That last observation about AI is the correct one: computers aren't becoming more human, we're becoming more mechanical. I think there's a parallel to be drawn with this country's obsession with pets as quasi-children: we're becoming more like animals, like pets.
With regards to the seeming inconsistency of Pope Francis, I would encourage…
That last observation about AI is the correct one: computers aren't becoming more human, we're becoming more mechanical. I think there's a parallel to be drawn with this country's obsession with pets as quasi-children: we're becoming more like animals, like pets.
With regards to the seeming inconsistency of Pope Francis, I would encourage people to look up some of the writings of a Substacker going by the name N. S. Lyons. While I won't vouch for everything the man says, I think his basic theory of the open society vs. the closed society is the correct interpretation of what has been happening during the last century on the global political stage. Read through this lens, Pope Francis is certainly a man of the open society, and I think that is his highest priority. In fact, I suspect that this is how he reads the entire Spirit of Vatican II, so-called: Vatican II was the Church's entry into a compact with the world powers for the building of an the open society, and there's no going back. It didn't really have to do with the church so much, but the churches place in the world, and therefore it's orientation towards and investment in the world. ("Latin Mass," anyone?)
Pope Francis's overwhelming concern with the Trump administration, and other "right wing" administrations throughout the world, is that they are contrary to the open society. The Democrats named in this article, however, were definitely believers in that vision. Look also at the variable treatment of different ecclesiastical figures throughout the world. Therefore, I suspect that Pope Francis thinks he is taking the broader view of what is necessary for world peace and justice, and this must be prioritized. Perhaps he feels he can overlook a relatively localized problem as abortion in the United States for the sake of the bigger picture of the global order.
I'm not saying this is justified, BTW, only that this might be how he thinks through things. I also think that it explains the mindset of a few of generations of clergy and religious. With the open society international order breaking down, see if the lens I've sketched out helps you think through the reactions you're seeing from people on both sides of the aisle. This lens has helped me quite a bit, especially when it comes to being patient with people. There is a lot riding on the two different visions of what makes for a good political order, i.e. closed vs. open society.
This is an interesting perspective, and makes sense considering that the generations most likely to hold the "open society" ideal would be those who experienced WWII and/or the early days of the nuclear arms race. It's easy to see how you might come out of such experiences believing that the best way to prevent it happening again would be to abolish all meaningful differences between people groups.
I think Pp Francis is just trying to administratively impose his political world view. And that view is very much the 1960s South American jesuitical view: USA bad, communazifasciocialism good. That’s how he was intellectually raised. He doesn’t appear to have critically reflected upon his own biases / prejudices (witness his constant harping against America along with his complimenting the chicoms).
Notice how he has no “overwhelming concern” for the actually genocidal chicom regime.
When he preaches politics I disregard him. When (if?) he preaches Christ as our rescuer instead of some socialistic utopia I will listen.
Father thank you so much for this very thoughtful and edifying reflection. This feels very much like a hermeneutical key.
I find myself wondering, what is the worldview of the global political stage and also of the Church via the world is coming in pendulum swing? Bc pendulum swings almost by nature tend to be an extreme of the other which feels …. Ominous. And more importantly than what is coming, what is the *correct* one 🤷🏽♀️
Thank you for your perspective on ‘open society vs closed society’ as possible agendas of our present-day world leaders. I would suggest one caveat; that each world leader is tasked with a responsibility to their ‘flock’. That caveat in the friction between Pp Francis and the “right-wing” (or left-wing or totalitarian or communist or Marxist or socialist) world leaders is the real driver and divider between the national vs global societal lenses (IMO). That responsibility and subsequent accountability should not be left out of the dynamic.
Both lenses might be justified in seeking the goal of the common good, given the caveat above.
As to justification of one societal view over the other; mankind has had and has a propensity to want to “fix it”. But my understanding is that man is a sinner first. His Fall opens the door to Pride and those nasty things that follow, like power (and those in the shadows wanting the power [Parolin or AOC].
All of this has a long history to include prophets and earthly leaders consistently ‘fumbling the ball’. Little did Peter realize that including the Gentiles would prove to be so problematic but here we are. I’m praying that Jesus returns soon with His peace and justice.
Yet he seems rather miffed that Christians tried to spread the gospel in the Amazon. He seems rather unwelcoming to traditionalists. He had held the most closed society on earth as the great example of Catholic Social teaching. And within his own hierarchy he seems to have little love for those whose cultural values clash with his own.
That last observation about AI is the correct one: computers aren't becoming more human, we're becoming more mechanical. I think there's a parallel to be drawn with this country's obsession with pets as quasi-children: we're becoming more like animals, like pets.
With regards to the seeming inconsistency of Pope Francis, I would encourage people to look up some of the writings of a Substacker going by the name N. S. Lyons. While I won't vouch for everything the man says, I think his basic theory of the open society vs. the closed society is the correct interpretation of what has been happening during the last century on the global political stage. Read through this lens, Pope Francis is certainly a man of the open society, and I think that is his highest priority. In fact, I suspect that this is how he reads the entire Spirit of Vatican II, so-called: Vatican II was the Church's entry into a compact with the world powers for the building of an the open society, and there's no going back. It didn't really have to do with the church so much, but the churches place in the world, and therefore it's orientation towards and investment in the world. ("Latin Mass," anyone?)
Pope Francis's overwhelming concern with the Trump administration, and other "right wing" administrations throughout the world, is that they are contrary to the open society. The Democrats named in this article, however, were definitely believers in that vision. Look also at the variable treatment of different ecclesiastical figures throughout the world. Therefore, I suspect that Pope Francis thinks he is taking the broader view of what is necessary for world peace and justice, and this must be prioritized. Perhaps he feels he can overlook a relatively localized problem as abortion in the United States for the sake of the bigger picture of the global order.
I'm not saying this is justified, BTW, only that this might be how he thinks through things. I also think that it explains the mindset of a few of generations of clergy and religious. With the open society international order breaking down, see if the lens I've sketched out helps you think through the reactions you're seeing from people on both sides of the aisle. This lens has helped me quite a bit, especially when it comes to being patient with people. There is a lot riding on the two different visions of what makes for a good political order, i.e. closed vs. open society.
This is an interesting perspective, and makes sense considering that the generations most likely to hold the "open society" ideal would be those who experienced WWII and/or the early days of the nuclear arms race. It's easy to see how you might come out of such experiences believing that the best way to prevent it happening again would be to abolish all meaningful differences between people groups.
I think Pp Francis is just trying to administratively impose his political world view. And that view is very much the 1960s South American jesuitical view: USA bad, communazifasciocialism good. That’s how he was intellectually raised. He doesn’t appear to have critically reflected upon his own biases / prejudices (witness his constant harping against America along with his complimenting the chicoms).
Notice how he has no “overwhelming concern” for the actually genocidal chicom regime.
When he preaches politics I disregard him. When (if?) he preaches Christ as our rescuer instead of some socialistic utopia I will listen.
Father thank you so much for this very thoughtful and edifying reflection. This feels very much like a hermeneutical key.
I find myself wondering, what is the worldview of the global political stage and also of the Church via the world is coming in pendulum swing? Bc pendulum swings almost by nature tend to be an extreme of the other which feels …. Ominous. And more importantly than what is coming, what is the *correct* one 🤷🏽♀️
Thank you for your perspective on ‘open society vs closed society’ as possible agendas of our present-day world leaders. I would suggest one caveat; that each world leader is tasked with a responsibility to their ‘flock’. That caveat in the friction between Pp Francis and the “right-wing” (or left-wing or totalitarian or communist or Marxist or socialist) world leaders is the real driver and divider between the national vs global societal lenses (IMO). That responsibility and subsequent accountability should not be left out of the dynamic.
Both lenses might be justified in seeking the goal of the common good, given the caveat above.
As to justification of one societal view over the other; mankind has had and has a propensity to want to “fix it”. But my understanding is that man is a sinner first. His Fall opens the door to Pride and those nasty things that follow, like power (and those in the shadows wanting the power [Parolin or AOC].
All of this has a long history to include prophets and earthly leaders consistently ‘fumbling the ball’. Little did Peter realize that including the Gentiles would prove to be so problematic but here we are. I’m praying that Jesus returns soon with His peace and justice.
Yet he seems rather miffed that Christians tried to spread the gospel in the Amazon. He seems rather unwelcoming to traditionalists. He had held the most closed society on earth as the great example of Catholic Social teaching. And within his own hierarchy he seems to have little love for those whose cultural values clash with his own.