tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-67490676259319339622024-03-06T12:02:40.447-08:00Prudentia Politicaprudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.comBlogger12426125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-24640120239923983782022-01-04T07:34:00.004-08:002022-01-04T07:34:36.495-08:00Todo el mundo es antifascista, incluidos los cristianos ... pero no todos los que son clasificados como fascistas lo son realmente, y mucho menos pueden ser clasificados como nazis.<p style="text-align: center;"> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>Chantal Delsol deplora "El fin de la
cristiandad"</b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Por Eric Delcroix - POLÉMIA <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span lang="ES"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></span><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">La sustitución revolucionaria de las
normas morales</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span></b><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">A diferencia de Jean-Claude Michéa, con su supuesta
neutralidad axiológica del capitalismo, Chantal Delsol refuta absolutamente el
argumento de que estamos siendo testigos de una erosión del estándar moral. Por
el contrario, observa que estamos asistiendo a una doble inversión: “inversión
normativa” e “inversión ontológica” (volveremos a esto más adelante). Para el
autor: “La experiencia cotidiana nos confirma que la moral no desapareció con
la caída de la cristiandad, e incluso que la moral lo invade todo… (…) Ni la
civilización ni la moral se detienen en la cristiandad. "</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> La</span></b><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> profesora Delsol señala que los fascismos, en
sentido amplio, excepto el nacionalsocialismo, fueron el último intento de
salvar a la cristiandad, desde un punto de vista civilizatorio, lo que Henri
Massis y Charles Maurras entendieron en su tiempo. Mussolini, Franco o Salazar,
fueron activos contra el "caos nihilista". Chantal Delsol recuerda
las palabras de Spengler repetidas, según Massis, los creadores de la falange
española: "En el último momento, siempre es un pelotón de soldados el que
salva a la civilización".</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Hoy, todo el mundo es antifascista,
incluidos los cristianos, por lo que nadie está obligado a entender las causas
de la "agonía o cómo pasó" ... Los progresistas han ganado, pero su
materialismo ahora es devorado por el "revolucionario bíblico"
americano. espíritu ... Inversión normativa e inversión ontológica</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">“El
humanitarismo, moral contemporánea, es una moral enteramente orientada al
bienestar del individuo, sin ninguna visión antropológica. Lo que importa es el
deseo y el bienestar, ahora mismo.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Bajo
la influencia estadounidense, "... la inversión normativa se lleva a cabo
bajo el paraguas de la culpa, que la vuelve violenta y amarga. »Y, todavía
escribe Chantal Delsol,« desde mediados del siglo XX, la Iglesia abandona toda
pretensión de pesar sobre la sociedad, e incluso, empieza a avergonzarse de su
dominación secular (…) Que la Iglesia ande en este infernal esquema muestra
cuánto está sujeta a las circunstancias. "</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Pero
todo este formidable e irresistible proceso descansa sobre una "inversión
filosófica". Sería mejor decir una inversión ontológica. " La
Ilustración trajo, en términos históricos, la invalidación en la mente de las
fundaciones cristianas de Occidente. “Los cristianos de hoy, enloquecidos por
la caída de su influencia, tienden a afirmar que toda moralidad desaparecerá
con el borrado del monoteísmo. Esto es ignorar la historia. "En efecto, si
con la desaparición de Dios, la moral trascendente ciertamente se marchita, en
cambio se está desarrollando una nueva moral, producida no en el Cielo sino en
la Ciudad, bajo la égida del Estado. Y eso es lo que podemos observar, con el
nuevo orden moral antidiscriminatorio y el espíritu despierto.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Algunas
reservas sobre el discurso de Chantal Delsol</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Es
absolutamente necesario leer El fin de la cristiandad. De todos modos, me
permito dos críticas a esta notable obra. Por un lado, Chantal Delsol observa
que “los presentadores de televisión son los centinelas y, a veces, los
gobernantes de la moral común (...) Asumieron el papel que jugaron los obispos
hace medio siglo. »Por supuesto, esto es correcto, pero el autor omite
mencionar el rol primordial de los jueces del estado de derecho, entrenados por
los derechos humanos para confundir ley y moral, para convertirse en censores,
confesores y perseguidores. (Sin embargo, también ha podido criticar muy
eficazmente la justicia internacional [ii]). Por otro lado, el autor ve en la
nueva moral la marca del paganismo restaurado, olvidando que antes siempre fue
holística y correspondía a un propósito antropológico. En contraste, ¡la
exacerbación del individualismo narcisista contemporáneo es el legado
bíblico-revolucionario del cristianismo! De hecho, para él, y fue una
revolución para el mundo antiguo, la salvación solo concierne al individuo y su
ego.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="FR" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Eric
Delcroix 29/12/2021</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="FR" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> [i]
Éditions du Cerf, París, noviembre de 2021. </span></b><span lang="FR" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="FR" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">[ii]
La Grande méprise, Éditions de la Table Round, París, septiembre de 2004.</span></b><span lang="FR" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="FR" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span></b><span lang="FR" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Por
Eric Delcroix, jurista, ensayista y escritor, autor de Droit, conscience et
sentiments </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Chantal
Delsol, profesora emérita de universidades y miembro del Instituto, acaba de
publicar un libro cuyo título abarca el mismo tema, La Fin de la Chrétienté [i
], subtitulado Inversión normativa y la nueva era. Obra que se esfuerza, en más
de 177 densas páginas, en la objetividad, lo que es particularmente interesante
de un autor que continúa ubicándose entre los "católicos
tradicionalistas".</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Leer aquí - Fuente: <a href="http://www.polemia.com">www.polemia.com</a></b></span> <span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;"><span lang="ES" style="color: black; font-family: "Georgia",serif; font-size: 13.5pt; mso-ansi-language: ES; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: ES-AR;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>¿El fin de la cristiandad? </b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Con Chantal Delsol. <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>https://youtu.be/5wAnI9zOLho</b></span></span><span lang="ES" style="color: black; font-family: "Georgia",serif; font-size: 13.5pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: ES-AR;"> </span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Georgia",serif; font-size: 13.5pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: ES-AR;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p><a href="https://youtu.be/5wAnI9zOLho"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b> Video</b></span></a></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>El fin de la cristiandad </b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>por Chantal Delsol <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>176 páginas - Octubre de 2021
€ 16,00</b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Dieciséis
siglos de cristianismo están llegando a su fin. </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">El tiempo actual vive una
inversión normativa y filosófica que nos compromete con una nueva era. La
transición es brutal. Es difícil de aceptar para los defensores de la era que
se desvanece. </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Así como el anciano tiende a colorear el mundo con su propia
decrepitud y a verlo decadente, así hay cristianos a los que hoy les gusta
contemplar la decadencia del mundo en su propia decadencia. </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">De hecho, estamos
asistiendo a una metamorfosis. El comienzo del tiempo pagano está restaurando
las antiguas sabidurías junto con el antiguo salvajismo. El gran Pan está de
vuelta. La era cristiana que está llegando a su fin se había vivido en la
modalidad de dominación. </span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">El cristianismo debe inventar otra forma de existencia.
El del simple testigo. Del agente secreto de Dios.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"><i>Catedrática
emérita de Filosofía, miembro del Instituto y columnista de Le Figaro. Chantal
Delsol es autora de libros de filosofía, ensayos y novelas, traducidos a veinte
idiomas.</i></span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;"><span lang="ES"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><span style="color: #20124d;"><b>Leer aquí - Fuente: <a href="http://www.editionsducerf.fr">www.editionsducerf.fr</a></b></span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>El fin de la cristiandad, de
Chantal Delsol </b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="ES"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El blog de Francis Richard <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;"> </span></b><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">La increíble energía con la que la cultura
cristiana ha luchado durante dos siglos para no morir, demuestra claramente que
de hecho ha formado un mundo cohesionado en todas las áreas de la vida, llamado
cristianismo. La cristiandad, esta civilización de dieciséis siglos, ha estado
en agonía desde mediados del siglo veinte. Su cuestionamiento se inició con el
Renacimiento; continuó con la Revolución Francesa que se logró oponiéndola
porque era enemiga de la modernidad: El cristianismo como civilización es fruto
del catolicismo, una religión holística, que defiende una sociedad orgánica,
desafía el individualismo y la libertad individual.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">UNA
REVOLUCIÓN CON SENTIDO ESTRICTO</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">A
partir de entonces su agonía fue inevitable, a pesar de los trastornos del
período de entreguerras del siglo XX. Sin embargo, la modernidad no se tradujo
en el reinado del ateísmo y el racionalismo todopoderoso. El espíritu
religioso, inherente al hombre, no se ha extinguido con el progreso: Creo que
debemos entender el momento que vivimos como una revolución, en el sentido
estricto del retorno de un ciclo, en las dos áreas fundacionales de la
existencia humana: la moral y la ontología. Chantal Delsol muestra que somos a
la vez sujetos y actores de una inversión normativa; y una inversión
ontológica. Esto quiere decir que nuestros preceptos morales, así como nuestras
visiones del mundo, con nuestro lugar dentro de este mundo, se están
invirtiendo.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">INVERSIÓN
NORMATIVA</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Cuando
el cristianismo, a partir del siglo IV, se convierte en la religión dominante,
rápidamente se afirma por la fuerza, utiliza parte de lo existente y lo
transforma, luego, paulatinamente, penaliza el divorcio, el aborto y el
infanticidio, condena el suicidio, persigue a los homosexuales. A partir del
siglo XVIII y la Revolución se inició el movimiento inverso; lo que había sido
abolido vuelve a ser la norma: la sociedad evoluciona en la dirección de una
mayor libertad individual. El objetivo es claro: poder brindar a todos todas
las posibilidades tecnológicas. La moral está volcada hacia el bienestar del
individuo, sin ninguna visión antropológica: lo que importa es el deseo y el
bienestar en el momento. Se rechaza la pedofilia, que daña al niño, pero no el
aborto que ataca al inconsciente y beneficia a la gestante, etc.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">INVERSIÓN
ONTOLÓGICA</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span lang="ES" style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Esta
inversión normativa no podría haberse realizado sin una inversión ontológica,
en el sentido clásico de la ciencia de los primeros principios. Sin embargo, la
fe en los principios cristianos se ha derrumbado, lo que los ha vuelto
ilegítimos: lo que funda una civilización [...] es la creencia en una verdad.
Tal inversión ocurrió cuando el monoteísmo judío, una religión secundaria, es
decir, apelando a las nociones de revelación, fe, sabiduría interior y ser
nutrido, reemplazó al politeísmo, una religión primaria, es decir, natural,
ocupando el lugar si ella es libre. En esta ocasión, la diferencia es que la
religión secundaria que es el cristianismo ha sido rechazada y que en lugar del
ateísmo o el nihilismo, es el politeísmo, sobre todo asiático, el que ha tomado
su lugar, cumpliendo con las exigencias generales del momento y principalmente
el igualitarismo: El panteísmo en el ámbito religioso, la democracia en el
ámbito político, ambos consideran a la humanidad como una gran masa cuyos
individuos son átomos iguales y débiles.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">ECOLOGISMO</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">No es de extrañar, por tanto, que el
ecologismo, que es una apología del ímpetu vital y de lo natural eterno, sea,
por estar ligado a la defensa de la naturaleza, el politeísmo más prometedor
para el hombre posmoderno, sobre todo porque borra el dualismo que caracteriza
al judeocristianismo:</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">La sacralización de la naturaleza
constituye la base religiosa más primitiva y rudimentaria, la que viene, por
así decirlo, por sí sola y en cualquier sociedad humana.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">De modo que el ecologismo es una
religión primaria, con su liturgia y sus normas morales. Mientras que en las
religiones secundarias provienen de Dios, en las religiones primarias provienen
de la sociedad humana, es decir, de los hábitos y costumbres, y el Estado es su
guardián.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">LA MORAL DEL ESTADO</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">A comienzos del siglo XXI, la Iglesia
abandonó su papel de guardiana de las normas morales y esta última regresó al
Estado.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">La nueva moral común, que retoma y
recicla las virtudes evangélicas, es el humanitarismo (y no el humanismo que
situaba al hombre en el centro del universo), una filantropía bastante llorona
y muy victimaria, dominada por la emoción y el sentimentalismo.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Esta moral ya no está ligada a una
religión e ignora toda trascendencia. Es decretado por la élite gobernante, que
promueve las leyes para hacer cumplir y posiblemente hacer cumplir a través de
insultos y ostracismo. Es omnipresente en la escuela, en el cine, en las
familias:</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Cuando es necesario enderezarlo o
darle una buena dirección, es la élite gobernante la que se encarga de ello.
Los gobernantes europeos representan a este respecto el tabernáculo de la
clericatura. En definitiva, hemos vuelto a una situación típica del paganismo:
tenemos una moral de Estado.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">CRISTIANISMO SIN CRISTIANISMO</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">La Iglesia se avergüenza de la
cristiandad como poder y como coacción y anhela otras formas de existencia.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">El personal de la Iglesia tiene mala
conciencia y cae en el arrepentimiento, reúne las corrientes de pensamiento que
los desafían, se preocupa por la ecología para ser moderno; una parte incluso
se desliza hacia el panteísmo. Llega a cuestionar la idea de misión y
transmisión.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Es ilusorio querer hacer perdurar a
la cristiandad; Los cristianos deben dejarlo, renunciar al reino de la fuerza:
¿No hay héroes que no sean los de la fuerza? ¿Héroes de la paciencia, el
cuidado y el amor humilde? ¿Vida diaria, indulgencia, ecuanimidad?</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 21.0pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Para cumplir la misión y transmitir
no hay necesidad de conquistar, es mejor despertar el deseo de ser llevando
todo dentro. Chantal Delsol, por lo tanto, sugiere que nosotros [los
cristianos] permanezcamos sólo testigos silenciosos y, en última instancia,
agentes secretos de Dios.</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Francis Richard<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Libros anteriores:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span lang="FR"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Las piedras angulares Éditions du Cerf (2014)</b></span></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Populismo - Los
restos de la historia Éditions du Rocher (2015)</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El odio al mundo -
Totalitarismos y posmodernidad Éditions du Cerf (2017)</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El crepúsculo de
las Universal Éditions du Cerf (2020)</b></span></li></ul><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><o:p> </o:p>Publicación
conjunta con lesobservateurs.ch</b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Leer aquí -
Fuente: www.francisrichard.net</b></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-58049067739467363002022-01-04T06:22:00.002-08:002022-01-04T06:22:22.364-08:00Syllabus of Errors: historical consciousness means at least making a partial effort to do so.<p><br /></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: white; width: 560px;"><tbody><tr><td style="word-break: normal;"><h2 class="yiv6731418694post-title" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Notes on Pope Pius IX and Science </span></a></h2><h2 class="yiv6731418694post-title" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">in Light of the Syllabus of Errors</span></a></h2><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b>by <a href="https://voegelinview.com/?author=1469" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Dennis Durst</a></b></div></span></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="yiv6731418694post-content" style="background-color: white; direction: ltr; margin-top: 1em; max-width: 560px;"><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">Introduction</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Few in the Roman See have elicited such strong emotions and evaluations, both in his own era and in ours, regarding guidance of the Catholic church and her wary posture toward modernity, as Pope Pius IX (1792-1878). On the whole, scholarship has not regarded his pontificate with positive regard, and often the criticisms of an ultramontane or reactionary spirit proliferate in secondary accounts.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[1]</sup></a> What I offer here is a partially revisionist view of Pius IX. I make no special claim of originality. I think it is important in assessing figures of the past that we move beyond their writings and seek out the trends and developments that were environing them. Certain dramatic developments in Europe, both politically and philosophically, contributed to shaping the pontiff’s attitudes toward modernity, of which science (as then interpreted) played a part. Personal experiences also served an undeniable role. Therefore, it was not science <em>per se</em>, but materialist dogmatism promulgated in European education under the guise of science that provoked Pius IX, and stimulated the harsh wording in the <em>Syllabus of Errors</em>. Were there perhaps better or other ways he could have responded to these trends? Of course there were, but that is not of much comfort to the historian.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">The Early Years</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Born May 13, 1792, Giovanni Maria Mastai Ferretti, of Ancona, Italy, Pope Pius IX held the longest pontificate in history. His occupation of the Vatican’s highest seat stretched (with a brief absence from Rome) from 1846 to 1878. Many accounts of his early life and career stress a liberality of spirit and ethos in his priestly and episcopal duties.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[2]</sup></a> Pio Nono, as he was often known, was “well regarded in liberal circles for his administrative qualities, good will, and avoidance of party spirit,” as observes one encyclopedic account. On the eve of his election to the pontificate, Eamon Duffy notes that of the finalists, he was regarded as the “more conciliatory and open-minded” of the options before the conclave in 1846. Winsome personal qualities, such as “a gift for friendship and a track-record of generosity” even toward opponents, and some policy statements as a bishop, made him seem as if he would become a reformer.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The use of the word “liberal” for this early period must be tempered however, given that the primary thrust of that descriptor was political. As an Archbishop at Spoleto from 1827 to 1832, then as a Bishop at Imola, he had spoken in favor of altering the status of the Papal States, then a point of considerable internecine debate in Italy, and he sympathized with the nationalist movement in his home country. During his first two years in the Vatican, he granted amnesty to some of the political prisoners and exiles, as well as streamlined the operation of the Papal States, even granting some new governing powers therein to laymen.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[3]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>According to Aubert, et. al., the pope’s upbringing and context placed him under three handicaps. One was his epilepsy, which began in his youth and vexed him periodically throughout life. This Aubert connects to his hesitancy and indecisiveness until circumstances became pressing. The second was common to priests of his generation, a sub-standard educational formation. This he was able to mitigate by his shrewd common sense most of the time. The third handicap is that he was surrounded by officials in the Vatican who were very insulated from the developments of the modern world. They were, on this account, “uncompromising theoreticians out of touch with contemporary views.” The conditions to which they were insensitive included “the profound evolution which was in the process of completely altering the structures of bourgeois society,” as well as the need of theological tenets “to be viewed in light of the progress made in the natural sciences and historical research.” These deficits must be tempered by acknowledgement of his unpretentiousness and basic goodness, sensitivity and personal charm, widely acknowledged in the biographical literature.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[4]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">A Sense of Siege</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Political events began to overshadow any long-term trends toward moderation. The year 1848 saw Europe convulsed with revolutions and governments falling like dominoes. Italy’s crisis was an occupation by Austrian troops. With past sympathies for nationalist causes, many assumed the new pope would assert his authority against the Austrians, but he urged a course of church neutrality, given that there were many faithful Catholics in both Austria and in Italy. This, coupled with his reluctance to cede more of the papal territories to Italy, led to protests, riots, and even the public assassination of pope’s own Prime Minister. Revolutionaries mobbed his palace, and he escaped incognito on November 24, 1848. When Italy was declared a Republic in February of 1849, the pope urged the Catholic rulers of Europe to aid his restoration to power in Rome. Less than three months after the pontiff’s departure, the Assembly of the new Republic of Italy, issued a decree asserting that 1) the papacy would no longer wield temporal power in the Roman State; 2) the pope would retain “all the guarantee necessary to freely exercise his spiritual authority; 3) declaration of a pure democracy under the name The Roman Republic; and 4) the uniting of all Italy under the new republic.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[5]</sup></a> Still, on February 9, 1849, the Constituent Assembly promised that the Pope would have “every guarantee needed for the independent exercise of his spiritual power.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[6]</sup></a> The cardinals advising the pope remained adamant that he could not compromise with such an arrangement, nor trust in such promises. This was a position with which he came largely to agree both in theory and in practice. Kertzer notes the hardening of the pope’s attitude by late 1849:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>Listening to those who told him he had to adapt to modern times had produced only heartache for him and disaster for the church he loved. Parliamentary government and individual freedom, thought Pius, were not only incompatible with the divinely ordained status of the (papal) states, but inherently evil. It was a belief that he would hold for the rest of his life.</em><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup><em>[7]</em></sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>French troops besieged and eventually took Rome. After an awkward period of several months’ Roman occupation during which the French, in vain, hoped for the pope to make concessions to the republican spirit of the Italian masses, by April 12, 1850, Pius IX took his place once again at the Vatican.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[8]</sup></a> Leaders in the territory of Turin engaged in an especially aggressive program of secularization which meant the seizing of church properties and the dissolving of monasteries. The days of liberalism and compromise came to a stern halt.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Such harrowing events convinced Pio Nono that the modern world and liberalization were inimical to the faith he cherished. In order to protect his role as spiritual guide, he had to shore up his role as a temporal ruler over the Papal States. One biographer notes that, “Although expert theologians admitted that the temporal power was not based on dogma, Pius was determined not to surrender an inch of the territory he considered necessary to safeguard the spiritual power.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[9]</sup></a> His forces dwindled throughout the decade of the 1860s as his ability to maintain real control over Papal States territory steadily eroded through the losses of battles both on the field and to the withering scorn of the European press. It is difficult to see the papacy as he saw it, for today’s popes exercise extraordinary global influence irrespective of the tiny geographical dimensions of papal holdings in Rome. For Pius IX, the papacy itself was at stake in the local battles over control of the Papal States.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Pius IX had a powerful bête noire, King Vittorio Emmanuel II (r. 1861-1878). He was declared King of Italy by an all-Italian parliament gathered at Turin, in May, 1861.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[10]</sup></a> While sometimes affable toward Pio Nono, the monarch held to an indiosyncratic Catholicism that detested clerics but at the same time longed to see miracles. One historian avers that the king “had not the least interest in theology and sometimes talked of wanting to shoot all priests.” Though more than once excommunicated by the pope, he hoped to be absolved by the one he labeled ‘that poor devil of a holy father.’”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[11]</sup></a> Given such powerful opponents, the pope’s beleaguered attitude and sharp pen take on, for the historian, the needed contours of nuance. Many powerful leaders both in and out of Italy wished to see the Papal States and their wealth carved up and redistributed, and for starkly non-religious purposes. When the pope’s French protectors left Rome to fight in the Franco-Prussian War in July of 1870, Victor Emmanuel seized the opportunity. The walls of Rome were breached by his forces on September 20, 1870. A month later the pope restated his standing excommunication of the leaders of the new constitutional monarchy. Victor Emmanuel allowed the pope control over the Vatican and few surrounding acres. The pope was no longer king of the Papal States.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[12]</sup></a> In that light, Eamon Duffy describes the pope’s oppositional mentality thus: “The absorption of papal territory into a united Italy therefore seemed to him a device of the devil to undermine the papacy itself.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn13" name="_ftnref13" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[13]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><em><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">Syllabus of Errors</span></em></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The most important year for a discussion of Catholicism and modern science was not the revolutionary year of 1848, nor during the first Vatican Council when, in July of 1870, the pope triumphed in the declaration of Papal Infallibility. It was the year 1864. For in this year, he used the sword of Peter to battle against rationalism, and any ideologies promoted as science yet used to abet anti-religious fervor. In that year <em>The Syllabus of Errors </em>was published, as an appendix to the papal encyclical <em>Quanta Cura</em>.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Some of the errors announced and condemned by Pius IX would not have taken the intellectual world by surprise, as they were mere restatements of positions long held by the teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church. Significant erosions of biblical authority had been emerging in German scholarship in particular, that concerned not merely Catholics, but many Protestants as well.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[14]</sup></a> For example, Error number 7, if widely embraced, would have utterly undermined Christianity regarding its essential historical integrity:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[15]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Less clear for the freedom of modern thought, including that of the natural sciences to operate, was Error 9, drawn from an earlier letter to the Archbishop of Munich:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>All the dogmas of the Christian religion are indiscriminately the object of natural science or philosophy, and human reason, enlightened solely in an historical way, is able, by its own natural strength and principles, to attain to the true science of even the most abstruse dogmas; provided only that such dogmas be proposed to reason itself as its object.</em><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn16" name="_ftnref16" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup><em>[16]</em></sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Terms like “all,” “indiscriminately,” “solely,” and “only,” marked the pope’s reactions to the reductive tendencies of Auguste Comte’s Positivism, and to theological liberalization in German academic circles. Positivism reduced all disciplines to the procrustean bed of scientific categories and methods, and at that time was growing in popularity in European salons. Papal condemnation of a figure such as University of Munich philosopher Jacob Frohschammer, whose books <em>On the Generation of Human Souls </em>(1854) and <em>On the Freedom of Science </em>(1861) became a special target of papal ire.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn17" name="_ftnref17" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[17]</sup></a> The mindset of the pope toward the relationship of faith and reason early in his pontificate can be gleaned from an encyclical <em>Qui Pluribus</em>, issued November 9, 1846. Here Pius had written:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>For although faith is above reason, no real disagreement or opposition can ever be found between them; this is because both of them come from the same greatest source of unchanging and eternal truth, God. They give such reciprocal help to each other that true reason shows, maintains, and protects the truth of the faith, while faith frees reason from all errors and wondrously enlightens, strengthens and perfects reason with the knowledge of divine matters.</em><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn18" name="_ftnref18" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup><em>[18]</em></sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Efforts to protect churchly intellectual prerogatives from incursions of modern thought and the investigative techniques just then under development in universities now may seem like so much obscurantism. Yet at the time <em>The Syllabus </em>was written, the Papal States were under siege, so a siege mentality on the part of the pope is at least somewhat understandable, even if not wholly excusable, within his historical setting. While the language of the <em>Syllabus </em>is quite sweeping on the surface, E. E. Y. Hales has argued that Error 80, which seemed to deride the progress of civilization itself, had as its target “the Piedmontese government’s idea of what constituted progress and civilization with which the pope declined to come to terms.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn19" name="_ftnref19" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[19]</sup></a> Richard J. Evans has noted the following developments in the early 1860s: the widespread popularity of incorporating the Papal States into the Kingdom of Italy, a government that dissolved some 38,000 separate churchly organizations and took over their finances. Further, seminarians were now subject to forcible military service. Marriage was taken from clerical control and placed firmly under civil jurisdiction. During the revolution a few years earlier, officials of the Roman Republic had gone to many of Rome’s monasteries and convents, telling the religious inhabitants that they could now break their religious vows. Few, if any, had taken them up on the offer.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn20" name="_ftnref20" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[20]</sup></a> Arrests of many bishops and cardinals continued to occur in the 1860s. Evans concludes: “The alienation of Catholic institutions from those of the Kingdom of Italy remained deep.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[21]</sup></a> After the taking of the Vatican by the new King, the pope lashed out again in the encyclical <em>Respicientes</em> of November 1, 1870. He took pains to insist that the security of the religious prerogatives rested, for the papal office, on his unfettered authority in the temporal realm of the Papal States. “We protest before God and the whole Catholic world that while detained in such captivity, we are unable to exercise our supreme pastoral authority safely, expediently, and freely.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn22" name="_ftnref22" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[22]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Victor Emmanuel, still under excommunication, died in 1878; Pio Nono passed just four months later. The pope had requested to be buried outside of Rome at one of his favorite Basilicas. En route, hundreds of pro-revolutionary protesters tried to seize his casket and cast it into the Tiber River, yet were narrowly prevented from doing so by the police escort on hand.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[23]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">Science and Progress</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The <em>Syllabus of Errors </em>is a very poor guide for anyone trying to generalize about Catholic attitudes toward modern science. Doubtless there were episodes that have occasioned friction in that long history, a fact no one would deny. Despite widespread assumptions that the Galileo Affair, for example, was merely typical of Catholic attitudes toward science, the reality of the church’s patronage of scientific endeavors was actually quite positive. Many of the religious orders founded after the Council of Trent engaged in cutting-edge scientific research. Jesuits in Rome as well as Germany studied astronomy and quietly began to show Galileo’s findings to be sound. Researches in meteorology, geography, and mathematics were carried out by Jesuits, Benedictines, and Oratorians. Experimental methods became routine, and the missionary activity of these orders added to the growing collections of flora and fauna in Europe’s museums. Learning of herbal remedies from indigenous populations enabled the missionaries to advance the cause of medicine. In the same decade as <em>The Syllabus of Errors</em>, Monk Gregor Mendel was methodically laying the biological groundwork that would later flourish as modern genetics.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn24" name="_ftnref24" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[24]</sup></a> Thus one may reasonably query if the <em>Syllabus</em> was truly representative of Catholic attitudes toward science generally, or represented a more specified and contextual aberration from a generally open-minded norm.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The matter of science came up more than once in the catalogue of condemned propositions, though the specific form of science the Vatican saw as problematic remained quite vague. Error 13 reads: “The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences.” The blunt wording here could give the impression that Pius IX perceived theology as incapable of making progress, or of becoming more scientifically exacting, or of responding to the needs of the times. Yet two decades earlier, the most famous British convert to Roman Catholicism, John Henry Newman, had published his <em>Essay on the Development of Doctrine</em>. He had written, “Again, if Christianity be a universal religion, suited not to one locality or period, but to all times and places, it cannot but vary in its relations and dealings toward the world around it, that is, it will develop.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn25" name="_ftnref25" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[25]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>It would be up to Pius IX’s successor, Pope Leo XIII, to chart a more positive and engaging way forward in the effort to re-energize and seek to utilize medieval thought categories in the modern world, a development known as Neo-Thomism.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn26" name="_ftnref26" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[26]</sup></a> In an essay just prior to the publication of the <em>Syllabus</em>, liberal Catholic scholar Lord Acton sought to explain the importance of scientific thinking. He noted that the Catholic is subject to the Church’s correction when that individual contravenes truth. Basic doctrines are at the core of the faith and must be protected, such as “the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the punishment of sin.” Such must be explained by the church over time via her development of systematic doctrine. This core is not susceptible of being “destroyed by the progress of knowledge, the last defined dogma no more than the first, no more than the existence of God, or the immortality of the thinking being.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn27" name="_ftnref27" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[27]</sup></a> Around such core beliefs forms, over time, a shell of opinions. This develops “ . . . by its contact with human science or philosophy, as a coating of oxide forms round a mass of metal when it comes in contact with the shifting atmosphere.”</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>For Acton, the church must accommodate modernity or “put herself in harmony with existing ideas.” This causes difficulty in separating the two, however, “as opinion changes, principles become developed, and as habits alter, one element of the amalgam is constantly losing its vitality, and the true dogma is left in an unnatural union with exploded opinion.” Then Acton set forth the argument that doubtless raised conservative hackles amongst his traditional Catholic readers: “From time to time a very extensive revision is required, hateful to conservative habits and feelings; a crisis occurs, and a new alliance has to be formed between religion and knowledge, between the Church and society.” Such, for Acton, is actually a gain because it represents “a victory of truth over error, of science over opinion.” Perhaps with too much optimism, Acton rhapsodized: “It is a change not to be deplored but to be accepted with joy.” For Acton the danger of progress is merely apparent, to disappear when Catholics “break the bonds of human tradition, and associate themselves with the progress of their times.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn28" name="_ftnref28" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[28]</sup></a> To conservative ears, Acton’s distinguishing of core and husk in matters of doctrine sounded very like the liberal Protestant approach of Schleiermacher half a century earlier. If the <em>Syllabus </em>was soon to become something of a broadsword rather than a scalpel in confronting error, Acton’s liberalism stood at the opposite extreme, giving little mechanism for identify any error that might enter under the guise of mere benevolent progress.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>One more alleged error in the syllabus focused on science, this time in the context of the debates over public vs. parochial education that roiled both Europe and America during this period. Error 47 regarding education reads:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power at the pleasure of the rulers, and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age.</em><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn29" name="_ftnref29" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup><em>[29]</em></sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The full force of the pope’s wrath on this point can be discerned by investigating the larger encyclical, <em>Quanta Cura, </em>which clarifies the objections that would distill within Error 47. The pope’s warnings against educational innovation waxed hot in the following passage:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>By which impious opinions and machinations these most deceitful men chiefly aim at this result, viz., that the salutary teaching and influence of the Catholic Church may be entirely banished from the instruction and education of youth, and that the tender and flexible minds of young men may be infected and depraved by every most pernicious error and vice. For all who have endeavored to throw into confusion things both sacred and secular, and to subvert the right order of society, and to abolish all rights, human and divine, have always (as we above hinted) devoted all their nefarious schemes, devices and efforts, to deceiving and depraving incautious youth and have placed all their hope in its corruption.<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn30" name="_ftnref30" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[30]</sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Such statements appeared to presume extreme ill-will and evil intent on the part of secular educators across Europe. Frank Coppa has observed that it was the pope’s trammeling of such social “errors” that garnered the most severe pushback from the public and the press of that historic moment. “There was resentment,” he writes, “of the condemnation of the notion that public schools should be freed of all ecclesiastical authority.” The rhetoric of the document was quite sweeping, “and the condemnations seemed directed against the principles worldwide and for all time.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn31" name="_ftnref31" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[31]</sup></a> Protestant essayist Joseph S. Van Dyke wrote about the <em>Syllabus</em> in an especially scathing manner:</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>With characteristic impudence they claim for the Pope the right of abrogating civil law, of enforcing obedience to Catholic dogmas, of employing corporal punishment, and even of compelling princes to execute civil penalties for ecclesiastical offenses. They insist, in language not to be mistaken, that to Holy Mother belongs the exclusive right to educate the young, that priests are not subject to civil governments, that the Pope rules, jure divino, in temporal things, that the right to solemnize marriage is the exclusive possession of the priesthood, that Catholicism is the only system of faith entitled to man’s suffrage, and, accordingly, that Protestant worship ought not to be tolerated, and where it can be suppressed, as in New Granada and in Rome, must be.</em><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn32" name="_ftnref32" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup><em>[32]</em></sup></a></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Such debates over the seamless integration of matters political, educational, and religious may strike the 21<sup>st</sup>-century reader as odd, but for a 19<sup>th</sup>-century audience, such spheres were not neatly separated, albeit in the midst of a painful process of fracturing. McCool clarifies the situation by noting: “The theological controversies of the nineteenth century cannot be divorced from the Church-state tensions of the period.” Furthermore, such debates also impinged on “the relations between faith and reason.” Such social debates coalesced as “aspects of the one basic problem concerning the relation between grace and nature.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn33" name="_ftnref33" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[33]</sup></a> In Catholic thought in this era, nature must be, of its very essence, subservient to grace, even if nature carries its own integral status as a result of its created <em>telos</em>.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>For all the broadening of the scope of the <em>Syllabus of Errors</em>, some Catholic scholars have been at pains to qualify and constrain some features of the document, by historical contextualization and careful attention to its original Latin wording or to its originating source materials. In commenting on the international stir the <em>Syllabus </em>caused, Franciscan historian Damian McElrath has urged that: “Not only was the positive teaching in many cases difficult to determine, but the historical context for the errors was hardly known in many countries outside of Italy.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn34" name="_ftnref34" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[34]</sup></a> Even an early-twentieth-century Jesuit historian who lauded the <em>Syllabus</em> against its liberal detractors acknowledged that “the <em>Syllabus </em>was an emergency measure intended to meet the attacks of the moment,” and did not even partake of the same authority as <em>Quanta Cura</em>, the encyclical to which it was “attached quite accidentally to facilitate distribution.”<a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn35" name="_ftnref35" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><sup>[35]</sup></a> Such efforts at qualification by supporters of Pius IX serve as evidence of their perception of a need for damage control, and may hint at some latent embarrassment at the document.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>A more recent and more critical assessment is taken by Donald O’Leary, in his fine work surveying the history of science in its encounter with Catholicism. He identifies two public speeches that tipped the scales at the Vatican toward the publication of the <em>Syllabus, </em>elements of which had been in development since 1852. The first was The Munich Congress of September 1863, and specifically liberal theologian Ignaz von Döllinger’s (1799-1890) so-called Munich Brief, which called for freedoms in the areas of science, history, and philosophy. The pope’s responses to the gathering at Munich caused the suspension of the Congress from its planned annual occurrence. The second speech to which the pope and his assistants objected was that of French liberal thinker Charles Forbes René Montalembert (1810-1870). In his speech to a Congress of Catholics in Belgium, the Count urged the Vatican to come to an agreement with the modern state, and to pursue religious toleration. O’Leary concludes: “The papacy felt compelled to reassert its authority within the church and to dispel any doubts about its attitudes on a broad range of issues.”<sup><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftn36" name="_ftnref36" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[36]</a></sup> This was the proximate context prompting the publication of <em>The Syllabus of Errors.</em></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">Conclusion</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Pope Pius IX observed dramatic changes in modern assessments of science and religion in a short span of time. Such themes got caught up in episodes of violent confrontation with opponents both ideological and political, during an era when Europe was convulsed with revolutions. Educational experimentalism along with a swift-paced secularization favored even by some liberal churchmen of great influence created the perfect storm wherein the <em>Syllabus of Errors</em> offered a shouted warning. Add to this the realization that the careful editing of materials and presentation of the issues to the pontiff by the Curia sometimes occurred in a reactionary manner. The combination of these factors must be taken together to form a composite life situation for an influential document such as this. It is difficult from this cultural and chronological distance to perceive such developments as did Pius IX. Historical consciousness means at least making a partial effort to do so.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><strong><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia;">Notes</span></strong></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[1]</a> Ultramontane, “over the mountains” meaning beyond the Alps from the perspective of most of Europe; became a term of art, and sometimes a pejorative, in the modern era. It represents an extreme version of the absolute authority of the pope, both in temporal and spiritual matters. One Jesuit scholar labels this more clearly as “the papalist standpoint,” and describes it thus: “The papalist standpoint does not recognize as legitimate any questions about the participation of the members of the Church, including the entire episcopate, in the making of decisions about policy or doctrine. The instinctive tendency of this view is to perceive any suggestion about involvement of the community as infringement on the Power, as some kind of attempt—overt or devious—to evade or depreciate the Power. For this reason the suggestion is rejected out of hand as being self-evidently wrong.” Richard F. Costigan, <em>The Consensus of the Church and Papal Infallibility: A Study in the Background of Vatican I </em>(Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2005), 187.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[2]</a> R. Aubert, “Pius IX, Pope, BL.” In <em>New Catholic Encyclopedia, </em>2<sup>nd</sup> ed. (New York: Thomson Gale, 2003), 11: 384; Eamon Duffy, <em>Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes </em>(New Haven, CT: 1997), 222.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[3]</a> Richard P. McBrien, <em>Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II </em>(San Francisco: HarperSanfrancisco, 1997), 344-5; Thomas Bokenkotter, <em>A Concise History of the Catholic Church, </em>Rev. ed. (New York: Doubleday, 1990), 272.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[4]</a> Roger Aubert, J. Beckman, P. Corish, and R. Lill, <em>The Church in the Age of Liberalism, </em>trans. Peter Becker, History of the Church, Vol, 8, ed. H. Jedin and J. Dolan, (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 84.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[5]</a> David L. Kertzer, <em>The Pope who Would be King: The Exile of Pius IX and the Emergence of Modern Europe </em>(New York: Random House, 2018), 153. This book is an indispensable guide to the intrigues and shifting alliances that emerged in the wake of the pope’s departure from Rome and the effort of several nations to return him safely.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[6]</a> Mike Rapport, <em>1848: Year of Revolution </em>(New York: Basic, 2008), 350.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[7]</a> Kertzer, 292.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[8]</a> McBrien, 345; Duffy, 223.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[9]</a> Frank J. Coppa, <em>Pope Pius IX: Crusader in a Secular Age, </em>Twayne’s World Leaders Series 81 (Boston, MA: Twayne, 1979), 135.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[10]</a> Norman Davies, <em>Europe: A History </em>(New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 824.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[11]</a> Denis Mack Smith, <em>Italy and its Monarchy </em>(New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989), 7.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[12]</a> Kertzer, 342-4.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[13]</a> Duffy, 224.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[14]</a> Errors 11, 12, and 13 seem especially pointed at the notions of a prominent liberal German theologian. See Thomas Albert Howard, <em>The Pope and the Professor: Pius IX, Ignaz von Döllinger, and the Quandary of the Modern Age </em>(New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 111-12.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[15]</a> <em>The Syllabus of Errors,</em> Papal Encyclicals Online, at URL: <a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9syll.htm" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9syll.htm</a>. Accessed 14 May, 2019.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[16]</a> Ibid. Howard, 106, quotes the position of Döllinger at the Congress of Catholic Scholars held in Munich, September, 1863, namely: “The faults of science must be met with the arms of science, for the Church cannot exist without a progressive theology.” He held that within theology a basic paradox obtains, namely, that only through error can truth finally be found. His address, not surprisingly, was met by outrage from the Roman or ultramontane parties on hand or soon apprised of the paper, many of whom were already suspicious of the Munich theologian. In 1869, Pius derided him as “The Pope of the Germans,” given his resistance to the looming push toward a declaration of papal infallibility; cf. 138. Eight days before the council began, Döllinger’s book <em>The Pope and the Council</em>, was placed on the Index of prohibited books. When he later refused to bend the knee to the dogma of infallibility, he was excommunicated April 17, 1871, cf. 163.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[17]</a> Howard, 83-4. Frohschammer was excommunicated by Pio Nono in 1871.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[18]</a> Claudia Carlen, ed., <em>The Papal Encyclicals: 1740-1878, </em>Vol. 1 (Wilmington, NC: McGrath, 1981), 278.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[19]</a> E. E. Y. Hales, <em>Pio Nono: A Study in European Politics and Religion in the Nineteenth Century </em>(New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1954), 258.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[20]</a> Kertzer, 196.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[21]</a> Richard J. Evans, <em>The Pursuit of Power: Europe 1815-1914</em> (New York: Viking, 2016), 463.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[22]</a> Carlen, 396. For a helpful analysis contrasting Catholic and Protestant understandings of authority that emerged in the late 19<sup>th</sup> century see Brian Sudlow, <em>Catholic Literature and Secularization in France and England, 1880-1914 </em> (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2011), 192-214.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[23]</a> Kertzer, 344-5.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref24" name="_ftn24" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[24]</a> Steven J. Harris, “Roman Catholicism since Trent,” in <em>Science and Religion: A Historical Introduction, </em>ed. Gary B. Ferngren (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002), 250-253; cf. Paula Findlen, <em>Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy </em>(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 155-93.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref25" name="_ftn25" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[25]</a> John Henry Newman, <em>An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine</em> (London: W. Blanchard and Sons, 1845), 96. Owen Chadwick writes: “The idea of development was the most important single idea which Newman contributed to the thought of the Christian Church.” Owen Chadwick, <em>Newman, </em>(New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), 48.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref26" name="_ftn26" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[26]</a> See Gerald A. McCool, <em>Catholic Theology in the Nineteenth Century: The Quest for a Unitary Method </em>(New York: Seabury, 1977), 226-36 cf. Neil Ormerod, <em>Faith and Reason: The Possibility of a Christian Philosophy</em> (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2017), 15-20.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref27" name="_ftn27" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[27]</a> Lord Acton, “Ultramontanism,” in <em>Essays in the Liberal Interpretation of History: Selected Papers</em>, ed. William H. McNeill (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1967), 210. Plenty of people would soon undertake to undermine the existence of the soul in the name of scientific progress, <em>contra </em>Acton’s optimistic take on it.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref28" name="_ftn28" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[28]</a> Ibid., 210-11.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref29" name="_ftn29" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[29]</a> <em>Syllabus of Errors.</em></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref30" name="_ftn30" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[30]</a> <em>Quanta Cura, </em>Papal Encyclicals Online, Par. 4, at URL: <a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9quanta.htm" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9quanta.htm</a>, accessed 14 May, 2019.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref31" name="_ftn31" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[31]</a> Coppa, 147.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref32" name="_ftn32" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[32]</a> Joseph S. Van Dyke, <em>Popery: The Foe of the Church and of the Republic </em>(Philadelphia, PA: P. W. Ziegler, 1871), 119-20.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref33" name="_ftn33" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[33]</a> McCool, 27.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref34" name="_ftn34" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[34]</a> Damian McElrath, <em>The </em>Syllabus <em>of Pius IX: Some Reactions in England </em>(Louvain: Publications Universitaires De Louvain, 1964), 323.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref35" name="_ftn35" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[35]</a> Raymond Corrigan, <em>The Church in the Nineteenth Century </em>(Milwaukee, WI: Bruce, 1938), 176.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/#_ftnref36" name="_ftn36" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">[36]</a> Don O’Leary, <em>Roman Catholicism and Modern Science: A History </em>(New York: Continuum, 2006), 48-51.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/notes-on-pope-pius-ix-and-science-in-light-of-the-syllabus-of-errors/">Read more</a> - Soiurce: https://voegelinview.com</b></span></p></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-51274958881927634782022-01-04T06:12:00.003-08:002022-01-04T06:12:38.749-08:00Isn’t action essential for holiness—especially repetitive action, like regularly taking the sacraments and doing a daily office?<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: x-large; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">In praise of habit</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Micah Mattix <micah@thespectator.com></b></div><span class="D_F ab_CI" style="align-items: flex-start; background-color: white; color: #1d2228; display: flex; font-family: YahooSans, "Helvetica Neue", "Segoe UI", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"></span><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><div><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></b></div>We have the kids home for Christmas—a son back from college in South Carolina, a daughter from Germany, a daughter and son-in-law from British Columbia for a three-week visit, and our youngest, who has been with us all year but who is as happy as a peach in summer to have her siblings home. We’re happy, too.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Yesterday morning we were reading around the fire and started chatting about pastors and the emphasis in the Protestant church on feelings and niche theology. It is sometimes held that if one feels a certain way or espouses certain esoteric ideas, then one is a “mature” Christian. This, of course, is great for Christian publishers and pastors, who produce books and create experiences that promise to lead people to the holy land of Christian maturity, where a select few live with a sense of satisfying superiority. Gnosticism is alive and well.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">But isn’t action essential for holiness—especially repetitive action, like regularly taking the sacraments and doing a daily office? It’s harder (though not impossible) to build a marketable brand on these things, which is perhaps why there are so few celebrity pastors in churches that emphasize routine.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">I mention all of this because one of the first things I read this morning was Meghan O’Gieblyn’s excellent essay in Harper’s </span><a href="https://spectator.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=c825ea2e83&id=5e6ea041e5&e=e57f8ac6b3" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">on routine</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">:</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">“Of all the attempts to pinpoint the origin of modernity—an exercise of which modernity never tires—my favorite begins with medieval monks. According to this account, it was the Benedictines who came up with the idea that it was possible to do the same thing, at the same time, every day. Although time was still widely regarded as fluid and coterminous with eternity, the monastery was governed by the rhythms of that most modern instrument: the clock. The monks rose together, ate together, and prayed together, starting and stopping each task at the appointed canonical hour. In time, their obsession with order seeped into the world at large. The tradesmen and merchants in town heard the monastery bells ring out eight times a day and began to synchronize their daily tasks to their rhythm. The butcher picked up his cleaver at Prime and set it down for lunch at None. Clerks hustled to finish their work by Vespers. Time became currency, something that could be spent or saved, and people increasingly turned to machines to make life more efficient. By the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, the religious impulse behind these regimens had been long forgotten. The monastery gave way to the factory. Ritual dissolved into routine.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">“This is, at any rate, the story that Lewis Mumford tells in his 1934 book Technics and Civilization, which argues that monasteries ‘helped to give human enterprise the regular collective beat and rhythm of the machine.’ Contemporary medievalists have come to doubt this tidy account, but I have always liked the picture it paints, as though the life of that era were an enormous astronomical clock with its automaton figures (the friar, the cobbler, the weaver) clicking along their tracks to the same relentless metronome. I’ve thought of it more than once while plodding along my own daily course, rising at six to prepare the same breakfast every morning (oatmeal, coffee), leaving at seven to embark on the route I have walked for the past ten years, one that winds around the lake and is timed precisely (fifty minutes) so that I can sit down at my desk by eight. I work from home, so I have no co-workers or time card to register my punctuality—though I suppose you could look at my browsing history, which bears the record of a life so deeply routinized that even my screen time falls into a discernible pattern: the email log-in at the top of each hour, the thirty minutes allotted to social media during lunch.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">“Repetition is a component of all ascetic traditions, and I like to think that my own habits constitute something like a spiritual discipline. My nature bends toward listlessness and disorder. Resolving to do the same thing each day, at the same time, has given my life a center, insulating me from the siren song of novelty and distraction that has caused me so much unhappiness in the past. I live a monotonous life, which is not to say a tedious one. (I believe, with Rilke, that those who find life dull are not poet enough to call forth its riches.) And I imagine that these tightly circumscribed days are radiating, with each turn of the circle, into widening arcs, amounting to a life whose ties are deeper, whose direction is more certain.”</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">She goes on to write, however, that “what I’ve been describing as a spiritual discipline bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the cruder ethos of ‘life hacking,’” which renews her “fundamental ambivalence about habit, which seems to belong, as Mumford’s theory suggests, to that uncertain territory between the monastery and the machine.” Her question is: “Is it possible in our age of advanced technology to recall the spiritual dimension of repetition? Or has it been conclusively subsumed into the deadening drumbeat of modern life?” </span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Do </span><a href="https://spectator.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=c825ea2e83&id=9fba2111f0&e=e57f8ac6b3" style="font-family: georgia;">read the whole thing</a><span style="font-family: georgia;">. Source: https://harpers.org</span></span></b></div></b><br />prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-60835871847958076192022-01-04T05:51:00.002-08:002022-01-04T05:51:51.486-08:00God, Philosophy, Universities, a brief history of Catholic philosophy<p></p><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/god-philosophy-universities-a-selective-history-of-the-catholic-philosophical-tradition/" style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">God, Philosophy, Universities. </span></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/god-philosophy-universities-a-selective-history-of-the-catholic-philosophical-tradition/" style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">A Selective History of the Catholic Philosophical Tradition</span></a><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">by </span><a href="https://voegelinview.com/?author=1206" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Lee Trepanier</a></div><br /><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2228; font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; width: 560px;"><tbody><tr><td style="word-break: normal;"><br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; color: #888888; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL0KiCqxczTWUmIUt68AW27d75mnAwjGs63XUhCh4JXMEvBl5Bdtg71y3I2fyrdQv2KyVKjkN0YkkhdwTH6B2BDKDdZwkSMOjySaY2tEfZHbKpQevYnWpNLBjXYg-EQJaQHGXgSBpI8T9t/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="499" data-original-width="333" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL0KiCqxczTWUmIUt68AW27d75mnAwjGs63XUhCh4JXMEvBl5Bdtg71y3I2fyrdQv2KyVKjkN0YkkhdwTH6B2BDKDdZwkSMOjySaY2tEfZHbKpQevYnWpNLBjXYg-EQJaQHGXgSBpI8T9t/" width="160" /></a></div><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-size: small;"><b><br /></b></span></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="yiv5347429815post-content" style="background-color: white; direction: ltr; margin-top: 1em; max-width: 560px;"><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/God-Philosophy-Universities-Selective-Philosophical-ebook/dp/B004WD9J7G" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><em>God, Philosophy, Universities. A Selective History of the Catholic Philosophical Tradition</em>.</a> Alasdair MacIntyre. </span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009.</span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>God, Philosophy, Universities </em>traces the idea of God through different philosophers’ engagement on this question in the context of the university. Aimed at advanced undergraduate and first-year graduate students, this book divides the topics into </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>1) God, philosophy, and the university; </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>2) Augustine, Boethius, Islamic, and the Catholic philosophical tradition; </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>3) Aquinas; </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>4) Scholasticism to Descartes, Pascal, and Arnauld; and </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>5) modernity with Newman, <em>Fides et Ratio</em>, and other contemporary considerations of the university, philosophy, and God. </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>While adopting a historical approach to the subject, MacIntyre provides insight and illumination about these subjects that will be of interest to Catholic and non-Catholic readers alike.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In the first section, MacIntyre spells out the problems of understanding God as ones of evil (theodicy), the independence of human beings (free will), and how does one speak meaningfully about God. He also discusses the problem of philosophy as being practice by non-philosophers, which should be encouraged but observed with caution. He also asks whether philosophy should be directed towards the common good and what should be the parameters of agreement and disagreement. To understand God, according to MacIntyre, philosophy is required, along with faith, with the university being the most suitable place for this to take palce. The problem with the modern university is that knowledge has become specialized and fragmented, including philosophy, and therefore our understanding of God is siloed in school.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In his examination of the Hellenistic philosophy and early Christian and Islamic thinkers, MacIntyre points out that philosophical inquiry by itself cannot provide us with an adequate knowledge of God or ourselves. Hence, the need for faith. As Augustine, Boethius, and Anselm show, there is no chain of philosophical reasoning or method of philosophical inquiry through which we can arrive at the truths of faith as conclusions. But once by faith we have acknowledged those truths, we are able to understand why there is good reason to acknowledge them.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Philosophy also is useful when Christians encounter non-Christian traditions and texts, whether Greek, Jewish, or Islamic, and this training prepares the Christian for a range of responses in these encounters. Aquinas is the model of this Christian response with his qualified acceptance of Aristotelianism in the name of Christianity. MacIntyre makes the point that Aquinas’ writing was addressed to his own students and therefore we should understand Aquinas communicating to the plain person of his time which took place in the university. It is also important to note that MacIntyre describes both Scotus and Ockham, two philosophers who today are sometimes accused of ushering in modernity, as Catholic thinkers whose “work has to be integral to any adequate conception of the Catholic philosophical tradition” (101). In other words, Scotus and Ockham are not a rejection of the Catholic tradition of philosophy but are essential to it and consequently should be studied accordingly.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The movement from scholasticism to skepticism culminated in Descartes’ writing of <em>Cogito ergo sum</em> and the success of modern science that depends upon a foundation immune to skeptical doubt. However, MacIntyre argues this skepticism should not necessarily matter to us as much as it mattered to Descartes, for “skepticism does not require an answer” (117). All knowledge, including scientific knowledge, is fallible and needs to be revised and given updated reasons. Thus, the skeptical challenge is a phantom challenge which is why it ceased to have an influence within the Catholic tradition.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In the modern period, MacIntyre focuses on Newman and <em>Fides et Ratio</em>. For Newman, the task of philosophy was to understand what kind of claims can be justified within each particular science and how these claims relate to one another. The purpose of the university is to cultivate good moral character, which is only possible if the university community is attentive to the moral teaching of the Catholic Church. Theology and philosophy therefore should be at the center of the university, integrating knowledge across disciplines.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In <em>Fides et Ratio</em>, MacIntyre observes that the encyclical opens with the observation that people ask questions not as philosophers but as plain persons. It also argues that, while philosophy and theology are intertwined with each other, philosophy is an autonomous secular enterprise in the search of the truth. Thus, those in the Church have a duty to call attention to the errors of philosophy when it strands from its teachings.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The problem confronting the contemporary university is that any sense for inquiry among disciplines and that disciplines contribute to a shared inquiry is entirely absent. Catholic universities imitating prestigious secular university only exacerbates this problem in higher education. MacIntyre calls for Catholic philosophers to reclaim their role in leading the university to a common identity which translates into rejecting what Harvard, Yale, and Stanford do. Instead of looking outwards, Catholic universities need to reflect inward on their tradition to discover what makes them distinct from the hundreds of other schools out there.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/god-philosophy-universities-a-selective-history-of-the-catholic-philosophical-tradition/">Read more</a> - Source: <a href="https://voegelinview.com/god-philosophy-universities-a-selective-history-of-the-catholic-philosophical-tradition/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="background-color: #efefef; outline-color: var(--thin-outline-color); outline-style: dotted; outline-width: 0px !important;" target="_blank">https://voegelinview.com</a></b></span></p></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-22363000601874971662022-01-04T05:41:00.002-08:002022-01-04T05:41:28.860-08:00Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekhov: bringing together the disciplines of economics and literature in conversation with each other ...<p><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 560px;"><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1" style="word-break: normal;"><h2 class="yiv3512896304post-title" style="margin: 0px;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/russias-capitalist-realism/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" style="outline-color: var(--thin-outline-color); outline-style: dotted; outline-width: 0px !important; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Russia’s Capitalist Realism</span></a></h2><div><br /></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>by <a href="https://voegelinview.com/?author=1206" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" target="_blank">Lee Trepanier</a><br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPUok7FX1XMdZFgeSH_OTKHrI8d5s2l_gANi8Vbmwl_UdXE3CUNAR7qBUfvYspQ9kLs1p-l12Fyp91dmBoq9bF85mXRiiG6it0lqP-phvmj1pzsIHVODvJ95ROOf2w3PiuUrHGSKO9aono/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="499" data-original-width="329" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPUok7FX1XMdZFgeSH_OTKHrI8d5s2l_gANi8Vbmwl_UdXE3CUNAR7qBUfvYspQ9kLs1p-l12Fyp91dmBoq9bF85mXRiiG6it0lqP-phvmj1pzsIHVODvJ95ROOf2w3PiuUrHGSKO9aono/" width="158" /></a></div><br /><br /></b></span></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="yiv3512896304post-content" style="background-color: white; direction: ltr; margin-top: 1em; max-width: 560px;"><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Russias-Capitalist-Realism-Dostoevsky-Literature/dp/0810142481" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" target="_blank"><em>Russia’s Capitalist Realism. Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, and Chekhov</em></a><em>. </em></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Vadim Shneyder. </span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2021.</span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>Russia’s Capitalist Realism </em>breaks new grounds in the studies of nineteenth-century Russian literature by illustrating the way economics is portrayed in these works. By examining these economic factors, we gain new insights into Russia’s literature multifaceted response to a whole complex of cultural, economic, and political changes from the Great Reforms of Alexander II (1861-74) to the end of the nineteenth century. Russian literature, particularly the novel, was a key site for public discourse about this period of transition.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In the decades following the emancipation of serfs in 1861, million of peasants found seasonal work in factories; railroads were financed with foreign capital and crisscrossed European Russia; and St. Petersburg and Moscow became some of the largest metropolises in Europe. While these economic changes lagged western Europe, they nonetheless had a decisive impact on Russian politics and culture. Russian realist writers were acutely concerned with Russia’s tumultuous entry into modernity and focused as much as the economic transformations in the country as much as the political and cultural changes.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>However, the early reception of Russian realist literature in the West generally disregarded this context of lively economic debate in nineteenth-century Russia and thus gave the impression that Russian realism, the literary movement that sought to depict reality as it truly exists, was uninterested in economic and material questions. Shneyder reviews how the economic elements portrayed in Dostoevsky’s <em>The Gambler </em>are ignored by western literary critics and authors, like Virginia Woolf. This is all more puzzling given that the very title indicates the economic and material concerns that the novel will explore.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Starting with Gogol’s <em>Dead Souls</em>, Shneyder provides the historical and literary context of nineteenth-century Russian literature wrestling with economic issues as Russia embarked on modernization. Well-known works like <em>Oblomov </em>and lesser well-known, such as <em>A Contemporary Idyll</em>, are brought into conversation, setting up the analysis of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekhov in the following chapters. In the first chapter, Shneyder examines the mills and factories that appear between the 1850s and 1890s as symbols of a disorienting modernity in contrast to the harmonious landscape of the countryside. Looking at the works of Gogol, Turgenev, Reshetnikov, Kuprin, and others, Shneyder shows how the mills and factories are literary representations of both the terror and boredom to the nineteenth-century Russian public.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In chapter two, Shneyder examines how economics of <em>Anna Karenina</em> link the stories of Anna and Levin, the two characters were there is almost no diegetic connection between them. Shneyder argues persuasively that Anna’s relentless drive forward resembles the economic model of industrialization while Levin’s theories of agriculture preserve the natural rhythms of the seasons and countryside. This is insightful analysis of the novel brings together the two narratives of Anna and Levin that has bedeviled critics since the publication of the novel.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Shneyder then moves to Dostoevsky’s <em>The Idiot </em>where he argues that Myshkin, contrary to the received interpretation as an isolated and otherworldly figure, is embedded in a money economy undergoing an uneven transition to capitalism. In the novel there emerges two divergent conceptions of money: vivid merchants (Rogozhin and Myshkin as related through his mother) and faceless capitalists (Totsky and Epanchin). Whereas the merchants and their money are dramatic and interesting, the capitalists and their money is invisible. At the end of the novel, when the capitalists have vanquished the merchants, the novel enters a new age of invisibly circulating capital “in which the kind of events that could support novelistic narration have become impossible” (29).</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Money again is the theme of Shneyder’s analysis of <em>The Brothers Karamazov </em>in chapter four. Money is ubiquitous throughout the novel with a price put on everything. The figure of 3,000 rubles introduces the possibility of equivalence among a diverse selection of people, relationships, and things. However, Shneyder argues that money turns out to be “heterogeneous,” unequal to itself, and thus incapable of quantifying value.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>In his chapter about Chekhov, Shneyder explores how Chekhov portrays capitalists into his stories, being reticent regarding the economic transformation that is so central to many of his characters. Shneyder attributes this silence to the short story genre which seeks to provide a perspective of how to understand modernity, as opposed to the novel which offers an entire worldview. What we find in Chekhov’s stories is the sense of alienation that capitalists feel as they superseded older social groups in Russia.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><em>Russia’s Capitalist Realism </em>is a brilliant analysis of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekhov and provides a fresh and innovative way to analyze their writings. It brings together the disciplines of economics and literature in conversation with each other and offer new insights into old texts. As we in the West are undergoing on our transition to a new type of virtual economy, <em>Russia’s Capitalist Realism </em>can help us understand some of the problems and possibilities that we currently confront.</b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p style="direction: ltr; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://voegelinview.com/russias-capitalist-realism/">Read more</a> : Source: https://voegelinview.com</b></span></p></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-11801723508669288532022-01-04T04:42:00.005-08:002022-01-04T04:42:54.226-08:00The Church must do the hard, patient work of building up a culture where there is none<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>Tradition is No Dead Thing</b></span></span></p><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>by Anthony Esolen</b></span></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></span></div><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Aeneas, in exile from Troy, that queen of Asia which the Greeks have burnt to the ground</span>, has come to Italy to settle his refugee people. But meeting with hostility from an alliance of the natives there, he seeks and finds his own allies, the Arcadians, who dwell on the site that will become Rome. Their king, Evander—the name means </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">good man</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">—has promised to assist him. Not the least of his motives is that a chieftain of cruel impiety, Mezentius, is among Aeneas’ opponents. Here Evander describes the most remarkably inhuman thing that Mezentius does:</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">How shall I relate the carnage beyond telling,</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Beastly crimes this tyrant carried out?</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Requite them, gods, on his own head and on</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">His children. He would even couple carcasses</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">With living bodies as a form of torture.</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Hand to hand and face to face, he made them</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Suffer corruption, oozing gore and slime</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">In that wretched embrace, and a slow death.</i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;" /></i><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">(translation by Robert Fitzgerald)</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">It appears to me that in the present conflicts within the Church</span>, which have their analogues elsewhere—in schools and colleges, in the arts, in many a people’s understanding of their own history, and especially in secular politics—we are fighting, without perhaps being aware of it, over a question of fact. Let us all agree that it is evil to bind a living person to a dead thing, to be infected by the corpse, and to die. The question is, </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">what is that dead thing?</i></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The modernist response is that the dead thing is the past. Literary critics have a term for people who love traditional forms of art and the worlds they recall to mind: </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">necrophiliacs. </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The presumption is always against tradition, as if that noun came with inevitable adjectives: </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">hide-bound, closed-minded, antiquated, musty, anachronistic, stolid, blind</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. </span></b></span></p><div class="1PXPpxxj" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><ins class="CANBMDDisplayAD CANDisplayAdDisplayed" data-bmd-ad-unit="31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F" id="BMD31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F_y49Dq1641299399194" style="display: block; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"></div></div></div></ins></div><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Marx saw the entire history of man as a struggle between the classes, as if the medieval guild was no other or no better than the sweatshops of industrial England. Feminism sees the entire history of man (with exceptions for sentimental views of favored aboriginal tribes) as the suppression of Woman by her irredeemable enemy, Man. “History is bunk,” said Henry Ford. From sea to shining sea, schools instill disdain in their students, waving away the great artists and poets of the past as “dead white males,” and thus sparing them the considerable trouble of learning how to read Chaucer and Milton.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">But what if modernism itself is the dead thing?</span> Again, we are arguing a question of </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">fact. </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The most remarkable thing about modernism as an ideology or even an emotional attitude is its destructive hatred, envy, and violence. Chairman Mao and his Red Guard battled to obliterate the “four olds”: old ideas, old culture, old customs, old habits. They steeped China in blood. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>American proponents of a “living Constitution” do not really believe that that written law says what they wish it would say. It simply does not matter what it says; and, by the abortion license, it has steeped America in blood. The old Soviet Union, reeling inconsistently between veneration of and hatred for ancient Russian culture, sent authors and artists to the gulags for being “reactionary,” for committing the dreadful crime of dragging their feet as the nation was marching forth into the glorious future.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Of course, people devoted to tradition can be bloody and warlike too. Think of the ancient Romans. Think of the Sioux and the Apaches. Think of the Zulus. But modernism is hostile at its heart. </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">It is defined by opposition, </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">and what it opposes is a deeply human thing, a natural good. Man does not live merely in time, like a tree or a dog. By his imagination and his memory, he seeks to grasp time at both ends, to transcend it. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The dreadful curse of the Old Testament is that a people’s place will know them no more. That curse is modernism’s demand. If I say, “You are graduating people with degrees in English who do not recognize the name of George Herbert,” the modernist response is to shrug and say, “So what?” or to cock the head and say, “Exactly.”</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">But there is a terrible self-contradiction here, one that many people have noted</span>. You cannot consign your forefathers to irrelevance without instructing your son to do the same to you. The blade turns against the hand. See what that implies. We have set aside polyester bell-bottom trousers in their loud colors. They are an embarrassment now. So is </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Jesus Christ, Superstar. </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Who sings that pleasantly trivial song by Soeur Sourire, beginning </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Dominique-nique-nique s’en allait tout simplement</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">? Let it go. But then, let go also of all the would-be revolutionary social understandings that come from that time. Liberation theology? Mold is growing on it. Nothing can lay claim to permanence.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Obviously, modernists themselves do not want that. The tenacity with which elderly Roman Catholics cling to the dreams of their youth, when the Second Vatican Council tried to usher the Church into what the fathers thought was the modern world, shows that they are more human than their philosophy warrants. They, too, want tradition. They, too, want culture. But modernism cannot provide it.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Again, I am arguing more from fact than from the inner contradictions of the modernist attitude. We might consider any one of the arts. Before we get to the quality of production, we must note the disappearance of entire genres of art, with nothing recognizable to take their place. In poetry, the epic, the romance, the narrative, the dramatic monologue, the ode, the epistle, and the hymn are all pretty much gone; and the difficult lessons of meter and rhyme and formal construction have not been handed down. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">What I say of poetry, those who are learned in the craft can say about architecture. We must almost be archaeologists to recover what the masons, carpenters, plasterers, metalworkers, and glaziers did a mere hundred years ago, let alone a thousand years ago. We no longer ask why we </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">do not </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">now build Grand Central Station. We ask why we </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">cannot </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">do it. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Similarly, we do not ask why the neighborhood boys do not get together with guitar, banjo, clarinet, trumpet, and drums to play music out of their heads. We hardly remember that such things ever happened. Scott Joplin was far closer to Mozart, George Gershwin was far closer to Richard Strauss, than any of them are to us now and to our largely mass-produced music with its severely limited range in genre.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Move away from the arts to the natural human things that all cultures must accomplish</span>. Here our colossal failure is like a dead beast in the yard, stinking under the sun. We have not one wholesome custom to get the boys and girls together. Our marriage rate has sunk into the cellar, even as nearly half of marriages end in divorce. People who do not venerate their fathers bring fatherless children into the world; and the boys and girls, each sex in its own way, go bad. Our children will see a hundred pornographic videos for every innocent kiss they take. That may be an underestimate.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Our churches, like our children, are few, and not innocent. The secular hope that people would be united once they gave up belief in God has been shown as the anthropological absurdity that human culture and history could have demonstrated. Man is united from above, not below. Appetites are boundless—for sex, vengeance, wealth, rank, fame, and power; but self-denial, humility, forgiveness, and divine worship allay the rage of the appetite and its frustrations, and they raise the mind to higher things, where the old saying really is true, the more the merrier.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>To say that the Church should be “acculturated” is to assume that there is a culture to begin with. There is not. There are mass habits, developed by the mass phenomena—mass schooling, mass entertainment, and mass politics, perhaps three forms of the same thing. The Church must then do the hard, patient work of building up a culture where there is none. It is what I think Pope John Paul II was getting at when he called ours a “culture of death.” To say that we should bind ourselves to this time, or rather to attitudes freeze-dried from sixty years ago, is to thwart that culture-building work. It is to bind us to a corpse.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><i>Anthony Esolen, a contributing editor at <span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Crisis</span>, is a professor and writer-in-residence at Magdalen College of the Liberal Arts. He is the author, most recently, of <span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Sex and the Unreal City</span> (Ignatius Press, 2020).</i></b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.crisismagazine.com/2022/tradition-is-no-dead-thing">Read more</a> - Source: www.crisismagazine.com</b></span></span></p>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-28677295663083254872022-01-04T04:27:00.000-08:002022-01-04T04:27:05.396-08:00Tout le monde est antifasciste, y compris les chrétiens... mais tous ceux qui sont classés comme fascistes ne le sont pas vraiment, et encore moins peuvent-ils être classés comme étant des nazis.<span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; font-weight: bold;"><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Chantal Delsol déplore « La Fin de la chrétienté »</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div></span><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Par Eric Delcroix - </span><a href="https://www.polemia.com/author/polemia-02/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">POLÉMIA</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"> </span></div><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwlTEfCqqh_6D8I1JzYefQbOFOqsUMXtS7cB7OocAe5Llrs-fBzRIbLrsn72hmbnPCU0gumrVF320F2KS_WSPZSCUosK3EqiI-Mhe_i1DHvnJ7B6BQ-wt-k8PyKNXRDUF1vs8TuT3TbOeo/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="382" data-original-width="246" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwlTEfCqqh_6D8I1JzYefQbOFOqsUMXtS7cB7OocAe5Llrs-fBzRIbLrsn72hmbnPCU0gumrVF320F2KS_WSPZSCUosK3EqiI-Mhe_i1DHvnJ7B6BQ-wt-k8PyKNXRDUF1vs8TuT3TbOeo/" width="155" /></a></div><br /><br /></div><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">La substitution révolutionnaire des normes morales</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Contrairement à Jean-Claude Michéa, avec sa prétendue neutralité axiologique du capitalisme, Chantal Delsol réfute absolument l’argument selon lequel nous assisterions à un étiolement de la norme morale. Elle constate au contraire que nous assistons à une double inversion : « inversion normative » et « inversion ontologique » (nous reviendrons sur celle-ci infra). Pour l’auteur : « L’expérience de chaque jour nous confirme que la morale n’a pas disparu avec la chute de la Chrétienté, et même que la morale envahit tout … (…) Ni la civilisation ni la morale ne s’arrêtent avec la Chrétienté. »</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Le professeur Delsol constate que les fascismes, au sens large mais national-socialisme excepté, ont été l’ultime tentative de sauver la Chrétienté, du point de vue civilisationnel, ce qu’avaient compris en leur temps Henri Massis et Charles Maurras vis-à-vis de Mussolini, Franco ou Salazar, actifs contre le « chaos nihiliste ». Chantal Delsol rappelle les mots de Spengler que se répétaient, selon Massis, les créateurs de la Phalange espagnole : « Au dernier moment, c’est toujours un peloton de soldats qui sauve la civilisation ».</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Aujourd’hui, tout le monde est antifasciste, chrétiens inclus, aussi nul n’est-il forcé de comprendre les causes de l’ « agonie ou comment s’est arrivé » … Les progressismes ont gagné, mais leur matérialisme est maintenant phagocyté par l’esprit « biblico-révolutionnaire » américain…</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">L’inversion normative et l’inversion ontologique</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">« L’humanitarisme, la morale contemporaine, est une morale entièrement tournée vers le bien-être de l’individu, sans aucune vision anthropologique. Ce qui compte, c’est le désir et le bien-être, à l’instant même. » Sous influence américaine, « … l’inversion normative est menée sous l’égide de la culpabilité, ce qui la rend violente et pleine d’amertume. » Et, écrit toujours Chantal Delsol, « à partir du milieu du XXe siècle, l’Église abandonne toute prétention à peser sur la société, et même, elle commence à avoir honte de sa domination séculaire (…) Que l’Église marche dans cette combine infernale, montre à quel point elle est soumise aux circonstances. »</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Mais tout ce formidable et irrésistible processus repose sur une « inversion philosophique. Il vaudrait mieux dire une inversion ontologique. »</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Les Lumières ont porté, à terme historique, l’invalidation dans les esprits des fondements chrétiens de l’Occident. « Les chrétiens d’aujourd’hui, affolés devant la chute de leur influence, ont tendance à prétendre que toute morale va disparaître, avec l’effacement du monothéisme. C’est méconnaître l’histoire. » En effet, si, avec l’effacement de Dieu, la morale transcendantale certes s’étiole, en revanche une nouvelle morale se développe, produite non dans le Ciel mais dans la Cité, sous l’égide de l’État. Et c’est bien ce que nous pouvons observer, avec le nouvel ordre moral anti-discriminatoire et l’esprit woke.</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Quelques réserves sur le discours de Chantal Delsol</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Il faut absolument lire la Fin de la Chrétienté. Je me permets tout de même deux critiques sur cet ouvrage marquant.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">D’une part, Chantal Delsol observe que « Les animateurs de plateaux de télévision sont les sentinelles et parfois les cerbères de la morale commune (…) Ils ont revêtu le rôle que jouaient les évêques il y a encore un demi-siècle. » Certes, c’est exact, mais l’auteur omet d’évoquer le rôle primordial des juges de l’État de droit, entraînés par les droits de l’homme à confondre droit et morale, à devenir des censeurs, confesseurs et persécuteurs des dissidents. (Pourtant elle a su par ailleurs critiquer très pertinemment la justice internationale</span><a href="https://www.polemia.com/chantal-delsol-deplore-la-fin-de-la-chretiente/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=la_lettre_de_polemia&utm_term=2022-01-03#_edn2" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">[ii]</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">).</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">D’autre part, l’auteur voit dans la nouvelle morale la marque du paganisme restauré, en oubliant que celui-ci fut précédemment toujours holiste et correspondait à un dessein anthropologique. En revanche, l’exacerbation de l’individualisme narcissique contemporains est l’héritage biblico-révolutionnaire du christianisme ! En effet, pour celui-ci, et ce fut une révolution pour le monde antique, le Salut ne concerne que l’individu et son moi.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Éric Delcroix</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">29/12/2021</span><br /><br /><a href="https://www.polemia.com/chantal-delsol-deplore-la-fin-de-la-chretiente/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=la_lettre_de_polemia&utm_term=2022-01-03#_ednref1" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">[i]</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> Éditions du Cerf, Paris, novembre 2021.</span><br /><br /><a href="https://www.polemia.com/chantal-delsol-deplore-la-fin-de-la-chretiente/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=la_lettre_de_polemia&utm_term=2022-01-03#_ednref2" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">[ii]</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> La Grande méprise, Éditions de la Table ronde, Paris, septembre 2004.</span><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /><br />Par Eric Delcroix, juriste, essayiste et écrivain, auteur de <a href="https://www.akribeia.fr/censure/2106-droit-conscience-et-sentiments.html">Droit, conscience et sentiments</a> <a href="https://www.polemia.com/droit-conscience-et-sentiments-requisitoire-eclaire-contre-le-nouvel-ordre-moral-occidental-par-eric-delcroix/#_ftn1"></a>♦ Chantal Delsol, professeur émérite des universités et membre de l’Institut, vient de publier un livre dont le titre enveloppe l’objet même, <a href="https://www.editionsducerf.fr/librairie/livre/19337/la-fin-de-la-chretiente">La Fin de la Chrétienté</a><a href="https://www.polemia.com/chantal-delsol-deplore-la-fin-de-la-chretiente/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=la_lettre_de_polemia&utm_term=2022-01-03#_edn1">[i]</a>, sous-titré l’Inversion normative et le nouvel âge. Travail s’efforçant, sur 177 pages denses, à l’objectivité, ce qui est particulièrement intéressant de la part d’un auteur qui continue de se situer parmi « les catholiques traditionalistes ».</i></b></span><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><a href="https://www.polemia.com/chantal-delsol-deplore-la-fin-de-la-chretiente/">Lire ici</a> - Source: www.polemia.com</i></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div><div><h1 class="title style-scope ytd-video-primary-info-renderer" style="-webkit-box-orient: vertical; -webkit-line-clamp: 2; background: rgb(249, 249, 249); border: 0px; display: -webkit-box; line-height: 2.6rem; margin: 0px; max-height: 5.2rem; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; text-shadow: var(--ytd-video-primary-info-renderer-title-text-shadow,none); transform: var(--ytd-video-primary-info-renderer-title-transform,none);"><yt-formatted-string class="style-scope ytd-video-primary-info-renderer" force-default-style="" style="word-break: break-word;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">La fin de la chrétienté ? Avec Chantal Delsol.</span></yt-formatted-string></h1></div><div><br /></div><div>https://youtu.be/5wAnI9zOLho</div><div><yt-formatted-string class="style-scope ytd-video-primary-info-renderer" force-default-style="" style="word-break: break-word;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></yt-formatted-string></div><div><yt-formatted-string class="style-scope ytd-video-primary-info-renderer" force-default-style="" style="word-break: break-word;"><a href="https://youtu.be/5wAnI9zOLho"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>video ici</b></span></a></yt-formatted-string></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><br /><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">La fin de la Chrétienté</span></b></div><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">de </span><a href="https://www.editionsducerf.fr/librairie/auteurs/livres/9645/chantal-delsol" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Chantal Delsol</a><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">176 pages - oct. 2021</span><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">16,00€</span></div><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Seize siècles de Chrétienté s’achèvent. Le temps présent connaît une inversion normative et philosophique qui nous engage dans une ère nouvelle.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">La transition est brutale. Elle est difficile à accepter pour les défenseurs de l’âge qui s’efface.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">De même que le vieillard tend à colorer le monde de sa propre décrépitude et à le voir décadent, de même il est des chrétiens qui, aujourd’hui, se plaisent à contempler le déclin du monde dans leur propre déclin.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Nous assistons en fait à une métamorphose. Le temps païen qui s’ouvre restaure les anciennes sagesses en même temps que les anciennes sauvageries. Le grand Pan est de retour.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">L’ère chrétienne qui s’achève avait vécu sur le mode de la domination. Le christianisme doit inventer un autre mode d’existence. Celui du simple témoin. De l’agent secret de Dieu.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Professeur émérite des universités en Philosophie, membre de l’Institut, et chroniqueur au Figaro. Chantal Delsol est l’auteur d’ouvrages de philosophie, d’essais et de romans, traduits en une vingtaine de langues.</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="font-family: georgia;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><a href="https://www.editionsducerf.fr/librairie/livre/19337/la-fin-de-la-chretiente">Lire ici </a>- Source: www.editionsducerf.fr</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="font-family: georgia;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></b></div><div><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.francisrichard.net/2021/10/la-fin-de-la-chretiente-de-chantal-delsol.html"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>La fin de la Chrétienté, de Chantal Delsol</b></span></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="font-family: georgia; text-align: start;"><br /><a href="https://www.francisrichard.net/2021/10/la-fin-de-la-chretiente-de-chantal-delsol.html" style="color: #20124d;">Le blog de Francis Richard</a></b></div></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>L'énergie incroyable avec laquelle la culture chrétienne se bat depuis deux siècles pour ne pas mourir, démontre à l'évidence qu'elle a bien formé un monde cohérent dans tous les domaines de la vie - appelé Chrétienté.</b></span></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br />La Chrétienté, cette civilisation vieille de seize siècles est à l'agonie depuis la moitié du XXe siècle. Sa remise en cause a commencé avec la Renaissance; elle s'est poursuivie avec la Révolution française qui s'est accomplie en s'y opposant parce qu'elle était l'ennemie de la modernité:<br /><br />La Chrétienté comme civilisation est le fruit du catholicisme, religion holiste, défendant une société organique, récusant l'individualisme et la liberté individuelle.<br /><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="color: red;">UNE RÉVOLUTION AU SENS STRICT</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Dès lors son agonie était inéluctable, malgré des soubresauts dans l'entre-deux-guerres du XXe siècle. La modernité ne s'est pas traduite pour autant par le règne de l'athéisme et du rationalisme tout-puissant. L'esprit religieux, inhérent à l'homme, ne s'est pas éteint avec le progrès:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Il faut, je crois, comprendre le moment que nous vivons comme une révolution, au sens strict de retour de cycle, dans les deux domaines fondateurs de l'existence humaine: la morale et l'ontologie.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Chantal Delsol montre que nous sommes à la fois les sujets et les acteurs d'une inversion normative; et d'une inversion ontologique. C'est dire que nos préceptes moraux aussi bien que nos visions du monde - avec notre place au sein de ce monde - sont en train de se renverser.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red;">L'INVERSION NORMATIVE</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Quand le christianisme, à partir du IVe siècle, devient religion dominante, il s'impose très vite par la force, utilise une partie de ce qui existe et le transforme, puis, progressivement, pénalise le divorce, l'avortement et l'infanticide, réprouve le suicide, persécute les homosexuels.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">À partir du XVIIIe siècle et de la Révolution, le mouvement inverse est initié; ce qui avait été aboli redevient la norme: la société évolue dans le sens d'une liberté individuelle de plus en plus grande. La finalité est claire: pouvoir permettre à chacun tout le possible technologique.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">La morale est tournée vers le bien-être de l'individu, sans aucune vision anthropologique: ce qui compte, c'est le désir et le bien-être à l'instant même. La pédophilie, qui nuit à l'enfant, est récusée, mais pas l'IVG qui s'attaque à un être inconscient et bénéficie à la femme enceinte, etc.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red;">L'INVERSION ONTOLOGIQUE</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Cette inversion normative n'aurait pu se faire sans une inversion ontologique, au sens classique de la science des premiers principes. Or la foi dans les principes chrétiens s'est effondrée, ce qui les a rendus illégitimes: Ce qui fonde une civilisation, [...] c'est la croyance en une vérité.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Une telle inversion s'était produite quand le monothéisme juif, religion secondaire, i.e. faisant appel aux notions de révélation, de foi, de sagesse intérieure, et devant être entretenue, avait remplacé le polythéisme, religion primaire, i.e. naturelle, occupant la place si elle est libre. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Cette fois, la différence, c'est que la religion secondaire qu'est le christianisme a été rejetée et qu'au lieu de l'athéisme ou du nihilisme, c'est le polythéisme, notamment asiatique, qui s'y est substitué, répondant aux exigences générales du moment et principalement à l'égalitarisme:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Le panthéisme dans le domaine religieux, la démocratie dans le domaine politique, considèrent l'un comme l'autre l'humanité comme une grande masse dont les individus sont des atomes égaux et faibles.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red;">L'ÉCOLOGISME</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Il n'est donc pas étonnant que l'écologisme, qui est apologie de l'élan vital et de l'éternel naturel, soit, parce qu'il est lié à la défense de la nature, le polythéisme le plus prometteur pour l'homme post-moderne, d'autant qu'il efface le dualisme qui caractérise le judéo-christianisme:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">La sacralisation de la nature constitue le socle religieux le plus primitif et le plus rudimentaire, celui qui vient pour ainsi dire tout seul, et dans n'importe quelle société humaine.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Aussi l'écologisme est-il une religion primaire, avec sa liturgie et ses normes morales. Alors que dans les religions secondaires, celles-ci viennent de Dieu, dans les religions primaires, elles viennent de la société humaine, i.e. issues des us et coutumes, et que l'État en est le gardien.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red;">LA MORALE D'ÉTAT</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Au tournant du XXIe siècle, l'Église abandonne son rôle de gardien des normes morales et ce dernier revient à l'État.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">La nouvelle morale, commune, qui reprend et recycle les vertus évangéliques, c'est l'humanitarisme (et non pas l'humanisme qui plaçait l'homme au centre de l'univers), une philanthropie assez pleurnicharde et très victimaire, qui est dominée par l'émotion et le sentimentalisme.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Cette morale n'est plus rattachée à une religion et ignore toute transcendance. Elle est décrétée par l'élite gouvernante, qui promeut les lois pour la faire appliquer, et éventuellement la fait appliquer par injures et ostracisme. Elle est omniprésente à l'école, au cinéma, dans les familles:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Quand il faut la redresser ou lui assigner une bonne direction, c'est l'élite gouvernante qui s'en charge. Les gouvernants européens représentent à cet égard le tabernacle de la cléricature. Bref, nous sommes revenus à une situation typique de paganisme: nous avons une morale d'État.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red;">CHRISTIANISME SANS CHRÉTIENTÉ</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">L'Église a honte de la Chrétienté comme pouvoir et comme contrainte et elle aspire à d'autres formes d'existence.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Le personnel de l'Église a mauvaise conscience et tombe dans la repentance, rallie les courants de pensée qui le mettent en cause, se soucie d'écologie pour se montrer moderne; une partie même glisse dans le panthéisme. Il en vient à mettre en doute l'idée de mission et de transmission.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Il est illusoire de vouloir faire perdurer la Chrétienté; les chrétiens doivent la quitter, renoncer au règne de la force: N'y a-t-il pas d'autres héros que ceux de la force? Des héros de la patience et de l'attention, et de l'humble amour? De la quotidienneté, de l'indulgence, de l'équanimité?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Pour accomplir la mission et transmettre, il n'est nul besoin de conquérir, il vaut mieux susciter l'envie de ressembler en portant tout à l'intérieur. Chantal Delsol suggère donc que nous [chrétiens] demeurions seulement des témoins muets, et finalement des agents secrets de Dieu.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Francis Richard</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Livres précédents:</span><br /><ul style="color: #20124d; text-align: left;"><li><a href="http://www.francisrichard.net/2014/12/les-pierres-d-angle-de-chantal-delsol.html">Les pierres d'angle</a> Éditions du Cerf (2014)</li><li><a href="http://www.francisrichard.net/2015/06/populisme-les-demeures-de-l-histoire-de-chantal-delsol.html">Populisme - Les demeurés de l'histoire</a> Éditions du Rocher (2015)</li><li><a href="http://www.francisrichard.net/2017/07/la-haine-du-monde-totalitarismes-et-postmodernite-de-chantal-delsol.html">La haine du monde - Totalitarismes et postmodernité</a> Éditions du Cerf (2017)</li><li><a href="https://www.francisrichard.net/2020/03/le-crepuscule-de-l-universel-de-chantal-delsol.html">Le crépuscule de l'universel</a> Éditions du Cerf (2020)</li></ul><span style="color: #20124d;">Publication commune avec </span><a href="https://lesobservateurs.ch/2021/10/31/la-fin-de-la-chretiente-de-chantal-delsol/" style="color: #20124d;">lesobservateurs.ch</a></b></span><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.francisrichard.net/2021/10/la-fin-de-la-chretiente-de-chantal-delsol.html">Lire ici </a> - Source: www.francisrichard.net</b></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-32543314808256500872022-01-03T05:31:00.001-08:002022-01-03T05:31:19.654-08:00The Second Vatican Council was a single battle in a much longer war<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b> </b></span></p><h1 class="headline" style="background-color: white; line-height: 43px; margin: 10px 0px 7px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Confessions of a Modernist</span></h1><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>by <span style="background-color: white;">Michael Warren Davis</span></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Readers of <i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Crisis Magazine</i></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> who know the name Garry Wills</span> probably wouldn’t expect to see his books recommended in these pages. But I strongly urge all of you to pick up a copy of his memoir of faith, </span><a href="https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/why-i-am-a-catholic_garry-wills/300431/?resultid=67836b6a-3daa-45b7-a1f2-e9053a81171f#edition=4223817&idiq=1730816" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. No other book offers such a clear glimpse into the Modernist mind. I’m not aware of a more powerful testament to the weakness of the “liberal Catholicism” that’s come to infect so many parishes and chanceries around the First World.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">But first we should ask, “What </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">is</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> a Modernist?” Here, I don’t mean Catholics who hold a particular set of heterodox views. Rather, I mean Catholics whose heterodox views are inspired by the dominant paradigm of their age. In the 21</span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">st</span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> century, with its rabid materialism, a Modernist might deny the Virgin Birth. But in the 2</span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">nd</span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> century, which was full of Gnostics, a Modernist would deny the Incarnation. In other words, a Modernist is a Christian who prefers the fashionable ideologies of one’s day to the permanent truths of the Faith.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Now, obviously, there’s no such thing as an “avowed Modernist.”</span> Not exactly. Mr. Wills would never say, “I am a Modernist. As such, I prefer the fashionable ideology of my day to the permanent truths of the Faith.” A Christian doesn’t embrace Modernism: he’s embraced </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">by </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Modernism—carried away by the spirit of the world, which is so fickle.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">And that’s one of the first things that struck me as I read </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. Just twenty years after its publication, it feels dated. </span></b></span></p><div class="N4eAR1KY" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><ins class="CANBMDDisplayAD CANDisplayAdDisplayed" data-bmd-ad-unit="31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F" id="BMD31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F_AkzjR1641216281585" style="display: block; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"></div></div></div></ins></div><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s start at the beginning.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">For those who don’t know, Mr. Wills began his career as the wunderkind of the conservative movement. Shortly after Wills dropped out of seminary, William F. Buckley offered him a job at </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">National Review</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. Buckley took Mr. Wills under his wing, despite colleagues’ warnings that the young man was not quite sound. Sure enough, Mr. Wills soon broke with the conservative movement, going on to write for left-leaning magazines like </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The Atlantic </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">and teaching at Northwestern University.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">In fairness to Mr. Wills, he never really thought of himself as a conservative</span>. He said as much to Buckley before accepting his offer of a job. Instead, Mr. Wills called himself a distributist, after G.K. Chesterton. (In fairness, Mr. Wills is an excellent reader of Chesterton.) Anyway, Buckley didn’t mind. But after his leftward turn, Mr. Wills also began to voice his doubts with some fundamental teachings of the Catholic faith.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">In 2001, these doubts bubbled over into the book </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">, which Fr. Robert Sirico took to task </span><a href="https://www.crisismagazine.com/2001/the-strange-spiritual-journey-of-gary-wills" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">in these pages</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> when it first appeared. </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Papal Sin </i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">was so heterodox that Mr. Wills was inundated with letters—from believers and nonbelievers alike—asking him why, exactly, he still called himself a Catholic. The next year, he published his response: </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>As I said, it’s a powerful and enlightening book. I’ve never read anything like it. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>For instance, when he entered the Jesuit seminary in 1951, he read a biography of St. Ignatius Loyola. He concludes from this biography that St. Ignatius intended the Jesuits to be “adaptable, mobile, responding to the crises of the church”—quite unlike the rigid conservatives who ran the seminary. Loyola also favored a more flexible training process, relying mostly on “a series of ‘experiments’ fitted to each candidate’s needs and talents”—again, quite unlike the rigid discipline to which Mr. Wills was subjected as a novice. He explains that early Spanish Jesuits like Francis Borgia found St. Ignatius’ vision “too unstructured” (his words) and imposed stricter regulations on the order. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The seventeen-year-old Mr. Wills tried to explain all of this to his novice master, Fr. Gschwend. Amazingly, the old Jesuit didn’t immediately call Pope Pius XII and demand that the order be reformed. Instead, Fr. Gschwend asked him to consider the possibility that he was wrong, and perhaps the thousands of Jesuits who came before him were right. Or, as Mr. Wills puts it:</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>He answered that the wisdom of the order over the ages had perfected this training—who did I think I was to come in and call for changes after brief exposure to it?—and assured me that I would come to understand it if I just trusted my superiors and prayed harder.</b></span></i></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">In its context, Fr. Gschwend’s answer is supposed to be self-evidently absurd</span>. He’s the toxic reactionary who scoffs at the concerns of this boy genius. But Fr. Gschwend’s answer is the only possible one—or, at least, the only sane one. Obviously, the young Mr. Wills wasn’t concerned that the Jesuits were being unfaithful to their founder. He didn’t believe that St. Ignatius’ training methods were infallible and that his successors had no right to change them. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Mr. Wills also showed no desire to revive certain other of St. Ignatius’ practices that fell out of favor with the Jesuits. He expressed no desire to flagellate himself with a chord of ropes, or to wear a hairshirt, or to wrap a belt of nails around his waist, or to walk barefoot through the snow. Indeed, Mr. Wills even says that Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises encourage “fundamentalism.” (He worries that, by meditating on the Gospels, some folks may be led to believe those events </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">actually happened</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">.)</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">No. Clearly, Mr. Wills was chaffing under the strict discipline of life in the seminary. But, like many priests and seminarians of that era, he refused to accept that he simply wasn’t cut out for the clergy. Rather, it was </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">the Church</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> that was wrong. It was</span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> the Church</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> that had to change. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>For instance, Mr. Wills is an insomniac. Oftentimes, when he couldn’t sleep, he would sneak out of his room and find a place to read or listen to records. But whenever the professors caught him, he would be punished! That was unfair. The Jesuits’ rule should be more “adaptable,” more “unstructured.” That way, priests can read and listen to music whenever they want. It’s what St. Ignatius would want.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The arrival of a more liberal novice master isn’t enough to keep Mr. Wills in seminary, though he clearly feels vindicated. And this is why the book is so illuminating. Mr. Wills never considered that he might be wrong. Or, if he did, the old novice master’s ousting dispelled any doubts. Fifty years later, he sneers at Fr. Gschwend’s suggestion that five centuries of Jesuits were right and he—Garry Wills—was wrong.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">What’s really amazing is that Mr. Wills seems to acknowledge a link</span> between the Church’s liberalization and its decline. For instance, he says: “The group who entered with me in the Jesuit province of Missouri exceeded sixty in 1951 (one or two from an equivalent area would be considered a lucky draw today).” What happened in the American Church between the 1950s and the early 2000s that might have decimated the Western Church? Not the Second Vatican Council, of course, but rather “the way Vatican II reforms were being reversed or coming under siege.” If it weren’t for Archbishop Lefebvre, every third man would be a Jesuit priest. And they’d be allowed to </span><a href="https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/11/19/when-priests-marry/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">get married</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">, ideally to </span><a href="https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2012/05/09/marriage-myth/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">each other</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. Also, they </span><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/why-priests/309228/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">wouldn’t be priests</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">For what it’s worth, I think it’s wrong to blame the crisis in the Church on “the Council.” If nothing else, </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> shows that the Church was being undermined by Modernists long before John XXIII took office. Vatican II was a single battle in a much longer war. But that’s neither here nor there.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>As far as “enemy intel” goes, this book contains infinite riches. What I’ve written here concerns three pages in chapter two. We haven’t even touched on his fervent support for artificial contraception, or his use of female pronouns in referring to the Holy Spirit, or his assertion that Jesus called Peter “the Rock” as an insult. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">But my point is this: over and over again, Mr. Wills invokes “modern scholarship” to justify his heterodoxy</span>. Sometimes he actually names the text he’s drawing from, as with the biography of St. Ignatius—as if reading one book, or any number of books, makes one an expert in spiritual formation. At other times, he just invokes the word “scholarship” as though it has some magical powers. For instance, in this passage, to which I’ve already alluded:</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>It is true that we spent endless hours in prayerful meditation on the Gospel events, according to the Ignatian method of the “Spiritual Exercises.” In that discipline, you imagine yourself, as vividly as possible, in one particular story told by a Gospel, and then imagine Christ speaking directly to you within that context. This literal, even fundamentalist, reading of the Gospels was natural to Ignatius, in whose time there was no such thing as Scriptural scholarship in the modern sense.</b></span></i></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Well, there you have it! No need for Christians to actually read the Bible, so long as we have “Scriptural scholarship in the modern sense.”</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>I don’t say any of this to be cruel. I say it because when Modernists tell us about themselves, we should listen. And what is Mr. Wills telling us about Modernism? The most important lesson, I think, is this: One may deny that the pope is the Vicar of Christ or that marriage is a sacrament. One may desire to abolish the priesthood or condone homosexuality. One may even claim that the Gospels are a work of fiction. But why would one go on calling himself Catholic? Why not join a liberal Congregationalist church? Why do such (patently intelligent) men commit these whopping category errors? </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Because that’s how the Modernist mind works—and why it’s so deadly. For a Modernists, the “spirit of the age” is aligned with the faults to which one is especially susceptible. Their whole intellectual ecosystem validates their error. </b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Take again the example of Mr. Wills in the seminary. Had he entered a Jesuit seminary at any point between the 1560s and the 1920s, he never would have clung to this notion of a more “adaptable” Society of Jesus. There were liberals in the Church, of course, but they were never so blithe. But as we draw nearer to the present day, the momentum of history appears to be behind Mr. Wills. Not only is it </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">possible</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> to imagine a more “unstructured” Jesuit Order, but it seems almost </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">inevitable</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">. Why? Because asceticism, dogmatism, and fundamentalism are on their way out! Everything rigid and old-fashioned is about to be swept into history’s great dustbin. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>So, an intelligent young man like Mr. Wills latches on to this one observation in this one biography of one saint and makes it the basis for his entire worldview. What’s more, he turned that presumptuousness into a successful career.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">It’s a little sad that <i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">, which was so radical when it was published, already feels curiously dated</span>. There’s hardly anything about white privilege or LGBT rights. How could he hope to compete with </span><a href="https://www.them.us/story/black-trans-prayer-book-religion-faith-healing" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The Black Trans Prayer Book</i></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">? What enduring relevance could it possibly have? Once the Baby Boomers die off, liberal Catholicism will be irrelevant, and so will Mr. Wills’ book. It may have some interest to scholars with certain niche interests, like a U.S. history textbook from the 1840s. But that’s about it. </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">In the meantime, </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Why I Am a Catholic</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> is invaluable to anyone trying to understand some of our leading bishops, not to mention the current Vatican regime. You know as well as I do that they’ll look as silly to our grandchildren as </span><a href="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/03/bishop-brown-episcopal-church-communism-marxism-liberation-theology/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">“Bad Bishop Brown”</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> does to us. If they can’t see that, it’s because they’ve spent their whole lives trying to stay on “the right side of history.” </span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Now they’re getting old and slow, and history’s lead is getting wider. It’s not scary anymore. It’s not provocative. It’s not even quaint. It’s just pathetic.</b></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Michael Warren Davis is the author of <a href="https://bookshop.org/books/the-reactionary-mind-why-conservative-isn-t-enough/9781684511327" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The Reactionary Mind</a> (Regnery, 2021). He previously served as editor of <i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Crisis Magazine</i> and U.S. editor of the <i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Catholic Herald</i> of London. Read more at his newsletter, <a href="https://noreaster.substack.com/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">“Nor’easter”</a>.</b></span></span></p></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-48383283549711032512022-01-03T05:24:00.003-08:002022-01-03T05:24:44.318-08:00El Concilio Vaticano II fue una sola batalla en una guerra mucho más larga.<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><div class="headline_area" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><h1 class="headline" style="line-height: 43px; margin: 10px 0px 7px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Confesiones de un modernista</span></h1></div><div class="post_content" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">por Michael Warren Davis</span></b></span></div><div class="post_content" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Los lectores de </span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Crisis Magazine </span></span></i></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">que conocen el nombre de Garry Wills</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> probablemente no esperarían ver sus libros recomendados en estas páginas. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero les insto encarecidamente a todos a que recojan una copia de sus memorias de fe, </span></span></span><a href="https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/why-i-am-a-catholic_garry-wills/300431/?resultid=67836b6a-3daa-45b7-a1f2-e9053a81171f#edition=4223817&idiq=1730816" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Por qué soy católico</i></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ningún otro libro ofrece una visión tan clara de la mente modernista. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No conozco un testimonio más poderoso de la debilidad del “catolicismo liberal” que ha llegado a infectar a tantas parroquias y cancillerías en todo el Primer Mundo.</span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Pero primero deberíamos preguntarnos, "¿Qué </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">es</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> un modernista?" </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Aquí, no me refiero a católicos que tienen un conjunto particular de puntos de vista heterodoxos. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Más bien, me refiero a católicos cuyas opiniones heterodoxas se inspiran en el paradigma dominante de su época. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En la 21 </span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">st </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">siglo, con su materialismo rabioso, un modernista podría negar el nacimiento virginal. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero en el </span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">siglo </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">II </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">, que estuvo lleno de gnósticos, un modernista negaría la Encarnación. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En otras palabras, un modernista es un cristiano que prefiere las ideologías de moda de la época a las verdades permanentes de la fe.</span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ahora, obviamente, no existe tal cosa como un "modernista declarado". </span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No exactamente. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El Sr. Wills nunca diría: “Soy un modernista. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Como tal, prefiero la ideología de moda de mi época a las verdades permanentes de la Fe ". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Un cristiano no abraza Modernismo: él está abrazado </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">por</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> el Modernismo llevado lejos por el espíritu del mundo, que es tan voluble.</span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Y esa es una de las primeras cosas que me llamó la atención cuando leí </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Por qué soy católico</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Solo veinte años después de su publicación, parece anticuado. </span></span></span></b></span></p><div class="dZo4xpwb" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><ins class="CANBMDDisplayAD CANDisplayAdDisplayed" data-bmd-ad-unit="31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F" id="BMD31049420201009T1159205904773A19B3168409DB277D926B663DD5F_bNcVg1641215043975" style="display: block; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><div style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"></div></div></div></ins></div><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero me estoy adelantando. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Empecemos desde el principio.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Para aquellos que no lo saben, el Sr. Wills comenzó su carrera como el niño prodigio del movimiento conservador. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Poco después de que Wills abandonara el seminario, William F. Buckley le ofreció un trabajo en </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">National Review</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Buckley tomó al Sr. Wills bajo su protección, a pesar de las advertencias de sus colegas de que el joven no era del todo sano. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Efectivamente, Wills pronto rompió con el movimiento conservador, escribiendo para revistas de izquierda como </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The Atlantic</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> y enseñando en la Northwestern University.</span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Para ser justos con el Sr. Wills, en realidad nunca se consideró un conservador</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Se lo dijo a Buckley antes de aceptar su oferta de trabajo. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En cambio, el Sr. Wills se llamó a sí mismo un distributista, después de GK Chesterton. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">(Para ser justos, el Sr. Wills es un excelente lector de Chesterton.) De todos modos, a Buckley no le importaba. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero después de su giro hacia la izquierda, el Sr. Wills también comenzó a expresar sus dudas con algunas enseñanzas fundamentales de la fe católica.</span></span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">En 2001, estas dudas surgieron en el libro </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> , que el P. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Robert Sirico se puso manos a la obra </span></span></span><a href="https://www.crisismagazine.com/2001/the-strange-spiritual-journey-of-gary-wills" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">en estas páginas</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> cuando apareció por primera vez. </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Papal Sin</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> era tan heterodoxo que Wills se vio inundado de cartas, tanto de creyentes como de no creyentes, preguntándole por qué, exactamente, todavía se llamaba católico. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Al año siguiente, publicó su respuesta: </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Por qué soy católico</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> .</span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Como dije, es un libro poderoso y esclarecedor. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Nunca he leído nada parecido. </span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Por ejemplo, cuando ingresó al seminario jesuita en 1951, leyó una biografía de San Ignacio de Loyola. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">A partir de esta biografía, concluye que San Ignacio pretendía que los jesuitas fueran “adaptables, móviles, respondiendo a las crisis de la iglesia”, bastante a diferencia de los rígidos conservadores que dirigían el seminario. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Loyola también favoreció un proceso de formación más flexible, apoyándose principalmente en “una serie de 'experimentos' ajustados a las necesidades y talentos de cada candidato”, una vez más, bastante diferente de la rígida disciplina a la que el Sr. Wills fue sometido como novato. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Explica que los primeros jesuitas españoles como Francisco Borgia encontraron la visión de San Ignacio “demasiado desestructurada” (sus palabras) e impusieron regulaciones más estrictas a la orden. </span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El señor Wills, de diecisiete años, trató de explicarle todo esto a su maestro de novicios, el p. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Gschwend. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Sorprendentemente, el viejo jesuita no llamó inmediatamente al Papa Pío XII y exigió que se reformara la orden. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En cambio, el P. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Gschwend le pidió que considerara la posibilidad de que estuviera equivocado, y tal vez los miles de jesuitas que vinieron antes que él tuvieran razón. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">O, como dice el Sr. Wills:</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Respondió que la sabiduría de la orden a lo largo de los siglos había perfeccionado este entrenamiento (¿quién pensó que iba a entrar y pedir cambios después de una breve exposición a él?) Y me aseguró que llegaría a entenderlo si solo confiara mis superiores y ore más duro.</b></span></i></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En su contexto, el P. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Se supone que la respuesta de Gschwend es evidentemente absurda</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es el reaccionario tóxico que se burla de las preocupaciones de este chico genio. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero el P. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">La respuesta de Gschwend es la única posible o, al menos, la única cuerda. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Obviamente, al joven Sr. Wills no le preocupaba que los jesuitas fueran infieles a su fundador. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No creía que los métodos de entrenamiento de San Ignacio fueran infalibles y que sus sucesores no tuvieran derecho a cambiarlos. </span></span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El Sr. Wills tampoco mostró ningún deseo de revivir algunas otras prácticas de San Ignacio que cayeron en desgracia con los jesuitas. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No expresó ningún deseo de flagelarse con una cuerda de sogas, ni de llevar peineta, ni de envolver un cinturón de clavos alrededor de la cintura, ni de caminar descalzo por la nieve. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">De hecho, el Sr. Wills incluso dice que los Ejercicios espirituales de Loyola fomentan el "fundamentalismo". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">(Le preocupa que, al meditar en los Evangelios, algunas personas puedan llegar a creer que esos eventos </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">realmente sucedieron</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> ).</span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No. Claramente, el Sr. Wills estaba bromeando bajo la estricta disciplina de la vida en el seminario. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero, como muchos sacerdotes y seminaristas de esa época, se negó a aceptar que simplemente no estaba hecho para el clero. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Más bien, fue </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">la Iglesia la</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> que se equivocó. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Fue </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">la Iglesia la</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> que tuvo que cambiar. </span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Por ejemplo, el Sr. Wills es un insomne. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">A menudo, cuando no podía dormir, se escapaba de su habitación y buscaba un lugar para leer o escuchar discos. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Pero siempre que los profesores lo atraparan, sería castigado! </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Eso era injusto. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El gobierno de los jesuitas debería ser más "adaptable", más "desestructurado". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">De esa manera, los sacerdotes pueden leer y escuchar música cuando lo deseen. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es lo que querría San Ignacio.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">La llegada de un maestro de novicios más liberal no es suficiente para mantener al Sr. Wills en el seminario, aunque claramente se siente reivindicado. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Y es por eso que el libro es tan esclarecedor. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El Sr. Wills nunca consideró que pudiera estar equivocado. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">O, si lo hizo, la expulsión del viejo maestro de novicios disipó cualquier duda. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Cincuenta años después, se burla de l</span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">a sugerencia de Gschwend de que cinco siglos de jesuitas tenían razón y él, Garry Wills, estaba equivocado.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Lo que es realmente sorprendente es que el Sr. Wills parece reconocer un vínculo</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> entre la liberalización de la Iglesia y su declive. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Por ejemplo, dice: "El grupo que entró conmigo en la provincia jesuita de Missouri superó los sesenta en 1951 (uno o dos de un área equivalente se consideraría un sorteo hoy)". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Qué sucedió en la Iglesia estadounidense entre la década de 1950 y principios de la de 2000 que podría haber diezmado a la Iglesia occidental? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No el Concilio Vaticano II, por supuesto, sino más bien "la forma en que las reformas del Vaticano II estaban siendo revertidas o bajo asedio". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Si no fuera por el arzobispo Lefebvre, uno de cada tres hombres sería un sacerdote jesuita. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Y se les permitiría </span></span></span><a href="https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/11/19/when-priests-marry/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">casarse</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> , idealmente </span><a href="https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2012/05/09/marriage-myth/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">entre ellos</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, </span></span></span><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/why-priests/309228/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">no serían sacerdotes</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> .</span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Por lo que vale, creo que está mal culpar de la crisis en la Iglesia al "Concilio". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Al menos, </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Por qué soy católico</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> muestra que la Iglesia estaba siendo socavada por los modernistas mucho antes de que Juan XXIII asumiera el cargo. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">El Vaticano II fue una sola batalla en una guerra mucho más larga. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero eso no es ni aquí ni allá.</span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En lo que respecta a la "información del enemigo", este libro contiene riquezas infinitas. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Lo que he escrito aquí se refiere a tres páginas del capítulo dos. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ni siquiera hemos mencionado su ferviente apoyo a la anticoncepción artificial, o su uso de pronombres femeninos para referirse al Espíritu Santo, o su afirmación de que Jesús llamó a Pedro “la Roca” como un insulto. </span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero mi punto es este: una y otra vez, el Sr. Wills invoca la "erudición moderna" para justificar su heterodoxia</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">A veces, en realidad, nombra el texto del que está extrayendo, como con la biografía de San Ignacio, como si leer un libro, o cualquier número de libros, lo convirtiera a uno en un experto en formación espiritual. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En otras ocasiones, simplemente invoca la palabra "erudición" como si tuviera algunos poderes mágicos. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Por ejemplo, en este pasaje, al que ya he aludido:</span></span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es cierto que pasamos horas interminables en meditación orante sobre los acontecimientos evangélicos, según el método ignaciano de los “Ejercicios espirituales”. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">En esa disciplina, te imaginas a ti mismo, lo más vívidamente posible, en una historia particular contada por un evangelio, y luego imaginas a Cristo hablándote directamente dentro de ese contexto. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Esta lectura literal, incluso fundamentalista, de los Evangelios era natural para Ignacio, en cuya época no existía la erudición bíblica en el sentido moderno.</span></b></span></span></i></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Bueno, ahí lo tienes! </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No es necesario que los cristianos lean realmente la Biblia, siempre que tengamos "erudición bíblica en el sentido moderno".</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No digo que nada de esto sea cruel. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Lo digo porque cuando los modernistas nos hablan de sí mismos, debemos escucharlos. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Y qué nos dice el señor Wills sobre el modernismo? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Creo que la lección más importante es la siguiente: se puede negar que el Papa es el Vicario de Cristo o que el matrimonio es un sacramento. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Uno puede desear abolir el sacerdocio o tolerar la homosexualidad. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Incluso se puede afirmar que los Evangelios son una obra de ficción. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero, ¿por qué seguiría llamándose católico? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Por qué no unirse a una iglesia congregacionalista liberal? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Por qué hombres tan (evidentemente inteligentes) cometen estos enormes errores de categoría? </span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Porque así es como funciona la mente modernista y por qué es tan mortal. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Para un modernista, el "espíritu de la época" está alineado con las fallas a las que uno es especialmente susceptible. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Todo su ecosistema intelectual valida su error. </span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Tomemos nuevamente el ejemplo del Sr. Wills en el seminario. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Si hubiera entrado en un seminario jesuita en cualquier momento entre las décadas de 1560 y 1920, nunca se habría aferrado a esta noción de una Compañía de Jesús más "adaptable". </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Había liberales en la Iglesia, por supuesto, pero nunca estaban tan alegres. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero a medida que nos acercamos al día presente, el impulso de la historia parece estar detrás del Sr. Wills. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No solo es </span></span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">posible</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"> imaginar una orden jesuita más “desestructurada”, sino que parece casi </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">inevitable</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Por qué? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Porque el ascetismo, el dogmatismo y el fundamentalismo están desapareciendo! </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Todo lo rígido y anticuado está a punto de ser arrojado al gran cubo de basura de la historia. </span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Entonces, un joven inteligente como el Sr. Wills se aferra a esta única observación en esta biografía de un santo y la convierte en la base de toda su cosmovisión. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es más, convirtió esa presunción en una carrera exitosa.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es un poco triste que </span></span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Why I Am a Catholic </span></span></i></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">, que era tan radical cuando se publicó, ya se sienta curiosamente anticuado</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Casi no hay nada sobre el privilegio de los blancos o los derechos LGBT. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Cómo podía esperar competir con </span></span></span><a href="https://www.them.us/story/black-trans-prayer-book-religion-faith-healing" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">The Black Trans Prayer Book</i></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> ? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Qué relevancia duradera podría tener? </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Una vez que los Baby Boomers mueran, el catolicismo liberal será irrelevante, al igual que el libro de Wills. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Puede tener algún interés para los académicos con ciertos intereses específicos, como un libro de texto de historia de los EE. UU. De la década de 1840. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero eso es todo. </span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Mientras tanto, </span><i style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">Por qué soy católico</i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> es invalorable para cualquiera que intente comprender a algunos de nuestros principales obispos, sin mencionar el actual régimen del Vaticano. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Sabes tan bien como yo que a nuestros nietos les parecerán tan tontos como a nosotros el </span></span></span><a href="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/03/bishop-brown-episcopal-church-communism-marxism-liberation-theology/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;">“Bad Bishop Brown”</span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> . </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Si no pueden ver eso, es porque han pasado toda su vida tratando de permanecer en "el lado correcto de la historia". </span></span></span></b></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ahora se están volviendo viejos y lentos, y la ventaja de la historia es cada vez más amplia. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ya no da miedo. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">No es provocativo. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Ni siquiera es pintoresco. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Es simplemente patético.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><i><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Michael Warren Davis es el autor de </span></span><a href="https://bookshop.org/books/the-reactionary-mind-why-conservative-isn-t-enough/9781684511327" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">The Reactionary Mind</span></span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> (Regnery, 2021). </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Anteriormente se desempeñó como editor de </span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Crisis Magazine</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> y editor estadounidense del </span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Catholic Herald</span></span></span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> of London. </span><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">Lea más en su boletín, </span></span><a href="https://noreaster.substack.com/" style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;">“Nor'easter”</span></span></a><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"> .</span></span></i></b></span></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 29px; margin: 0px 0px 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia; margin: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><a href="https://www.crisismagazine.com/2022/confessions-of-a-modernist">Leer más aquí </a> - Fuente: www.crisismagazine.com</b></span></span></span></span></span></p></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-15649384539097636012022-01-02T06:37:00.001-08:002022-01-02T06:37:15.747-08:00"Con la prohibición de la educación en el hogar, Francia se une a China, Cuba y Arabia Saudita".<p style="text-align: center;"><b style="background-color: #fefefe; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Entrevista a Jean-Baptiste y Marie Maillard, autores de </span></b></p><p style="text-align: center;"><b style="background-color: #fefefe; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">“La escuela en casa, una libertad fundamental” (Ed. Artège).</span></b></p><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>por <a href="https://fr.irefeurope.org/Philbert-Carbon">Philbert Carbon</a></b></span></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /><blockquote><i>Jean-Baptiste y Marie Maillard tienen tres hijos a los que educan en su casa. Cuando Emmanuel Macron anunció el 2 de octubre de 2020 que la educación en el hogar ahora estaría prohibida, con raras excepciones, para "luchar contra el separatismo", fue una ducha fría. Tras un momento de asombro, decidieron luchar creando la asociación “Liberté Éducation” y escribiendo un libro. Hablamos con ellos para comprender mejor su lucha. Entrevista de Philbert Carbon.</i></blockquote><br />Philbert Carbon: Has elegido la escuela en casa. Por qué ?</b></span><div><br /><div class="texte surlignable clearfix" style="background-color: #fefefe; border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; height: 3938.28px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Marie Maillard: Comenzamos la escuela en casa después de descubrir la pedagogía Montessori, que aprendí gradualmente. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Queríamos que nuestro hijo mayor aprendiera de esta manera a leer, escribir, contar ... Y luego nos metimos en el juego, y queríamos seguir, incluso para sus dos hermanos, pero cruzando con otras pedagogías según las asignaturas y los niños. .</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>PC: ¿Cuáles son los beneficios para sus hijos?</b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Jean-Baptiste Maillard: La escuela en casa, además de sus buenos resultados (¡en última instancia son lecciones privadas!), Libera mucho tiempo libre para los niños. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">No hay tarea por la noche o los fines de semana, sino tiempo para tocar, leer, aprender a tocar un instrumento. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Uno de nuestros muchachos toca el violín, los otros dos tocan el piano en el Conservatorio Regional de Música. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Lo están haciendo bastante bien. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">También tienen más tiempo para practicar deportes, uno de ellos incluso combina tenis y esgrima.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>PC: Cuando Emmanuel Macron anunció, en un discurso en Les Mureaux sobre la “lucha contra el separatismo”, que quería prohibir la educación en casa, ¿cuál fue su reacción?</b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: Nos quedamos atónitos, atónitos, devastados. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Habíamos construido todo un proyecto de vida familiar, llevado a cabo con éxito durante más de diez años y, de la noche a la mañana, el Presidente de la República te anuncia que se acabó, ¡a menos que tu hijo pueda justificar una discapacidad! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Y todo ello, por un supuesto riesgo de terrorismo, mientras no existan cifras sobre el tema, ni siquiera en los Ministerios de las Fuerzas Armadas o del Interior, como informa nuestro libro.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: Quedó particularmente sorprendido por ciertos comentarios hechos por los ministros después de este anuncio. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Que eran?</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Tras su discurso en Les Mureaux, Emmanuel Macron declaró que "el lugar de un niño es la escuela", lo que implica que no hay otra opción posible. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Jean-Michel Blanquer, el ministro de Educación Nacional repitió, como un mantra, durante toda la batalla parlamentaria: "La escuela es buena para los niños", dando a entender que cualquier otra forma de hacer las cosas, enseñar a los niños no es bueno. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">En cuanto a la relatora del proyecto de ley a la Asamblea Nacional, Anne Brugnera, dijo a Le Monde que "la educación en casa es separatismo". </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Todavía es un poco breve como argumento.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: Decir sin matices que "la escuela es buena para los niños" es olvidar que 700.000 niños son acosados cada año en la escuela y que un cierto número de ellos se las arregla gracias a la escuela en casa. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Deberían ser privados de esta línea de vida? </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Porque los decretos de aplicación de la ley, que se filtraron esta semana en la prensa, son inequívocos: ahora será necesario obtener "un certificado del director del establecimiento educativo público o privado en el que está inscrito el niño" y cualquier documento útil que establezca “Que su integridad está amenazada”. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">En definitiva, se trata de una autorización autorización que puede resultar difícil de obtener cuando sabemos que los jefes de establecimiento muchas veces se oponen a esta solución de instrucción familiar. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Serán jueces y partidos aquí!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Uno de los más fervientes defensores de la educación en el hogar en la Asamblea Nacional, el diputado Grégory Labille, ex director de escuela y maestro, acaba de publicar un libro testimonial titulado “No, señor ministro, la escuela no es buena para todos los niños”. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Y cuando la escuela es buena para los niños, la educación en el hogar también puede ser buena para ellos. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿No les corresponde a los padres elegir la solución que les parezca mejor para cada uno de ellos? </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Personalmente, agradezco que mis hijos no se enamoren de una educación uniforme, y se beneficien de una experiencia diferente a las demás que les permita desarrollar sus talentos, ser únicos. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">En el mundo del trabajo que les espera, esto será, creo, una ventaja. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Podrán aportar su creatividad, fruto de la libertad que ofrece la educación en el hogar.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: Tras la declaración del presidente de la República, tomó la decisión de luchar creando una asociación, Freedom Education. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Cuáles son sus acciones?</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Creamos esta asociación para hacer oír la voz de las familias, que hoy son más de 1.000 las que se han unido a nosotros. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Fuimos escuchados en la Asamblea Nacional y en el Senado durante la fase de examen parlamentario del proyecto de ley. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Nos acercamos a otras asociaciones históricas de educación familiar para movilizarnos aún más con los parlamentarios. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Una movilización que dio sus frutos ya que hemos ganado más o menos tres años en la aplicación de la ley. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Continuamos la batalla en el período previo a las elecciones presidenciales (varios candidatos nos han pedido nuestros argumentos). </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Con nuestros abogados, también preparamos acciones legales contra los decretos de ejecución. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Como afirmamos en el momento de la sanción de la ley, </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Debido al riesgo de arbitrariedad causado por motivos de autorización demasiado restrictivos, es probable que surjan litigios muy pesados. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Por ejemplo, las familias tendrán que justificar un proyecto educativo cada año con una gran cantidad de documentos acreditativos que se entregarán antes del 31 de mayo del año anterior al inicio de la educación familiar, y una autorización emitida, en el mejor de los casos, en el corazón. de verano, que es muy tarde y generará mucho estrés. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, para estar autorizado para practicar la educación familiar, también será necesario proporcionar un horario, el ritmo y la duración de las actividades: ¡este es el riesgo de nuevas y graves infracciones a la libertad educativa de los padres! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Las familias deberán justificar cada año de un proyecto educativo con una gran cantidad de documentos acreditativos a entregar antes del 31 de mayo del año anterior al inicio de la educación familiar, y una autorización emitida - en el mejor de los casos - al corazón de verano, que es muy tarde y generará mucho estrés. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, para estar autorizado para practicar la educación familiar, también será necesario proporcionar un horario, el ritmo y la duración de las actividades: ¡este es el riesgo de nuevas y graves infracciones a la libertad educativa de los padres! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Las familias deberán justificar cada año de un proyecto educativo con una gran cantidad de documentos acreditativos a entregar antes del 31 de mayo del año anterior al inicio de la educación familiar, y una autorización emitida - en el mejor de los casos - al corazón de verano, que es muy tarde y generará mucho estrés. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, para estar autorizado para practicar la educación familiar, también será necesario proporcionar un horario, el ritmo y la duración de las actividades: ¡este es el riesgo de nuevas y graves infracciones a la libertad educativa de los padres! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">que es muy tarde y generará mucho estrés. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, para estar autorizado para practicar la educación familiar, también será necesario proporcionar un horario, el ritmo y la duración de las actividades: ¡este es el riesgo de nuevas y graves infracciones a la libertad educativa de los padres! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">que es muy tarde y generará mucho estrés. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, para estar autorizado para practicar la educación familiar, también será necesario proporcionar un horario, el ritmo y la duración de las actividades: ¡este es el riesgo de nuevas y graves infracciones a la libertad educativa de los padres!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>PC: También escribió un libro en el que recordó la importancia del fenómeno de la educación en el hogar en todo el mundo.</b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: De hecho, nuestro primer capítulo es un viaje alrededor del mundo de la escuela a la casa, que es un fenómeno global aún poco conocido pero en pleno desarrollo y que se ha acelerado aún más con la pandemia. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">En Francia, las cifras también van en aumento, a pesar de la aprobación de la ley. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">En 2011, había 5.000 niños educados en casa. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Fueron 62,000 durante el año escolar 2020-2021. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Sin duda serán aún más numerosos para este año 2021-2022. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">De hecho, muchos padres han dado el paso después de una experiencia feliz mientras estaban encerrados. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Otros no quieren que sus hijos mayores de tres años sean educados todo el día como lo exige la ley de 2019, a menos que sean educados en familia.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: Clasifica a los países según su legislación en la materia. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Francia no estaba muy bien clasificada. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿No se arriesga, con esta ley, a unirse a los países menos tolerantes?</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: Antes de esta ley, Francia tenía un sistema de doble control ya muy estricto. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">La inspección académica verifica los conocimientos durante una visita que concierne tanto al padre-instructor como al niño (en el sistema escolar, el maestro y el alumno no son inspeccionados al mismo tiempo) y que tiene lugar cada año (en comparación con una inspección cada cinco años en promedio en Educación Nacional). </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, el ayuntamiento controla, en la mayoría de los casos con la ayuda de un trabajador social, las condiciones en las que estudia el niño. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">A pesar de esto, el ministerio ha decidido cambiar a un régimen de autorización que en realidad es una prohibición encubierta de la educación familiar, ya que dos tercios de los niños serán enviados de regreso a la escuela sin el consejo de sus padres, según el informe. estudio.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: La educación en el hogar es objeto de críticas recurrentes (desocialización de los niños, padres insuficientemente formados, programas mal seguidos, etc.). </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Son todas estas críticas objetables?</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Para nuestro libro, entrevistamos a muchos investigadores de ciencias sociales. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Todos llegan al mismo resultado: "los niños educados en familias son también, si no mejor socializados, que los de las escuelas públicas". </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Este resultado puede explicarse por el tiempo dedicado a actividades al aire libre, que generalmente es muy importante cuando se educa en casa.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: En cuanto a los padres que estarían insuficientemente formados o los programas mal seguidos, basta con referirse a los resultados: el 98% de los niños escolarizados en casa han superado su primera prueba de conocimientos, según la Dirección General de Educación Escolar (DGESCO). ). </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Recuerdo muy bien nuestro primer cheque. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Todos estábamos un poco estresados. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Cuando me fui, mi hijo me dijo: “¡Realmente fue demasiado fácil! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">". </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Desde entonces vamos allí muy relajados!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: Lo que destaca particularmente en su libro es el hecho de que, contrariamente a lo que afirman Emmanuel Macron y sus ministros, no se puede establecer un vínculo entre el “separatismo” y la educación en el hogar. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¿Puede explicar esto?</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Si por "separatismo" nos referimos a "radicalización", basta con leer nuestra encuesta de investigadores especializados en el tema: ¡no hay cifras! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">El último informe de la DGESCO sobre educación familiar, que los diputados exigieron durante la batalla parlamentaria para no votar a ciegas, se hizo público en septiembre, ¡después de la promulgación de la ley! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Informa que 32 niños regresaron a la escuela, o el 0,09% de los niños afectados. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Y ninguno fue por "separatismo", ¡la palabra ni siquiera está presente en el informe!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>PC: Usted también advierte: abolir la educación en el hogar solo podría ser el comienzo de lograr el “gran servicio público unificado y laico de la educación nacional” con el que soñaron los socialistas en 1981.</b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: ¡Creo que no deberíamos intentar repetir el partido! </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Esta cuestión ya se decidió durante las monstruosas manifestaciones que hicieron doblegar a Mitterrand y su gobierno. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¡La palabra "Libertad" también se mostró en grande en los podios de la época!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: Mis hijos no van a la escuela, así que no tengo ninguna crítica que hacer en su contra. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Sé que muchos profesores son geniales. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Pero, ¿por qué atacar a quienes "educan en casa a conciencia", como dijo Jules Ferry en 1882, haciendo que la educación sea obligatoria y no la escuela?</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">PC: Por eso, en su opinión, todos los padres y abuelos, sean quienes sean, deberían movilizarse contra esta ley. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Explícanos por qué debemos luchar a tu lado.</span></b></span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">MM: Los padres son los primeros educadores de sus hijos: ninguna ley, ni siquiera constitucional, tendría razón para decir lo contrario. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Abogar por lo contrario es poner el dedo en una marcha que no sabemos adónde nos podría llevar. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">La mayoría de los regímenes totalitarios han prohibido la educación en el hogar. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Además, la educación familiar es un contrapoder educativo, que también protege la escuela gratuita bajo contrato y fuera de contrato. </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">Para mí, prohibir la educación en casa es contrario a la República, y a todo lo que aboga por el respeto, la libertad, la benevolencia.</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">JBM: Este sistema de autorización de educación familiar votado por la mayoría de LREM sigue siendo en principio contrario a la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos que indica: "Los padres tienen, como prioridad, el derecho a elegir el género. La educación que se les dará a sus hijos ”(Artículo 26.3). </span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;">¡Contamos con los candidatos presidenciales para defender este derecho fundamental e inalienable de todos los padres!</span></span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0px 0px 1rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; vertical-align: inherit;"><b><a href="https://fr.irefeurope.org/Publications/Articles/article/Avec-l-interdiction-de-l-ecole-a-la-maison-la-France-rejoint-la-Chine-Cuba-et-l-Arabie-Saoudite">Leer aquí</a> - Fuente: https://fr.irefeurope.org</b></span></span></p></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-27676593527706343372022-01-02T06:29:00.004-08:002022-01-02T06:29:46.175-08:00 « Avec l’interdiction de l’école à la maison, la France rejoint la Chine, Cuba et l’Arabie Saoudite » !<span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; font-weight: bold;"><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Interview de Jean-Baptiste et Marie Maillard, auteurs de « L’école à la maison, une liberté fondamentale » (Ed. Artège).</span></b></div></span><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">par </span><a href="https://fr.irefeurope.org/Philbert-Carbon" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Philbert Carbon</a></div><br /><br /><blockquote><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Jean-Baptiste et Marie Maillard ont trois fils qu’ils scolarisent à leur domicile. Quand Emmanuel Macron a annoncé le 2 octobre 2020 que l’école à la maison serait désormais interdite, sauf à de rares exceptions, pour « lutter contre les séparatismes », ce fut la douche froide. Après un moment de sidération, ils ont décidé de se battre en créant l’association « Liberté Éducation » et en écrivant un livre. Nous avons échangé avec eux pour mieux comprendre leur combat. </span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Propos recueillis par Philbert Carbon.</span></blockquote><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Philbert Carbon : Vous avez choisi de faire l’école à la maison. Pourquoi ?</span><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Marie Maillard : Nous avons commencé l’école à la maison après avoir découvert la pédagogie Montessori, à laquelle je me suis formée progressivement. Nous voulions que notre aîné apprenne de cette manière à lire, écrire, compter… Et puis nous nous sommes pris au jeu, et avons souhaité continuer, y compris pour ses deux frères, mais en croisant avec d’autres pédagogies selon les matières et les enfants.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Quels bénéfices vos enfants en tirent-ils ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Jean-Baptiste Maillard : L’école à la maison, outre ses bons résultats (il s’agit finalement de cours particuliers !), permet de dégager beaucoup de temps libre pour les enfants. Pas de devoirs le soir ni le week-end, mais du temps pour jouer, pour lire, pour apprendre un instrument. L’un de nos garçons fait du violon, les deux autres du piano au Conservatoire régional de musique. Ils se débrouillent plutôt bien. Ils ont aussi plus de temps pour faire du sport, l’un d’entre eux combine même tennis et escrime.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Quand Emmanuel Macron a annoncé, dans un discours aux Mureaux sur la « lutte contre les séparatismes », vouloir interdire l’école à la maison, quelle a été votre réaction ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Nous étions sidérés, abasourdis, anéantis. Nous avions bâti tout un projet familial de vie, mené avec succès depuis plus de dix ans et, du jour au lendemain, le Président de la République vous annonce que c’est terminé, à moins que votre enfant puisse justifier d’un handicap ! Et tout cela, à cause d’un soi-disant risque de terrorisme, alors qu’aucun chiffre n’existe sur le sujet, même aux ministères des Armées ou de l’Intérieur, comme notre livre le rapporte.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Vous avez été particulièrement choqués par certains propos tenus par des ministres après cette annonce. Quels étaient-ils ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Après son discours aux Mureaux, Emmanuel Macron a déclaré que « la place d’un enfant est à l’école », ce qui sous-entend qu’il n’y a aucun autre choix possible. Jean-Michel Blanquer, le ministre de l’Education nationale a répété, comme un mantra, pendant toute la durée de la bataille parlementaire : « L’école, c’est bon pour les enfants », sous-entendant que tout autre manière d’instruire ses enfants n’est pas bonne. Quant à la rapporteuse du projet de loi à l’Assemblée nationale, Anne Brugnera, elle a affirmé au journal Le Monde que « faire l’école à la maison, c’est du séparatisme ». C’est quand même un peu court comme argumentation.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Affirmer sans nuances « l’école, c’est bon pour les enfants », c’est oublier que 700 000 enfants sont harcelés chaque année à l’école et qu’un certain nombre d’entre eux s’en sortent grâce à l’école à la maison. Faudrait-il les priver de cette planche de salut ? Car les décrets d’application de la loi, qui ont fuité cette semaine dans la presse, sont sans ambiguïté : il faudra désormais obtenir « une attestation du directeur de l’établissement d’enseignement public ou privé dans lequel est inscrit l’enfant » et tout document utile établissant « que son intégrité y est menacée ». Au bout du compte, il s’agit d’une autorisation d’autorisation qui risque d’être difficile à obtenir quand on sait que les chefs d’établissements s’opposent souvent à cette solution d’une instruction en famille. Ils seront ici juges et parties !</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : L’un des plus ardents défenseurs de l’école à la maison à l’Assemblée nationale, le député Grégory Labille, ancien directeur d’école et enseignant, vient de publier un livre-témoignage intitulé « Non, Monsieur le Ministre, l’école n’est pas bonne pour tous les enfants ». Et quand l’école est bonne pour les enfants, l’école « à la maison » peut aussi être bonne pour eux. N’est-ce pas aux parents de choisir la solution qui leur semble la meilleure pour chacun d’eux ? Personnellement, j’apprécie que mes enfants ne tombent pas dans une éducation uniforme, et bénéficient d’une expérience différente des autres qui leur permette de développer leurs talents, d’être uniques. Dans le monde du travail qui les attend, ce sera, je crois, un atout. Ils pourront apporter leur créativité, fruit de la liberté offerte par l’école à la maison.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Suite à la déclaration du Président de la République, vous avez pris la décision de vous battre en créant une association, Liberté éducation. Quelles sont ses actions ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Nous avons créé cette association pour faire entendre la voix des familles qui sont plus de 1 000 aujourd’hui à nous avoir rejoint. Nous avons été auditionnés à l’Assemblée nationale et au Sénat pendant la phase d’examen parlementaire du projet de loi. Nous nous sommes rapprochés d’autres associations historiques de l’instruction en famille pour être encore plus mobilisés auprès des parlementaires. Une mobilisation qui a payé puisque nous avons gagné plus ou moins trois ans dans l’application de la loi. Nous poursuivons la bataille dans la perspective de l’élection présidentielle (plusieurs candidats nous ont demandé nos arguments). Avec nos avocats, nous préparons par ailleurs des actions en justice contre les décrets d’application. Comme nous l’affirmions au moment du vote de la loi, en raison du risque d’arbitraire causé par des motifs d’autorisation beaucoup trop restrictifs, un très lourd contentieux risque d’advenir. Par exemple, les familles vont devoir justifier chaque année d’un projet pédagogique avec un grand nombre de pièces justificatives à fournir avant le 31 mai de l’année précédant une rentrée en instruction en famille, et une autorisation délivrée – dans le meilleur des cas – au cœur de l’été, ce qui est très tardif et va générer beaucoup de stress. De plus, pour être autorisé à pratiquer l’instruction en famille, il faudra aussi fournir un emploi du temps, le rythme et la durée des activités : c’est le risque de nouvelles et graves atteintes à la liberté pédagogique des parents !</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Vous avez aussi écrit un livre dans lequel vous rappelez l’importance du phénomène de l’école à domicile dans le monde.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : En effet, notre premier chapitre est un tour du monde de l’école à la maison, qui est un phénomène mondial encore méconnu mais en plein développement et qui a été encore accéléré par la pandémie. En France, les chiffres sont aussi à la hausse, et ce malgré le vote de la loi. En 2011, il y avait 5 000 enfants scolarisés à domicile. Ils étaient 62 000 lors de l’année scolaire 2020-2021. Ils seront sans doute encore plus nombreux pour cette année 2021-2022. En fait, beaucoup de parents ont franchi le pas à la suite d’une expérience heureuse pendant le confinement. D’autres ne souhaitent pas scolariser toute la journée leurs enfants de plus de trois ans comme le leur impose la loi de 2019 à moins de pratiquer l’instruction en famille. Enfin de nombreux autres parents souhaitent obtenir la fameuse dérogation promise par la nouvelle loi si leurs enfants sont instruits en famille en 2021-2022, à condition de contrôles académiques réussis.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Vous classez les pays en fonction de leur législation sur le sujet. La France n’était pas très bien classée. Ne risque-t-elle pas, avec cette loi, de rejoindre les pays les moins tolérants ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Avant cette loi, la France avait un dispositif de double contrôle déjà très strict. L’inspection académique contrôle les connaissances lors d’une visite qui concerne à la fois le parent-instructeur et l’enfant (dans le système scolaire, l’enseignant et l’élève ne sont pas inspectés en même temps) et qui a lieu chaque année (contre une inspection tous les cinq ans en moyenne dans l’Éducation nationale). De plus, la mairie contrôle, avec l’aide le plus souvent d’une assistante sociale, les conditions dans lesquelles l’enfant étudie. Malgré cela, le ministère a décidé de passer à un régime d’autorisation qui est en réalité une interdiction déguisée de l’instruction en famille, puisque les deux tiers des enfants seront renvoyés à l’école contre l’avis de leurs parents, selon l’étude d’impact du gouvernement. La France rejoint ainsi les pays les plus restrictifs au monde, à savoir le Pakistan, la Chine, Cuba et l’Arabie Saoudite.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : La scolarisation à domicile fait l’objet de critiques récurrentes (désocialisation des enfants, parents insuffisamment formés, programmes mal suivis, etc.). Ces critiques sont-elles toutes récusables ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Pour notre livre, nous avons interrogé de nombreux chercheurs en sciences sociales. Tous arrivent au même résultat : « les enfants instruits en famille sont aussi bien, voire mieux socialisés que ceux des écoles publiques ». Ce résultat peut s’expliquer par le temps consacré aux activités extérieures qui est généralement très important lorsqu’on fait l’école à la maison.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Quant aux parents qui seraient insuffisamment formés ou les programmes mal suivis, il suffit de se référer aux résultats : 98% des enfants scolarisés à la maison ont réussi leur premier contrôle de connaissances, d’après la Direction générale de l’enseignement scolaire (DGESCO). Je me souviens très bien de notre premier contrôle. Nous étions tous un peu stressés. En sortant, mon fils m’a dit : « C’était vraiment trop facile ! ». Depuis nous y allons très décontractés !</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Ce que vous mettez particulièrement en avant dans votre livre, c’est le fait que, contrairement à ce qu’affirment Emmanuel Macron et ses ministres, aucun lien ne peut être fait entre « séparatisme » et école à la maison. Pouvez-vous expliquer cela ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Si par « séparatisme », on veut dire « radicalisation », il suffit de lire notre enquête auprès des chercheurs spécialistes du sujet : il n’y a pas de chiffres ! Le dernier rapport de la DGESCO sur l’instruction en famille, que les députés ont réclamé pendant toute la durée de la bataille parlementaire pour ne pas voter à l’aveugle, a été rendu public en septembre, après la promulgation de la loi ! Il fait état de 32 enfants renvoyés à l’école, soit 0,09 % des enfants concernés. Et aucun ne l’a été pour « séparatisme », le mot n’étant même pas présent dans le rapport !</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : Vous mettez en garde également : supprimer l’école à la maison ne pourrait qu’un début pour réaliser le « grand service public unifié et laïque de l’éducation nationale » dont rêvaient les socialistes en 1981.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Je crois qu’il ne faudrait pas essayer de rejouer le match ! Cette question a déjà été tranchée lors des manifestations monstres qui ont fait plier Mitterrand et son gouvernement. Le mot « Liberté » était d’ailleurs affiché en grand sur les podiums de l’époque !</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Mes enfants ne vont pas à l’école, je n’ai donc aucune critique à formuler à l’encontre de celle-ci. Je sais que bien des professeurs sont remarquables. Mais pourquoi s’attaquer à ceux qui font « consciencieusement l’école à la maison » comme le disait Jules Ferry en 1882 en rendant l’instruction obligatoire et non l’école ?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">PC : C’est pourquoi, selon vous, tous les parents et les grands-parents, quels qu’ils soient, devraient se mobiliser contre cette loi. Expliquez-nous pourquoi il faut se battre à vos côtés ?</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MM : Les parents sont les premiers éducateurs de leurs enfants : aucune loi, même constitutionnelle, n’aurait raison d’affirmer le contraire. Prôner l’inverse, c’est mettre le doigt dans un engrenage dont on ne sait où il pourrait nous mener. La plupart des régimes totalitaires ont interdit l’école à la maison. De plus, l’instruction en famille est un contre-pouvoir éducatif, qui protège aussi l’école libre sous contrat et hors-contrat. Pour moi, interdire l’école à la maison est contraire à la République, et à tout ce qu’elle prône de respect, de liberté, de bienveillance.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JBM : Ce régime d’autorisation de l’instruction en famille voté par la majorité LREM reste dans son principe contraire à la Déclaration universelle des Droits de l’Homme qui indique : « Les parents ont, par priorité, le droit de choisir le genre d’éducation à donner à leurs enfants » (article 26.3). Nous comptons sur les candidats à l’élection présidentielle pour défendre ce droit fondamental et inaliénable de tous les parents !</span></div></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><a href="https://fr.irefeurope.org/Publications/Articles/article/Avec-l-interdiction-de-l-ecole-a-la-maison-la-France-rejoint-la-Chine-Cuba-et-l-Arabie-Saoudite">Lire ici</a> - Source: </span><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b>https://fr.irefeurope.org</b></span></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-4797043595478205292022-01-02T06:00:00.002-08:002022-01-02T06:00:39.426-08:00The Eric Voegelin Society is meeting online January 3<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><header class="single-blog-header wpex-mb-10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><h1 class="single-post-title entry-title wpex-text-3xl" itemprop="headline" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Eric Voegelin Society Mini-Conference</span></h1></header><div class="single-blog-media single-media wpex-mb-20" id="post-media" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><img alt="" class="blog-single-media-img wpex-align-middle" height="187" itemprop="image" loading="lazy" src="https://voegelinview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Eric-Voegelin-Society-e1479689080979.jpg" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; height: auto; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: middle;" width="177" /></b></span></div><ul class="meta wpex-text-sm wpex-text-gray-600 wpex-mb-20 wpex-last-mr-0" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><li class="meta-date" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 20px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span aria-hidden="true" class="ticon ticon-clock-o" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 10px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-rendering: auto; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><time class="updated" datetime="2022-01-01" itemprop="datePublished" pubdate="" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">January 1, 2022</time></li><li class="meta-author" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 20px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span aria-hidden="true" class="ticon ticon-user-o" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 10px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-rendering: auto; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><span class="vcard author" itemprop="name" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="fn" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/author/davidwalsh/" itemprop="author" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="https://schema.org/Person" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Posts by David Walsh">David Walsh</a></span></span></li><li class="meta-author" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline-block; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 20px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></li></b></span></ul><div><div class="single-blog-content entry wpex-mt-20 wpex-mb-40 wpex-clr" itemprop="text" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 20px 0px 40px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>The Eric Voegelin Society is meeting online January 3. </b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>For more details visit the link to the full program: <a href="https://sites01.lsu.edu/faculty/voegelin/eric-voegelin-society-mini-conference-january-3-2022/" style="box-sizing: border-box;">Eric Voegelin Society Mini-Conference, 3 January 2021</a>. </b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>You can register at the link provided in the program if you have not done so already.</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Conference Schedule is as follows:</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Welcome: 12:00-12:05 pm EST (5:00-5:05 pm GMT)</span> – David Walsh, Catholic University of America</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Panel 1: 12:05-1:35 pm EST (5:05-6:35 pm GMT)</span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Chair: James R. Stoner, poston@lsu.edu; Louisiana State University</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Bruno Latour and Eric Voegelin: Did Voegelin Know about the Anthropocene?,” Mendo Henriques, The Catholic University of Portugal, mendohenriques@ucp.pt</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Voegelin’s Vicinity to and Critique of Toynbee’s Philosophy of History,” Harald Bergbauer, University of Applied Sciences Munich, dr.hb@web.de</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“The Political Philosophy of the European City,” Ferenc Hörcher, University of Public Service, Budapest; Institute of Philosophy, Centre for the Humanities, Budapest, horcherferenc2@gmail.com</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Mythology and Anti-Mythology in John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance,” Victor Bruno, Universidade Federal do Piauí, victorbruno@outlook.com</b></span></li></ul><p></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Discussant: James R. Stoner, Louisiana State University, poston@lsu.edu</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> </b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Panel 2: 2:00-3:30 pm EST (7:00-8:30 GMT)</span></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Chair: Steven McGuire, Villanova University, sfmcguire@gmail.com</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Michael Polanyi’s Recovery of the Person Through Science,” Thomas Cloud, Louisiana State University, tcloud4@lsu.edu</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“The Tension of Existence in Christian Morality,” Thomas Holman, The Catholic University of America, holmant@cua.edu</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Virtue and the Politics of Pluralism in the Thought of Jacques Maritain,” Steven Waldorf, University of Chicago, sdwaldorf@gmail.com</b></span></li><li><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>“Truth or Methodology: Reflections on Voegelin’s ‘Reason: The Classic Experience’,” Sarah Dunford, The Catholic University of America, dunford@cua.edu</b></span></li></ul><p></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Discussants: Steven McGuire, Villanova University, sfmcguire@gmail.com; Gustavo Santos, Independent Scholar, gadolfo1917@gmail.com</b></span></p></div><section class="author-bio wpex-boxed wpex-flex wpex-gap-20 wpex-flex-col wpex-sm-flex-row wpex-mb-40 wpex-text-center wpex-sm-text-left" style="background-color: #f7f7f7; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: row; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; gap: 20px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 40px; outline: 0px; padding: 20px; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="author-bio-avatar wpex-flex-shrink-0" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; flex-shrink: 0; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/author/davidwalsh/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Visit Author Page"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><img alt="" class="lazy avatar avatar-70 photo wpex-align-middle wpex-round lazy-loaded" data-lazy-src="https://voegelinview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Walsh1-e1468679919539-70x70.jpg" data-lazy-srcset="https://voegelinview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Walsh1-e1468679919539-120x140.jpg 2x" data-lazy-type="image" height="70" loading="lazy" src="https://voegelinview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Walsh1-e1468679919539-70x70.jpg" srcset="https://voegelinview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Walsh1-e1468679919539-120x140.jpg 2x" style="border-radius: 50%; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: block; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; height: 70px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: middle; width: 70px;" width="70" /><br /></b></span></a></div><div class="author-bio-content wpex-flex-grow wpex-last-mb-0" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; flex-grow: 1; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><h4 class="author-bio-title wpex-m-0 wpex-mb-10 wpex-text-lg" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.4; margin: 0px 0px 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://voegelinview.com/author/davidwalsh/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;" title="Visit Author Page"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">David Walsh</span></a></h4><div class="author-bio-description wpex-mb-15 wpex-last-mb-0" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>David Walsh is the Chair Board Member of VoegelinView, President of the Eric Voegelin Society, and Professor of Political Science at Catholic University of America. He is the author of a three-volume study of modernity: After Ideology: Recovering the Spiritual Foundations of Freedom (Harper/Collins, 1990), The Growth of the Liberal Soul (Missouri, 1997), and The Modern Philosophical Revolution: The Luminosity of Existence (Cambridge, 2008). His latest book is Politics of the Person and as the Politics of Being (Notre Dame, 2015).</b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></p><p style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit;"><b>Source: </b></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>https://voegelinview.com/eric-voegelin-society-mini-conference/</b></span></p></div></div></section></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-86859179449589673172022-01-02T05:50:00.002-08:002022-01-02T05:50:54.665-08:00Combattre le socialisme n’est pas qu’une affaire d’économie, mais avant tout une question morale<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Le socialisme est incompatible avec la liberté</span></span><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Par Nicolas Jutzet - Un article de Liber-Thé</span></div> <br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Le socialisme conserve un grand pouvoir de séduction et il bénéficie actuellement d’un retour à la mode particulier sous le couvert de diverses revendications sociales, écologiques et économiques. Entre plan de relance, mesures collectivistes et toute-puissance de l’État, il prend différentes formes.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Pourtant, </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2019/03/01/337983-le-socialisme-aujourdhui-5-quels-pays-sont-reellement-socialistes" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">cette idéologie</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> a échoué dans le passé et continuera de le faire, pour deux raisons principales : c’est un système immoral et irréaliste. C’est sa nature qui explique ses échecs et non l’intensité de son application.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Le socialisme dont nous parlons – qui poursuit les idéaux de </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Justice_sociale" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">justice sociale</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> et d’égalité – n’est pas affaire de parti et les questions que nous traiterons ici n’ont que peu de choses en commun avec celles qui font l’objet des conflits entre familles politiques.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Nous allons clarifier en quoi le socialisme et les idées qui le sous-tendent sont incompatibles avec les principes d’une société libre.</span><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: red;">Le socialisme et sa volonté de modifier la nature humaine</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Pour différencier le socialisme et le libéralisme, on peut faire la distinction entre le </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Collectivisme" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">collectivisme</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> d’une part et l’</span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Individualisme" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">individualisme</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> d’autre part.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">L’attitude du collectiviste consiste à penser qu’on peut « modeler » une société selon ses propres vœux, qu’on peut la conduire comme on le ferait d’une machine. C’est l’approche adoptée par le socialisme, dans laquelle on veut imposer sa vision de la société idéale aux autres.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">À l’opposé, l’individualiste ou le libéral laisse la société évoluer librement, même si cette réalité est liée à une certaine imprévisibilité des résultats. Le libéral souhaite respecter l’individu en tant que tel, reconnaître que ses opinions et ses goûts n’appartiennent qu’à lui, dans sa sphère. L’égalitarisme est une forme connue d’application concrète de projet collectiviste.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Il existe deux visions différentes de l’égalité : l’</span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/%C3%89galit%C3%A9_en_droit" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">égalité face à la loi</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> et l’</span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2019/10/08/355264-ce-que-coute-a-la-france-sa-politique-de-lutte-contre-les-inegalites" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">égalité des résultats</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">. Ces revendications sont antinomiques. La première approche constitue l’un des fondements du libéralisme, car elle postule que tous les individus sont égaux devant la loi. La seconde école, qui vise l’égalité des résultats défend une vision de la société qui nécessite un interventionnisme fort dans les processus naturels de vie en commun.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">La différence entre les deux types de vision est fondamentale. C’est la même qu’entre poser des panneaux indicateurs et imposer aux gens la route à prendre. En interférant dans le cours des choses, pour imposer des résultats conformes au modèle défendu par les détenteurs du pouvoir, cette approche est en réalité extrêmement injuste, car elle place sur un pied d’égalité ceux qui souhaitent vivre de leurs efforts et s’en donner les moyens, et ceux qui profitent du fait que chacun a droit à la même récompense, et qui vivent sur le dos des efforts d’autrui.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: red;">Le socialisme est par nature immoral</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Comme nous avons pu le voir, le socialisme place l’entité collective (la nation, la classe, le groupe etc.) avant l’individu et ses droits. Au nom d’un but commun, le groupe peut le sacrifier à son gré, car l’intérêt collectif est supérieur.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Le libéralisme rejette la substitution de l’individu par le groupe et réfute la notion d’un « </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Int%C3%A9r%C3%AAt_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9ral" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">intérêt général</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> », tout simplement car il ne peut pas exister. Car comme tous les individus sont uniques et ont des préférences diverses et variées, il est impossible d’affirmer qu’il existe un « intérêt général ». Prétendre le contraire, c’est faire preuve d’une arrogance et d’une ambition aussi vertigineuses qu’illusoires.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En affirmant et en imposant un but collectif au nom d’une destinée prétendument d’intérêt général, on nie le fait que chaque individu peut avoir des préférences différentes qui sont elles aussi légitimes et qui méritent d’être respectées. Le socialisme s’attaque donc au fondement de nos sociétés libres et fait preuve d’un profond mépris pour l’individu.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Comme l’affirme Alain Laurent, « ce qui caractérise les systèmes qui portent le nom de socialisme, c’est une tentative continue, variée, incessante, pour mutiler, pour écourter, pour gêner la liberté humaine de toutes les manières ; c’est l’idée que l’État ne doit pas seulement être le directeur de la société, mais doit être, pour ainsi dire, le maître de chaque homme[…]son maître, son précepteur, son pédagogue ; que de peur de le laisser faillir, il doit se placer sans cesse à côté de lui, au-dessus de lui, autour de lui, pour le guider, le garantir, le retenir, le maintenir ; en un mot, c’est la confiscation de la liberté humaine ».</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Pour toutes ces raisons, le socialisme est avant tout, </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2014/11/15/188253-le-socialisme-amene-t-il-les-gens-a-agir-plus-moralement" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">immoral</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">.</span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: red;">Le planisme est avant tout un échec économique</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En plus d’être une doctrine immorale, le socialisme a </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2014/02/05/155691-au-venezuala-comme-partout-ailleurs-le-socialisme-mene-a-la-penurie" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">toujours échoué</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> dans son application. Sa principale erreur étant sa volonté de planifier de façon centralisée les actions d’une communauté.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Le fait de vouloir anticiper les activités d’un groupe, ou à l’échelle individuelle, n’est pas en soi une démarche problématique. Elle répond même à une volonté somme toute raisonnable de gérer des ressources de façon rationnelle. La controverse porte sur le meilleur moyen de le faire.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Pour les collectivistes, il ne suffit pas de mettre en place des institutions et un cadre légal qui offrent aux individus et aux groupes la possibilité de prévoir de façon rationnelle leurs activités.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Car cette approche libérale ne permet pas de viser un objectif préalablement défini sur le plan politique. Ils appellent de leurs vœux une direction centralisée de toute l’activité économique, avec un but à atteindre.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">L’</span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Planisme" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">échec du planisme centralisé</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> est explicable par son absence de mécanisme transparent de fixation des prix. Sans concurrence ni processus de remise en question des prix, il est impossible de déterminer le coût et le rendement d’une activité et de s’appuyer sur cette réalité pour décider de la pertinence de son idée.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Cette seule raison suffirait déjà à montrer que le socialisme est irréalisable et qu’il mènera à des inefficacités. Car sans « </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2020/04/09/368578-le-controle-des-prix-est-un-probleme-pas-une-solution" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">signal prix</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> » qui peut indiquer à quel point un produit est désiré par autrui, il est impossible de définir l’utilité réelle qu’il représente aux yeux des consommateurs.</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Arbitraire et pouvoir politique</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Dans un tel système, tout est arbitraire et donc sujet à une lutte de pouvoir politique.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Dans les systèmes d’économie de marché libéraux, la </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Loi_de_l%27offre_et_de_la_demande" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">rencontre entre l’offre et la demande</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> permet de régler de façon décentralisée les échanges entre les individus. Ces échanges spontanés se basent sur la libre variation des prix. Leur fixation autoritaire par la collectivité entraîne toujours une conséquence économique.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Si le prix fixé est trop élevé : une surproduction est inévitable, car l’incitatif est clair. Il faut produire davantage, car le niveau de prix est garanti, même au-delà de l’utilité réelle pour les gens.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Dans l’autre sens, en cas de prix fixé de manière centralisée à un niveau trop bas, la demande excèdera l’offre. Ici, une pénurie surviendra. Car personne n’aura une incitation à fournir d’autres produits à un tel prix.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Ce genre de situation est inévitable dans des économies planifiées.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">L’</span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2018/08/24/323190-la-moralite-de-leconomie-de-marche" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">économie de marché</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> ne fonctionne donc pas sous le socialisme, car la collectivité se substitue de façon rigide aux individus et à la fixation décentralisée des prix. Donner ce pouvoir exorbitant à la collectivité, c’est confier une tâche irréaliste à une petite minorité privilégiée qui peut fixer des prix pour tous, sans être capable de prendre en compte les sensibilités de chaque personne du groupe.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En résumé : l’économie de marché décentralise le pouvoir de décision, en le donnant à chaque individu, le socialisme le centralise et laisse la porte ouverte à une dérive clientéliste qui est, en définitive, tout sauf sociale, puisqu’elle bénéficie à une partie de la population déjà favorisée : les groupes qui ont un accès privilégié au pouvoir politique.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Malgré son immoralité intrinsèque et son absence de réalisme sur le plan économique, ce courant de pensée continue de trouver des adeptes. Ce que disait Ludwig von Mises « le socialisme n’a pas échoué en raison de résistances idéologiques, il reste l’idéologie dominante. Il a échoué car il est irréalisable » est toujours d’actualité.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Plus que jamais ? Combattre le socialisme n’est pas qu’une affaire d’économie, mais avant tout une question morale.</span><br /><br /><div style="font-family: georgia; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#" style="font-weight: bold;">Lire ici</a><span style="font-weight: bold;"> - Source: www.contrepoints.org</span></span></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-20823748704089384212022-01-02T05:45:00.000-08:002022-01-02T05:45:36.025-08:00La lucha contra el socialismo no es solo una cuestión de economía, sino sobre todo una cuestión moral<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">El socialismo es incompatible con la libertad</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div><div style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">por </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/author/nicolas-jutzet" style="color: #20124d; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Nicolás jutzet</a><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"> - Un artículo de Liber-Thé</span></div><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El socialismo conserva un gran poder de seducción y actualmente está disfrutando de un retorno a la moda particular bajo el disfraz de diversas demandas sociales, ecológicas y económicas. Entre un plan de recuperación, medidas colectivistas y la omnipotencia del Estado, toma diferentes formas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Sin embargo, </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2019/03/01/337983-le-socialisme-aujourdhui-5-quels-pays-sont-reellement-socialistes" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">esta ideología</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> ha fracasado en el pasado y seguirá haciéndolo, por dos razones principales: es un sistema inmoral y poco realista. Es su naturaleza lo que explica sus fallos y no la intensidad de su aplicación.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El socialismo del que hablamos, que persigue los ideales de </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Justice_sociale" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">justicia social</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> e igualdad, no es un asunto de partidos y los temas que trataremos aquí tienen poco que ver con los que son objeto de conflicto entre familias políticas.</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br />Aclararemos cómo el socialismo y las ideas que lo sustentan son incompatibles con los principios de una sociedad libre.</b></span><br /><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><br /><span style="color: red;">El socialismo y su voluntad de cambiar la naturaleza humana</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Para diferenciar entre socialismo y liberalismo, se puede distinguir entre </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Collectivisme" style="color: #20124d;">colectivismo</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> por un lado e </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Individualisme" style="color: #20124d;">individualismo</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> por otro.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">La actitud del colectivista consiste en pensar que se puede "modelar" una sociedad según los propios deseos, que se puede hacer funcionar como se haría con una máquina. Este es el enfoque adoptado por el socialismo, en el que queremos imponer nuestra visión de la sociedad ideal a los demás.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">En cambio, el individualista o el liberal permite que la sociedad evolucione libremente, aunque esta realidad esté ligada a una cierta imprevisibilidad de los resultados. El liberal quiere respetar al individuo como tal, reconocer que sus opiniones y sus gustos le pertenecen sólo a él, en su ámbito. El igualitarismo es una forma conocida de aplicación concreta de un proyecto colectivista.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Hay dos visiones distintas de la igualdad: </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/%C3%89galit%C3%A9_en_droit" style="color: #20124d;">igualdad ante la ley</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> e </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2019/10/08/355264-ce-que-coute-a-la-france-sa-politique-de-lutte-contre-les-inegalites" style="color: #20124d;">igualdad de resultados</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> . Estas afirmaciones son contradictorias. El primer enfoque constituye uno de los fundamentos del liberalismo, porque postula que todos los individuos son iguales ante la ley. La segunda escuela, que busca la igualdad de resultados, defiende una visión de la sociedad que requiere un fuerte intervencionismo en los procesos naturales de convivencia.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">La diferencia entre los dos tipos de visión es fundamental. Es lo mismo que entre colocar letreros y decirle a la gente qué ruta tomar. Al interferir en el curso de las cosas, para imponer resultados de acuerdo con el modelo defendido por los gobernantes, este enfoque es de hecho extremadamente injusto, porque coloca en pie de igualdad a quienes desean vivir de sus esfuerzos y lo hacen. los medios, y los que se aprovechan de que todos tienen derecho a la misma recompensa, y que viven a expensas del esfuerzo de los demás.</span></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><br /><span style="color: red;">El socialismo es inherentemente inmoral</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Como hemos visto, el socialismo antepone la entidad colectiva (nación, clase, grupo, etc.) al individuo y sus derechos. En nombre de un objetivo común, el grupo puede sacrificarlo a voluntad, porque el interés colectivo es superior.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">El liberalismo rechaza la sustitución del individuo por el grupo y refuta la noción de " </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Int%C3%A9r%C3%AAt_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9ral" style="color: #20124d;">interés general</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> ", simplemente porque no puede existir. Dado que todos los individuos son únicos y tienen preferencias diversas y variadas, es imposible decir que existe un "interés general". Afirmar lo contrario es mostrar una arrogancia y una ambición tan vertiginosas como ilusorias.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Al afirmar e imponer un fin colectivo en nombre de un destino supuestamente de interés general, se niega que cada individuo pueda tener preferencias distintas, que también son legítimas y que merecen ser respetadas. El socialismo, por tanto, ataca los cimientos de nuestras sociedades libres y muestra un profundo desprecio por el individuo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Como afirma Alain Laurent, “lo que caracteriza a los sistemas que llevan el nombre de socialismo es un intento continuo, variado, incesante de mutilar, recortar, obstaculizar la libertad humana en todos los sentidos; es la idea de que el Estado no solo debe ser el director de la sociedad, sino que debe ser, por así decirlo, el amo de cada hombre […] su amo, su tutor, su maestro; que por temor a dejarlo fallar, debe colocarse constantemente a su lado, por encima de él, a su alrededor, para guiarlo, garantizarlo, retenerlo, mantenerlo; en una palabra, es la confiscación de la libertad humana ” .</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Por todas estas razones, el socialismo es ante todo </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2014/11/15/188253-le-socialisme-amene-t-il-les-gens-a-agir-plus-moralement" style="color: #20124d;">inmoral</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> .</span></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><br /><span style="color: red;">La planificación es ante todo un fracaso económico</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Además de ser una doctrina inmoral, el socialismo </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2014/02/05/155691-au-venezuala-comme-partout-ailleurs-le-socialisme-mene-a-la-penurie" style="color: #20124d;">siempre</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> ha </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2014/02/05/155691-au-venezuala-comme-partout-ailleurs-le-socialisme-mene-a-la-penurie" style="color: #20124d;">fallado</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> en su aplicación. Su principal error es su deseo de planificar centralmente las acciones de una comunidad.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">El hecho de querer anticipar las actividades de un grupo, o a nivel individual, no es en sí mismo un proceso problemático. Incluso responde a un deseo razonable después de todo de administrar los recursos de manera racional. La polémica gira en torno a la mejor forma de hacerlo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Para los colectivistas, no es suficiente con poner en marcha instituciones y un marco legal que ofrezca a los individuos y grupos la posibilidad de planificar racionalmente sus actividades.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Porque este enfoque liberal no permite apuntar a un objetivo previamente definido a nivel político. Piden una dirección centralizada de toda la actividad económica, con un objetivo por alcanzar.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">El </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Planisme" style="color: #20124d;">fracaso de la planificación centralizada</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> se puede explicar por la falta de un mecanismo de precios transparente. Sin competencia y un proceso de cuestionamiento de precios, es imposible determinar el costo y retorno de una actividad y apoyarse en esta realidad para decidir la idoneidad de su idea.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Esta sola razón bastaría para demostrar que el socialismo es inviable y que conducirá a ineficiencias. Porque sin una " </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2020/04/09/368578-le-controle-des-prix-est-un-probleme-pas-une-solution" style="color: #20124d;">señal de precio</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> " que pueda indicar cuánto desean los demás un producto, es imposible definir la utilidad real que representa a los ojos de los consumidores.</span></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><br /><span style="color: red;">Poder político y arbitrario</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">En tal sistema, todo es arbitrario y, por lo tanto, sujeto a una lucha por el poder político.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">En los sistemas liberales de economía de mercado, el </span><a href="https://www.wikiberal.org/wiki/Loi_de_l%27offre_et_de_la_demande" style="color: #20124d;">encuentro entre oferta y demanda</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> permite regular los intercambios entre individuos de manera descentralizada. Estos intercambios espontáneos se basan en la libre variación de precios. Su fijación autoritaria por la comunidad siempre tiene una consecuencia económica.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Si el precio fijado es demasiado alto: la sobreproducción es inevitable, porque el incentivo es claro. Hay que producir más, porque el nivel de precios está garantizado, incluso más allá de la utilidad real para las personas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Por otro lado, si el precio se fija centralmente en un nivel demasiado bajo, la demanda superará a la oferta. Aquí surgirá una escasez. Porque nadie tendrá un incentivo para ofrecer otros productos a ese precio.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Este tipo de situación es inevitable en las economías de planificación centralizada.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Por tanto, la </span><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2018/08/24/323190-la-moralite-de-leconomie-de-marche" style="color: #20124d;">economía de mercado</a><span style="color: #20124d;"> no funciona bajo el socialismo, porque la colectividad es un sustituto rígido de los individuos y de la fijación de precios descentralizada. Dar este poder desorbitado a la colectividad es encomendar una tarea poco realista a una pequeña minoría privilegiada que puede fijar precios para todos, sin poder tener en cuenta las sensibilidades de cada uno del grupo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">En resumen: la economía de mercado descentraliza el poder de decisión, al cederlo a cada individuo, el socialismo lo centraliza y deja la puerta abierta a una deriva clientelista que es, en definitiva, cualquier cosa menos social, ya que beneficia a una sociedad. Parte de la población ya favorecidos: grupos que tienen acceso privilegiado al poder político.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">A pesar de su inmoralidad inherente y falta de realismo económico, esta escuela de pensamiento sigue encontrando adeptos. Lo que dijo Ludwig von Mises “el socialismo no ha fracasado debido a la resistencia ideológica, sigue siendo la ideología dominante. Falló porque no es práctico " sigue siendo relevante hoy.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Mas que nunca ? La lucha contra el socialismo no es solo una cuestión de economía, sino sobre todo una cuestión moral.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d;">Artículo publicado originalmente el 2 de octubre de 2020.</span></b></span><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.contrepoints.org/2022/01/02/381294-le-socialisme-est-incompatible-avec-la-liberte">Leer aquí</a> - Fuente: www.contrepoints.org</b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-47662207023299570602022-01-02T04:48:00.002-08:002022-01-02T04:48:15.679-08:00The assault on the classics will only continue to gain traction as the culture war drags on: "take the Odyssey out of your curriculum because it’s trash"<b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">Cancelling the Classics? </span></b></div></b><div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">The Woke Crowd Comes for Homer’s “Odyssey”</span></b></div><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">By </span><a href="https://theimaginativeconservative.org/author/matthew-pheneger" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Matthew Pheneger</a></i></b></div><i style="font-weight: bold;"><br /><br /></i><blockquote style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><i>The “woke” crowd is now intent on tossing out Homer’s “Odyssey” and challenging classical literary tradition. They want to inculcate a Jacobin uniformity of belief in the minds of future generations. How much easier will it be to recast history in the rigid terms of oppressor and oppressed, of exploiter and exploited, when no one has the intellectual wherewithal to understand history in all of its facets and contours?</i></span></blockquote><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">For well over a century, Homer’s Odyssey has been a mainstay of American high school education. Indeed, although it is common to allow educators a significant degree of independence with regards to which books they choose to include in their curriculum, the Odyssey occupies an almost hallowed place in American cultural life, symbolizing as it does the value of the quest, or journey, and the realization of the goal to which it leads. As an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal this past December makes alarmingly clear however, the burgeoning “cancel-culture” or “woke” crowd is not content to merely silence the voices of the living. Now, they have set their sights on Homer and the classical literary tradition.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The article, authored by the essayist Meghan Cox Gurdon and entitled “Even Homer Gets Mobbed,” details a recent Twitter exchange in which a high school English teacher implored her followers to “Be like Odysseus and take the long haul to liberation, and then take the Odyssey out of your curriculum because it’s trash.” In response to the latter, a second teacher, employed at a public high school in Massachusetts, declared: “Hahaha. Very proud to say we got the Odyssey removed from the curriculum this year.”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Far from an isolated incident, Ms. Gurdon is keen to point out that this exchange reflects the most recent examples of a “sustained effort” to deny young people the pleasure of engaging with the literary treasures of the past. As one critic bluntly put the matter in an edition of the School Library Journal published this past June: “Challenging old classics is the literary equivalent of replacing statues of racist figures.” In addition to Homer, Ms. Gurdon suggests that authors ranging from Shakespeare to Nathaniel Hawthorne are seemingly at risk of being consigned to the rubbish bin of history.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">In place of the classics, those hankering for their disposal appear to be advocating for a more “inclusive” curriculum consisting largely of young adult fiction and socio-political tracts that expound on various hot-button political themes. While there is certainly nothing wrong with teaching such works, the Twitter conversation Ms. Gurdon describes makes it clear that simply diversifying the curriculum isn’t the motivation here. Rather, it is to reduce the “subtle complexities of literature” to the “crude clanking of ‘intersectional’ power struggles.”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Indeed, as those of us who read dystopian novels such as Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World or George Orwell’s 1984 should recognize, power is the bottom line. To those who want to dispense with it, the emphasis that the principal works of the Western Canon have historically enjoyed is not a reflection of the intrinsic worth of the texts themselves, but of who wields the most power in society. Pursuing this Machiavellian logic through to its conclusion, it follows that if those who are critical of “old classics” can successfully disparage them in the public arena, the amount of power they possess will increase relative to those who allegedly have an interest in the perpetuation of such works.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">But the degree of wisdom that a society has attained is not a question of power. Rather, we ought to consider its capacity for wrestling with nuance and complexity. Tempting as it may be to view the world through the black and white lens of “us vs. them” or “good and evil,” reality invariably proves itself to be one or more shades of grey. Homer’s poetry is a testament to this enduring truth. Consider, for example, the Iliad, which recounts the story of the Trojan War. The final scene of that epic is famous, not for a hair-raising depiction of combat between the Greeks and the Trojans, or of one side triumphing over the other, but for the fleeting moment of compassion in which the Greek hero Achilles finally lets go of his overbearing wrath and turns the body of Hector over to Priam, the aged Trojan King. Thus Homer shows us that even in the midst of the most protracted and bitter conflicts, humanity’s capacity for love and mutual understanding prevails over its baser instincts, at least momentarily.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Those intent on tossing out the classics don’t want nuance however. They want to inculcate a Jacobin uniformity of belief in the minds of future generations. How much easier will it be to recast history in the rigid terms of oppressor and oppressed, of exploiter and exploited, when no one has the intellectual wherewithal to understand history in all of its facets and contours? How much easier to keep society polarized when its members lack common cultural reference points or a willingness to engage with perspectives that clash with their own?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Though all indicators suggest that the assault on the classics will only continue to gain traction as the culture war drags on, such efforts may ironically do these time-honored texts a great service. As history attests, attempting to suppress something or construe it as “forbidden fruit” more often than not only serves to make the object of derision that much more alluring to those who are kept from it. That aspect of human nature at least is not so easy to re-program. Given the overwhelmingly positive response that Ms. Gurdon’s article has received, this appears to be no less true where Homer is concerned. As a simple Google search reveals, at least ten articles have already surfaced coming to Homer’s defense against these most recent ideological attacks.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Indeed, although Homer was traditionally said to have been a blind poet, his vision was seemingly prophetic when he composed these immortal lines:</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Yea, and if some god shall wreck me in the wine-dark deep,</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">even so I will endure…</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">For already have I suffered full much,</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">and much have I toiled in perils of waves and war.</span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Let this be added to the tale of those.</span></blockquote><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><i>Matthew Pheneger studies international and comparative law at Case Western Reserve University. He attended Ohio Wesleyan University and Anglo-American University in Prague, where he studied Classics, Philosophy, and International Relations.</i></span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-style: italic; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><i style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: center;"><i><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#" style="font-family: georgia;">Read more</a><span style="font-family: georgia;"> - Source: https://theimaginativeconservative.org</span></span></i></div></i><div class="fusion-meta-info" style="background-color: white; border: none; box-sizing: border-box; clear: both; color: #444444; font-family: Montserrat, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: var(--meta_font_size); margin-top: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px;"><div class="fusion-meta-info-wrapper" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span class="vcard" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><p> </p></span></div></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-64631500366825785222022-01-02T04:38:00.006-08:002022-01-02T04:52:42.545-08:00El asalto a los clásicos solo seguirá ganando terreno a medida que la guerra cultural se prolongue: "este año hemos eliminado la Odisea del plan de estudios"<div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>¿Cancelar los clásicos? La multitud "despierta"</b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>viene por la "Odisea" de </b></span><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b>Homero</b></span></div></span><div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Por <a href="https://theimaginativeconservative.org/author/matthew-pheneger">Matthew Pheneger</a></b></div></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><i><blockquote><br />La multitud "despierta" ahora tiene la intención de deshacerse de la "Odisea" de Homero y desafiar la tradición literaria clásica. Quieren inculcar una uniformidad de creencia jacobina en las mentes de las generaciones futuras. ¿Cuánto más fácil será reformular la historia en los términos rígidos de opresor y oprimido, de explotador y explotado, cuando nadie tiene los medios intelectuales para comprender la historia en todas sus facetas y contornos?</blockquote></i></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Durante más de un siglo, la Odisea de Homero ha sido un pilar de la educación secundaria estadounidense. De hecho, aunque es común permitir a los educadores un grado significativo de independencia con respecto a qué libros eligen incluir en su plan de estudios, la Odisea ocupa un lugar casi sagrado en la vida cultural estadounidense, simbolizando como lo hace el valor de la búsqueda, o viaje, y la realización de la meta a la que conduce. Sin embargo, como deja alarmantemente claro un artículo de opinión publicado en el Wall Street Journal en diciembre pasado, la creciente multitud de la “cultura de la cancelación” o del “despertar” no se contenta con simplemente silenciar las voces de los vivos. Ahora, han puesto sus miras en Homero y la tradición literaria clásica.<br /><br />El artículo, escrito por la ensayista Meghan Cox Gurdon y titulado "Incluso Homero es molestado", detalla un intercambio reciente en Twitter en el que una profesora de inglés de secundaria imploró a sus seguidores que "sean como Ulises y tomen el largo camino hacia la liberación, y luego saquen a la Odisea de su plan de estudios porque es basura ". En respuesta a esto último, un segundo maestro, empleado en una escuela secundaria pública en Massachusetts, declaró: “Jajaja. Muy orgulloso de decir que este año hemos eliminado la Odisea del plan de estudios ".<br /><br />Lejos de ser un incidente aislado, la Sra. Gurdon desea señalar que este intercambio refleja los ejemplos más recientes de un "esfuerzo sostenido" destinado a negar a los jóvenes el placer de comprometerse con los tesoros literarios del pasado. Como dijo un crítico sin rodeos en una edición del School Library Journal publicado el pasado mes de junio: "Desafiar a los viejos clásicos es el equivalente literario de reemplazar estatuas de figuras racistas". Además de Homero, la Sra. Gurdon sugiere que autores que van desde Shakespeare hasta Nathaniel Hawthorne aparentemente corren el riesgo de ser enviados a la basura de la historia.<br /><br />En lugar de los clásicos, aquellos que anhelan su eliminación parecen estar abogando por un plan de estudios más "inclusivo" que consiste principalmente en ficción para adultos jóvenes y tratados sociopolíticos que exponen varios temas políticos candentes. Si bien ciertamente no hay nada de malo en enseñar tales trabajos, la conversación de Twitter que describe la Sra. Gurdon deja en claro que simplemente diversificar el plan de estudios no es la motivación aquí. Más bien, se trata de reducir las “sutiles complejidades de la literatura” al “crudeza de las luchas de poder 'interseccionales'”.<br /><br />De hecho, como los que leía novelas distópicas como de Aldous Huxley Un mundo feliz o George Orwell de 1984 se debería reconocer, el poder es la línea de fondo. Para aquellos que quieran prescindir de él, el énfasis que históricamente han disfrutado las principales obras del Canon Occidental no es un reflejo del valor intrínseco de los textos mismos, sino de quién ejerce más poder en la sociedad. Siguiendo esta lógica maquiavélica hasta su conclusión, se deduce que si aquellos que son críticos de los "viejos clásicos" pueden desacreditarlos con éxito en la arena pública, la cantidad de poder que poseen aumentará en relación con aquellos que supuestamente tienen un interés en la perpetuación. de tales obras.<br /><br />Pero el grado de sabiduría que ha alcanzado una sociedad no es una cuestión de poder. Más bien, deberíamos considerar su capacidad para luchar con los matices y la complejidad. Por muy tentador que sea ver el mundo a través de la lente en blanco y negro de "nosotros contra ellos" o "el bien y el mal", la realidad invariablemente demuestra tener uno o más tonos de gris. La poesía de Homero es un testimonio de esta verdad perdurable. Considere, por ejemplo, la Ilíada, que narra la historia de la Guerra de Troya. La escena final de esa epopeya es famosa, no por una descripción espeluznante del combate entre los griegos y los troyanos, o de un lado triunfando sobre el otro, sino por el fugaz momento de compasión en el que el héroe griego Aquiles finalmente se suelta. de su ira dominante y entrega el cuerpo de Héctor a Príamo, el anciano rey troyano. Así, Homero nos muestra que incluso en medio de los conflictos más prolongados y amargos, la capacidad de amor y comprensión mutua de la humanidad prevalece sobre sus instintos más básicos, al menos momentáneamente.<br /><br />Sin embargo, aquellos que intentan descartar los clásicos no quieren matices. Quieren inculcar una uniformidad de creencia jacobina en las mentes de las generaciones futuras. ¿Cuánto más fácil será reformular la historia en los términos rígidos de opresor y oprimido, de explotador y explotado, cuando nadie tiene los medios intelectuales para comprender la historia en todas sus facetas y contornos? ¿Cuánto más fácil mantener polarizada a la sociedad cuando sus miembros carecen de puntos de referencia culturales comunes o de la voluntad de participar con perspectivas que chocan con las suyas?<br /><br />Aunque todos los indicadores sugieren que el asalto a los clásicos solo seguirá ganando terreno a medida que la guerra cultural se prolongue, esos esfuerzos pueden, irónicamente, hacer que estos textos consagrados brinden un gran servicio. Como atestigua la historia, intentar suprimir algo o interpretarlo como "fruta prohibida", la mayoría de las veces solo sirve para hacer que el objeto de burla sea mucho más atractivo para aquellos que se mantienen alejados de él. Ese aspecto de la naturaleza humana, al menos, no es tan fácil de reprogramar. Dada la respuesta abrumadoramente positiva que ha recibido el artículo de la Sra. Gurdon, esto no parece ser menos cierto en lo que respecta a Homero. Como revela una simple búsqueda en Google, al menos diez artículos ya han aparecido en defensa de Homero contra estos ataques ideológicos más recientes.<br /><br />De hecho, aunque tradicionalmente se decía que Homero era un poeta ciego, su visión era aparentemente profética cuando compuso estas líneas inmortales:<br /><i><br />Sí, y si algún dios me hundiere en la oscuridad del vino,<br />así aguantaré ...<br />Porque ya he sufrido mucho,<br />y mucho me he afanado en los peligros de las olas y la guerra.<br />Que esto se agregue a la historia de aquellos.</i></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: inherit;">Matthew Pheneger estudia derecho internacional y comparado en la Case Western Reserve University. </span><span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: inherit;">Asistió a la Ohio Wesleyan University y a la Anglo-American University en Praga, donde estudió Clásicos, Filosofía y Relaciones Internacionales.</span></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#">Leer aquí</a> - Fuente: https://theimaginativeconservative.org</div></span></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-8088499965485846072022-01-01T13:47:00.002-08:002022-01-01T13:47:34.312-08:00¿Qué es la Ideología de Género y cómo se está implantando en el mundo? | Dr. César Vidal<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><b><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">¿Qué es la Ideología de Género y cómo se está implantando en el mundo?</span></b></div></b><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">por Dr. César Vidal</b></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br />Es indispensable desenmascarar la agenda que está moviendo al mundo en el sentido equivocado. Es indispensable no sólo enterarnos, sino actuar en defensa de la vida, de la familia y de la sociedad. Conferencia grabada en el Congreso Iberoamericano por la Vida y la Familia 2019, Panamá. Más información: www.congresoiberoamericanoporlavidaylafamilia.org<br /><br /><br />https://youtu.be/WGVBOKnBBfM</b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://youtu.be/WGVBOKnBBfM">Ver aquí</a></b></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-67732792047031904722022-01-01T13:43:00.005-08:002022-01-01T13:43:34.093-08:00Forty years later, the papal correction Pope St. John Paul II directed at the Society of Jesus still hasn’t taken hold.<br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">The Jesuit Reform That Never Happened</span><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">by </span><a href="https://www.ncregister.com/author/father-raymond-j-de-souza" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Father Raymond J. de Souza</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"> </span></div> <br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Forty years ago on New Year’s Eve there was heightened anticipation in Rome, even tension, for the singing of the Te Deum — the Church’s traditional hymn of thanksgiving to God — at the conclusion of the civil year. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">What would St. John Paul II say at the end of 1981? Would he comment upon the assassination attempt in May, or the declaration of martial law in Poland in December?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Those tragic topics were not the source of tension. The issue that had everyone on tenterhooks was the turmoil in the deeply troubled Society of Jesus.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">John Paul kept the custom of traveling to the mother church of the Jesuits in Rome for the year-end Te Deum. The church, conceived by St. Ignatius himself, is known commonly as Il Gesù, but its complete title is The Holy Name of Jesus. Before the reform of the calendar, Jan. 1 was the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus (it’s now Jan. 3), so Il Gesù was fitting place to keep vigil for the end of the Christmas Octave and the beginning of a new civil year. (Pope Benedict XVI moved the year-end Te Deum to St. Peter’s Basilica, and Pope Francis has kept it there. He visits Il Gesù for the feast of St. Ignatius in July.)</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">By 1980, the superior general of the Jesuits, Father Pedro Arrupe, was contemplating retirement and the calling of a general congregation of the Society of Jesus. John Paul was deeply concerned about the direction of the society, its high number of priestly defections, internal divisions, doctrinal confusion, liturgical abuses and moral turpitude. The Holy Father did not want a congregation called until some sort of correction was in place. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">At the Te Deum at the end of 1980, Father Arrupe’s assistants cornered John Paul at Il Gesù, demanding progress on their desire to move ahead with a general meeting and election of a new superior general. John Paul demurred. A few months later he was shot, and in August 1981 Father Arrupe had a stroke that made his continuing as superior general impossible. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">John Paul had to act. In October 1981 he gave his decision. It was an earthquake. The Holy Father suspended the ordinary governance of the Society of Jesus. Father Arrupe’s authority was given to a papal delegate, Father Paolo Dezza, who would govern until the Holy Father gave permission for a general congregation and election of a new superior. It was the greatest blow to the Jesuits since the order was supressed in 1773 by Pope Clement XIV. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“Life is religious orders was in crisis in the years after the Second Vatican Council, and while John Paul may not have thought that the Jesuits were worse off than others, he believed their influence was so great that a period of reflection was called for,” wrote George Weigel in Witness to Hope. “The intervention was shock therapy.”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Thus the Jesuits were traumatized — many of them enraged — when John Paul came to Il Gesù on Dec. 31, 1981. Tradition dictated that they host him at their principal church, housing the tomb of St. Ignatius and the precious relic of St. Francis Xavier, just months after his thunderous vote of non-confidence and evident lack of trust in their own capacity to reform themselves.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">There were no fireworks at the Te Deum. John Paul did not speak about the Jesuits. He </span><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/homilies/1981/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_19811231_te-deum.html" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">restricted himself</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> to general comments on the passage of time, only alluding to the assassination attempt and the declaration of martial law:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“The year that is coming to an end today reconfirms this struggle [of death against life],” he said. “Doesn’t it reconfirm it within each of us? Does it not reconfirm it in the dimensions of life, societies and nations? Does it not reconfirm it in the dimensions of the entire globe?”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The anti-climactic Te Deum at the end of 1981 would presage the eventual resolution of John Paul’s intervention. He had acted with boldness, even severity, but he would leave it to the Jesuits to follow through on the path of reform.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">At the general congregation eventually convoked in 1983, the Jesuits did not markedly change direction. They would continue to hemorrhage members and their orthodoxy and discipline did not markedly improve. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Pope Francis, </span><a href="https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/the-logic-of-the-inexplicable-pope-francis-in-conversation-with-the-jesuits-of-greece/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">recently meeting with Jesuits in Greece</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">, noted that there were only half as many Jesuits as there were in his youth, and this was a “humiliation” for the society — a spiritually fruitful one, he hoped, but a humiliation nonetheless.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“We have to get used to humiliation,” the Holy Father said to his brother Jesuits.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Forty years after the shock therapy, under a Jesuit pope, the humiliation continues as the Jesuits shrink and shed apostolates. Though the Jesuits are led now by Father Arturo Sosa, their most prominent member is Father Antonio Spadaro and their most notable English-language personality is Father James Martin. The reform St. John Paul II had in mind did not take hold.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">An epilogue to 1981, given that significant measures can often only be seen in hindsight:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The great papal correction of October 1981 was a failure. One of John Paul’s great papal successes would follow the next month, with the appointment of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on Nov. 25, 1981. Correcting errors would turn out to be less fruitful than proposing instead the splendor of the truth.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">In hindsight, another seed planted in 1981 did bear fruit. Mother Angelica launched the Eternal Word Television Network in August 1981. Forty years on, Jesuits and their collaborators in the media made attacks on EWTN something of a favored theme in 2021. Who would have thought in 1981 that EWTN might do more to strengthen the faith of ordinary Catholics than the once-mighty, now humiliated, Jesuit order?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">John Paul would not have known about EWTN at the Te Deum of 1981. He would come to know about it in time. But one notes that Christ, who is “The Eternal Word” did make it into his preaching that evening.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“The world seen in the Eternal Word — the world as a vestige imprinted by Divine Wisdom — is beautiful and it is good,” the Pope John Paul</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><i style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><a href="https://www.ncregister.com/author/father-raymond-j-de-souza">Father Raymond J. de Souza</a> Father Raymond J. de Souza is the founding editor of Convivium magazine.</i></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/the-jesuit-reform-that-never-happened">Read more</a> . Source: www.ncregister.com </b></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-57474663339610011442022-01-01T09:53:00.001-08:002022-01-01T09:53:30.926-08:00Where there is a mutual commitment to truth and truth-seeking, relationships can be built between religious believers and secularists<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: x-large; font-weight: bold;">From the Archives: Can We Still Reason Together? A Conversation with Robert P. George</span></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b>BY <a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/serena-sigillito/">SERENA SIGILLITO</a> AND <a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge/">ROBERT P. GEORGE</a></b></div><br />Note from the editors of Public Discourse: This week, while our staff takes a week off between Christmas and the new year, we are showcasing past conversations we’ve had with leading intellectuals. Serena and Robert George’s discussion was originally published on March 20, 2021. Enjoy!<br /><blockquote><b>Where there is a mutual commitment to truth and truth-seeking, relationships can be built between religious believers and secularists, and they can indeed reason together. The minimum condition is this: interlocutors, however wide and deep their substantive philosophical or other differences, need to share the conviction that business between them is to be conducted in the proper currency of intellectual discourse—namely, reasons, evidence, and arguments.</b></blockquote><b>In the latest installment of our Public Discourse interview series, PD Editor Serena Sigillito talks with Robert P. George about whether it’s possible to uncover the truths of natural law in our secular culture, the problem with appealing to “neutrality” in the identification of principles of justice and the design of political institutions, and the proper role of judges in promoting the common good. Professor George is the Herbert W. Vaughan Senior Fellow of the Witherspoon Institute, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, and a </b><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge/" style="font-weight: bold;">frequent contributor</a><b> to Public Discourse.</b><br /><br /><b>Serena Sigillito: Thanks so much for taking the time to answer my questions today, Robby! In this interview, I’d like to focus on the prospects and possibility of natural law reasoning in today’s political and cultural climate.</b><br /><br /><b>You are well-known and widely respected for your passionate advocacy of the natural law and its potential to help people of good faith to reason well together, even on contentious questions like the nature of marriage. Over the course of your career, you have helped to build impressive institutions such as the James Madison Program and The Witherspoon Institute (the home of Public Discourse and my own employer). Both the JMP and Witherspoon work with intelligent and motivated young people who are passionate about pursuing the truth. They are often people of faith, who hold traditional views on topics like abortion, contraception, marriage, sex, and gender. Yet I have found that many—perhaps most—of these young people are very pessimistic about the prospects of using natural law argumentation to persuade their peers on these questions.</b><br /><br /><b>Why do you think this is? What are they missing?</b><br /><br /><b>Robert George: Secular progressive ideology is ascendant in the elite institutions of our society: the federal government, many state governments, universities, news and entertainment media, the arts, professions and professional associations, labor unions, charitable foundations, major business corporations, and on and on. David Brooks rightly says that this gives the “Woke” a monopoly, or near monopoly, on cultural power. Obviously, it enables the transmission of Woke ideology—a fundamentalist and increasingly militant pseudo-religion—to rising generations and makes it difficult for dissenters to challenge that ideology and, indeed, to survive without being subjected to discrimination and even “cancellation.”</b><br /><br /><b>Those of us who do challenge it, whether in the name of natural law and natural rights or from some other perspective, are fighting what amounts to an intellectual guerrilla war against an extremely powerful and deeply entrenched adversary. That it is an intellectual war—a war for hearts and minds—doesn’t make it any easier. One would expect a certain amount of pessimism in these circumstances.</b><br /><br /><b>SS: In a discussion about advocacy for traditional marriage, one Princeton graduate student told me that she was uncomfortable with the idea of trying to convince others to oppose same-sex marriage by appealing to social science or the kind of arguments you have articulated in What Is Marriage. Although she herself is Catholic, to this student, such an approach felt deceptive—like smuggling in religious precepts under the guise of neutrality and disinterested intellectual inquiry.</b><br /><br /><b>How would you respond to her? Is it intellectually honest to make arguments based on natural law or social science for positions you only hold because of your own religious faith?</b><br /><br /><b>RG: From your description of her, it sounds like the graduate student you were talking to doesn’t understand the teachings of her own Catholic faith when it comes to the nature of morality, moral questions, and moral judgments, including those concerning marriage. Catholicism self-consciously embraces and proposes a certain understanding of marriage and the norms shaping and protecting it for reasons—reasons that are in principle accessible to anyone, Catholic or not. The point of </b><a href="https://www.encounterbooks.com/books/what-is-marriage-man-and-woman-a-defense/" style="font-weight: bold;">What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense</a><b> was to articulate, explain, and defend those reasons.</b><br /><br /><b>Catholicism is not a fideistic religion. Quite the opposite. Its basic view of marriage as conjugal union (and not a mere form of sexual-romantic companionship or domestic partnership), for example, is not a matter of “religious precepts” that we (or the pope, or the Church) know because God has communicated them to us only by special revelation. Your friend may happen to believe what she believes about marriage because that is what the Church believes and teaches; but the Church herself believes and teaches what she believes and teaches on the subject for reasons that by the Church’s own lights—and her teachings—are available to be understood by “disinterested intellectual inquiry.” These reasons are matters of natural law.</b><br /><br /><b>Interlocutors, however wide and deep their substantive philosophical or other differences, need to share the conviction that business between them is to be conducted in the proper currency of intellectual discourse—namely, reasons, evidence, and arguments.</b><br /><br /><b>SS: Thomas Aquinas began the Summa Theologica with the admission that it is very difficult to discover many of the most important truths by means of our reason alone, writing: “Even as regards those truths about God which human reason could have discovered, it was necessary that man should be taught by a divine revelation; because the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors.” That’s why, for example, God revealed through the ten commandments that we must not lie or steal, even though those are prohibitions that should theoretically be discoverable through reason alone.</b><br /><br /><b>In your book Making Men Moral, you have written about the ways that the law can help direct human beings toward what is good. Today, however, our society’s most influential educational institutions and governing bodies are dominated by a deeply flawed vision of what it means to be human and how one ought to live. Many conservatives have become so disheartened at the ways that the character and intellects of their fellow citizens have been malformed that they have given up trying to persuade them through reason. Others express doubts that most people actually make decisions based on reason at all.</b><br /><br /><b>Yet you have exhibited a fierce optimism about the possibility of reasoning together in a spirit of intellectual friendship. I think, for example, about your long-time friendship with Cornel West. What makes such a friendship possible? Is it your shared Christian faith that enables you to maintain such affection and respect for each other in spite of your deep and lasting disagreements? In an increasingly secular culture, in which disagreement is often interpreted as existential violence, do you think most people are still capable of reasoning together in this way?</b><br /><br /><b>RG: I’ll plead guilty to hope—not optimism (or pessimism). Hope is a virtue, and we should all have it. Despair is the sin against the Holy Ghost. Hope moves us to act—trusting in God much more than in our own poor abilities and efforts.</b><br /><br /><b>Cornel West is a dear, dear friend—truly a brother. At the foundation of our friendship, our fraternal bond, is a love of truth and commitment to truth-seeking. That, obviously, is connected to our shared Christian faith, and our belief that the ultimate truth, the supreme truth, is not a proposition (or set of propositions) but, rather, a person—Jesus Christ, who is the way, the truth, and the life. Our work together—including in the classroom—is underwritten and sustained, despite our various political and other differences, by this sharing.</b><br /><br /><b>You ask whether such work and reasoning together can be done by people “in an increasingly secular culture, in which disagreement is often interpreted as existential violence.” Well, the lack of something like shared faith makes that difficult, but my own experience is that where there is a mutual commitment to truth, and truth-seeking, relationships can be built between religious believers and secularists, and they can indeed reason together and even collaborate on some important matters. The minimum condition is this: interlocutors, however wide and deep their substantive philosophical or other differences, need to share the conviction that business between them is to be conducted in the proper currency of intellectual discourse—namely, reasons, evidence, and arguments.</b><br /><br /><b>SS: You have spent your career as a prominent critic of the kind of Rawlsian liberalism that attempts to push Christian belief and practice into a completely private sphere. At the same time, you have been a champion of the kind of liberalism defended by John Courtney Murray, one that sees freedom of religion as vital to a flourishing society. Many young conservatives today, influenced by figures like Patrick Deneen and Alasdair MacIntyre, argue that this latter kind of liberalism reduces to the former. Put differently, they argue that American liberal institutions ultimately lead to a supposedly neutral public square that in fact denies the legitimacy of Christianity and forces it into a ghetto. As proof, they use cases like Bostock and Obergefell and President Biden’s recent executive order mandating that schools must force women to compete against men with gender dysphoria in sports.</b><br /><br /><b>What do you think distinguishes your form of liberalism from this kind of Rawlsian liberalism? What is it about your form that you believe would robustly defend against evils such as abortion, pornography, the sterilization of children under the guise of “gender affirmation,” and ultimately the suppression of Christian religious expression?</b><br /><br /><b>RG: I built my scholarly career as a critic of liberalism, but that does not mean that I reject everything liberals stand for or support everything they oppose. Some of what they believe, or have traditionally said they believe, I believe. For example, they have traditionally said they believe in freedom of thought and speech. So do I. They have said they believe in religious liberty. So do I. They say they believe in the equal dignity of all human beings. So do I. Sometimes we do actually believe in the same principles—even if our reasoning to the affirmation of those principles differs somewhat (or even a great deal). Sometimes we have dramatically different conceptions of principles for which we use the same labels (e.g., equal dignity).</b><br /><br /><b>I certainly disagree with anyone who in the name of liberalism (or anything else) endorses abortion, pornography, “gender affirmation” surgery, or the suppression of religious expression. I also disagree with anyone—the late Professor Rawls, for example—who holds that sound principles of justice and the common good can be identified, or that political institutions can and should be designed, without reference to the human good (or disputed questions of the human good).</b><br /><br /><b>The fundamental error in the forms of liberalism that have been dominant in academic philosophy and political theory in my lifetime has been the belief that, in constitutional essentials and matters of basic justice, it is necessary for law and government to retain a stance of neutrality on questions of what makes for, or detracts from, a valuable and morally worthy way of life. So my conception and defense of equality, for example, or my conceptions and defenses of basic civil liberties such as freedom of speech and religious liberty, are natural-law conceptions and defenses—they reflect judgments about human goods and how best to protect them; they are not shaped by, or grounded in, appeals to an alleged requirement of moral neutrality.</b><br /><br /><b>The fundamental error in the forms of liberalism that have been dominant in academic philosophy and political theory in my lifetime has been the belief that, in constitutional essentials and matters of basic justice, it is necessary for law and government to retain a stance of neutrality on questions of what makes for, or detracts from, a valuable and morally worthy way of life.</b><br /><br /><b>SS: Recently an intra-conservative debate has arisen between strict originalists and what your friend </b><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/common-good-constitutionalism/609037/" style="font-weight: bold;">Adrian Vermuele</a><b> has called “common-good constitutionalists.” Here at Public Discourse, we recently ran an exchange between </b><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/02/74146/" style="font-weight: bold;">Josh Hammer</a><b>, who calls for a judicial philosophy of “common-good originalism,” and </b><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/03/74424/" style="font-weight: bold;">Ed Whelan</a><b>, who finds this position incoherent and imprudent.</b><br /><br /><b>Strict originalists like Whelan and Scalia argue that a judge’s job is exclusively to apply the law as written, and that it is the legislature’s job to make judgments of the rightness or wrongness of a given law. Common-good constitutionalists, on the other hand, argue that there is no such thing as value-free application of law. They argue that judges must be well-formed in order to make good political judgments in each particular case. In their view, if conservatives stick with strict originalism, we will continue to lose every important political battle, because we are not making a substantive argument for why a policy is good. As a result, progressivism will continue to transform our culture in deeply damaging ways.</b><br /><br /><b>What is your pitch to young conservatives, especially young law students and judges, to embrace strict originalism instead of common-good constitutionalism? If legislators have consistently failed to craft laws in ways that incline citizens toward the good and the separation of powers has essentially collapsed, why not use the judiciary and the administrative state to make our society more conducive to human flourishing?</b><br /><br /><b>RG: Originalism is now a well-developed theory (or family of theories) of constitutional interpretation. Its strengths and weaknesses are well-known. Its leading exponent—the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia—described it as “the lesser evil.” “Common-good constitutionalism” has historic roots, but as a constitutional interpretative theory it is still being worked out. It will be interesting and instructive to observe its development in the hands of first-rate thinkers such as Professor Vermeule.</b><br /><br /><b>I’ve already indicated that I believe that justice and the common good require that laws and policies be shaped in light of our best judgments of what makes for and detracts from a valuable and morally worthy way of life. Law cannot be, and must not aspire to be, substantively neutral—that is, neutral on questions of morality and human well-being and fulfillment. That, however, is a view about lawmaking. It does not propose an answer to the question of the role of the judge in our legal system or any other; nor does it offer a theory of the proper allocation of lawmaking authority among various institutional actors (including judges) in a political system.</b><br /><br /><b>Fundamentally, I do not think that the scope of authority of judges is settled by principles of natural law; rather, that is a matter that any particular system resolves by positive law, and may legitimately settle in different ways. There is no single, uniquely correct resolution or settlement that provides a fixed standard of justice for all societies.</b><br /><br /><b>My own view of the proper interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is that the judge (or other interpreter) should be guided by the text; the logical implications (and presuppositions) of its provisions; its structure and the structure of its various provisions (as well as the structure of the complex system of government it establishes); and the public meaning of its terms at the time of their ratification. I don’t know what this makes me, as far as labeling is concerned. It does preserve in general (and in principle) the distinction between legislation and adjudication, and between the legislator, as lawmaker, and the judge, as law-applier; and preserving such a distinction strikes me as important—not because the common good doesn’t matter, but rather because it does. Achieving and maintaining the rule of law are requirements of the common good, as, relatedly, are judicial objectivity, the relative autonomy of law, and the principle of equal justice according to law. Sometimes the way officials occupying particular offices, such as judges, serve the common good is by playing their procedural roles well and being careful to respect the legal (e.g., constitutional) limits of their authority—even if that means refraining from pursuing the common good in the direct way that officials occupying certain other offices (e.g., legislators) might legitimately (i.e., pursuant to their legal authority) do.</b><br /><br /><b>Achieving and maintaining the rule of law are requirements of the common good, as, relatedly, are judicial objectivity, the relative autonomy of law, and the principle of equal justice according to law.</b><br /><br /><b>SS: In the early 2000s, the vision of thinkers like yourself played a major role in political and moral debates. The President’s Council on Bioethics, for example, was hugely influential. In many ways, it seems like the influence of natural law reasoning has waned in the GOP, if not the federal judiciary. Why do you think that is? If Father Richard John Neuhaus were alive today, what wisdom do you think he might offer us about our current situation?</b><br /><br /><b>RG: Bill Clinton was something of a policy wonk, but George W. Bush was much more interested in moral and political philosophy—in ideas. This will scandalize some people, but the truth is that President Bush was more interested in ideas—much more interested in ideas—than Barack Obama was. He was certainly more interested in them than Donald Trump was.</b><br /><br /><b>I think this largely explains why conservative intellectuals of a certain stripe—Fr. Neuhaus, Leon Kass, Michael Novak, Mary Ann Glendon, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, James Q. Wilson, Jean Bethke Elshtain, and others—were especially influential in the early 2000s. Clinton and Obama both had bioethics councils, but they had nothing approaching the influence and high profile that the Bush bioethics council, chaired originally by Dr. Kass, had. Of course, President Trump, regrettably, did not establish a bioethics council. Many of the intellectuals with whom President Bush was in conversation were—you’re right about this—either natural law thinkers themselves or associated with ideas or, more broadly, traditions of thought that are not entirely out of sync with the thinking of natural law theorists. Such thinkers are certainly not likely to have roles in Joe Biden’s administration. Will they—or their successors—have roles in future Republican administrations? Naturally, that depends on who the presidents are. Lots of Republican presidential aspirants, or possible aspirants, are men and women of ideas. It’s easy to picture people like Ryan Anderson, Yuval Levin, Daniel Mark, Melissa Moschella, Sherif Girgis, Devorah Goldman, and Alexandra DeSanctis having influence in a Rubio, DeSantis, Noem, Sasse, or Cotton administration.</b><br /><br /><b>You asked what wisdom Fr. Neuhaus would have for us, were he alive today. That’s an easy question to answer. He would say what he never tired of saying: “Remember, our job is to be faithful—ever faithful—standing boldly and fighting for what’s right; the victory will surely come, but its timing and terms are not up to us. The victory will come in God’s time and on his terms. We must stick to doing our job, and not try to do His. We are merely His instruments. So, however dark things may seem, never yield to despair. Leave the timing and terms of the victory to God. Be faithful—ever faithful.”</b><br /><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b style="color: #20124d;">About the Author</b><br /><br /><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/serena-sigillito" style="color: #20124d; font-weight: bold;">SERENA SIGILLITO</a><b style="color: #20124d;">Serena Sigillito is Editor of Public Discourse. She recently completed a Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship at The Fund for American Studies, focusing on contemporary American women’s experiences of work and motherhood. You can follow her work here. Serena earned her BA i...</b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/serena-sigillito" style="color: #20124d; font-weight: bold;"> READ MORE</a><br /><br /><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge" style="color: #20124d; font-weight: bold;">ROBERT GEORGE</a><b style="color: #20124d;">Robert P. George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University. He has served as Chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and as a member of the President�...</b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge" style="color: #20124d; font-weight: bold;"> READ MORE</a><br /><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#" style="font-weight: bold;">Read more here</a><b style="color: #2b00fe;"> - Source: www.thepublicdiscourse.com</b></div></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-14334866300077960292022-01-01T09:46:00.000-08:002022-01-01T09:46:27.634-08:00Donde hay un compromiso mutuo con la verdad y la búsqueda de la verdad, se pueden construir relaciones entre creyentes religiosos y secularistas<br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">De los archivos: ¿Podemos todavía razonar juntos? Una conversación con Robert P. George</span><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">POR </span><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/serena-sigillito/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">SERENA SIGILLITO</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;"> Y </span><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">ROBERT P. GEORGE</a></div> <br /><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><i>Nota de los editores de Public Discourse: esta semana, mientras nuestro personal se toma una semana libre entre Navidad y el año nuevo, mostramos conversaciones pasadas que hemos tenido con destacados intelectuales. La discusión de Serena y Robert George se publicó originalmente el 20 de marzo de 2021. ¡Que disfruten!</i></span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"><blockquote><i>Donde hay un compromiso mutuo con la verdad y la búsqueda de la verdad, se pueden construir relaciones entre creyentes religiosos y secularistas, y de hecho pueden razonar juntos. La condición mínima es la siguiente: los interlocutores, por muy amplios y profundos que sean sus diferencias filosóficas o de otro tipo, deben compartir la convicción de que los negocios entre ellos deben llevarse a cabo en la vigencia adecuada del discurso intelectual, es decir, razones, pruebas y argumentos.</i></blockquote></span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En la última entrega de nuestra serie de entrevistas Public Discourse , la editora de PD Serena Sigillito habla con Robert P. George sobre si es posible descubrir las verdades de la ley natural en nuestra cultura secular, el problema de apelar a la "neutralidad" en la identificación de principios. de la justicia y el diseño de las instituciones políticas, y el papel adecuado de los jueces en la promoción del bien común. El profesor George es Herbert W. Vaughan Senior Fellow del Witherspoon Institute, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence y Director del Programa James Madison sobre Ideales e Instituciones Americanas en la Universidad de Princeton, y </span><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/author/rgeorge/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">colaborador frecuente</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> de Public Discourse .</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Serena Sigillito: ¡ Muchas gracias por tomarte el tiempo de responder a mis preguntas hoy, Robby! En esta entrevista, me gustaría centrarme en las perspectivas y la posibilidad del razonamiento de la ley natural en el clima político y cultural actual.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Es bien conocido y ampliamente respetado por su apasionada defensa de la ley natural y su potencial para ayudar a las personas de buena fe a razonar bien juntas, incluso en cuestiones polémicas como la naturaleza del matrimonio. A lo largo de su carrera, ha ayudado a construir instituciones impresionantes como el Programa James Madison y el Instituto Witherspoon (el hogar de Public Discoursey mi propio empleador). Tanto el JMP como Witherspoon trabajan con jóvenes inteligentes y motivados que sienten pasión por la búsqueda de la verdad. A menudo son personas de fe, que tienen puntos de vista tradicionales sobre temas como el aborto, la anticoncepción, el matrimonio, el sexo y el género. Sin embargo, he descubierto que muchos —quizá la mayoría— de estos jóvenes son muy pesimistas sobre las perspectivas de utilizar la argumentación de la ley natural para persuadir a sus pares sobre estas cuestiones.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿Por qué crees que es esto? ¿Qué les falta?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Robert George: La ideología progresista secular es ascendente en las instituciones de élite de nuestra sociedad: el gobierno federal, muchos gobiernos estatales, universidades, medios de comunicación y entretenimiento, artes, profesiones y asociaciones profesionales, sindicatos, fundaciones benéficas, grandes corporaciones comerciales y incesantemente. David Brooks dice con razón que esto le da al "Despertado" un monopolio, o casi un monopolio, del poder cultural. Obviamente, permite la transmisión de la ideología despierta, una pseudorreligión fundamentalista y cada vez más militante, a las generaciones futuras y dificulta que los disidentes desafíen esa ideología y, de hecho, sobrevivan sin ser objeto de discriminación e incluso de "cancelación".</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Aquellos de nosotros que lo desafiamos, ya sea en nombre de la ley natural y los derechos naturales o desde alguna otra perspectiva, estamos librando lo que equivale a una guerra de guerrillas intelectual contra un adversario extremadamente poderoso y profundamente arraigado. Que sea una guerra intelectual, una guerra por corazones y mentes, no lo hace más fácil. Cabría esperar cierto pesimismo en estas circunstancias.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SS: En una discusión sobre la defensa del matrimonio tradicional, una estudiante graduada de Princeton me dijo que se sentía incómoda con la idea de tratar de convencer a otros de que se opusieran al matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo apelando a las ciencias sociales o al tipo de argumentos que ha articulado en What Es el matrimonio . Aunque ella misma es católica, para esta estudiante, tal enfoque le pareció engañoso, como el contrabando de preceptos religiosos bajo el disfraz de neutralidad e investigación intelectual desinteresada.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿Cómo le responderías? ¿Es intelectualmente honesto presentar argumentos basados en la ley natural o las ciencias sociales para posiciones que solo ocupas por tu propia fe religiosa?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">RG: Según la descripción que ha hecho de ella, parece que la estudiante de posgrado con la que estaba hablando no comprende las enseñanzas de su propia fe católica en lo que respecta a la naturaleza de la moralidad, las cuestiones morales y los juicios morales, incluidos los relacionados con el matrimonio. El catolicismo abraza y propone conscientemente una cierta comprensión del matrimonio y las normas que lo configuran y protegen por razones, razones que en principio son accesibles a cualquiera, católico o no. El punto de </span><a href="https://www.encounterbooks.com/books/what-is-marriage-man-and-woman-a-defense/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿Qué es el matrimonio? Hombre y mujer: una defensa</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> consistía en articular, explicar y defender esas razones.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El catolicismo no es una religión fideísta. Todo lo contrario. Su visión básica del matrimonio como unión conyugal (y no una mera forma de compañerismo sexual romántico o pareja de hecho), por ejemplo, no es una cuestión de "preceptos religiosos" que nosotros (o el Papa, o la Iglesia) conocemos porque Dios nos las ha comunicado sólo mediante una revelación especial. Es posible que su amiga crea lo que cree sobre el matrimonio porque eso es lo que la Iglesia cree y enseña; pero la Iglesia misma cree y enseña lo que cree y enseña sobre el tema por razones que, a la luz de la propia Iglesia, y sus enseñanzas, están disponibles para ser entendidas por una "investigación intelectual desinteresada". Estas razones son cuestiones de derecho natural.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Los interlocutores, por amplias y profundas que sean sus diferencias filosóficas o de otro tipo, deben compartir la convicción de que los negocios entre ellos deben llevarse a cabo en la vigencia adecuada del discurso intelectual, es decir, razones, pruebas y argumentos.</span><br /> <br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SS: Tomás de Aquino comenzó la Summa Theologica admitiendo que es muy difícil descubrir muchas de las verdades más importantes solo por medio de nuestra razón, escribiendo: “Incluso en lo que respecta a las verdades acerca de Dios que la razón humana pudo haber descubierto, fue necesario que el hombre sea enseñado por una revelación divina; porque la verdad acerca de Dios tal como la podría descubrir la razón, sólo la conocerían unos pocos, y eso después de mucho tiempo, y con la mezcla de muchos errores ”. Por eso, por ejemplo, Dios reveló a través de los diez mandamientos que no debemos mentir ni robar, aunque esas son prohibiciones que teóricamente deberían ser descubiertas solo a través de la razón.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En su libro Making Men Moral , ha escrito sobre las formas en que la ley puede ayudar a dirigir a los seres humanos hacia lo que es bueno. Hoy, sin embargo, las instituciones educativas y los órganos de gobierno más influyentes de nuestra sociedad están dominados por una visión profundamente defectuosa de lo que significa ser humano y cómo se debe vivir. Muchos conservadores se han desanimado tanto por la forma en que el carácter y el intelecto de sus conciudadanos han sido deformados que han dejado de intentar persuadirlos a través de la razón. Otros expresan dudas de que la mayoría de las personas realmente toman decisiones basadas en la razón.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Sin embargo, ha mostrado un optimismo feroz sobre la posibilidad de razonar juntos en un espíritu de amistad intelectual. Pienso, por ejemplo, en su larga amistad con Cornel West. ¿Qué hace posible esa amistad? ¿Es su fe cristiana compartida la que les permite mantener tal afecto y respeto mutuos a pesar de sus profundos y duraderos desacuerdos? En una cultura cada vez más secular, en la que el desacuerdo a menudo se interpreta como violencia existencial, ¿cree que la mayoría de las personas todavía son capaces de razonar juntas de esta manera?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">RG: Me declararé culpable de la esperanza, no del optimismo (o pesimismo). La esperanza es una virtud y todos deberíamos tenerla. La desesperación es el pecado contra el Espíritu Santo. La esperanza nos mueve a actuar, confiando en Dios mucho más que en nuestras propias pobres habilidades y esfuerzos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Cornel West es un querido, querido amigo, verdaderamente un hermano. En la base de nuestra amistad, nuestro vínculo fraterno, está el amor por la verdad y el compromiso por la búsqueda de la verdad. Eso, obviamente, está conectado con nuestra fe cristiana compartida, y nuestra creencia de que la verdad última, la verdad suprema, no es una proposición (o un conjunto de proposiciones) sino, más bien, una persona: Jesucristo, que es el camino, el la verdad y la vida. Nuestro trabajo conjunto, incluso en el aula, está respaldado y sostenido, a pesar de nuestras diversas diferencias políticas y de otro tipo, mediante este intercambio.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Usted pregunta si tal trabajo y razonamiento juntos pueden ser realizados por personas "en una cultura cada vez más secular, en la que el desacuerdo a menudo se interpreta como violencia existencial". Bueno, la falta de algo como la fe compartida lo hace difícil, pero mi propia experiencia es que donde hay un compromiso mutuo con la verdad y la búsqueda de la verdad, se pueden construir relaciones entre creyentes religiosos y secularistas, y de hecho pueden razonar juntos y incluso colaborar en algunos asuntos importantes. La condición mínima es la siguiente: los interlocutores, por amplias y profundas que sean sus diferencias filosóficas o de otro tipo, deben compartir la convicción de que los negocios entre ellos deben llevarse a cabo en la vigencia adecuada del discurso intelectual, es decir, razones, pruebas y argumentos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SS: Ha pasado su carrera como un destacado crítico del tipo de liberalismo rawlsiano que intenta llevar la creencia y la práctica cristianas a una esfera completamente privada. Al mismo tiempo, ha sido un campeón del tipo de liberalismo defendido por John Courtney Murray, uno que ve la libertad de religión como algo vital para una sociedad floreciente. Muchos jóvenes conservadores de hoy, influenciados por figuras como Patrick Deneen y Alasdair MacIntyre, argumentan que este último tipo de liberalismo se reduce al primero. Dicho de otra manera, argumentan que las instituciones liberales estadounidenses finalmente conducen a una plaza pública supuestamente neutral que, de hecho, niega la legitimidad del cristianismo y lo obliga a entrar en un gueto. Como prueba, utilizan casos como Bostock y Obergefell. y la reciente orden ejecutiva del presidente Biden que ordena que las escuelas deben obligar a las mujeres a competir contra los hombres con disforia de género en los deportes.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿Qué crees que distingue tu forma de liberalismo de este tipo de liberalismo rawlsiano? ¿Qué hay en tu forma que crees que defendería enérgicamente contra males como el aborto, la pornografía, la esterilización de niños bajo el disfraz de “afirmación de género” y, en última instancia, la supresión de la expresión religiosa cristiana?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">RG: Construí mi carrera académica como crítico del liberalismo, pero eso no significa que rechace todo lo que los liberales defienden o apoye todo lo que se oponen. Algunas de las cosas que creen, o que tradicionalmente han dicho que creen, creo. Por ejemplo, tradicionalmente han dicho que creen en la libertad de pensamiento y expresión. Yo también. Han dicho que creen en la libertad religiosa. Yo también. Dicen que creen en la igual dignidad de todos los seres humanos. Yo también. A veces creemos en los mismos principios, incluso si nuestro razonamiento para la afirmación de esos principios difiere un poco (o incluso mucho). A veces tenemos concepciones dramáticamente diferentes de los principios para los que usamos las mismas etiquetas (por ejemplo, igual dignidad).</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Ciertamente no estoy de acuerdo con cualquiera que en nombre del liberalismo (o cualquier otra cosa) respalde el aborto, la pornografía, la cirugía de “afirmación de género” o la supresión de la expresión religiosa. También estoy en desacuerdo con cualquiera, el difunto profesor Rawls, por ejemplo, que sostenga que se pueden identificar principios sólidos de justicia y el bien común, o que las instituciones políticas pueden y deben diseñarse, sin hacer referencia al bien humano (o cuestiones controvertidas de el bien humano).</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El error fundamental en las formas de liberalismo que han sido dominantes en la filosofía académica y la teoría política durante mi vida ha sido la creencia de que, en lo esencial constitucional y en cuestiones de justicia básica, es necesario que la ley y el gobierno mantengan una postura de neutralidad sobre preguntas sobre lo que hace o quita mérito a una forma de vida valiosa y moralmente digna. Así que mi concepción y defensa de la igualdad, por ejemplo, o mis concepciones y defensas de las libertades civiles básicas como la libertad de expresión y la libertad religiosa, son concepciones y defensas de derecho natural: reflejan juicios sobre los bienes humanos y la mejor forma de protegerlos; no están moldeados ni basados en apelaciones a un supuesto requisito de neutralidad moral.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El error fundamental en las formas de liberalismo que han sido dominantes en la filosofía académica y la teoría política durante mi vida ha sido la creencia de que, en lo esencial constitucional y en cuestiones de justicia básica, es necesario que la ley y el gobierno mantengan una postura de neutralidad sobre preguntas sobre lo que hace o quita mérito a una forma de vida valiosa y moralmente digna.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SS: Recientemente ha surgido un debate intraconservador entre originalistas estrictos y lo que su amigo </span><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/common-good-constitutionalism/609037/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Adrian Vermuele</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> ha llamado "constitucionalistas del bien común". Aquí en Public Discourse, realizamos recientemente un intercambio entre </span><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/02/74146/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Josh Hammer</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> , quien aboga por una filosofía judicial del “originalismo del bien común”, y </span><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/03/74424/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Ed Whelan</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> , quien encuentra esta posición incoherente e imprudente.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Originalistas estrictos como Whelan y Scalia argumentan que el trabajo de un juez es exclusivamente aplicar la ley tal como está escrita, y que es trabajo de la legislatura emitir juicios sobre lo correcto o incorrecto de una ley dada. Los constitucionalistas del bien común, por otro lado, argumentan que no existe la aplicación de la ley sin valores. Argumentan que los jueces deben estar bien formados para poder emitir buenos juicios políticos en cada caso en particular. En su opinión, si los conservadores se adhieren al originalismo estricto, continuaremos perdiendo todas las batallas políticas importantes, porque no estamos presentando un argumento sustancial de por qué una política es buena. Como resultado, el progresismo continuará transformando nuestra cultura de formas profundamente dañinas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿Cuál es su propuesta para los jóvenes conservadores, especialmente los jóvenes estudiantes de derecho y jueces, para abrazar el originalismo estricto en lugar del constitucionalismo del bien común? Si los legisladores han fracasado sistemáticamente en elaborar leyes de manera que inclinen a los ciudadanos hacia el bien y la separación de poderes se ha derrumbado esencialmente, ¿por qué no utilizar el poder judicial y el estado administrativo para hacer que nuestra sociedad sea más propicia para el florecimiento humano?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">RG: El originalismo es ahora una teoría (o familia de teorías) bien desarrollada de interpretación constitucional. Sus fortalezas y debilidades son bien conocidas. Su principal exponente, el difunto juez de la Corte Suprema Antonin Scalia, lo describió como "el mal menor". El “constitucionalismo del bien común” tiene raíces históricas, pero como teoría interpretativa constitucional todavía se está elaborando. Será interesante e instructivo observar su desarrollo de la mano de pensadores de primer orden como el profesor Vermeule.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Ya he indicado que creo que la justicia y el bien común requieren que las leyes y políticas se formulen a la luz de nuestros mejores juicios sobre lo que favorece y resta valor a una forma de vida valiosa y moralmente digna. La ley no puede ser, ni debe aspirar a ser, sustancialmente neutral, es decir, neutral en cuestiones de moralidad y bienestar y realización humanos. Sin embargo, ese es un punto de vista sobre la elaboración de leyes. No propone una respuesta a la cuestión del papel del juez en nuestro ordenamiento jurídico ni en ningún otro; tampoco ofrece una teoría de la asignación adecuada de la autoridad legislativa entre varios actores institucionales (incluidos los jueces) en un sistema político.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Fundamentalmente, no creo que el alcance de la autoridad de los jueces esté determinado por los principios del derecho natural; más bien, ese es un asunto que cualquier sistema en particular resuelve mediante el derecho positivo, y puede resolverse legítimamente de diferentes maneras. No existe una resolución o arreglo único y exclusivamente correcto que proporcione un estándar fijo de justicia para todas las sociedades.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Mi propia opinión de la interpretación adecuada de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos es que el juez (u otro intérprete) debe guiarse por el texto; las implicaciones lógicas (y presuposiciones) de sus disposiciones; su estructura y la estructura de sus diversas disposiciones (así como la estructura del complejo sistema de gobierno que establece); y el significado público de sus términos en el momento de su ratificación. No sé en qué me convierte esto, en lo que a etiquetado se refiere. Conserva en general (y en principio) la distinción entre legislación y adjudicación, y entre el legislador, como legislador, y el juez, como aplicador de la ley; y preservar tal distinción me parece importante, no porque el bien común no importe, sino porque importa. Lograr y mantener el imperio de la ley son requisitos del bien común, como, en consecuencia, lo son la objetividad judicial, la autonomía relativa de la ley y el principio de igualdad de justicia de acuerdo con la ley. A veces, la forma en que los funcionarios que ocupan cargos particulares, como los jueces, sirven al bien común es desempeñando bien sus funciones procesales y teniendo cuidado de respetar los límites legales (por ejemplo, constitucionales) de su autoridad, incluso si eso significa abstenerse de perseguir el bien común. de la manera directa que los funcionarios que ocupan otros cargos (por ejemplo, legisladores) legítimamente (es decir, de conformidad con su autoridad legal) pueden hacerlo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Lograr y mantener el imperio de la ley son requisitos del bien común, como, en consecuencia, lo son la objetividad judicial, la autonomía relativa de la ley y el principio de igualdad de justicia de acuerdo con la ley.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SS: A principios de la década de 2000, la visión de pensadores como usted jugó un papel importante en los debates políticos y morales. El Consejo de Bioética del Presidente, por ejemplo, fue muy influyente. En muchos sentidos, parece que la influencia del razonamiento del derecho natural ha disminuido en el Partido Republicano, si no en el poder judicial federal. ¿Por qué crees que es? Si el padre Richard John Neuhaus estuviera vivo hoy, ¿qué sabiduría crees que podría ofrecernos sobre nuestra situación actual?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">RG: Bill Clinton era un experto en políticas, pero George W. Bush estaba mucho más interesado en la filosofía moral y política, en las ideas. Esto escandalizará a algunas personas, pero la verdad es que el presidente Bush estaba más interesado en las ideas —mucho más interesado en las ideas— que Barack Obama. Ciertamente estaba más interesado en ellos que Donald Trump.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Creo que esto explica en gran medida por qué los intelectuales conservadores de cierta línea — el p. Neuhaus, Leon Kass, Michael Novak, Mary Ann Glendon, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, James Q. Wilson, Jean Bethke Elshtain y otros, fueron especialmente influyentes a principios de la década de 2000. Clinton y Obama tenían ambos consejos de bioética, pero no tenían nada que se acercara a la influencia y el alto perfil que tenía el consejo de bioética de Bush, presidido originalmente por el Dr. Kass. Por supuesto, el presidente Trump, lamentablemente, no estableció un consejo de bioética. Muchos de los intelectuales con los que el presidente Bush estuvo conversando eran —tiene razón en esto— pensadores del derecho natural ellos mismos o asociados con ideas o, más ampliamente, tradiciones de pensamiento que no están completamente sincronizadas con el pensamiento del derecho natural. teóricos. Ciertamente, no es probable que esos pensadores desempeñen funciones en la administración de Joe Biden. ¿Tendrán ellos —o sus sucesores— papeles en las futuras administraciones republicanas? Naturalmente, eso depende de quiénes sean los presidentes. Muchos aspirantes presidenciales republicanos, o posibles aspirantes, son hombres y mujeres de ideas. Es fácil imaginar a personas como Ryan Anderson, Yuval Levin, Daniel Mark, Melissa Moschella, Sherif Girgis, Devorah Goldman y Alexandra DeSanctis teniendo influencia en una administración de Rubio, DeSantis, Noem, Sasse o Cotton.</span><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: 700; text-align: center;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: 700; text-align: center;">Usted preguntó qué sabiduría el P. Neuhaus lo habría hecho para nosotros, si estuviera vivo hoy. Esa es una pregunta fácil de responder. Diría lo que nunca se cansaba de decir: “Recuerde, nuestro trabajo es ser fieles, siempre fieles, defendiéndonos con valentía y luchando por lo que es correcto; la victoria seguramente llegará, pero el momento y los términos no dependen de nosotros. La victoria vendrá en el tiempo de Dios y en sus términos. Debemos ceñirnos a hacer nuestro trabajo y no tratar de hacer el Suyo. Somos simplemente sus instrumentos. Así que, por muy oscuras que parezcan las cosas, nunca cedas a la desesperación. Deje el momento y los términos de la victoria en manos de Dios. Sé fiel, siempre fiel ".</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/12/79702/">Leer aquí</a> - Fuente: www.thepublicdiscourse.com</b></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-42329425807572483952022-01-01T06:03:00.001-08:002022-01-01T06:03:37.303-08:00Some of the most important observations over the course of an awful year<p> </p><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">The Awful Year We Just Lived Through</span><br style="text-align: start;" /><br style="text-align: start;" /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">by </span><a href="https://www.dailysignal.com/author/dennis-prager/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">Dennis Prager</a></div><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">As this is my last column of 2021, I thought it would be worthwhile to review some of the most important observations I made over the course of an awful year. I hope you agree, and wish you—and our country—a happier New Year.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JAN. 5: These past few years have taught me not to so quickly judge the quiet Germans, Russians, etc. Of course, I still judge Germans who helped the Nazis and Germans who in any way hurt Jews. But the Germans who did nothing? Not so fast.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">What has changed my thinking has been watching what is happening in America (and Canada and Australia and elsewhere, for that matter). The ease with which tens of millions of Americans have accepted irrational, unconstitutional, and unprecedented police state-type restrictions on their freedoms, including even the freedom to make a living, has been, to understate the case, sobering.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JAN. 12: We are faced with a lockdown on speech the likes of which have never been seen in America. And the parallels with Germany are even more stark. What the left is doing is announcing—and enforcing—that conservatives “do not belong” in our society.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The parallels to 1933 are precise. And most good Americans are keeping silent, just as did most Germans. Though they do not risk being beaten up, are Americans in 2021 as afraid of the American left as Germans in 1933 were of the German fascists? We’re about to find out.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JAN. 19: Why does the left need to crush all dissent? This is a question made all the more stark because there is no parallel on the right: Conservatives do not shut down dissent or debate.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The answer is the left fears dissent. And it does so for good reason. Leftism is essentially a giant balloon filled with nothing but hot air. Therefore, no matter how big the balloon—the Democratic Party, The New York Times, Yale University—all it takes is a mere pin to burst it.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">FEB. 9: The American medical profession as a whole and many individual doctors are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans—very possibly, more than that. Along with the media—from The New York Times to Google/YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter—Americans have been denied both lifesaving information and lifesaving drugs.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">FEB. 23: If you don’t hate communism, you don’t care about, much less love, people.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MARCH 2: The great tragedy of our time is that liberals vote left. Virtually every value liberals have held for a century is now held by conservatives and scorned by leftists.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MARCH 9: Schools teach children to hate reason, tradition, America, Christianity, white people, excellence, freedom, and masculinity. Parents must either find a school that teaches reading, writing, and arithmetic rather than America-hatred, or they should homeschool their child.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MARCH 16: The bigger the government, the fewer the institutions in which people can feel important. Therefore, given the deep human need to feel important, people will look elsewhere for their importance—like fighting systemic racism, heteronormativity, capitalism, patriarchy, and transphobia. And, most of all, global warming—because you cannot feel more important than when you believe you are saving the world.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MARCH 30: When Christianity died in Europe, we got communism, fascism, and Nazism. What will we get in America if Christianity and Judeo-Christian values die?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">APRIL 6: Mask-wearing represents fear and blind obedience, not science.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">APRIL 20: Whites aren’t hated for slavery. They are hated for making America and for making Western civilization.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">APRIL 27: Affluence plus secularism equals boredom equals leftism.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">MAY 18: The left demands we believe and announce that men menstruate and give birth and that it is in no way unfair to girls and women when biological men compete in girls and women’s sports.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">In tens of thousands of American schools, students are brainwashed to believe that America was not founded in 1776, but in 1619. The world’s left demands that we believe Israel is the villain and Hamas is the victim.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JUNE 8: The single best thing Americans can do to counter the left-wing attack on America—against its freedoms, its schools, its families, its children, its governmental institutions, its sports, its news and entertainment media, its medical establishment, the CIA, the FBI, the State Department, and the military—is to take their children out of America’s schools.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Sending your child(ren) to most American schools is playing Russian roulette with their values—but unlike the gun in Russian roulette, which has a bullet in only one of its six chambers, the schools’ guns hold four or five bullets.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JUNE 15: Unconditional love is neither biblical nor rational nor moral. Can you name anything good that is or should be given with no moral or ethical conditions?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JUNE 22: If America is racist, why have millions of blacks emigrated here? Did Jews emigrate to Germany in the 1930s?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JUNE 29: “Safetyism,” like all religions, places what it values—in this case, being safe—above other values. Safetyism explains the willingness of Americans to give up their most cherished values—including liberty—in the name of safety.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The desire to lead as safe a life as possible is a major factor that explains why fewer and fewer young Americans are getting married and even fewer are having children. Neither marriage nor having children is safe. Both are filled with risks.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">You can live a safe life. Or you can live a full life. You can’t live both.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JULY 20: You have a right to be transgender. You don’t have a right to expose your penis to women.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">JULY 27: It is hard to imagine greater proof of the power of mass media and of the left than a normal woman celebrating her daughter’s choice not to be a mother and not to make her a grandmother because of climate change.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">AUG. 24: Imagine if some of the biggest cities in America seceded from their states. Imagine Illinois without Chicago, Pennsylvania without Philadelphia, California without Los Angeles or San Francisco, New York state without New York City, or Texas without Houston, Dallas, or San Antonio.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Those states would lose a major tax base and some of their best orchestras and other artistic institutions. But the gains in quality of life would completely offset any financial or artistic losses.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Big cities have been and continue to be centers of destructive ideas, and the people living in them are generally coarser and often just plain meaner.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 7: Colorblind means one does not believe a person’s color is in any way significant. There is little that reveals the immorality, dishonesty, and racism of the left more than its war on colorblindness.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 14: Will the left succeed? Unless Americans fight the left as hard as the Union fought the slave states, the answer is yes.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 21: As America has become more secular, it has become less free. Individuals can differ as to whether these two facts are correlated, but no honest person can deny they are facts.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 5: There is almost nothing Democrats can do to damage America, or Israel, that would change most American Jews’ political leanings. The latest example took place just last week. A college student speaking to the vice president of the United States, a Democrat, condemned America for supporting Israel, and charged Israel with committing “ethnic genocide” against Palestinians.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Vice President Kamala Harris’ response?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“Your voice, your perspective, your experience, your truth cannot be suppressed, and it must be heard.”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 19: The fate of America and the West lies largely in the hands of liberals. There are simply not enough leftists to destroy our most revered institutions. They need liberals to serve as fellow travelers to accomplish their ends.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 26: If no one goes to prison for actor Alec Baldwin’s accidental killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, our society will have failed a crucial moral test. We will be saying human life is not sacred; that it, in effect, is of little or no consequence.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 2: As incredible as this assertion is to just about all religious people and virtually all conservatives, most leftists do not believe stealing is wrong.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 9: Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, confirmed an Israeli study: “In Israel, vaccinated individuals had 27 times higher risk of symptomatic COVID infection compared to those with natural immunity from prior COVID disease.”</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The denial of the efficacy of natural immunity is among the many reasons so many Americans no longer trust the American medical establishment.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 23: All my life, I thought love and hate were the two most powerful human emotions. But owing to recent events, I have changed my mind. I now understand that for most people, fear is the strongest emotion.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">DEC. 7: If you are a conservative, why should you come out of the closet?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">First, you will sleep better. Staying in the closet exacts a serious mental price. Second, kindred spirits, all quality people, will reach out to you, some of whom will undoubtedly become close friends. Third, you will respect yourself more. Fourth, you will help save this country from tyranny. For some, that is reason enough.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">DEC. 21: Trans swimmer Lia Thomas is a cheat. As far as sports are concerned, one’s biology, not one’s gender identity, is all that matters.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">COPYRIGHT 2021 CREATORS.COM</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.</span><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Read more</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> - Source: www.dailysignal.com</span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-82888427296611272962022-01-01T05:58:00.003-08:002022-01-01T06:03:59.899-08:00Las observaciones más importantes a lo largo de un año terrible<p> </p><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: x-large; font-weight: 700; text-align: start;">El año terrible que acabamos de vivir</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: x-large; font-weight: 700; text-align: start;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><span style="font-weight: 700; text-align: start;">by </span><a href="https://www.dailysignal.com/author/dennis-prager/" style="font-weight: bold;">Dennis Prager</a></span></div><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Como esta es mi última columna de 2021, pensé que valdría la pena revisar algunas de las observaciones más importantes que hice a lo largo de un año terrible. Espero que esté de acuerdo y le deseo a usted ya nuestro país un feliz año nuevo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">ENE. 5: Estos últimos años me han enseñado a no juzgar tan rápidamente a los alemanes tranquilos, rusos, etc. Por supuesto, todavía juzgo a los alemanes que ayudaron a los nazis y a los alemanes que de alguna manera lastimaron a los judíos. ¿Pero los alemanes que no hicieron nada? No tan rapido.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Lo que ha cambiado mi forma de pensar ha sido observar lo que está sucediendo en Estados Unidos (y en Canadá, Australia y otros lugares, para el caso). La facilidad con la que decenas de millones de estadounidenses han aceptado restricciones irracionales, inconstitucionales y sin precedentes del tipo de los estados policiales a sus libertades, incluida incluso la libertad de ganarse la vida, ha sido, para subestimar el caso, aleccionadora.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">ENE. 12: Nos enfrentamos a un bloqueo en el discurso como nunca se ha visto en Estados Unidos. Y los paralelismos con Alemania son aún más marcados. Lo que está haciendo la izquierda es anunciar — y hacer cumplir — que los conservadores “no pertenecen” a nuestra sociedad.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Los paralelos con 1933 son precisos. Y la mayoría de los buenos estadounidenses guardan silencio, al igual que la mayoría de los alemanes. Aunque no corren el riesgo de ser golpeados, ¿tienen los estadounidenses en 2021 tanto miedo a la izquierda estadounidense como los alemanes en 1933 a los fascistas alemanes? Estamos a punto de averiguarlo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">ENE. 19: ¿Por qué la izquierda necesita aplastar a todos los disidentes? Esta es una pregunta que se hace aún más cruda porque no hay paralelo en la derecha: los conservadores no cierran la disidencia ni el debate.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">La respuesta es que la izquierda teme disentir. Y lo hace por una buena razón. El izquierdismo es esencialmente un globo gigante lleno de aire caliente. Por lo tanto, no importa cuán grande sea el globo — el Partido Demócrata, el New York Times, la Universidad de Yale — todo lo que se necesita es un simple alfiler para reventarlo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">FEB. 9: La profesión médica estadounidense en su conjunto y muchos médicos individuales son responsables de la muerte de decenas de miles de estadounidenses, muy posiblemente, más que eso. Junto con los medios de comunicación, desde The New York Times hasta Google / YouTube, Facebook y Twitter, a los estadounidenses se les ha negado información y drogas que salvan vidas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">FEB. 23: Si no odias el comunismo, no te preocupas, y mucho menos amas, a la gente.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">2 DE MARZO: La gran tragedia de nuestro tiempo es que los liberales votan a la izquierda. Prácticamente todos los valores que los liberales han tenido durante un siglo ahora lo tienen los conservadores y los izquierdistas lo desprecian.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">9 DE MARZO: Las escuelas enseñan a los niños a odiar la razón, la tradición, Estados Unidos, el cristianismo, los blancos, la excelencia, la libertad y la masculinidad. Los padres deben encontrar una escuela que enseñe lectura, escritura y aritmética en lugar del odio hacia los Estados Unidos, o deben educar a sus hijos en el hogar.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">16 DE MARZO: Cuanto más grande sea el gobierno, menos instituciones en las que la gente pueda sentirse importante. Por lo tanto, dada la profunda necesidad humana de sentirse importante, la gente buscará su importancia en otra parte, como la lucha contra el racismo sistémico, la heteronormatividad, el capitalismo, el patriarcado y la transfobia. Y, sobre todo, el calentamiento global, porque no puede sentirse más importante que cuando cree que está salvando al mundo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">30 DE MARZO: Cuando el cristianismo murió en Europa, obtuvimos el comunismo, el fascismo y el nazismo. ¿Qué obtendremos en Estados Unidos si mueren el cristianismo y los valores judeocristianos?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">6 DE ABRIL: El uso de máscaras representa miedo y obediencia ciega, no ciencia.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">20 DE ABRIL: Los blancos no son odiados por ser esclavos. Se los odia por hacer América y por hacer la civilización occidental.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">27 DE ABRIL: Afluencia más secularismo es igual a aburrimiento es igual a izquierdismo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">18 DE MAYO: La izquierda exige que creamos y anunciemos que los hombres menstrúan y dan a luz y que de ninguna manera es injusto para las niñas y mujeres cuando los hombres biológicos compiten en deportes femeninos y femeninos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">En decenas de miles de escuelas estadounidenses, a los estudiantes se les lava el cerebro para creer que Estados Unidos no fue fundado en 1776, sino en 1619. La izquierda del mundo exige que creemos que Israel es el villano y Hamas la víctima.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">8 DE JUNIO: Lo mejor que pueden hacer los estadounidenses para contrarrestar el ataque de la izquierda contra Estados Unidos: sus libertades, sus escuelas, sus familias, sus niños, sus instituciones gubernamentales, sus deportes, sus medios de comunicación y entretenimiento, su establecimiento médico, la CIA, el FBI, el Departamento de Estado y las fuerzas armadas: sacarán a sus hijos de las escuelas de Estados Unidos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Enviar a sus hijos a la mayoría de las escuelas estadounidenses es jugar a la ruleta rusa con sus valores, pero a diferencia del arma en la ruleta rusa, que tiene una bala en solo una de sus seis cámaras, las armas de las escuelas tienen cuatro o cinco balas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">15 DE JUNIO: El amor incondicional no es ni bíblico ni racional ni moral. ¿Puede nombrar algo bueno que sea o deba darse sin condiciones morales o éticas?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">22 DE JUNIO: Si Estados Unidos es racista, ¿por qué han emigrado aquí millones de negros? ¿Los judíos emigraron a Alemania en la década de 1930?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">29 DE JUNIO: El “seguridadismo”, como todas las religiones, coloca lo que valora, en este caso, estar a salvo, por encima de otros valores. El Safetyism explica la disposición de los estadounidenses a renunciar a sus valores más preciados, incluida la libertad, en nombre de la seguridad.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">El deseo de llevar una vida lo más segura posible es un factor importante que explica por qué cada vez menos jóvenes estadounidenses se casan y aún menos tienen hijos. Ni el matrimonio ni tener hijos es seguro. Ambos están llenos de riesgos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Puedes vivir una vida segura. O puedes vivir una vida plena. No puedes vivir ambos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">20 DE JULIO: Tienes derecho a ser transgénero. No tienes derecho a exponer tu pene a las mujeres.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">27 DE JULIO: Es difícil imaginar una prueba más grande del poder de los medios de comunicación y de la izquierda que una mujer normal celebrando la decisión de su hija de no ser madre y no convertirla en abuela a causa del cambio climático.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">AGO. 24: Imagínese si algunas de las ciudades más grandes de Estados Unidos se separaran de sus estados. Imagínese Illinois sin Chicago, Pensilvania sin Filadelfia, California sin Los Ángeles o San Francisco, el estado de Nueva York sin la ciudad de Nueva York, o Texas sin Houston, Dallas o San Antonio.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Esos estados perderían una base impositiva importante y algunas de sus mejores orquestas y otras instituciones artísticas. Pero las ganancias en la calidad de vida compensarían por completo cualquier pérdida financiera o artística.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Las grandes ciudades han sido y siguen siendo centros de ideas destructivas, y las personas que viven en ellas son generalmente más toscas y, a menudo, simplemente más malas.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 7: Daltónico significa que uno no cree que el color de una persona sea significativo de ninguna manera. Hay pocas cosas que revelen la inmoralidad, la deshonestidad y el racismo de la izquierda más que su guerra contra el daltonismo.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 14: ¿Logrará la izquierda? A menos que los estadounidenses luchen contra la izquierda tan duro como la Unión luchó contra los estados esclavistas, la respuesta es sí.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">SEPT. 21: A medida que Estados Unidos se ha vuelto más secular, se ha vuelto menos libre. Los individuos pueden diferir en cuanto a si estos dos hechos están correlacionados, pero ninguna persona honesta puede negar que son hechos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 5: No hay casi nada que los demócratas puedan hacer para dañar a Estados Unidos, o Israel, que cambiaría las inclinaciones políticas de la mayoría de los judíos estadounidenses. El último ejemplo tuvo lugar la semana pasada. Un estudiante universitario que habló con el vicepresidente de los Estados Unidos, un demócrata, condenó a Estados Unidos por apoyar a Israel y acusó a Israel de cometer un "genocidio étnico" contra los palestinos.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">¿La respuesta de la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">“Tu voz, tu perspectiva, tu experiencia, tu verdad no pueden ser reprimidas y deben ser escuchadas”.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 19: El destino de Estados Unidos y Occidente está en gran parte en manos de los liberales. Simplemente no hay suficientes izquierdistas para destruir nuestras instituciones más veneradas. Necesitan liberales que sirvan como compañeros de viaje para lograr sus fines.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">OCT. 26: Si nadie va a prisión por el asesinato accidental de la directora de fotografía Halyna Hutchins por parte del actor Alec Baldwin, nuestra sociedad no habrá superado una prueba moral crucial. Diremos que la vida humana no es sagrada; que, en efecto, tiene poca o ninguna consecuencia.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 2: Por increíble que sea esta afirmación para casi todas las personas religiosas y prácticamente para todos los conservadores, la mayoría de los izquierdistas no creen que robar esté mal.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 9: Martin Kulldorff, profesor de medicina en la Facultad de Medicina de Harvard, confirmó un estudio israelí: "En Israel, las personas vacunadas tenían 27 veces más riesgo de infección sintomática por COVID en comparación con aquellos con inmunidad natural a la enfermedad previa por COVID".</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">La negación de la eficacia de la inmunidad natural es una de las muchas razones por las que muchos estadounidenses ya no confían en el establecimiento médico estadounidense.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">NOV. 23: Toda mi vida, pensé que el amor y el odio eran las dos emociones humanas más poderosas. Pero debido a los acontecimientos recientes, he cambiado de opinión. Ahora comprendo que para la mayoría de la gente, el miedo es la emoción más fuerte.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">DIC. 7: Si eres conservador, ¿por qué deberías salir del armario?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Primero, dormirás mejor. Quedarse en el armario tiene un precio mental serio. En segundo lugar, espíritus afines, todas personas de calidad, se acercarán a usted, algunos de los cuales, sin duda, se convertirán en amigos cercanos. En tercer lugar, te respetarás más a ti mismo. Cuarto, ayudarás a salvar a este país de la tiranía. Para algunos, eso es razón suficiente.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">DIC. 21: La nadadora trans Lia Thomas es una trampa. En lo que respecta a los deportes, lo único que importa es la biología, no la identidad de género.</span><br /><br /><i><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">COPYRIGHT 2021 CREATORS.COM</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The Daily Signal publica una variedad de perspectivas. Nada de lo escrito aquí debe interpretarse como una representación de las opiniones de The Heritage Foundation.</span></i><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/#" style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Read here</a><span style="font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> - Source: www.dailysignal.com</span></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-43825716029530376272021-12-31T07:14:00.000-08:002021-12-31T07:14:13.881-08:00¿Por qué Occidente es analítico e inconformista? Porque la Iglesia creó la familia nuclear<span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>La mentalidad occidental es única y surgió </b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>con </b><b>la familia católica: ¡un estudio lo constata!</b></div></b></span><div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/secciones/1/114/autor/autores.html" style="line-height: 29px; outline: none; text-decoration-line: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Pablo J. Ginés/ReL</b></span></a></div><div><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El cristianismo occidental, con su<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> insistencia constante contra el incesto y la poligamia y poniendo muchas barreras a los matrimonios forzados </span>y a los matrimonios de niñas muy jóvenes creó una sociedad muy especial: la individualista sociedad occidental y, con el paso del tiempo, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">la sociedad que el biólogo Joseph Henrich llama OEIRD (Occidental, Educada, Industrializada, Rica y Democrática).</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Así lo defiende <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/366/6466/eaau5141" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">un estudio (aquí)</span></a> que presenta no un teólogo ni historiador, sino un biólogo especializado en evolución humana, Joseph Henrich (junto con otros colaboradores), en el número de la <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">revista <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Science</span></em></a> del 8 de noviembre de 2019.<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" /><br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />Entre los partidarios de este estudio está un profesor de psicología de la Universidad de British Columbia, Steven Heine, que no ha trabajado en él pero considera que es muy convincente, como <a href="https://www.livescience.com/catholic-church-made-westerners-weird.html" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">declara en <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">LiveScience</em></a><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">.</em></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>"Muchas décadas de investigación han mostrado que<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> la psicología de los occidentales es distinta a la del resto del mundo: son más individualistas, analíticos y menos conformistas</span>. Sin embargo, hasta ahora no teníamos una buena explicación de cómo la gente en Occidente obtuvo una psicología tan distinta. Este estudio muestra convincentemente que las redes de parentesco son centrales a la psicología, y que <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">la Iglesia Católica medieval instituyó políticas sobre la estructura familiar que tuvieron un impacto de largo alcance</span> que continúa afectando a cómo piensa hoy la gente en Occidente, incluso si no son religiosos", afirma Heine.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La clave es que el cristianismo latino medieval (mucho más organizado e insistente que el griego) logró<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> imponer con fuerza sus principios de monogamia y oposición al incesto</span> allí donde logró una implantación organizada muy potente.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Una forma de constatarlo es medir los matrimonios entre primos. Los investigadores dan un ejemplo: Italia. En Italia del norte y central, con mucha presencia de clero, la cultura cristiana hizo casi inexistente el matrimonio entre primos.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>En cambio, en la Italia del extremo sur, que durante siglos fue de tradición griega y <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">donde la Iglesia latina siempre sería más débil en época medieval, el matrimonio entre primos se mantuvo entre el 3 y el 5% durante siglos</span>, incluso hasta los años de inmediatamente después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><img alt="Tabla que relaciona las culturas católicas con la familia nuclear y sus beneficios" height="490" src="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/images/carpeta_gestor/archivos/2019/11/12/individualismo_cultura.jpg?r=2" style="display: inline-block; height: auto; margin: 12px 0px; max-width: 100%; outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" title="Tabla que relaciona las culturas católicas con la familia nuclear y sus beneficios" width="640" /></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Un ejemplo de las tablas del estudio; se miden los siglos bajo hegemonía cultural católica medieval, y los índices de matrimonios entre primos (lazos de linaje para reforzar clanes); más política familiar católica genera más familias nucleares (no de clan) y la cultura llamada WEIRD en inglés (occidental, rica, inconformista)</b></span></em></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Las otras culturas: clanes, poligamia, la mujer vale poco...</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El paganismo, y la mayoría de las culturas, son muy tolerantes con el incesto y la poligamia. Al final, consiste en que<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> hombres fuertes consiguen lo que quieren: chicas débiles y accesibles (incluyendo sobrinas, primas, hijastras...),</span> para hacerse un harén o tener varias concubinas.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Es por placer sexual, pero también <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">puede ser fomentado por la sociedad pagana para generar lazos entre clanes y linajes, mediante la sangre.</span> Tener muchos hijos comunes de muchos clanes con los que emparentarse ayuda a tener lazos y aliados.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Pero <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">las chicas se usan como objetos de intercambio o placer y se entregan como trofeos o sobornos</span> incluso en edades muy tempranas. Y a los hijos no necesariamente les cuidan sus padres, sino "el clan" (donde puede haber feroz competencia, más que amor familiar). </b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Incluso <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">cuando una cultura pasa de vivir en grandes casas comunales</span> (clanes entrelazados bajo un mismo techo) <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">a casas unifamiliares</span> (con un claro padre de familia, una sola esposa, hijos bajo un mismo techo)<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> ya se da un cambio grande</span> en la dirección que Occidente ha promovido.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El Islam creció con rapidez gracias a la poligamia y al uso de concubinas:<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> un musulmán podía engendrar grandes cantidades de descendientes</span>. En el siglo XIII, el conquistador pagano mongol <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Gengis Khan tuvo 36 esposas e infinidad de concubinas (esclavas sexuales)</span> y se calcula que <a href="https://www.eltiempo.com/archivo/documento/MAM-1563401" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">tiene hoy muchos millones de descendientes</a>.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>En Occidente, el emperador de los francos, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Carlomagno, tuvo 4 esposas</span> (no todas a la vez) y muchas concubinas, pero la Iglesia regional, en <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">el Concilio de Maguncia (año 814), dejó claro que evidentemente eso no era una conducta cristiana ni virtuosa.</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Cinco siglos antes, en algún momento entre el año 300 y el 324, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">cuando los cristianos aún eran una pequeña minoría en Hispania,</span> se reunieron 19 obispos y 26 presbíteros de Andalucía y Murcia <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">en el Concilio de Elvira</span> y dictaminaron: <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">"Si alguno toma por esposa a una hijastra suya,</span> se acordó que, por haber cometido un<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> incesto, no se le conceda la comunión</span> ni al final de su vida".</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Es decir, incluso rodeados de paganos sexualmente promiscuos, los cristianos del siglo IV eran<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> durísimos con quien se casaba con una hijastra (que ni siquiera era de la misma sangre)</span>.</b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El Occidente cristiano cambió el mundo con la familia</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Lo habitual en una cultura humana sería la poligamia, alto nivel de incesto y la consanguineidad, y <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">que los hombres fuertes acumulen chicas y que haya muchos lazos difusos de linajes entremezclados.</span> Así se ha hecho en infinidad de culturas.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Hasta que el Occidente cristiano creó <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">un mundo nuevo al insistir en la familia nuclear: un hombre, una mujer, comprometidos hasta la muerte, educando a sus hijos,</span> excluyendo a otras parejas.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Y, según este estudio, eso generó nuestra cultura individualista y no conformista, es decir, poco dócil al poder. Como decía el escritor converso G.K. <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Chesterton: "La familia es el primer núcleo de resistencia a la tiranía".</span></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Algo que no contrasta, sino que encaja, con<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> lo que dice Jesús cuando su clan familiar intenta controlarle o limitarle</span>. «Ahí fuera están tu madre y tus hermanos, que te buscan», dicen a Cristo. Y Él responde:<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> ¿Quién es mi madre y quiénes son mis hermanos?</span>». Mirando a los que estaban sentados a su alrededor, dijo: «Estos son mi madre y mis hermanos. Porque <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">el que cumple la voluntad de Dios, ése es mi hermano, mi hermana y mi madre</span>»".</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>En la sociedad del siglo I, en que el clan, el linaje, el parentesco amplio, lo era todo, esto sonaba revolucionario.<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> Jesús enseñaba que los lazos intra-familiares no eran lo primordial, y que se pueden crear lazos muy intensos, generar nuevos "hermanos", fuera de la familia</span> (cuando se busca "la voluntad de Dios").</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><img alt="Sagrada Familia del Pajarito, de Murillo" height="885" src="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/images/carpeta_gestor/archivos/2019/11/12/Sagrada_Familia_del_pajarito_Murillo.jpg?r=10" style="display: inline-block; height: auto; margin: 12px 0px; max-width: 100%; outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" title="Sagrada Familia del Pajarito, de Murillo" width="1200" /></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La Sagrada Familia "del pajarito", de Murillo (hacia el año 1650); la familia humana del Niño Dios ha sido un modelo familiar para Occidente durante siglos; los nombres de José y María fueron los más usados por los españoles</b></span></em></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Los medievales reflexionaron sobre eso. ¿Cómo ir más allá de las alianzas entre clanes y crear pueblos más grandes y estables? <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Cuando un pueblo medieval quería dejar de ser "bárbaro" y formar parte de la "familia" llamada Cristiandad se bautizaba y adoptaba el modelo de familia cristiano.</span> Los reyes debían impedir la poligamia e incesto en su familia y en todo su pueblo.<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" /><br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />Al bautizarse los húngaros hacia el año mil dejaban de ser bárbaros saqueadores paganos, su jefe San Esteban pasaba a ser un rey cristiano. Cuando los kipchacos o cumanos llegaron a Hungría desde el este de Ucrania huyendo de los mongoles y pidiendo ser acogidos en el s.XIII, los húngaros los aceptaron porque ellos admitieron ser bautizados. (Por desgracia, los mongoles les siguieron y exterminaron).</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3gbZwjOHKCo" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Boda de Carlos V e Isabel de Portugal en 1526 (en la teleserie Carlo Rey Emperador);<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />España y Portugal llevaron la familia nuclear cristiana por todo el mundo a América, África y Asia a partir del siglo XVI</b></span></em></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Cómo medir la "mentalidad occidental"</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El estudio de Heinrich examina 1.291 poblaciones pre-industriales y mide varios rasgos de mentalidad como:</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>- nivel de individualismo<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />- nivel de creatividad<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />- nivel de conformismo<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />- valoración del pensamiento analítico<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />- capacidad de confianza en el extraño<br style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" />- valoración de la honestidad</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Lo que encuentra el estudio es que<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> las sociedades donde la Iglesia occidental fue fuerte durante muchos siglos e insistió en su modelo de familia</span>, reduciendo el incesto y los matrimonios forzados, creando lo que hoy llamamos "familia nuclear", <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">allí nace la sociedad OEIRD (occidental, educada, industrializada, rica y democrática),</span> que tiene alto nivel de individualismo, de creatividad, de inconformismo, de confianza en el extraño y de valoración de la honestidad y el pensamiento analítico.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><img alt="Los reyes católicos Isabel y Fernando bautizan a su hijo en la teleserie Isabel" height="330" src="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/images/carpeta_gestor/archivos/2019/11/12/familia_isabel_fernando_640.jpg?r=7" style="display: inline-block; height: auto; margin: 12px 0px; max-width: 100%; outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" title="Los reyes católicos Isabel y Fernando bautizan a su hijo en la teleserie Isabel" width="640" /></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Los reyes Isabel y Fernando bautizan a su hijo en la teselerie "Isabel" de RTVE; la familia natural con sus afectos, la dimensión sobrenatural de los sacramentos y los efectos sociales y políticos se entrelazan en la foto</b></span></em></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La sociedad OEIRD que triunfó en Europa occidental y se fue extendiendo a otros continentes desde el siglo XVI es algo único.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>En Europa Oriental<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> la Iglesia Ortodoxa generó muchos menos decretos sobre familia y presionó mucho menos</span> desde el Estado o desde el clero para cambiar los hábitos familiares... y en esos países de tradición ortodoxa hay menos rasgos de sociedad OEIRD.</b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La familia cristiana y la próspera sociedad OEIRD</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La sociedad OEIRD no es "lo estándar", no es lo que cabe esperar, no es la dirección en la que reman las sociedades de forma natural ni la mentalidad humana. Es un fenómeno especial y peculiar que ha existido gracias a la familia cristiana. Y que ha generado la sociedad más próspera y libre.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Si se debilita la familia cristiana y se sustituye por experimentos</span> de relaciones fluidas, sin compromisos, de<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> lazos vaporosos y gratificación instantánea</span>... ¿qué quedará en Occidente?</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Y hay otras civilizaciones en este planeta, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">civilizaciones donde el individuo vale poco, civilizaciones que esperan en la puerta</span> para tomar el relevo.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>(Esta artículo se publicó originariamente en ReL en noviembre de 2019)</b></span></em></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-align: center; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/ciencia_y_fe/381711999/La-mentalidad-occidental-es-unica-y-surgio-con-la-familia-catolica-ahora-un-estudio-lo-constata.html">Leer más aquí </a> - Fuente: </b></span></em><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><b><i>www.religionenlibertad.com</i></b></span></span></span></p></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-47977740846519901352021-12-31T07:04:00.005-08:002021-12-31T07:04:46.759-08:00Los primeros puestos entre los vídeos más vistos del año en Religión en Libertad<div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Lo más visto: Santiago Martín, los gays cantores, </b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Canadá «woke», Grílex eucarístico, la edil provida</b></div></span><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/secciones/1/19/autor/autores.html">C.L. / ReL</a> - 31 diciembre 2021</b></div></span><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/cultura/780317053/mas-visto-santiago-martin-gays-cantores-canada-woke-grilex-edil-provida.html">Ver aquí</a> - Fuente: www.religionenlibertad.com</b></span></div><div class="cont_txt_art margen_inf" id="Contenido" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; float: left; line-height: 28.05px; margin: 30px 0px 10px; max-width: 660px; outline: none; padding: 30px 0px 15px; text-size-adjust: 100%; width: 660px;"><div class="cont_txt_art_solo_cuerpo" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Y esto fue lo más granado de la cosecha 2021. Feliz Año Nuevo. Y si quieres acceder a todos los vídeos que sacamos en ReL, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/videos.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">pincha en su sección</a></span>.Como viene ocurriendo en los últimos años, los análisis de actualidad del padre <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Santiago Martín</span>, superior de los Franciscanos de María, han ocupado los primeros puestos entre los <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">vídeos más vistos del año</span> en Religión en Libertad. Suyas son la medalla de oro y la de plata, y varios de sus comentarios figuran en el Top 10 y el Top 20 de lo más clicado en el carrusel que encabeza nuestro portal.</b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La Iglesia, ante una encrucijada asombrosa</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El vídeo con mayor número de visualizaciones en ReL en 2021 fue el titulado <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/132857/dureza-pasividad.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Dureza con unos, pasividad con otros</em></a>. Fue difundido al día siguiente del motu proprio de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Francisco</span> <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Traditionis Custodes</em>, que deroga el <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Summorum Pontificum</em> de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Benedicto XVI</span> y limita a los sacerdotes y fieles devotos de la misa tradicional.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mkr8Lb7ez_c" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Todo ello, en un contexto que ha estado marcado a lo largo del año por el <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">camino sinodal alemán</span>, donde se han producido hechos que el religioso franciscano considera gravísimos y no han tenido respuesta de la jerarquía de la Iglesia, salvo si acaso apoyarlos. Por eso el padre Martín se preguntaba en mayo, en el segundo vídeo más visto del año, <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/131131/nadie-impedira-sacrilegio.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">¿Nadie impedirá este sacrilegio horroroso?</em></a> Se refería a un acto ecuménico en una iglesia de Frankfurt donde se iba a producir (y se produjo) la comunión de protestantes, alentada por el presidente de la conferencia episcopal germana, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Georg Bätzing</span>.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Y esta profanación u otras desviaciones similares de algunos grupos católicos, ¿para qué? Además de la <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">afrenta a Dios</span> que el religioso denunciaba, su traducción en términos cuantitativos es que <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">la Iglesia se desploma hasta extremos nunca vistos</span>. <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/134230/nueva-iglesia-fracasado.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">La "nueva Iglesia" ha fracasado</em></a>, titulábamos otro de los vídeos más vistos de Santiago Martín, donde comentaba el hecho de que solo el 12% de los alemanes considera la religión como algo bueno para la Humanidad.</b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La medalla de bronce</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>La medalla de bronce se la llevó este año una canción: <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/132730/coro-gay-convertiremos-hijos.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">Gays: "Convertiremos a vuestros hijos"</a>. Una historia que tiene su enjundia. El San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus difundió un vídeo el 1 de julio con un "mensaje de la comunidad gay", explicitado en la letra de la canción: "Convertiremos a vuestros hijos". Pretendía burlarse de los padres inquietos por la omnipresente propaganda homosexualista (la conversión a la que se refiere el título es a la "tolerancia", definida por el lobby LGTBIQ+ como la sumisión a sus ideas y objetivos), pero las referencias utilizadas se parecen tanto a la realidad, que <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">lo que pretendía ser una parodia se asemejaba demasiado a una auto-delación</span>, por lo que el propio coro lo retiró a los pocos días.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>"Estáis asustados porque creéis que corromperemos a vuestros hijos si imponemos nuestra agenda. Lo divertido es que, por primera vez, tenéis razón", introducía el intérprete principal. La pegadiza letra, por su parte, proclamaba: "<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Convertiremos a vuestros hijos poco a poco, de forma silenciosa y sutil, y ni te enterarás</span>". Pese al tono satírico, lo que quedaba clara era la <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">voluntad adoctrinadora sobre menores ejercida por adultos que no son sus padres</span>. Una invasión del ámbito familiar totalmente explícita: "Te llenará de preocupación que cambie su grupo de amigos, no aprobarás a dónde van por la noche, te irritará que encuentren cosas <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">on line</em> de las que querrías alejarle (como información)... Convertiremos a tus hijos, alguien les va a enseñar a no odiar, vamos a por ellos, vamos a por tus hijos".</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cgmvWm4cBSM" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Canadá y la "cancelación" de la verdad</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Un tema tan específico como la campaña anticatólica desatada en Canadá por la escolarización de niños indígenas en el siglo XIX se coló en el Top 10 de lo más visto. Los estragos que provocan la ideología <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">woke</em> y la cultura de la cancelación no conocen fronteras y ya no hay asuntos locales. En el vídeo <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/131923/canada-verdad-escuelas-indigenas.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Canadá: la verdad de las escuelas indígenas</em></a>, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Pablo Muñoz Iturrieta</span>, doctor en Filosofía Política y Legal por la Carleton University/Dominican University en Ottawa (Canadá), cuenta la realidad de estas escuelas y de las tumbas halladas en ellas, pretexto para la campaña. Imprescindible para no dejarse manipular en algo que va a seguir presente en la actualidad en los próximos meses.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/daPVm_sdNJ0" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Un rapero ante el Santísimo</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El 5 de julio, el rapero <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Grílex</span> dijo unas <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/132146/grilex-palabras-santisimo.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">palabras ante el Santísimo</a> expuesto con motivo de la consagración de Talavera de la Reina (Toledo) al <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Sagrado Corazón de Jesús</span>. Un testimonio impresionante, lleno de unción y de emoción, de aliento de conversión y de impulso para una vida de amor a Jesucristo. Así lo entendieron los lectores al situarlo entre lo más visto del año.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d3OvfHlDf18" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>San Fernando, un rey decisivo</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Con motivo del 350º aniversario de la canonización en 1671 de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Fernando III el Santo</span>, rey de Castilla y de León, HM Televisión estrenó un documental dramatizado sobre su vida y reinado en una España que luchaba por reconquistar la unidad perdida del reino visigótico, rota por la invasión mahometana. Se titula <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/128105/san-fernando-rey-cristiandad.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Fernando III el Santo. Un reinado en defensa de la Cristiandad</em></a>. El tráiler tuvo mucho éxito, como también la película, que se ofreció gratuitamente durante un tiempo y puede verse ahora en alquiler <a href="https://eukmamie.org/es/especial/san-fernando/?idU=2" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">pinchando aquí</a>.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/n1Q26DJU5gA" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El Avemaría de una concejal</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Uno de los vídeos virales del año tiene como protagonista a <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/134199/provida-avemaria.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">Paula Badanelli</a></span>, portavoz municipal de Vox en el Ayuntamiento de Córdoba. Tras una contundente defensa del derecho a rezar ante los abortorios (algo que el Gobierno socialcomunista de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Pedro Sánchez</span> quiere castigar incluso con penas de cárcel, por considerarlo un acoso a las madres que acuden a abortar), <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">concluyó su intervención rezando un Avemaría</span>, que la corporación municipal escuchó en silencio. Enseguida las imágenes del gesto empezaron a difundirse en redes, como expresión de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">un compromiso político vivido sin respetos humanos</span>.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vRKF71jloBw" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Clérigos masones</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>A lo largo del año hemos incorporado a nuestro carrusel de vídeos una serie completa sobre la <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">masonería</span>, "píldoras" de muy pocos minutos en los que la historiadora italiana <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Angela Pellicciari</span> (autora de <a href="https://www.ociohispano.es/libro/la-verdad-lutero" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">La verdad sobre Lutero</em></a>, <a href="https://editorialbenditamaria.com/tienda/una-historia-unica/" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Una historia única</em></a>, <a href="https://bac-editorial.es/es/estudios-y-ensayos/1564-una-historia-de-la-iglesia-papas-y-santos-emperadores-y-reyes-gnosis-y-persecucion.html" rel="nofollow" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank"><em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Una historia de la Iglesia</em></a>) ha ido explicando su historia, sus ideas, sus objetivos. Fueron veinticinco entregas, todas de gran aceptación, pero en la que sobresalió la "píldora" dedicada a los <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/133358/sacerdotes-masones.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">dos mil sacerdotes y religiosos masones</a> que han pasado por las logias, a pesar de la severa prohibición canónica y la incompatibilidad doctrinal entre la masonería y la Iglesia.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/suWWFV29G6I" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>¿Impulsar el aborto no es pecado?</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>¿<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Puede comulgar un católico</span> que, elevado a un cargo público, utiliza todo el peso de ese poder para fomentar el aborto, nombrar a abortistas en todos los puestos clave relacionados con la cuestión, garantizarlo frente a hipotéticas restricciones judiciales, imponerlo en países donde no existe o ampliarlo donde está limitado, favorecer con dinero público a los abortorios, y todo esto en cualquier momento del embarazo, incluso un minuto antes del parto y sin necesidad de invocar causa alguna? Es el caso del actual ocupante de la Casa Blanca, <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Joe Biden</span>, pero los obispos estadounidenses <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/eeuu/374482877/biden-papa-buen-catolico-comunion.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">han decidido no implicarse en el asunto</a> y dejar la pregunta sin responder, al menos colectivamente.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b> <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">William Kosco</span>, párroco de la iglesia de San Enrique, en Buckeye (Arizona), <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/130819/biden-aborto-obispos-sermon.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">la respondió por ellos</a> en un sermón donde también les recuerda cuál es la misión que han preferido no ejercer.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2F100010789175454%2Fvideos%2F1365973733772253%2F&show_text=0&width=560" style="border-style: none; border-width: initial; outline: none; overflow: hidden; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>"Hallellujah" por la vida</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>De todas las numerosas piezas musicales que solemos incorporar a nuestro carrusel de vídeos para mostrar la pujanza de la música cristiana, curiosamente la más escuchada este año fue <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/130997/hallelujah-nina-prodigio.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">una canción no religiosa en sentido estricto</a> (aunque sí referencialmente), pero que incluimos como una hermosa celebración de la vida: el <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Hallellujah</em> de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Leonard Cohen</span> cantado por <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Karolina Protsenko</span>, una niña de 13 años miembro de una familia de músicos ucranianos, junto con su madre ante la llegada de una hermanita.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/asdGBnn9zJE" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>De la inquina al abrazo</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>El 29 de abril, se vivió en Varsovia <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/131492/polonia-lgbti-escena-impactante.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">una escena que comenzó agria y concluyó esperanzadora</a>, y así lo entendieron los lectores, al situar la situación entre lo más visto del año en ReL. Un grupo de católicos se congregó ante un tribunal para <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">rezar la coronilla de la Divina Misericordia en apoyo de Radio María</span>, cuyos representantes declaraban ante el juez porque están siendo hostigados por el <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">lobby LGBTI polaco</span>.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Una joven envuelta en la<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> bandera arcoiris</span> empezó a molestarles con música en su móvil y gritando consignas. Inesperadamente, una anciana se acercó a ella y le besó los pies. Entablaron un diálogo en el que la señora, sollozando, expresa a la chica su desazón ante el futuro de su patria: "Tengo 83 años y te quiero. <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">He luchado toda mi vida por Polonia. Pronto dejaré este mundo y Polonia está dividida</span>. Lo siento mucho y estoy muy emocionada. ¡Y estos chicos, nuestros pobres jóvenes, que fueron educados por polacos...!". En los momentos finales ambas compartieron un momento impactante.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WiMfmDWz1-k" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></b></span></p><p class="ladillo_azul" style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Cómo fue enterrado Jesucristo</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><b>Y cerramos esta selección con una excelente infografía con la que<span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;"> Carlos Llorente</span>, autor de <em style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">La primera Semana Santa de la historia</em>, ofrece <a href="https://www.religionenlibertad.com/video/130491/entierro-cristo.html" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" target="_blank">una explicación detallada</a> de lo que se hizo con el cuerpo de <span style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;">Cristo </span>desde el Descendimiento hasta el cierre de la tumba. Fue el vídeo estrella de nuestra Semana Santa.</b></span></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Titillium Web", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 17px; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Titillium Web", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 17px; margin: 0px 0px 20px; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-size-adjust: 100%;"><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" height="314" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/svepBsJvFzw" style="outline: none; text-size-adjust: 100%;" width="560"></iframe></p></div></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6749067625931933962.post-52808126225565496192021-12-31T06:39:00.002-08:002021-12-31T06:39:10.271-08:00At home and abroad, 2021 has been an an annus horribilis for classical liberalism.<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: 700;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;">The Global Recession of Classical Liberalism</span></b></div><div style="font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red; font-family: times; font-size: large;"><br /></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">by </span><a href="https://lawliberty.org/author/john-mcginnis/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold; text-align: start;">john o. mcginnis</a></div><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The scale of classical liberalism’s retreat became ever more visible in 2021. Its recession is global—spanning the Americas and enveloping Europe and Asia. It is pan-ideological: not only are free nations becoming less free, unfree nations are becoming more unfree. It is not only that the left is moving farther left but the parties of the right, currently the best political hope for classical liberalism, are turning to various forms of illiberalism. And the results for policy have been comprehensively deleterious, threatening to reorient everything from free trade to competition law to social insurance in a more statist direction.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Global Retrenchment</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">As Americans, we mostly focus on what is happening at home. The momentum against classical liberalism can be measured by contrasting the legislative programs of the Obama and Biden administrations. To be sure, President Obama pursued legislation that moved the nation in a more statist direction on health care and financial services. But Biden has been open about his hope to create the largest increase in the welfare state since Lyndon Johnson. His proposed legislation would have created entitlements to free pre-K education, free community colleges, paid leave from all employment, and rights to long-term care. It would lower the Medicare age to 60 and expand the scope of the services covered by the program. Its aspiration was to create a European-style, cradle-to-grave welfare state.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">To be sure, the so-called Build Back Better bill may not be enacted into law because of the narrow Democratic majorities in Congress. But the very boldness of the proposals given these narrow majorities shows that this party is transforming itself into a social-democratic party of the left like those in Europe. And whatever the result for the legislation this year or next, it will become a template for the next time that Democrats have a substantial majority—an inevitability in a two-party system.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The energy on the left is even more striking abroad. In this hemisphere, Chile has elected its </span><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/president-elect-boric-aims-to-undo-chiles-economic-progress-pensions-taxes-south-america-11640123805" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">most left-wing president</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> since Salvador Allende, an ideologue who promises that his administration will be the “graveyard of neoliberalism.” Its recent constitution-making takes aim at the free market society that the “Chicago boys” created on liberal principles imported from the University of Chicago. Peru and Honduras too have elected far-left presidents. The authoritarian left continues to hold Cuba and Venezuela.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">In Europe, the most important nation, Germany, elected a center-left government after years of governing from the center. No right of center party leads any major nation on the continent.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">No nation in Asia matters more than China, and it has been moving left. Of course, it has been a communist-ruled nation for decades but until Xi’s accession, green shoots of freedom were growing, particularly in the economy. But Xi is bringing the market sector to heel, directing companies to leave foreign stock exchanges, putting commissars in every office, and cutting large companies down to size when they pose any competition to the state. This year he crushed freedom in Hong Kong, closing down a city-state that was a bastion of classical liberalism and showing that China was reverting to the kind of twentieth-century totalitarian regime that cannot be trusted even to keep to the terms of the treaties it signs.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Beyond China, other important authoritarian nations are also becoming more intolerant of dissent. For instance, Russia has jailed the leading opposition leader, and its governing party has just won elections widely regarded as rigged.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The Right‘s Abandonment of Classical Liberalism</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Another mark of classical liberalism’s waning fortunes is its weakening on the right. While it is notable in the United States, this phenomenon too is global. Here at home most of the leading contenders for the next Republican presidential nomination emulate former President Trump, not in his style, but in many of the policies that diverged from classical liberalism. There is far less enthusiasm for free trade and more sympathy for industrial policy. Even more important is what is now absent—any interest in the kind of entitlement reforms that were routinely proposed to prevent transfer programs like Social Security and Medicare from overwhelming the federal budget. Much of the Republican Party is no longer a party of deregulation and low social spending, even if it retains an attachment to low taxes.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">There may be diminishing returns on the economic growth that classical liberalism has promoted. It is this relative comfort that allows citizens to focus on prioritizing collective projects or wallowing in their identity.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The story is the same for the oldest political party of the right in the world—the British Conservatives. There, Boris Johnson has made a decisive break from Thatcherism. He has raised taxes, promised to increase social spending so as to “level up” the less developed parts of the nation with London, and vowed to become a world leader in global warming regulation.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">On the continent, the already weak classical liberal parties have become even less important parts of the coalition of the right. In France, they will likely not even make the presidential run-off, being beaten out by either the National Front or a </span><a href="https://lawliberty.org/the-new-face-of-the-french-right/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">provocative journalist</a><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;"> who promises to make France great again. In Italy, the classical liberal strand of the right has almost disappeared, being replaced by parties that want to facilitate rent-seeking or increase the welfare state.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">In Japan, the long-time governing liberal Democrats adopted some liberalizing policies under Shinzo Abe but now are returning to their corporatist baseline.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The Classical Liberal Policy Collapse</span><span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">And just as liberalism has receded globally, it has also receded comprehensively across policy spaces. One of the core triumphs of classical liberalism since the period of its formation in the eighteenth century was that of free trade over mercantilism. Practically speaking, from World War II to the end of the century free trade became a global policy with successive rounds of world negotiations cutting tariffs and regulatory barriers. Nations entered more local free trade zones as well, as the United States, Canada, and Mexico did with NAFTA. But world trade talks have stalled for a decade with little prospect of restarting them. The international dispute settlement structure that sustained world trade rules is in danger of collapse.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Free trade zones are no longer proliferating. The United States under both Republican and Democratic administrations has refused to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Even the obvious geopolitical advantages of uniting the democratic nations of the Pacific against China have been insufficient to overcome the forces of protectionism.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">The Biden Administration has been nominating regulators who would break with decades of consensus that regulation should be limited to market failures. For instance, Saule Omarova, the failed nominee to be Comptroller of the Currency believes that the Federal Reserve should replace key functions of private banks. The newly confirmed chair of the FCC, Lina Khan, wants to upend a half-century of anti-trust law that focuses on promoting the welfare of consumers in favor of an expansive vision that would give government far more power to intervene to correct various inequities she perceives in the market. Antitrust is an excellent barometer of the fortunes of classical liberalism, because the more interventionist is antitrust, the less confidence there is that the market can regulate itself for the public good.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Even the growing debate on the right over constitutional interpretation reflects a diminution of the forces for liberty. Originalism seeks to restore the original Constitution, which is a charter for liberty both in its restraints on government and in its ample set of individual rights in the Bills of Rights, which were extended by the Fourteenth Amendment. The very name of the new right-wing alternative to originalism—common good constitutionalism—makes clear that its starting point is no longer liberty but the good of the collective.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">Reasons for Classical Liberalism’s Decline</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia; font-weight: bold;">What are the reasons for the long receding roar of classical liberalism? </span></div><div><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></b></div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">One is continuing hangover from the financial crisis of 2008. There is a diffuse sense that the crisis showed that capitalism failed, despite the substantial arguments that the crisis was a consequence in large part of the easy money policy of the Federal Reserve and lax lending policies of Freddie Mac and Fannie May—government-backed companies. And the decision to bail out some of the banks that made bad decisions—hardly in keeping with classical liberalism—seemed outrageous. Citizens are willing to tolerate a lot of inequality if they feel that the rules for getting rich are not rigged, but the financial crisis called law’s neutrality into question.</span></b></li><li><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">A second cause is the rise of identity politics. If everyone is first a member of a tribe and only an individual second, individual liberty obviously gets less of a priority. We see the politics of identity not only in the racial and ethnic politics of the United States, but in the regional identity politics of the UK (as in the Scottish effort at independence) and in much of the continent.</span></b></li><li><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Third, and relatedly, at least in the West, there may be diminishing returns on the economic growth that classical liberalism has promoted. It is this relative comfort that allows citizens to focus on prioritizing collective projects or wallowing in their identity even if these tendencies become antithetical to economic growth. That is the reason we now see on the right the claim that liberalism, including classical liberalism, has failed. That contention can become politically resonant in the West only after the memory of the miseries of the pre-liberal world have faded.</span></b></li></ul><b><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">Classical political theorists thought republics went through cycles where the republic declined after delivering relatively high levels of prosperity as the complacency of comfort and luxury naturally set in. We may be seeing a modern vindication of this ancient thesis.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">The New Year’s resolution for friends of liberty must be to develop some new strategies for its revival. The old ones are not working.</span><br /><br /><i><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">John O. McGinnis is the George C. Dix Professor in Constitutional Law at Northwestern University and a Contributing Editor at Law & Liberty. His book Accelerating Democracy was published by Princeton University Press in 2012. McGinnis is also the coauthor with Mike Rappaport of Originalism and the Good Constitution published by Harvard University Press in 2013 . He is a graduate of Harvard College, Balliol College, Oxford, and Harvard Law School. He has published in leading law reviews, including the Harvard, Chicago, and Stanford Law Reviews and the Yale Law Journal, and in journals of opinion, including National Affairs and National Review.</span><br /><br /><a href="https://lawliberty.org/author/john-mcginnis/" style="color: #20124d; font-family: georgia;">MORE BY THIS AUTHOR</a></i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-family: georgia;"><b><a href="https://lawliberty.org/the-global-recession-of-classical-liberalism/">Read more</a> . Source: https://lawliberty.org</b></span></div>prudentiapoliticahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00042460466729698239noreply@blogger.com0