@trevor_______@dimipan03_02@Cernovich@grok please put our minds at ease by explaining the Church's teaching on the right to private property and the universal destination of goods, and how those ideas transcend left-right distinctions or the opinion of one pope.
@trevor_______@dimipan03_02@Cernovich That would be an extreme, maximallist interpretation of what he said here, and would run counter to the rest of CST, so I guarantee that's not what he meant.
Resisting commodification ≠ advocating for socialization the means of food production.
@JackoWilliams64@bowtiedreact@Cernovich There is no contradiction. The Church still teaches there is no salvation apart from the Roman Pontiff, the nuance is that some are unified to the Church unwittingly through invincible ignorance. Who and how many is only for God to know.
@JackoWilliams64@bowtiedreact@Cernovich If a pope publishes an official teaching, then that teaching is binding unless directly abrogated by a later teaching with equal or greater authority. I can't think of any cases where that has actually happened, unless you count the Vat. 2 softening of language from Unam sanctam.
@gregoryjsloan@ejpreston@ThomasEWoods Nobody would claim there's not major tension between CST and free market economics. It is as much a rejection of Smith as it is of Marx.
Maybe he should've—how can I say? I think the core point he is driving at is that food is not the same "type" of commodity as non-life critical goods like iPhones, and it's inappropropriate to treat it as such. It needs a special category of its own which acknowledges and accommodates its unique and necessary role in human life—not by removing profit incentives, but by steering those incentives toward the common good.
@JackoWilliams64@bowtiedreact@Cernovich That's where I think you're off the mark: there is a coherent, consistent ideology, but the way that ideology expresses itself is naturally adaptable. The ideology remains identical while the appearance, application, and approach adjust to confront the world's needs.
@JackoWilliams64@bowtiedreact@Cernovich I've read them and I don't see the issue you see. What specifically do you think constitutes a break? I can read Magnifica Humanitas and comfortably draw a straight intellectual line back to Rerum novarum without leapfrogging anything between the two Leos.
@ejpreston@Joe_ICHTHUS You should've seen my face when I saw the notification that Cerno quoted me earlier.
I was not prepared for that level of combat today 😂
Glad to be a small fish most days.
I don't personally see what you see in terms of a break in continuity at John XXIII. The Second Vatican Council shifted the pastoral approach of the Church substantially, but did not actually change any teachings.
The shift from John XXIII onward is aesthetic and more to do with the Church adjusting the way it engaged with an increasingly pluralistic and interconnected world.
@RealMarcosDarcy@ThomasEWoods Yes absolutely, although maybe not "coordinated" as such. CST encodes the essence of strong grassroots movements and diverse cultural expression which is why totalitarian establishments always hate the Catholic Church.
@MarloweMic78463@ThomasEWoods Absolutely. Catholicism is incredibly based on communism.
Leo XIII crashed out and wrote like six encyclicals specifically on why communism is the worst. I love the Catholic Church.