Thursday, March 28, AD 2024 6:36pm

Res & Explicatio for A.D. 4-22-2009

Salvete AC readers!

Here are today’s Top Picks in the Catholic world:

1. The HOT rumor of the day is that “Father John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame, is in Washington today (Tuesday) for an unannounced meeting at the White House.”

Is he personally visiting with President Obama to offer his sincere apologies for rescinding the invitation to speak at the commencement?  Rescind the honorary law degree?  Ask for a job after he gets fired?

Your guess is as good as mine.

Phil Lawler of Catholic World News received a report from a reliable source of Fr. Jenkin’s unannounced visit to the White House and they cannot confirm this report yet.

In other news, this past Monday Fr. Jenkins expressed his profound pride in honoring the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history.

2. Have you seen Fr. Dwight Longenecker’s updated and revised blog?  It is awesome!

3. Even though the 2012 U.S. presidential elections are three years away we can dream and speculate who we would like to run for office between either a Democratic or Republican candidate (or even a legitimate third party candidate).  One name that has become quite intriguing to me is the former U.S. Representative from Georgia, Newt Gingrich.  His mea culpa of his previous marriages, his incredible intellect, speaking skills, and his recent conversion to our beautiful Catholic faith makes him my favorite for now.

4. During World War II The Vatican had plans in place that if Adolph Hitler seized the Vatican and Pope Pius XII, there were explicit orders to the remaining Curia and Cardinals to regard the papacy as vacant and immediately reconvene in Portugal and elect a new pope.

Pope Pius XII said, “if they want to arrest me they will have to drag me from the Vatican” and if “the person who would leave (the) under these conditions would not be Pius XII but Eugenio Pacelli”.  Meaning that he would no longer be pope, thus leaving the surviving Vatican officials to elect a new pope.

During the War, Pope Pius XII had been invited to escape to Portugal, Spain, and even the United States, but declined.

For the article from London’s Daily Telegraph written by Nick Squires and Simon Caldwell click here.

5. For the previous Res & Explicatio click here.

6. Want more news?  Click here.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
77 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:00pm

Newt Gingrich has a hundred ideas a day, at least three of which are sound! Bright guy but he would be a disaster as a candidate. Too many skeletons, too many bitter ex-wives and a tendency not to be trusted within the party. I could imagine him as a possible veep, but I don’t think he will ever be elected to the top job.

In regard to Hitler, rumors constantly swirled during the War that he planned to imprison Pius and set up a puppet papacy. Wiser heads in the Third Reich realized this would be a disaster for them, and Hitler in his saner moments agreed, but the risk was real enough at the time. Hitler often spoke of “settling accounts” with the Church after the war, and I could easily imagine him in a moment of high anger deciding not to wait.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:02pm

That is frightening to hear about “settling accounts”. If Hitler had won the war it may have well been one of the darkest periods for the Church since the French Revolution.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:08pm

Because of your excellent points on Mr. Gingrich I still have inadequate information to be completely convinced of his candidacy.

I’m still distraught over Senator Brownback’s support of Governor Sebelius so I don’t have anyone as of now that I really like.

I hear from insiders of the Baton Rouge political scene that Governor Jindal so far has ‘mixed reviews’ on his performance, so I’m hesitant to jump on that bandwagon.

And Governor Palin’s appointment of a pro-choice judge to the Alaska State Supreme Court has made my stomach turn.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:10pm

To answer the question headline of one of the related posts:

“Should Pope Pius XII Become a Saint?”

Yes!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Hitler%27s_Pope

largebill
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:22pm

As Donald said Gingrich is an ideas guy, but he is saddled with too much baggage. This is the land of second chances, but the presidency isn’t a second chance job.

Tito,

I’d recommend you do some more research before you let your stomach turn. This non-issue was debunked a while back. Alaska Supreme Court Justices, unlike the US Supreme Court, are not chosen by the executive branch. In Alaska the state Judiciary Council submits nominees to the governor who has to pick one of the nominated individuals. A previous governor fought this requirement and lost. Unless the Alaska state constitution is modified the process will remain as is.

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:25pm

In regard to Hitler here are some of his diatribes against the Church contained in his “Table Talk” compiled following the war from notes taken at the time he spoke:

‘The war will be over one day. I shall then consider that my life’s final task will be to solve the religious problem. Only then Will the life of the German native be guaranteed once and for all.”

“The evil that’s gnawing our vitals is our priests, of both creeds. I can’t at present give them the answer they’ve been asking for, but it will cost them nothing to wait. It’s all written down in my big book. The time will come when I’ll settle my account with them, and I’ll go straight to the point.”

“I don’t know which should be considered the more dangerous: the minister of religion who play-acts at patriotism, or the man who openly opposes the State. The fact remains that it’s their maneuvers that have led me to my decision. They’ve only got to keep at it, they’ll hear from me, all right. I shan’t let myself be hampered by juridical scruples. Only necessity has legal force. In less than ten years from now, things will have quite another look, I can promise them.”

“We shan’t be able to go on evading the religious problem much longer. If anyone thinks it’s really essential to build the life of human society on a foundation of lies, well, in my estimation, such a society is not worth preserving. If’ on the other hand, one believes that truth is the indispensable foundation, then conscience bids one intervene in the name of truth, and exterminate the lie.”

“Once the war is over we will put a swift end to the Concordat. It will give me the greatest personal pleasure to point out to the Church all those occasions on which it has broken the terms of it. One need only recall the close cooperation between the Church and the murderers of Heydrich. Catholic priests not only allowed them to hide in a church on the outskirts of Prague, but even allowed them to entrench themselves in the sanctuary of the altar.”

“The fact that I remain silent in public over Church affairs is not in the least misunderstood by the sly foxes of the Catholic Church, and I am quite sure that a man like the Bishop von Galen knows full well that after the war I shall extract retribution to the last farthing. And, if he does not succeed in getting himself transferred in the meanwhile to the Collegium Germanium in Rome, he may rest assured that in the balancing of our accounts, no “T” will remain uncrossed, no “I” undotted!”

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:29pm

LargeBill,

Thanks for that bit of information. I was unaware of how Alaska politics works.

Henry Karlson,

No personal attacks and insults will be tolerated anymore. You are given your first warning before being placed on moderation.

Michael Denton
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:33pm

Tito:

I’m no insider but I do live in Baton Rouge. For my view, Jindal still has a lot of respect for his handling of Gustav as well as telling Obama to keep some of the money and being one of the first to do so.

However, Louisiana does face a budget deficit (our problem is the oil revenues have gone down, just like Alaska) and there have been cuts, which rarely make one popular. Not to mention he did a pretty poor job in the response to Obama.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:37pm

Michael,

I do not doubt what you are saying is true. I like Mr. Jindal very much and I have heard many, many good things about him. I am just being cautious in my praise since he is a neophyte.

I don’t want to get excited about someone with so little experience, especially after watching President Obama create one disaster after another in his “on the job training”.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:39pm

Henry Karlson,

You are hereby placed on indefinite moderation until you have a change of heart.

[ed.-in fairness to Henry, I have edited out my accurate adjectives]

Phillip
Phillip
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:43pm

Ouch!

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:52pm

“Even though the 2012 U.S. presidential elections…”

2012?

Isn’t the world supposed to end in 2012?

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:54pm

“Henry Karlson…May God help you in your struggles [ed.].”

Is this the very same Henry Karlson who authored a series on ‘lies’ at the blog Vox Nova?

[ed.-sorry e., in fairness to Henry, I edited out my accurate adjectives]

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:55pm

Phillip et al,

We’ve received numerous complaints from many of our good readers of the ‘distractions’ that people like Karlson have become to constructive debates and engagement in dialogue.

The final straw came when we were being accused of tolerating insults and hate speech at the expense of good Catholics and dialogue.

I have seen across the Catholic blogosphere these same culprits use their political agenda to cloud their Catholic sense of being because of their hate towards orthodoxy in general and Pope Benedict specifically.

Many, many well meaning Catholics have been patient and charitable in tolerating these malcontents in their comboxes and we here at American Catholic have decided to draw a line in the sand against such hate speech.

Henry Karlson exemplifies the liberal extremists who disguise themselves as Catholics to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand. [conservative extremists can be just as awful. There is a distinction between liberals and liberal extremists. I count many friends with center-left leanings as good friends and model Catholics that I myself strive to be to follow in their footsteps.]

The TIDE IS TURNING against them and they know it. Hundreds of seminarians are more orthodox than their predecessors. Orthodox parishes are thriving while the Spirit of Vatican II churches are shrinking in number.

They know their days are numbered and they are frantically attacking anyone and anything that is bringing the Church closer to Christ.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 3:59pm

e.,

Yes. That’s if you follow Mayan paganism.

In reality what it really means is ‘time will reset itself’. Like when you jump forward in Spring or turn back the clock in the Fall.

Many people take it to mean something more sinister.

But we as Catholics do not know the time nor the place of His return.

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:02pm

Tito,

Thanks for the info!

On the other matter, I’m fairly disappointed at Karlson’s behaviour. I never knew he could sink so low.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:07pm

Now I’m just curious. What did he say?

Michael Denton
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:07pm

When the world ends is unknown, though if the Saints draft well enough to win the Superbowl this year, it will most certainly end in Feb. 2010. 😉

Tito:

This is true, though Jindal does have more experience than Obama (House of Reps for I think 3 years).

Donald:

Thanks for the Hitler quotes; they are very chilling and important to keep in mind.

Joe:

I just finished that book. It was very convincing that Pius has been unfairly marginalized and should in fact be canonized. I hope that when he is sainted, the calumny against him will subside and he will be honored as a “righteous Gentile.”

DarwinCatholic
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:10pm

Perhaps: “Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries.”

Or even just, “Ni!”

Phillip
Phillip
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:15pm

Darwin,

Now those are fighting words.

Tito,

Okay, just saying ouch.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:27pm

Michael D.,

I have a soft spot for people like Sam Brownback, Newt Gingrich, and Bobby Jindal. I love hearing and reading about conversion stories. These stories fill me with inspiration and joy while simultaneously they motivate me to turn closer to God.

Though they have many flaws I am reminded of Jesus’ mission that he came for these sinners so they may have eternal life. This particular passage is very soothing and I reflect on it right before the consecration during Mass.

Just awe-inspiring!

Morning's Minion
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 4:53pm

I know I’ll regret this, but part of me just cannot let this [ed.-your lies will not be tolerated] pass. I would advise Tito Edwards to get a better handle on the term “liberal” [ed.-I said liberal extremist] before he throws it around (hint: it’s not what Limbaugh and Hannity say it is). For the record, Henry Karlson is one of the most conservative people [ed.-I view Catholicism as to whether one adheres to the teachings or as one who does not] I have ever met. He had a deep love of the traditional faith [ed.-in the many insults that Henry has given me through the years, not once has he ever mentioned his love of Catholicism, Jesus, or the Church], and he has described himself as a monarchist. He does not fit in well with the American political debate, because both sides in that partisan divide are heavily influenced by liberalism (and that includes your hero, Mr. Gingrich [ed.-I said I favor him. Much different than hero. Another lie from a Vox Nova contributor, par for the course]).

Liberalism as manifested in politics neatly always boils down to the individual over the community, the focus on individual rights over the common good, the satisfaction of individual wants and needs. The US constitution is a deeply liberal document (I’m being descriptive, not pejorative). A second dimension of liberalism is a utopian approach to society, and both sides of the US debate share this zeal, especially when it comes to the role of the US and its institutions.

On the left, liberalism manifests itself by insisting on the right to satisfy one and all sexual needs, by the right to marry whoever one wishes, by placing one’s rights above those of the unborn, by belief in a that all the ils of society that can be guided by good government.

On the right, liberalism manifests itself as belief in the virtues of individuals maximizing utility in the free market, as an emphasis on keeping government off one’s back, on the right to own guns without restriction, on the right to consume as much material goods as one wishes regardless of its effect on the planet, and as a belief in the ability of the United States to impose democracy on the world through the barrel of a gun or the door of a torture chamber.

You need to understand these points. You need to understand that your politics are as liberal as a partisan Democrat, and have the exact same fault lines. But the problem is not really your politics– you are entitled (as are we all) to support who you think will do the least harm in the public square. Your problem is that your political error translates into how you see Catholicism, for you are quick to denounce any who do not share your politics (not your theology) [ed.-I am a Catholic first, political last] as somehow heterodox. Not that I want to get into a [ed.-typical liberal extremist always using vile language to prove a point. Such language will not be tolerated on AC] context, but I would safely bet that the average Vox Nova contributor agrees with the Church far more on the issues than the average contributor over here [ed.-an opinion emanating from a false Catholic such as yourself from Vox Nova, nice]. Your heterodoxy is against Republican party orthodoxy (liberalism of the right), not the faith. You really need to see the sharp difference between your politics and your faith– the former is deeply flawed, while the latter embodies the truth.

John Henry
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 5:08pm

Henry Karlson exemplifies the liberal extremists who disguise themselves as Catholics to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand.

I do not think Henry is a liberal extremist, much less someone who is Catholic as a ‘disguise…to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand.’ [ed.-inappropriate comments that do not deal with the posting will be deleted.]

Christopher Blosser
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 5:08pm

Henry Karlson exemplifies the liberal extremists who disguise themselves as Catholics to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand.

Tito, Lord knows I have my disagreements with Henry, but I would beg to differ with your characterization of him in this manner.

paul zummo
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 5:17pm

A second dimension of liberalism is a utopian approach to society, and both sides of the US debate share this zeal, especially when it comes to the role of the US and its institutions.

I have never encountered someone so intelligent who is nonetheless so completely ignorant of basic political theory. The idea that classical liberalism is in any way utopian is so wide of the mark that one wonders if you have even read an elementary book on political philosophy. The utopian strain is clearly prevalent in totalitarian systems, all of which are antithetical to classical liberalism and modern American conservatism.

On the right, liberalism manifests itself as belief in the virtues of individuals maximizing utility in the free market, as an emphasis on keeping government off one’s back, on the right to own guns without restriction, on the right to consume as much material goods as one wishes regardless of its effect on the planet, and as a belief in the ability of the United States to impose democracy on the world through the barrel of a gun or the door of a torture chamber.

Does this even resemble the actual beliefs of, well, anyone? Liberal or conservative. Also, while it is possible that a fetish for free market economics could have a utopian overtone, it’s sort of difficult to square that particular circle.

Your problem is that your political error translates into how you see Catholicism, for you are quick to denounce any who do not share your politics (not your theology) as somehow heterodox.

Unlike say, yourself? BTW, isn’t it curious that you boys at Vox Nova are all so cozy with one Gerald Naus now that he’s not a practicing Catholic but is a practicing leftist. I think your sudden coziness towards that particular individual reveals all too much your own blatant partisanship.

Michael R. Denton
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 5:31pm

Paul:

There is most certainly a utopian thread within classical liberalism. Locke and Rousseau view their states of nature as utopian (or close enough in Locke’s case). Now to be sure, it is much stronger in communism and fascism, but that is because building off the liberal tradition they came to the notion that science and the right amount of government will lead to an improve of society.

Indeed, liberalism holds that man is always rational and tends to deny the notion that man is fallen and therefore doomed to imperfection. This failure to emphasize the fallen nature of man made it prone to the utopian direction that its descendants have taken it.

Furthermore, while I agree that sometimes Naus is treated too sympathetically at VN, it’s not as if the “boys” at Vn (poor Katerina and RCM) never disagree. think it’s true that we have a tendency to downplay the faults of those who disagree with us less-whether they are our friends or usual allies. For more on that, see the McCain love-fest before November in conservative circles.

Minion:

I would point out that before Iraq, the other side was just as willing to promote democracy with guns and judging by Obama’s foreign policy that hasn’t changed a whole lot (see Israel, in a situation I know you sympathize with).

jonathanjones02
jonathanjones02
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 5:47pm

Labels are problematic over the Internet, for many reasons: as wannabe writers, we like to call attention to ourselves, we “say” things we wouldn’t normally “say” in a different medium, labeling is cheap and easy and we all tend to be lazy, ect.

That said, I enjoy TAC and hope that our blogs will continue to comment mutually. We should also all leave labeling behind as much as possible – like name-calling, which is also too easy to do – and engage points and substance with counter points and substance.

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:11pm

Contrary to popular belief, ‘labels’ aren’t in themselves an injustice; indeed, many times they are a ‘must’.

It is by such means that we call evil ‘evil’ and good ‘good’.

The injustice comes in when certain individuals come to call evil ‘good’ and good ‘evil’ or would leave the rather impressionable public believing thus.

paul zummo
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:28pm

There is most certainly a utopian thread within classical liberalism. Locke and Rousseau

I would reject the classification of Rossueau as a classical liberal. If he can labeled thusly, then the term has no meaning. And I have no brief for Locke, but I’m not quite comfortable branding him a utopian. Yes, his state of nature musings were idealistic, but at the same time he acknowledges the imperfections of such a state – after all, what else can justify the social contract other than the very imperfections of such a state?

Indeed, liberalism holds that man is always rational and tends to deny the notion that man is fallen and therefore doomed to imperfection.

What then of pretty much all of the Founding Fathers – men like Adams, Madison and Hamilton, in particular – who had a pretty good understanding of the fallen nature of mankind (If men were angels . . .) Unless you deem them to be outside of the classical liberal tradition, then it’s hard to justify that claim.

That being said, there certainly is a utopian strain in some current of liberal thought, exemplified in the American sense by Thomas Jefferson. That I would not deny, and I’d enjoy the opportunity of hashing this argument out further one day, but perhaps we’ll save that for another day.

. think it’s true that we have a tendency to downplay the faults of those who disagree with us less-whether they are our friends or usual allies.

The Closed Cafeteria

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:30pm

I have to agree with Paul – ‘utopian’ is a poor choice of word to describe classical liberalism.

If the state of nature is a utopia, why the need for government? Locke’s state of nature is no where near as chaotic and violent as Hobbes’, but to say it is utopian, I think, is a stretch. Government still comes along to fix the problems of the state of nature, which are ultimately the results of flaws in people and their ‘private judgment’. Perhaps this isn’t an explicit recognition of a fallen nature, but it still seems far from a utopian conception.

Rousseau on the other hand is not really a liberal; he is more a classical republican following in the tradition of Machiavelli. Republicanism and liberalism might have some overlap, and I think they are co-parents of 19th century socialism, but they’re distinct enough that no one should confuse them.

Finally, I think MM just mis-spoke; modern liberalism insofar as it has socialist parentage does have a Utopian streak. We do have to make the distinction between modern and classical liberalism.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:31pm

John Henry,

I do not think Henry is a liberal extremist, much less someone who is Catholic as a ‘disguise…to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand.’ That is a very serious and uncharitable accusation, and, in my opinion, calumnious, particularly since Henry made it quite clear he could not vote for Obama. If a commenter left such an accusation on one of my threads, I would delete it.

His whole point is to disrupt the discussion on the content of my post.

Henry K. has failed over and over to show any prudence, charity, or any semblance of practicing his Catholicism. If you have witnessed this then he is an even worse person than I thought. Purposely showing one face while in another instance leading sheep to the slaughter.

Anymore comments that doesn’t pertain to the original posting will be deleted from here on out.

paul zummo
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:32pm

Sorry, got cut off:

The Closed Cafeteria Gerald was almost literally hounded by the Vox Novaites on a daily basis. Now that Gerald has done a 180, they are eminently more accepting of him. So they’re basically showing by their actions that it is more tolerable to be a heterodox, politically left quasi-Catholic than an orthodox, politically conservative Catholic.

For more on that, see the McCain love-fest before November in conservative circles.

Umm, if by “love fest” you mean the “hold your nose and vote for him because he’s better than Obama” thread that ran through such circles, then maybe you have a point.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:34pm

Paul,

My reasons for placing Henry Karlson on indefinite moderation. His goal as well as his cohorts are to do the same to unwitting Catholics here at AC.

paul zummo
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:36pm

We do have to make the distinction between modern and classical liberalism.

Exactly. And even then I think we have to make distinctions within the world of classical liberalism itself.

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:52pm

Tony in regard to your definition of liberal, Tito is correct in regard to modern American usage. In the 19th century sense of the term I am a political liberal. In today’s usage in this country I am a conservative. However, in neither usage am I a statist or a socialist. In terms of economics and the role of the state in the economy that is the true dividing line between most of the contributors of American Catholic and most of the contributors of Vox Nova. The exceptions to this dividing line are not insignificant. For example, Blackadder as a libertarian makes me look Leftist on economic matters, and Joe, who is a contributor to both blogs, is a Distributist I believe. (Please correct me if I am mistaken Joe.) However I think in general the role of the state in society is the general line of division between the Left and the Right in contemporary America.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:53pm

Well its like Robert Bork said, liberalism was a good idea when it was tempered with other ideas and forces that prevented its less desirable tendencies from running amok.

But then, so was conservatism.

Now we simply have shrillness.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:55pm

I am a Distributist 🙂

But more importantly, I just try to follow Catholic social teaching as best I can, regardless of where that puts me on the secular political map.

Morning's Minion
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 6:59pm

Paul,

I think you are missing the connections. Liberalism and socialism are intimately related. The Church always tended to condemn both in the same breath – and here I think we can draw a very interesting parallel between Pius IX’s authoritarian hatred of liberalism and its socialist step-sister, and Leo XIII’s condemnation of both from an economic perspective.

My point remains: both sides of the debate in the United States are deeply grounded in the liberal tradition. There are very few true conservative voices. It’s always been a pet peeve of mine that people use these terms inappropriately. And no, you can’t just lump a bunch of unconnected and often contradictory beliefs together– free market liberalism, huge spending on military, small spending on everything else, nationalism, traditionalist sexual norms, opposition to abortion — and ascribe any consistent political philosophy to it, let alone “conservative”.

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:01pm

“I am a Distributist.

In other words, “Communist”.

paul zummo
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:08pm

I think you are missing the connections.

Yes, MM, please lecture me about the genesis of political thought in America, and the various influences on it. This is just a topic way beyond my pay grade.

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:28pm

e., Joe is not a Communist. Joe and I do not see eye to eye on economics, but there is nothing of the Bolshevik about him.

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:30pm

Mr. McClarey,

It’s just I don’t see how distributism, if actually implemented, would not ultimately end up being, in the end, “Communism”.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:30pm

E,

Seeing as how I don’t believe in a command economy, nationalization of the means of production, or violent class warfare, I’d have to be one strange communist.

That, or you don’t know what the h**l you’re talking about, once again.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:32pm

“It’s just I don’t see how distributism, if actually implemented, would not ultimately end up being, in the end, “Communism”.”

How do you define communism?

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:38pm

e, I have my doubts how Distributism would work in the real world. However, as Joe has pointed out he disavows the characteristic elements of most Communist movements and I take him at his word.

e.
e.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:40pm

Herr Hargrave,

Yes, I do not find it (i.e., distributism) exceptionally inviting for the very fact that it will merely result in the same sort of tyrannical coercion by the State not unlike that infamously found in your so dearly beloved Marxist system.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 7:59pm

John Henry & Christopher Blosser,

Reflecting on my comments I see my error.

Henry Karlson exemplifies the liberal extremists who disguise themselves as Catholics to push President Obama’s agenda of abortion on demand.

Henry isn’t pushing for abortion on demand. I assume he isn’t for that matter.

What I dislike are his distraction techniques of taking the discussion away from the intent of the post to something frivolous as to what the definition of “is” is (as an example).

I’m sure he’s quite a decent human being, though he makes it hard for me to see that part of him.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 8:02pm

Distributism does work in the real world. There are thousands of successful workers, consumers, housing and credit co-ops all over the world. I just think it needs to be spread further.

It’s the ‘free market’ that no one can seem to agree upon – does it exist, is it an ideal, has it existed? What we’ve only ever had is either command economies, or varying degrees of state-capitalism.

E,

I’m not going to let you continue slandering me. Your comments are entirely without foundation, I have never advocated anything close to ‘tyrannical coercion’, I have made it clear more than once that Distributism is a voluntary system.

If there is some thing I have said that makes you think otherwise, quote it, and we will discuss it.

If you can’t do that, I’m going to start throwing out the garbage – by that I mean, your posts.

S.B.
S.B.
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 8:23pm

What’s interesting about several of the comments above is that Tito went overboard in attacking Henry, and then was immediately criticized himself by several other bloggers here.

What a sharp contrast from the conduct at Vox Nova, where Michael I. gets away with all kinds of slanderous comments and no one disagrees; where Gerald openly dissents from the Magisterium but no one disagrees (far from it: Henry pretends to believe — but he couldn’t possibly be that dumb — that Gerald’s comments are all faithful to the Church’s teachings); where commenters like Digby and Mark D. and Kurt say even more outrageous things and are never called to account.

e
e
Wednesday, April 22, AD 2009 8:28pm

Joe,

I must’ve gotten you confused with some petty tyrant who actually wanted to impose this incredibly idealistic Chester-belloc vision on the whole world regardless of what anybody else had to say about it and would compel entire societies and even nations to do so on the simple basis that he knew what was best for them on a grander scale.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top