European Catholicism

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by DAPDN

I'm sorry, but I will not continue to explain what was good about Portugal's Authoritarian Regime, otherwise, people might start questioning my practice and living of the most essential Christian virtues, as some are already doing, while not being entitled to that. Whoever is interested and may want to explore the theme, go for it, there's plenty of resources. Search, study, learn, for that sanctifies your life, as S. Josemaria Escrivá would say.

But you're right, Cinette. One way, or another, the fact is that Portuguese Catholicism is in a real mess. We definitely need to pray and fight so that things get better arround here; meaning, get orthodox and obedient, so that all of the Catholic faithful may experiment a full-hearted conversion!

Pax Christi to all of you!

You have the right attitude. Thank God for measure of Faith he has given you and Praise him for loving you. Praise him for who He is and what he has given to the world.

John 1:10-13 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own and his own people did not accept him......

[WH1988]

Originally Posted by Cuddy Duck

On this forum I have read the following startling proclamtions:

• Franco's regime　had merit
• Salazar's regime had merit
• Fascism is "left wing"

I certainly stand by the first two statements. I admire both Salazar and Franco, and their regimes. Am I forbidden to do so? They were certainly not perfect, and were certainly far from that, but had merit, in my opinion.

Once again, I didn't say that fascist is left-wing (I called it very clearly "an hybrid political phenomenon), but that it's position on the economic freedom axis is certainly left-wing.

Cinette, all the facts that you mention are true, except from the status of the Portuguese citizens in the overseas provinces: they were certainly not second-class citizens (that was removed on the early 50s), and, on the 60s and 70s, they lived much better than the average Portuguese - people in Angola lived by Central European cilivization standarts. Luanda was called "the African Paris". My father was one of them, and was shocked to find stone roads that are so typical in Oporto - in Angola he had never seen something like that.

However, you must put things intro prespective. Portugal's poverty was not due to Salazar's regime, which was in fact the only golden age of the Portuguese economy since the discoveries. Salazar found a devastated economy, an huge budget deficit, ramping inflation, with massive starvation due to the rise of the food prices, and with an huge civil crisis.

The first republic (1910-1928) was known by it's radical anti-clericalism, with the religious orders banned, with hundreds of priests killed, persecution of Catholics, and scientific studies aimed at proving that the brain of catholic priests was smaller than average.

The military coup was the only option - it avoided a civil war simillar to Spain's - and so was a dictatorship, in my opinion. I'm not saying that Salazar shouldn't have resigned after doing his excellent job, and called for freer elections, but what I'm saying is that the final balance is certainly positive.

Salazar united Portugal behind Catholicism, built the Shrine of Fátima, and gave the church the position she deserves. His regime drastically improved the situation of the Portuguese people. Was that enough to reach the European standarts? Not at all, but from such a unbalanced starting point, I doubt a better job could have been done.

However, as DAPDN keeps saying, this became a political discussion, rather than a religious one. I'm not interested at all in continuing it - it think I made my point.

I do not accept someone to tell me that because I defend an authoritarian regime for Portugal (and I don't do it by somekind of nostalgia, but mostly for economic and moral reasons) I am some kind of monster. I just don't believe on democracy as an universal rule - it isn't perfect and it isn't a dogma.

[Augustine]

Originally Posted by Kaninchen

This isn't the thread for it but I'd really like to hear about Fascism's 'left-wing economic policies'.

How about nationalization of companies, farms and services, control of labor, confiscation of private property, etc? He pretty much followed the Leninist manual to consolidate his power through socialism.

If one considers that German fascism was put forth by the German National Socialist Workers Party, it's easy to understand that the antagonism between Fascism and Communism was as that of competing factions, ideologies.

[DAPDN]

Precisely what I defended and exposed in my previous posts about the fascist left-wing leaned economic policies.

[Kaninchen]

Originally Posted by Augustine

How about nationalization of companies, farms and services, control of labor, confiscation of private property, etc? He pretty much followed the Leninist manual to consolidate his power through socialism.

Margaret Thatcher used to have a wonderful phrase that something was not just nonsense but "nonsense on stilts". What I wonder about with this piece is why you bothered? I mean you obviously know virtually nothing about the Reich and, probably, even less about Lenin.

If one considers that German fascism was put forth by the German National Socialist Workers Party, it's easy to understand that the antagonism between Fascism and Communism was as that of competing factions, ideologies.

That is a profoundly silly argument.

[Augustine]

Originally Posted by Kaninchen

What I wonder about with this piece is why you bothered? I mean you obviously know virtually nothing about the Reich and, probably, even less about Lenin.

That is a profoundly silly argument.

Since you can't provide any constructive argument, but only resort to personal attacks, welcome to my ignore list.

[a_cermak]

But to be honest, I think an important point is being made here. When the Church (or any religious institution) cozies up to those in power, they hurt themselves by turning off those who may be on the other side of the political fence. And when the powerful is seen as being part of an authoritarian regime, that hurts doubly (such as in some parts of Central America in the past) because for many religion is supposed to be on the side of the powerless, not the powerful.

[Augustine]

Originally Posted by a_cermak

But to be honest, I think an important point is being made here. When the Church (or any religious institution) cozies up to those in power, they hurt themselves by turning off those who may be on the other side of the political fence.

The real question is did she and to what extent?

In recent history, communists in Russia, China, Spain and in Portugal, republicans in Italy, Masons in Mexico, Nazis in Germany, Jacobins in France, etc, all martyred the clergy, the religious and the laity because they were Catholics. Evidently, the Church was more sympathetic to those who wouldn't kill her members, but in none of these cases did she endorse their abuses or turned a blind eye, never ceasing to state the truth at the first possible moment.

[KingAlfred]

Originally Posted by Augustine

The real question is did she and to what extent?

In recent history, communists in Russia, China, Spain and in Portugal, republicans in Italy, Masons in Mexico, Nazis in Germany, Jacobins in France, etc, all martyred the clergy, the religious and the laity because they were Catholics. Evidently, the Church was more sympathetic to those who wouldn't kill her members, but in none of these cases did she endorse their abuses or turned a blind eye, never ceasing to state the truth at the first possible moment.

Amen.

[Frank J]

Hi bobzills

Wanted to correct you on you remarks on Jasenovac concentration camp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasenov...entration_camp
Jasenovac concentration camp

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...Jasenovac.html
Jasenovac camp

Have a great day.

Frank J

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by a_cermak

But to be honest, I think an important point is being made here. When the Church (or any religious institution) cozies up to those in power, they hurt themselves by turning off those who may be on the other side of the political fence. And when the powerful is seen as being part of an authoritarian regime, that hurts doubly (such as in some parts of Central America in the past) because for many religion is supposed to be on the side of the powerless, not the powerful.

Thank you for that comment. It is so true. Please would you identify what European country you are from. It helps. You may not be from Europe, in which case this helps too.

[Cuddy Duck]

Originally Posted by Augustine

Since you can't provide any constructive argument, but only resort to personal attacks, welcome to my ignore list.

Yeah. That'll help.

[deborahaz]

this is the second time i have heard someone mention this ignore list.

can someone explain to me what it is and how to use it in case i need it in the future? ! LOL

[bobzills]

Originally Posted by Frank J

Hi bobzills

Wanted to correct you on you remarks on Jasenovac concentration camp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasenov...entration_camp
Jasenovac concentration camp

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...Jasenovac.html
Jasenovac camp

Have a great day.

Frank J

Thank you kindly for the links.
This link appears to support the claim that there was mass murder and cruelty against Serbs in Jasenovac? I am not sure why you would say that it is a correction?

[Frank J]

Hi bobzills,

In your remarks it sound like that you may been brushing off as just a story. Maybe I missunderstood you remarks..

That is the only reason I wanted to correct the subject.

I much like Marley Ghost, I try to correct the person to place them on right track.

Have a good day.

Frank J