The Encyclical Cometh, Part II | National Catholic Reporter

The Encyclical Cometh, Part II | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: On the first point, it is not true to say that this Encyclical is not political, as the Pope is the head of the Vatican City State - so there are diplomatic implications from here to Kyoto.  This is as important as the moral message, which is based on natural law - any scriptural connection also likely stems from natural law teaching rather than any direct divine revelation.  Indeed, such inspiration usually occurs within the confines of, you guessed it, natural law.  As such, the only thing authoritative is the quality of the reasoning - which is not reserved to the Pope or the hierarchy but to any who seek the truth honestly (the Temple Priests did not think Jesus had the right to speak the truth, so they killed him - lets not make the same mistake).  Still, I suspect that there will be some good arguments that at least have to be considered.  Any forced agreement, however, is simply Catholic Relativism - truth for Catholics alone).  Hopefully, the message of this papacy is that we are done with such nonsense and can seek the truth rather than be given it.  Then, at some point, the authority of the message, which is truth, becomes powerful, not just for its own sake but because the mass of Catholics and others of good faith demand it be considered.  If it is not considered now, Mother Nature will do the job for us.



On the second point, as for the Catholic dissenters, if you can call them Catholic (although I will because I expect the same treatment when I point out inconvenient truths), they may have something to say that, if dealt with, makes the teaching stronger.  I pretty much doubt that, but they are as free to take their shot as I am to point out the political hypocrisy of the pro-life movement.  I am worried more about who is funding their search for truth.  I suspect they are not among the pure of heart in that regard.



On the third point, I have already explained what I think of the authority of papal writing exercises.  As for people saying Francis is a Democrat - if only and I wish.  I think he is more of a socialist and as one I can really live with that.



On the fourth point, Donald Trump is an example of Plutocracy, not Americanism.  While the nature of America is reflected in our debates on economics and science, that has to do with the tribalism we inherited from the rest of the world.  We seem to be everyone.  If the world agreed among itself, no doubt American would fall in line.  America would likely go first.  Like the third and second point, the problem really is Capitalism itself - of which American is the biggest purveyor and strongest champion.  Hopefully Francis will say something about that.  Of course, that would really bring out the critics.



I did not see the draft and would never seek such things.  Consumption may be a disease of the rich, but it is what keeps the middle and working classes from revolting when they figure out that the bosses are living so comfortably.  No plant manager, even in the third world, lives in slum housing.  The issue is still capitalism, with a side of development, and more people in underdeveloped countries, not less, brings the conversation on capitalism to a head yet again.  Maybe if we get it right this time, we can develop the third world without enslaving it first.  I do hope Francis talks about that.