December 5, 2013 by mfbukowski

[teddyaware]

Very good...

 

This is the problem that Traditional Catholics like me have with the ambiguous and verbose documents of Vatican II. Worse yet, after documents like these are adopted they are freely misinterpreted against the meaning of the Authors. Concern to maintain the intent of the authors is lost. Anything that can be forced to fit under the letter of the law becomes the authority. The legislation that follows comes from what ever spin a subsequent free wheeling generation should like to put upon it for sake of greed, convenience, power, or some other private agenda. Eventually, nobody cares if you can prove that someone hundreds of years or even decades ago didn't intend the interpretation that is given. At that point, "the law" is whatever the ruling power has been doing already.

 

With Vatican II, you would think that Traditionalists are against it because of what the Fathers intended to authorize. Not really. In most cases, a strict adherence to the fairly obvious meaning of the Fathers of the Council would be satisfactory to us. For example, in the name of Vatican II, without citing any references because there are none, to justify what Vatican II supposedly teaches, all kinds of abuses have occurred to the liturgy and to seminary formation. Traditionalists are marginalized by a Church in the West which has ignored what the Second Vatican Council actually said about the liturgy and seminary formation. I can prove it to anybody that isn't biased against Catholic Tradition.

 

I see it as a problem when the children lose respect for the fathers. In our age of scientific advancement, we have imagined that people in the past were unintelligent. Maybe they didn't know how to get to space or program a computer. But a nation and a religion that disdains and ignores the wisdom of their fathers are doomed to become something else that the Fathers would want to disown.

 

Regards,

 

3DOP

Very interesting perspective. Based on what you've said, it would seem the only possible way to prevent

perversions of the law would be to spell things out so clearly and unambiguously that there would be

absolutely no wiggle room for the mischief makers to do what they do. But alas, if you're right, even

perfect clarity and perfect precision of written expression wouldn't be enough to prevent perversions

and circumventions of the law.

[Stone holm]

Very interesting perspective. Based on what you've said, it would seem the only possible way to preventperversions of the law would be to spell things out so clearly and unambiguously that there would beabsolutely no wiggle room for the mischief makers to do what they do. But alas, if you're right, evenperfect clarity and perfect precision of written expression wouldn't be enough to prevent perversionsand circumventions of the law.

A document so precise would also be brittle as to be unable to withstand the test of time and cultural evolution.

[teddyaware]

A document so precise would also be brittle as to be unable to withstand the test of time and cultural evolution.

Where along the full continuum from most brittle to most flexible documents might you

consider the Book of Mormon to be?

Edited December 6, 2013 by teddyaware

[thesometimesaint]

Lots depends on the assumptions we bring to it.

[Stone holm]

Where along the full continuum of most brittle to most flexible documents might you consider the Bookof Mormon to be?

I would say fairly flexible, since it is the lens through which we make the OT and NT consistent. If you want brittle you, you need to look elsewhere.

[teddyaware]

I would say fairly flexible, since it is the lens through which we make the OT and NT consistent. If you want brittle you, you need to look elsewhere.

I know with this one I may be putting you on the spot, but I'm wondering if you might be able to

provide me with a concrete example of a law (either actual or theoretical) that might

be considered too rigidly written and therefore brittle, and an example of a law

(either actual or theoretical) written with the flexibility to adapt to changing times and environments?

Edited December 6, 2013 by teddyaware

[3DOP]

But if the documents are ambiguous, it is hard to tell what their intention was, I would think.  Therein lies the problem methinks.

 

 

Agreed. Harder. Hard is okay!

 

I tend to think that the side which claims to be able to demonstrate original intent is probably closer than the side that by ignoring the question, gets their way. 

[Stone holm]

I know with this one I may be putting you on the spot, but I'm wondering if you might be able toprovide me with a concrete example of a law (either actual or theoretical) that mightbe considered too rigidly written and therefore brittle, and an example of a law(either actual or theoretical) written with the flexibility to adapt to changing times and environments?

Sharia law for the first, and the U.S. Constitution for the second.

[teddyaware]

Sharia law for the first, and the U.S. Constitution for the second.

That's good, but I was hoping for specific examples to place side by side for easy comparison -- a

micro approach if you will.

[Stone holm]

That's good, but I was hoping for specific examples to place side by side for easy comparison -- amicro approach if you will.

Specific laws do not become brittle they are too small in scope so they are just ignored or changed. Prohibition being an example in our history. A system, however, which is too precise becomes brittle, I suppose if you think of the minutiae that the law of Moses developed into you would see a law becoming brittle. Any law which is based on declared religion or an all encompassing ideology has a tendency to become brittle. If you want to see a flexible law in action, I suppose one need look no further than the 14th Amendment.

[thesometimesaint]

I know with this one I may be putting you on the spot, but I'm wondering if you might be able to

provide me with a concrete example of a law (either actual or theoretical) that might

be considered too rigidly written and therefore brittle, and an example of a law

(either actual or theoretical) written with the flexibility to adapt to changing times and environments?

 

That one is easy. The KJV of the Bible has: Thou shalt not kill, but we all recognize that could only be reasonably interpreted as Thou shalt not murder.

[Hamilton Porter]

I just looked on the Pontifical Academy website and it looks like the Pope does have economists.

 

http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/academicians/ordinary/derbez-bautista.html

 

Perhaps they want to qualify his anti-capitalist statements.

[Hamilton Porter]

And here:

 

http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/academicians/ordinary/dasgupta.html

[Hamilton Porter]

Here as well:

 

http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/academicians/former/nojiri.html

[Hamilton Porter]

http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/academicians/honorary/tietmeyer.html

[Hamilton Porter]

Ken Arrow! Holy Smokes!

 

http://www.pass.va/content/scienzesociali/en/academicians/honorary/arrow.html

[BCSpace]

This is about where I am about this.  Now is the time for action - dead generations are dead- we just need to make it better for our kids, and unfortunately everyone disagrees about what that means, but everyone agrees it's essential.

 

Sigh.

 

 

"The trouble is people don't always agree."

"Well then they should be made to."

"By who?  Who's going to make them?"

"I don't know.  Someone..."

"You...?"

"Of course not me."

"But someone?"

"Someone wise..."

"Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me."

"Well...if it works..."

 

[Stone holm]

Am wondering if the Prophet will ever make Time's Person of the Year.

[Robert F. Smith]

Am wondering if the Prophet will ever make Time's Person of the Year.

Which prophet?  The one in the Vatican has just been so chosen, http://poy.time.com/2013/12/11/pope-francis-the-choice/ . Indeed, vaticinium means "prophecy."

[Stone holm]

Which prophet?  The one in the Vatican has just been so chosen, http://poy.time.com/2013/12/11/pope-francis-the-choice/ . Indeed, vaticinium means "prophecy."

 

Yeah, not that one -- but I will agree he is behaving like a real prophet should act, so I will say he is inspired.  Just talked with one of my son who deals a lot of with very conservative corporate executives -- he says the Roman Catholic ones are basically flipping out over the Pope.  Gotta say I haven't been this impressed with the Catholics since the Viet Nam War era -- so did the Cardinals just forget that they were electing a Jesuit with South American exposure or what?

[Stone holm]

The stories which keep coming out about this Pope are just just amazing.

[Helen47]

The Pope is now Times person of the year. I suppose he has read the feeding account where the boy was the only one who had brought anything to eat (showed initiative) and yet it was taken off him and spread around.