"At the same time, it’s not like there is much room for discussion with the ‘just war’ doctrine beyond semantics. Gaudium et Spes already, in a way, killed that doctrine in modern circumstances due to the capacity of destruction of nuclear weapons and now you add AI to the discussion. But the doctrine seems clear, there was a wide agreement on the issue, the doctrine seems clear, what the pope intends to want seems clear, so I didn’t see much of the point of the discussion,” a cardinal told The Pillar."
I am really glad that the doctrine seems clear to the college of cardinals, but I think the other billion catholic in the world are still confused by this seeming change in teaching.
Also I'm not sure what he means when he says Gaudium et Spes killed the just war doctrine. "As long as the danger of war remains and there is no competent and sufficiently powerful authority at the international level, governments cannot be denied the right to legitimate defense once every means of peaceful settlement has been exhausted. State authorities and others who share public responsibility have the duty to conduct such grave matters soberly and to protect the welfare of the people entrusted to their care."
I'm pleased (and not especially surprised) that once again the cardinals seem to have walked away largely happy. It was my understanding that next year's consistory was going to be longer than this one. Perhaps that's a good opportunity to add some additional plenary sessions? It seems like there are benefits to both formats and some issues are probably best handled as a large group where subject matter experts can lead, while others (like evangelization, where all of the cardinals have *some* experience they can share) benefit from the deeper discussions of the small group structure. Reading the thoughts and opinions of the cardinals, this just seems like a situation that calls for a both/and approach rather than an either/or, which should become easier to do with longer consistories
I really appreciate how Edgar tries to get the pulse of these ecclesial events, with extensive quotes from people with varying perspectives. And, a side note, I was very happy to hear from one cardinal that Pope Leo is leading by his example of celebrating the Mass with dignity and solemnity. The tide seems to be turning on this. To mix metaphors, I recall Ed's comment that Pope Leo doesn't seem to be interested in wild swings of the pendulum, rather, a calm but persistent movement towards stability.
"At the same time, it’s not like there is much room for discussion with the ‘just war’ doctrine beyond semantics. Gaudium et Spes already, in a way, killed that doctrine in modern circumstances due to the capacity of destruction of nuclear weapons and now you add AI to the discussion. But the doctrine seems clear, there was a wide agreement on the issue, the doctrine seems clear, what the pope intends to want seems clear, so I didn’t see much of the point of the discussion,” a cardinal told The Pillar."
I am really glad that the doctrine seems clear to the college of cardinals, but I think the other billion catholic in the world are still confused by this seeming change in teaching.
Also I'm not sure what he means when he says Gaudium et Spes killed the just war doctrine. "As long as the danger of war remains and there is no competent and sufficiently powerful authority at the international level, governments cannot be denied the right to legitimate defense once every means of peaceful settlement has been exhausted. State authorities and others who share public responsibility have the duty to conduct such grave matters soberly and to protect the welfare of the people entrusted to their care."
I'm pleased (and not especially surprised) that once again the cardinals seem to have walked away largely happy. It was my understanding that next year's consistory was going to be longer than this one. Perhaps that's a good opportunity to add some additional plenary sessions? It seems like there are benefits to both formats and some issues are probably best handled as a large group where subject matter experts can lead, while others (like evangelization, where all of the cardinals have *some* experience they can share) benefit from the deeper discussions of the small group structure. Reading the thoughts and opinions of the cardinals, this just seems like a situation that calls for a both/and approach rather than an either/or, which should become easier to do with longer consistories
I really appreciate how Edgar tries to get the pulse of these ecclesial events, with extensive quotes from people with varying perspectives. And, a side note, I was very happy to hear from one cardinal that Pope Leo is leading by his example of celebrating the Mass with dignity and solemnity. The tide seems to be turning on this. To mix metaphors, I recall Ed's comment that Pope Leo doesn't seem to be interested in wild swings of the pendulum, rather, a calm but persistent movement towards stability.