Watch. We’ll discuss.
The release today of Pope Benedict XVI’s latest encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, (”Charity in Truth”) completes the faith, hope and love trifecta begun with Deus Caritas Est (”God is Love”) and Spe salvi (”Saved by Hope”).
I confess that, unlike many of my gifted friends, associates and intellectual betters, I have not yet finished reading Caritas in Veritate.
Even so, I have (unsurprisingly) managed to form an opinion on the letter.
What I have read, I love.
I love it because aside from the messages that are pleasing to the “progressives” and the other messages that are pleasing to the “conservatives,” and beyond the rush for all comers in the Catholic family to define the thing and break it down for their targeted audiences, the essential message of Caritas in Veritate is that God loves us, and that God’s expansive, unconditional love is the ever-ancient, ever-new means by which we humans, we created creatures so beloved of Him that He deigned to become one of us, may fully develop as beings of body, of mind and of spirit.
“Each person finds his good by adherence to God’s plan for him, in order to realize it fully: in this plan, he finds truth, and through adherence to this truth he becomes free.”
– Introduction, Caritas in Veritate
Which leads me to the brilliant animated short embedded above, Pixar’s Partly Cloudy:
There are storks. There are numerous clouds upon each of which sits a Creator. With our Christian sensibilities, let us allow that the thousands of cloud Creators, enlivening beautiful babies and adorable puppies and kittens, depict the Triune God, omnipresent and yet “individual” to each of us. The storks do the Creator’s bidding, spreading his love (via new life, new creation) throughout the world. But Creation, in order to be perfect, balanced and complete, requires – along with all of that lovable goodness – the presence of the unlovable, the different and the mysterious.
Creating the dangerous-yet-necessary balancing truths is the God of Dark Clouds. He is as much a part of the Omniscient as the rest of the clouds, and he brings forth new life, but in the form of alligators that bite, rams that buck, porcupines that sting; he births the difficult and demands their delivery unto the world, for he knows what is not obvious; that the difficult and the challenging help hone and build “the strength for the life” of the world, what Caritas in Veritate calls “human development.”
It is left to one bedraggled-but-intrepid, faithful stork to put forth into the world the difficulties and challenges of the Creator, and the wordless exchanges between master and servant in this cartoon are eloquent of the dialogue of the life of faith.
“Here, I am Lord, I come to do your will – even though it bites, and I don’t understand.”
– I am so glad you are here; I love you.
“Here I am, Lord, I come to do your will – even if it bucks, because I trust.”
– I see what this trust is costing you; I love you.
“Here I am, Lord, I come to do your will – but it stings, and I cannot escape.”
– I will wipe away every tear and clutch you to my bosom in my deep love.
“Truth needs to be sought, found and expressed within the “economy” of charity, but charity in its turn needs to be understood, confirmed and practiced in the light of truth.”
- Introduction
The stork’s loyalty is very affecting, particularly when his feathers fall from his body and you realize that yes, all of this obedience, it costs the stork something. It is not painless. But he is a stork, and the delivery is his job, and he understands, confirms and practices those those two truths.
Note the cloud-Creator in the film: Though what he Creates is less obviously “good” than the rest, he completely and unabashedly loves all of it. And he loves his obedient and loyal servant so much that, seeing the lost feathers and woebegone expression, his compassion is moved; he removes the stingers, he caresses the ache, he clutches the stork to his breast in commiseration and a fervent attempt to console. He is fully aware of the cost to the stork, and looks after his leave-taking with concern, and his every arrival with anxious assessment. But the cloud-Creator does not in any way deny or dilute the truth: he is there to create, and to love; the stork is there to love, and to deliver. In that truth, great charity, great love, great understanding and something like a commonality of respect resides.
In Caritas in Veritate, Benedict writes:
“Only in truth does charity shine forth, only in truth can charity be authentically lived…Without truth, charity degenerates into sentimentality. Love becomes an empty shell, to be filled in an arbitrary way. In a culture without truth, this is the fatal risk facing love.”
This is true. Truth is humility, because it is true, even if -in our pride or our reason- we do not want to accept it. When the cloud-Creator and the Stork look at the other clouds, the easy, fun, joyful parts of creation, they long a little for the gooey-sentiment of perfection that seems to reside there.
But they know that perfection is not an entire and balanced truth; perfection is an illusion, just as “relative” truth is an illusion.
Finally, the long-suffering stork, faced with what appears to be more than he can bear, flies off to a different cloud-Creator, to one that seems extra-fluffy and incapable of dishing out anything but good times. The wounded God of Dark Clouds is shaken. He stomps a bit of lightening and then, heartbroken, he weeps at this seeming rejection. He does not chase after the stork, though, because, as Benedict writes,
“Fidelity to man requires fidelity to the truth, which alone is the guarantee of freedom and of the possibility of integral human development.”
– Introduction
Fidelity to his stork requires the same fidelity to the truth; God IS who He is, and cannot change. The stork is free to be who he is, as well, and to accept the intrinsic challenges in being the “difficult delivery” stork that will allow him to develop to his maximum potential. The stork, however, is also free to leave, to try to change things, even to reject the Creator and his truth, and his love, for what may seem like an easier life. His leaving cannot change who the stork is, though. It can only change his circumstances.
The anguish of the cloud-Creator is short-lived and rooted in the stork’s apparent choice to move against truth. It is quickly replaced by a deep wail. Does he weep for himself, in his abandonment, or for the stork who has moved against truth? Or for both?
The stork returns, carrying a protective helmet and shoulderpads; as prayer fortifies a lived-out faith, they fortify his lived-out mission. The stork manfully takes up his striking burden, and life goes on – creation continues, in truth. Caritas in Veritate; the Creator and the servant love each other, in the truth that is love, and the love that is truth. It is a lesson to be learned by each of us, as individuals, but that becomes more difficult in a world where created individuals are subsumed by ever-larger state-entities:
To regard development as a vocation is to recognize, on the one hand, that it derives from a transcendent call, and on the other hand that it is incapable, on its own, of supplying its ultimate meaning. Not without reason the word “vocation” is also found in another passage of the [Paul VI's Encyclical Populorum Progressio], where we read: “There is no true humanism but that which is open to the Absolute, and is conscious of a vocation which gives human life its true meaning.”
…A vocation is a call that requires a free and responsible answer. Integral human development presupposes the responsible freedom of the individual and of peoples: no structure can guarantee this development over and above human responsibility.
Caritas in Veritate, Sections 16, 17
Benedict wants us to know that the world is changing, but the truth never changes; that good and evil hang beside each other on neighboring crosses; that economic models rooted in human “truths” (and not Divine Truth) will only deepen what is difficult, exploitative, stagnant and false; that governments too-easily pay lip-service to “humanity,” while forgetting the human beings therein; that policies built on lies can never be true, and what is not true, cannot have charity…or love.
None of that is new. In fact, it’s an old, old message. But we need to really hear it, or ignore it at our own peril.
You can read the whole encyclical here. I will take my serving in small bites and mull them over by my own lights, rather than simply listening to what others say about it. I suggest you do likewise, and not put a lot of stock into my own cartoon-inspired musings. See how Caritas in Veritate resonates with you.
For much more cerebral (and undoubtedly more enlightening) takes on the letter, see below:
Over at First Thoughts, Joseph Bottum, writing as he reads, has many first second, third and fourth with more promised (or threatened?)
John Allen: Pope proposes A “Christian Humanism” for the global economy
Michael Novak: The Pope of Caritopolis
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Interviews Kishore Jayabalan, Director of the Rome office of the Acton Institute on Benedict’s ideas.
Joe Carter: The press is just distracted, but not ignoring the encyclical.
Fr. Z picks out what he finds an “important paragraph”
Conversion Diary: Looking at the individuals
Speaking of truth: R.R. Reno defends it.
Rod Dreher: figures if only Benedict had written about sexuality, the press might be paying attention
Spengler calls it An African Encyclical
Rocco’s useful primer
Christopher Blosser: a big roundup
July 7th, 2009 | 6:45 pm | #1
Benedict said “there is an urgent need of a true world political authority” whose task would be “to manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result.”
Such an authority would have to be “regulated by law” and “would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights.”
July 7th, 2009 | 6:47 pm | #2
I am most certainly NOT loving it.
A ‘world political authority’ universally recognized and invested with power?
I think there is a name for such a creature.
[I would hope that within this 30,000 word document you will not get hung up on a few phrases largely taken out of context. I have many links at the end of this piece, (and within the body) which I hope you'll read. Start with George Weigel and Deal Hudson, perhaps? It would behoove everyone to actually READ the document (myself included) before taking off on what the press offers as "examples" of the encyclical - the "examples" are usually taken out of context and distorted. In fact, my general rule of thumb with ANYTHING coming out of Benedict's pen (as with JPII's) is to wait 3-4 days for the inevitable "clarification" from the press. -admin]
July 7th, 2009 | 6:52 pm | #3
(Sorry for the double post – it said there was an error and I thought it did not go through.)
July 7th, 2009 | 6:56 pm | #4
“Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums,” he said.
The authority to ensure compliance……
Yup. That be the mark.
[Bethany, I'm not going to allow a hijacking of this thread into a "Benedict wants us all to wear the mark of the beast" hysteria. Have you read the full encyclical for yourself, or are you reacting to excerpts and offerings from a press that NEVER gets Benedict right on the first day of anything? This will be the last "mark of the beast" comment I'll be allowing -admin]
July 7th, 2009 | 7:30 pm | #5
The whole encyclical’s a bit much for me to take in right now, but a five and one-half minute cartoon is right up my alley.
How delightful! It captures the grandeur and mystery of God and creation beautifully whilst also touching upon the tension between a desire for tranquility and an acceptance of duty and responsibility.
That it does so in a way that’s funny, moving and humbling is remarkable. I can’t help but wonder whether I’m delivering all the creations in my charge as necessary. Definitely something to pray over.
July 7th, 2009 | 7:33 pm | #6
I can’t tell you what a smile that small movie and your commentary brought to my face. I’ve had a difficult day, so I thank God for sending me here! Thanks so much!
July 7th, 2009 | 7:37 pm | #7
[...] Still working my way through it, it’s been a busy day. The Anchoress explains B16 and Pixar. You heard me… Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Caritas in [...]
July 7th, 2009 | 8:08 pm | #8
“Have you read the full encyclical for yourself, or are you reacting to excerpts and offerings from a press that NEVER gets Benedict right on the first day of anything?”
Excuse me.
The quotes that I cited were from the EWTN website which has posted the document. It is from chapter 5 starting at section 67. I quoted it verbatim. I did not alter any words or remove it from its context.
So, yes. I have read it for myself. If the quotes make you uncomfortable, they should.
[I in no way suggested that you altered any words...but after searching, I do not find them in the text...I will look at EWTN to see what you're seeing. UPDATE: Here it is in full, and no, it does not make me feel "uncomfortable" as it is not a "one world" nightmare. In fact, it is nothing that has not been said before, by previous popes:
In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect 146 and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good,147 and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights.148
Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization.149 They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations.
As George Will says here: "there are those passages to be marked in red — the passages that reflect Justice and Peace ideas and approaches that Benedict evidently believed he had to try and accommodate. Some of these are simply incomprehensible, as when the encyclical states that defeating Third World poverty and underdevelopment requires a “necessary openness, in a world context, to forms of economic activity marked by quotas of gratuitousness and communion.” This may mean something interesting; it may mean something naïve or dumb. But, on its face, it is virtually impossible to know what it means."
...
And another Justice and Peace favorite — the creation of a “world political authority” to ensure integral human development — is revisited, with no more insight into how such an authority would operate than is typically found in such curial fideism about the inherent superiority of transnational governance. (It is one of the enduring mysteries of the Catholic Church why the Roman Curia places such faith in this fantasy of a “world public authority,” given the Holy See’s experience in battling for life, religious freedom, and elementary decency at the United Nations. But that is how they think at Justice and Peace, where evidence, experience, and the canons of Christian realism sometimes seem of little account.)
...
Benedict XVI, a truly gentle soul, may have thought it necessary to include in his encyclical these multiple off-notes, in order to maintain the peace within his curial household. Those with eyes to see and ears to hear will concentrate their attention, in reading Caritas in Veritate, on those parts of the encyclical that are clearly Benedictine, including the Pope’s trademark defense of the necessary conjunction of faith and reason and his extension of John Paul II’s signature theme — that all social issues, including political and economic questions, are ultimately questions of the nature of the human person.
Please read all of the links I have supplied - there are many of them, and a great many from the "right" as well as the "left." I think they will calm you down - admin]
July 7th, 2009 | 8:18 pm | #9
thank you, I have already linked to the whole letter in my post, and have printed the entire section in the comments area. Forgive me, I don’t mean to be short, but I’m weary of inserting links into comments; I’ve been doing it all day.- admin
July 7th, 2009 | 8:24 pm | #10
for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority
Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power
How is that an inaccurate Quote?
[OY! I corrected myself! I had originally cut and pasted your first comment, which was you paraphrasing into my search program! I've given you THE WHOLE SECTION! I'm not in the mood to "fight" so I would appreciate it if you would calm down, and I am asking you -very nicely - to do so. See Fr. Z, too if you want. admin]
July 7th, 2009 | 8:47 pm | #11
Thank you. I loved the video and commentary.
July 7th, 2009 | 8:49 pm | #12
Thank you for posting this Pixar clip! My kids and I recently saw UP! and this was the short before the movie and I cried with glee! I, too, thought of this cloud (all the clouds) as God – that even the creatures “not loved” are loved and created by God! Thank you, though, for your eloquent words and to compare it with the Pope’s encyclical? Thank God for Pixar and the Anchoress
July 7th, 2009 | 8:49 pm | #13
Haven’t read the encyclical, but I love the video. Saw it first the other night taking the five year old girls to see Up. I’m sure the encyclical will have greater lasting value, but fewer viewers.
July 7th, 2009 | 9:02 pm | #14
I just wanted to say that your take on the encyclical (and the lovely cartoon, as well) was exactly what I needed to read right now. Thank you for that.
Now, to read the rest of it for myself.
July 7th, 2009 | 9:05 pm | #15
“Here, I am Lord, I come to do your will – even though it bites, and I don’t understand.”
“Here I am, Lord, I come to do your will – even if it bucks, because I trust.”
“Here I am, Lord, I come to do your will – but it stings, and I cannot escape.”
I do not promise to make you happy in this world, only in the next.
† Saint Bernadette (1844-1879), quoting “the Lady” she saw who called herself “the Immaculate Conception” on March 25, 1858.
July 7th, 2009 | 9:12 pm | #16
[...] sing. Also, for the Cat’licks in the crowd, my take on Benedict’s latest encyclical is here, and since I am no genius, I use a cartoon to discuss it! Also, please note, my new rss feed! [...]
July 7th, 2009 | 9:17 pm | #17
Thank you for directing me here! I am reading it (encyclical) on my own now and there is much to love. Being from MI, I would like it if the Pope weren’t SO into unions (heh). Also, the big (world) gov. & “global warming” aspects make me sigh a bit…but overall it’s uplifting.
July 7th, 2009 | 9:28 pm | #18
I have to agree with Kelly; the PIXAR clip prior to UP was outstanding! Funny and thought-provoking at the same time. I am glad to watch it again. Thanks for posting it!
July 7th, 2009 | 9:43 pm | #19
This is a great gift. I might add to the non Catholics here this is a document that unlike his others is not only addresed to Catholics but to ALL PEOPLE
Let me say something here. If you are a conservative no matter what faith that is pro-life there needs to be some prayful consideration on embracing the outlook of this document. Benedict has basically said that one cannot seperate Social Justice in catgories and ignore parts you don’t. This is a significant movement.
As to the sensational headline son a world wide Govt all that is qualified by so many conditions that it should make most conservatives happy. Hs ies talking that such a agreement( and we have them now in numerous agreement this nations has on trade, etc) must be rotted in subsidarity. That is local control.
I am very excited by this document
July 7th, 2009 | 9:51 pm | #20
“Thank you for directing me here! I am reading it (encyclical) on my own now and there is much to love. Being from MI, I would like it if the Pope weren’t SO into unions (heh). Also, the big (world) gov. & “global warming” aspects make me sigh a bit…but overall it’s uplifting.”
HeatherY
Let me say this. First this document is for the world and for Americans. Still we should all be careful not to read it through American eyes
As to One one world Govt look at section 57. That is not one world Govt
As to Unions and worker associations it does not mean that everything the UAW wants or the Teachers Unions wants has Catholic approval. It needs to be recalled that in many places workers organziang is illegal. That is what is he talking about
July 7th, 2009 | 9:59 pm | #21
What a great short film!
I will digest this whole blog in pieces.
Thanks.
July 7th, 2009 | 10:04 pm | #22
I just watched it again! I love it.
July 7th, 2009 | 10:46 pm | #23
that economic models rooted in human “truths” (and not Divine Truth) will only deepen what is difficult, exploitative, stagnant and false;
The question is just what economic model Divine Truth offers. And the answer is no where near obvious. Sell all thou hast and give it to the poor? Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s? The tension between these and the accumulation of wealth by Catholic institutions, or any other institutions for that matter, has never been resolved.
In many, perhaps most, cases the Catholic accumulation is inevitable and requires no particular greed or acquisitiveness–you put people with a vow of poverty to work [roasting coffee, say] and they will generate much more profit than their simple lifestyle can ever consume. Thus wealth accumulates. So what should be done with it?
There is no obvious answer. I probably no longer have the stamina to read this thing in full, but it seems clear that Benedict once again talks about “truth” as if he can take for granted that we all know what truth he is talking about.
I don’t. I have presumed in the past that the Nicene Creed is as close as any single statement to what Benedict means by “truth”. But I can find nothing in the Nicene Creed that refers to anything but the “nature” of God. If there is a way of deducing from it how the economic world can be made both merciful and just, I’ve not been able to discover it.
And if there is some other source of economic premises in Divine Truth, surely Benedict should point out what they are for the millions of us who are in ignorance of them. And be ready to explain how they fit in with the two I have taken from the Gospel.
But were he to do so, he would run once again into the dilemma of whether any such Divine Truth can be known by reason or only by revelation. Benedict has thus far been unable to refute Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason that such knowledge by reasoning is impossible. And he knows it.
Thus if Benedict knows the Divine Truth only by revelation, how could he convince me or anyone else of it save by reason alone. After all, you can’t bottle and serve revelation.
This is exactly the same difficulty Bethany is having with the proposal for a universal world political authority that everyone will recognize is just. This still begs the question of how all the rest of us can know it is just, if we ourselves have not had the revelation of Divine Truth. And if we cannot know it without our own revelation, why should we take anybody else’s word for it?
Catholicism has always made large claims for the relevance of Divine Truth as a standard to shape the economics and politics of this world. Over it’s 2000 year history, it has made many different practical proposals about how our world should be run. Unfortunately, if you read the history, you find that, over the long term, the practical proposals largely contradict one another.
Perhaps that’s why Christ also remarked that His Kingdom was not of this world.
July 7th, 2009 | 11:11 pm | #24
[...] Anchoress and Amy Welborn have some great insights, as does Michael Denton, Joe Hargrave and M.J. Andrew, and [...]
July 7th, 2009 | 11:26 pm | #25
Thanks, Anchoress, for wonderful insights. I am hoping we can get our girls to Up! before it’s Out!
I haven’t read the encyclical yet, either, and I’ve already printed it off so I can bring it on vacation and digest it pool-side next week.
Had you seen what the Supreme Knight said about the encyclical (even before it was released)? I have the link somewhere on Domestic Vocation, but since I do not have much time, let me sum up.
He said that we mustn’t read the encyclical with a mind towards how it can reinforce our beliefs, but that we must read it with the idea that we ought to change ourselves to match the Holy Father’s writing. You’re summing this up beautifully, especially in reminding us that we should not read it with American eyes, but with Catholics ones.
God bless!
July 7th, 2009 | 11:35 pm | #26
While and/or after I was reading this, I started thinking of the phrase love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. Also I thought of the statement made that we are made in The Image of God. Obviously, ‘The God’ that I’ve heard so much about is “WAY” beyond my understanding and I can only imagine hoping to know a little about U.S. usual sinners ever becoming a god and so far this is what I’ve imagined in my figuring which is not really a spiritual thesis.
1st of all, I’ve tried to imagine finishing this kindergarten course which obviously to me is life on earth and then going into grade one with “God’s Angels” to learn a little more.
2nd, I’ve had thoughts that each and everyone of my cells would someday be working for me, myself plus I and we would all be as “ONE” god. In my imagination, “IT” would be kind of like a cloud but I think much deeper than that, let say like our grade one spiritual cells would be a kind of comedy storks as they are now to the real world in the cartoon. I believe that for any of us to truly know Our Heavenly Father, “IT” would be Loving Comedy to any of our eyes and ears.
3rd, I also believe that Angels are all around us in a virtual parallel spiritual reality highway, kind of like an hypnotic wheel and in someway they are responsible for everything which encompasses our daily world. The more they try to help us the more negative we also find which we could name good and bad and/or equal opposite reaction in other words the more complicated “IT” becomes. Stuff like finding the lowest common denominators, analyzing sentences, Algebra and much much more was all given to God’s Children by these angels so we could understand a little about our Heavenly Father.
Adam and Eve never stood a chance and neither do we if we try to figure any of “IT” out for ourselves. I think that Jesus, The Only Begotten Son of One of Our Heavenly Father’s Cell was born in a stable because “IT” was kind of a hijack by the animals who were left in paradise and truly believe that they are really “IT” but Our Heavenly Father is no fool!
I can almost hear the laughter now which is convincing my soul and/or spirit that I could be right on target but only God’s Time knows for sure and another laugh is that I’ve already finished my journey but I just don’t know about “IT” all yet.
Every day is an Eternal moment with the process starting from square one for each and every one of our cells to also accomplish what we’ve attained or should I say planted for Eternity so if any of you manage to change water to wine I would advise that you simply go on whisting a happy tune and keep “IT” to yourself cause no body wants a show off and besides most will just laugh at you like they did with Jesus. If you play your cards right I don’t think that any of these so called old goats will try to crucify you if they know what’s good for them.
I could go on and on but I know that many out there could have also given us a good laugh but between you and me when God’s Angels tell me that I’ve hit the nail on the head, I promise that I won’t keep “IT” just to myself but in the mean time and as we all know time can often be mean so until we learn to love all our enemies and that’s something that sinner vic still has not mastered as far as I know.
I hear ya! You and sinner vic really do have an imagination Victor!
Keep your powder dry says sinner vic!
Now don’t be like that! Be nice says Victor!
God Bless,
Peace
July 8th, 2009 | 1:24 am | #27
I’m halfway through, so no in-depth analysis yet, but it does seem that some parts are more distinctly and purely Benedictine than other parts. Those other parts require a careful reading, and a reading in the context of the whole. But as such, I fear that those portions might be susceptible of being misinterpreted and/or misappropriated, just as much of the Church’s social doctrine has been misinterpreted and misappropriated by some seeking to justify a certain leftist political slant.
July 8th, 2009 | 8:09 am | #28
Here is a bit of a secularist perspective tho:
I comment there as “asquith”- see, I’m more than just a troll
July 8th, 2009 | 11:15 am | #29
I haven’t always agreed with you on everything (politics, and no, I did NOT vote for Obama nor do I agree with him on everything, particularly on life issues and gay “marriage”). Still I have to say your comments in this post are some of the best stuff I have seen written in any blog in a long long time. Thanks.
As for the encyclical, I am working on getting through it. I doubt I’ll find anything to disagree with or have problems with. Mostly it will just take time and prayer to understand it and to figure out how to apply it to my own life (being far from being a G-anything). People who treat Caritas in Veritate as some kind of doctrinaire screed that they can ignore are making a terrible mistake.
July 8th, 2009 | 12:02 pm | #30
[...] fact, it’s worth watching—and her comments on it are extraordinary. So, go now—and be prepared the next few times you go by to see [...]
July 8th, 2009 | 12:13 pm | #31
Having now completed my reading –
In the past, Pope Benedict used the occasion of subsequent addresses and homilies to further explain and expand upon his encyclicals, Deus Caritas Est and Spe Salvi. Thus, I expect he will do the same in this case.
This would seem to be especially needed with respect to Section 67, which seems to be awfully and unduly utopianistic. Indeed, it borders on the dream land idea of creating a kingdom of heaven on earth. However, although he says there is a “need” for “a true world political authority,” he does not say whether such a utopian body is possible, especially when one adds in his qualifiers of true, subsidiarity, solidarity, common good, charity in truth, and conforming to the moral order.
Such an authority has never existed in the history of mankind and, indeed, every attempt at creating such an authority has only resulted in ever increasing horrors, as Benedict has noted in the past (e.g. Spe Salvi). Indeed, in Caritas in Veritate itself, Benedict many times cautions, however implicitly, against the idea that government is the answer to the problems of human development.
Now, it may be true that such an authority is “needed,” but the world needs lots of things that it will never have. Or, to be more precise, such a needed governmental authority will come about only when we are governed by the Heavenly King Himself, who alone can realistically fully embody the concepts of truth, subsidiarity, solidarity, common good, charity in truth, and conformance to the moral order.
That is, He is the needed authority, and attempts by us humans, individually or in international political associations, to supplant and usurp Him, will only harm, not help, authentic human development. This, again, is consistent with Benedict’s prior magisterial writings, etc.
I expect Pope Benedict will have occasion to further expand upon Section 67.
July 8th, 2009 | 12:36 pm | #32
To the Bethany person on top, I would note that whenever the Pope talks about a global authority, he always mentions it in connection with the principle of subsidiarity, the same governing principle advocated by Popes for the last 100 years.
Wonderful video! I cried.
July 8th, 2009 | 1:42 pm | #33
I am not a Catholic, but do attend an annual retreat for alcoholics conducted by different priests (and once stayed at a Holiday Inn Express), and was completely unaware of the encyclical when I saw the Pixar short preceding “UP.” And yet, I saw much of what you saw in “Partly Cloudy” via the encyclical, but via the experience of recovery through God. Caritas and Veritas (is that correct Latin?).
In re social order, I can try to understand the papal deliberation as to what is Godly as having nothing to do with left, right, or any other mortal conceptualization. This social order over the ages includes things that “bite and sting” by God’s design and is subject to His will in His time. Yet we may be sustained in God on Earth – if we let Him.
If anyone get’s a chance, also check out the Pixar short with the Jackalope and the sheep – it may have preceded “Cars.” Something about sacrifice, gratitude and the need for God, there. Or maybe I just see stuff like this everywhere when I’m functioning at a relatively healthy level.
July 8th, 2009 | 2:24 pm | #34
[...] you can see from my piece on Caritas in Veritate, I do like my brain [...]
July 8th, 2009 | 4:18 pm | #35
If you accept that globalization cannot be rolled back, then some kind of common framework of rules is inevitable. I’d like to see it rolled back, myself, but I gather the Church has decided it can’t be. In that case, insisting that whatever governing framework evolves respects the human person, is grounded in Christian ethics and leaves a wide scope for subsidiarity is not a bad response.
July 8th, 2009 | 4:22 pm | #36
[...] may have to scroll down and pause the video in my Caritas in Veritate posting) Comments [...]
July 8th, 2009 | 7:21 pm | #37
What I want to know is who delivers the baby storks?
July 8th, 2009 | 9:07 pm | #38
In fairness Anchoress: by your own admission, you yourself formed an opinion of the encyclical without having read it all. Yes it’s your blog, but you can’t then turn around and demand Bethany read it before she comments on it. And she did quote it and raised a legitimate question, one also raised by Weigel et al. And Weigel himself has been criticised for his red and gold source criticism, as if the Pope was some kind of tool.
It leaves a particularly sour aftertaste on your wonderful reflection.
[Good points - admin]
July 8th, 2009 | 9:58 pm | #39
Please change the embedded video from auto playing to manual playing. It freezes up my computer.
[I am not sure how to do that? UPDATE: I figured out how! Yay!-admin]
July 9th, 2009 | 12:08 am | #40
… of course the WTO, the World Bank, the UN and international accounting standards are all contemporary examples of “global governance”. Hmm, is this “world government” meme a massive red herring?
July 9th, 2009 | 12:22 pm | #41
Regarding your statement above:
“Benedict XVI, a truly gentle soul, may have thought it necessary to include in his encyclical these multiple off-notes, in order to maintain the peace within his curial household. Those with eyes to see and ears to hear will concentrate their attention, in reading Caritas in Veritate, on those parts of the encyclical that are clearly Benedictine, including the Pope’s trademark defense of the necessary conjunction of faith and reason and his extension of John Paul II’s signature theme — that all social issues, including political and economic questions, are ultimately questions of the nature of the human person.”
Surely you aren’t saying that Catholics should concentrate on the parts that appeal to us most because we’ve decided that they are “truly Benedictine” while relegating the rest to the back burner? Wouldn’t it be equally easy to concentrate on his statements that governments should have a large role in redistributing wealth and his call for a UN “with real teeth” and etc., while dismissing the rest as a sop to the traditionalists?
[Not my statement; I was quoting Weigel, with whom I do not completely agree, but offered for perspective -admin]
July 9th, 2009 | 2:57 pm | #42
[...] The Anchoress I love it because aside from the messages that are pleasing to the “progressives” and the other messages that are pleasing to the “conservatives,” and beyond the rush for all comers in the Catholic family to define the thing and break it down for their targeted audiences, the essential message of Caritas in Veritate is that God loves us, and that God’s expansive, unconditional love is the ever-ancient, ever-new means by which we humans, we created creatures so beloved of Him that He deigned to become one of us, may fully develop as beings of body, of mind and of spirit. [...]
July 11th, 2009 | 8:23 pm | #43
I don’t know if you are familiar with our site, the Catholic World Report, but we have a “Round-Table” wherein J. Brian Benestad, Francis J. Beckwith, Father Joseph Fessio, S.J., Richard Garnett, Thomas S. Hibbs, Paul Kengor, George Neumayr, Joseph Pearce, Tracey Rowland, Father James V. Schall, and Rev. Robert A. Sirico share their thoughts on Caritas in Veritate.
It’s located here.
July 13th, 2009 | 1:31 pm | #44
Americans love both capitalism and Christianity, but no party has ever dared to call itstelf the Christian Capitalist party, perhaps because we have some subliminal understanding that the two things don’t go together.
As the Republican Party becomes ever more openly the party of unbridled greed, no wonder it shrinks from the Pope’s message. The rich caring for the poor? How uncapitalist. How Christlike.
[Interesting, but I do recall somewhere in my reading in the last year, the discovery that Republicans, on the whole, donate more money to charity and give more time to volunteerism, and not simply to their churches. I think it's a very sloppy thing to just come in here and sneer so broadly about "greedy Republicans" when it is the "rich Democrats" who live on the prime (and completely "blue") coastal lands and (as we see with so many of our elected Democrats) give so very little to charity.
You can do the google searches yourself, but it seems to me that the difference in charitable giving reflects a difference in philosophy. Conservatives think charity should be extended personally, and Liberals seem to think it should be the government's job. Perhaps the difference is this: Conservatives think in terms of individualism and giving "a hand up" rather than a simple "hand out." - and this thinking follows back to the idea that we are all INDIVIDUALS, loved into being by a God who knows us. Liberals think in terms of "the collective," (although it must be said the very rich Democrats will remain quite untouched by the economic leveling they demand), love the collective over individualism and believe that somehow fairness and niceness can be legislated. Life is not fair; niceness cannot be forced.
This blog is very committed to charitable giving (a portion of my blog earnings go to various charities, not all of them religious), and I know other conservative bloggers who always donate a portion of their earnings to the less well-off, so I suppose I find your generalization a little ungenerous - almost as though you'd forgotten that when you talk about left and right, you're actually talking about real people, and when you talk about real people, you cannot escape individual stories - and therein you find that oh my - there are some really generous conservatives, and some really skinflint liberals...and vice versa...but that sure does disrupt the narrative and the conventional thinking, doesn't it?
That's the problem with conventional wisdom and conventional thinking...it's so conventional that it's not really thinking, at all. You started off with a good question: why is the notion of a "Christian/Capitalist Party" unappealing (and it is) and then got mired in a template that is outdated and not particularly honest. The stupid part of going to war against the "capitalists" who could also be called the producers of society is that when you've defeated them, there is no one left to produce, or to tax, and - since dreams become pointless - there are no innovations, nothing to inspire or to cause wonder. There is just a disappearing middle class, replaced with something that doesn't work, wherever its tried, and that only the already elite and comfortable find endurable. Capitalism is a flawed system, but I don't know if the alternative is more "Christlike." Whenever you subjugate individual freedoms and gifts to a governmental system, you have a hand in taking away "free will" which is the greatest and most valuable of our gifts. People should be free, frankly, to be their best (most generous and sharing) or their worst, and then answer for it to God, not to their government. But for those who don't really even believe in God or Jesus as the Christ, everything I have just written will sound like gibberish.
In terms of "unbridled greed," I think it's become pretty clear that as concerns congress, both Dems and GOP are pretty damned greedy and willing to take the cream and leave the dregs for everyone else. -admin]
July 16th, 2009 | 12:01 pm | #45
[...] for being too much in the left, it’s a good thing Popes don’t worry about popularity. My piece from the other day had the very first links (and I have added a few) but as folks are digesting the [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact