a papal condemnation of theocracy?

[egb_hibs]

thought this might be of passing interest given the passions aroused by Cardinal O'B recently.

it's not possible to be certain as once more i'm diletantte-ishly going by a book review rather than the book itself, but this is what it sounds like to me.

it also puts the critique of liberation theology into it's proper context, the former being, of course, a form of theocratic system (in a more overt and undisguised sense even than traditional marxism). it strikes me that leftish catholics who would rightly oppose theocracy sometimes try to have their cake and eat it, wrt this subject.

anyway, make of it what you will:

"John Paul II sought to steer the Catholic faithful away from what, in the heady days of the 1970’s, was called Liberation Theology. Benedict XVI, also, observes, in passing, the dangers of politicising Christianity. There is a particularly illuminating reference to the release of ‘the concrete political and social realm from theocratic legislation’, and its transferrence ‘to the freedom of man’. He actually sees this (in the chapter on the Sermon on the Mount) in the preceding Jewish context. He could have placed it in the Hellenistic culture to which the development was more centrally related — it was the Greeks whose genius rejected the theocratic monarchies of the East, and who humanised politics. The Pope’s conclusion is correct, however; when he writes that ‘discipleship of Jesus offers no politically concrete programme for structuring society’, and that Jesus’ liberation of humanity involved a recognition that ‘political arrangements are no longer treated as sacred law’"

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magaz...the-life.thtml

[snoots]

The Vaticans' world view changes with history, it has gradually lost all temporal power it held over the preceding thousand years. The idea that the Pope is "infallable" only dates from about 1850, it was an attempt to gain some kind of leverage politically. This looks like it was an attempt to go in a totally different direction, spiritual rather than the "concrete".

It's better off out of Politics imho, as are all religions. A lot more to say outwith that platform.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by snoots

The Vaticans' world view changes with history, it has gradually lost all temporal power it held over the preceding thousand years. The idea that the Pope is "infallable" only dates from about 1850, it was an attempt to gain some kind of leverage politically. This looks like it was an attempt to go in a totally different direction, spiritual rather than the "concrete".

i broadly agree. he's doing what some like to condemn them for both doing and not doing, ie - to change.

It's better off out of Politics imho, as are all religions. A lot more to say outwith that platform.

my view is that they should stay out of attempts to be the political body. they are otoh as entitled as any other individual or corporate body to contribute to the democratic political discourse. this is maybe the same as what you're saying - then again, mebbes naw.