I have seen the stuff about protecting pedophile priests. Obviously horrible, but it’s also the Catholic Church so I’m not really expecting great things from them. Iirc Francis was also not great on those things. Not really sure if this guy is worse, I don’t keep up on those things.
Can you expound a bit on the Rerum Novarum? I’m not in a place where I can really read anything rn. I did look briefly at the Wikipedia page, it seems like it’s mostly some typical lib “we don’t like socialism but we’re also against ‘crony capitalism’” stuff. Is that generally correct?
I wasn’t expecting some socialist or something in the papacy. But I suppose I’m coming from the perspective of seeing a lot of people hoping for the immediate rollback of the past 70 or more years of social progress after the election of Trump. Like a great worldwide mandate to return to the social order of old. And so even though this guy seems like just some basic moderate, not even as progressive as Francis (a low bar), the fact that he’s not completely against those reforms and in many cases supportive seems like not the worst outcome.
I wasn’t expecting some socialist or something in the papacy. But I suppose I’m coming from the perspective of seeing a lot of people hoping for the immediate rollback of the past 70 or more years of social progress after the election of Trump. Like a great worldwide mandate to return to the social order of old. And so even though this guy seems like just some basic moderate, not even as progressive as Francis (a low bar), the fact that he’s not completely against those reforms and in many cases supportive seems like not the worst outcome.
That’s reasonable, you’ll probably find that he won’t cosign Trump style fascism. I’m personally really concerned about how the Church will react as climate collapse forces millions of refugees up north, it’s bound to happen under his papacy unless he dies young. I think I would’ve preferred someone like Turkson for that end. I don’t know, maybe I should completely compartmentalize my political analysis from religious feelings seeing as Francis was very much an exceptional pope.
Can you expound a bit on the Rerum Novarum? I’m not in a place where I can really read anything rn. I did look briefly at the Wikipedia page, it seems like it’s mostly some typical lib “we don’t like socialism but we’re also against ‘crony capitalism’” stuff. Is that generally correct?
I’ve read Rerum Novarum and it is basically trying to hew a middle ground between socialist control of the economy because, won’t anyone think of the landlords and the business owners. That said, Leo XIII is considered the social pope that launched the concepts of Catholic Social Teaching, and very likely that without novarum we wouldn’t have had liberation theology. And they would not have their own internal justifications coming from Church doctrine (not that it matters, but still!).
Just to add on to this, from my own perspective as a Catholic, reading Rerum Novarum as a teen was a big moment for me that started to get me to seriously question capitalism. As a whole system. For a while I subscribed to the Church’s Distributist ideology, but I realized that it was just a completely non-actionable ideology that had no real world backing. So I turned to reading Marx and Lenin and quickly understood that the criticisms the Church makes of socialism are not grounded on actual socialism, they’re grounded on a misunderstanding of what we mean when we say private property, the state, etc etc.
I think there’s a possibility to bring people around based on a path similar to this, but it is contingent on the willingness (in my case it sprang from disillusionment) to go and read Marx. It’s incredibly rare for someone to read papal encyclicals and also Marx. I think that might be the reason they keep talking past each other.
I’d be very cautious to jump to conclusions. Tradcaths were going to mald no matter who stepped out the balcony if it wasn’t Robert Sarah or Erdo.
I posted Rerum Novarum in the news megathread which was Leo XIII’s encyclical touching on socioeconomic doctrine. TLDR it’s a pretty gross misunderstanding of the socialist critique of private property. There’s a possibility that Leo XIV wants to elaborate/iterate on that doctrine, for better or worse. And I don’t know if the documents are real but these letters from SNAP regarding protection of priests who had committed sexual abuse are also concerning.
I have seen the stuff about protecting pedophile priests. Obviously horrible, but it’s also the Catholic Church so I’m not really expecting great things from them. Iirc Francis was also not great on those things. Not really sure if this guy is worse, I don’t keep up on those things.
Can you expound a bit on the Rerum Novarum? I’m not in a place where I can really read anything rn. I did look briefly at the Wikipedia page, it seems like it’s mostly some typical lib “we don’t like socialism but we’re also against ‘crony capitalism’” stuff. Is that generally correct?
I wasn’t expecting some socialist or something in the papacy. But I suppose I’m coming from the perspective of seeing a lot of people hoping for the immediate rollback of the past 70 or more years of social progress after the election of Trump. Like a great worldwide mandate to return to the social order of old. And so even though this guy seems like just some basic moderate, not even as progressive as Francis (a low bar), the fact that he’s not completely against those reforms and in many cases supportive seems like not the worst outcome.
That’s reasonable, you’ll probably find that he won’t cosign Trump style fascism. I’m personally really concerned about how the Church will react as climate collapse forces millions of refugees up north, it’s bound to happen under his papacy unless he dies young. I think I would’ve preferred someone like Turkson for that end. I don’t know, maybe I should completely compartmentalize my political analysis from religious feelings seeing as Francis was very much an exceptional pope.
I’ve read Rerum Novarum and it is basically trying to hew a middle ground between socialist control of the economy because, won’t anyone think of the landlords and the business owners. That said, Leo XIII is considered the social pope that launched the concepts of Catholic Social Teaching, and very likely that without novarum we wouldn’t have had liberation theology. And they would not have their own internal justifications coming from Church doctrine (not that it matters, but still!).
Just to add on to this, from my own perspective as a Catholic, reading Rerum Novarum as a teen was a big moment for me that started to get me to seriously question capitalism. As a whole system. For a while I subscribed to the Church’s Distributist ideology, but I realized that it was just a completely non-actionable ideology that had no real world backing. So I turned to reading Marx and Lenin and quickly understood that the criticisms the Church makes of socialism are not grounded on actual socialism, they’re grounded on a misunderstanding of what we mean when we say private property, the state, etc etc.
I think there’s a possibility to bring people around based on a path similar to this, but it is contingent on the willingness (in my case it sprang from disillusionment) to go and read Marx. It’s incredibly rare for someone to read papal encyclicals and also Marx. I think that might be the reason they keep talking past each other.