This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
In preparation for the currently ongoing papal conclave, I decided to read the official rules currently in force, UNIVERSI DOMINICI GREGIS, issued by John Paul II in 1996. The document contains this provision (emphasis added):
Seems simple enough right?
Whoops.
Here I was, a schmuck, reading the canonically promulgated apostolic constitution as if it mattered, as if the supposed men of God involved in this 2000-year-old institution might care about established procedures.
Sure, Francis could have changed the rules, as many popes have done throughout the centuries, but he didn’t. He either didn’t notice or didn’t care, and neither did anyone else with influence within the Vatican either. How am I supposed to take this seriously if the cardinals and popes don’t even take it seriously?
I wish Christianity were true. I really do. It would certainly make my dating life easier. I’d have a sense of purpose in life, defined rules of virtue to follow, but it just doesn’t make any actual sense. The inconsistency I cited above is relatively minor, but it is illustrative of what one finds everywhere when one digs into the claims of Christianity and treats them with the truth-preserving tools of logic. Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican II, Matthew 24:34, these are fundamental truth claims that can’t be handwaved away like the finer points of ecclesiastical law.
If this is a topic in which you are actually interested, rather than simply a convenient opportunity to bemoan Christianity, here is a recent podcast of two canon lawyers discussing exactly this topic
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/ep-202-the-next-benevacantism
More or less, the rule was only put in place by Paul VI in 1975, and a Pope can't bind future Popes. The rule can be changed at any time by the Pope, and papal canon law cannot bind the Pope because it derives its authority directly from him.
Okay, I listened to the podcast. These guys are just wrong.
You're right that the rule can be changed at any time by the pope, except that the pope didn't actually change it. The 120 cardinal electors rule remains in place. The error that the podcast guys make is that they assume that the pope appoints "cardinal electors", but the pope doesn't appoint "cardinal electors", the pope appoints cardinals. "Cardinal elector" is not an office, it is simply a description of a cardinal who votes in the conclave. The rules for which cardinals get to be cardinal electors comes from the document Universi Dominici Gregis. Universi Dominici Gregis contains both the proposition that cardinals under the age of 80 have the right to vote, and the proposition that the maximum number of cardinal electors is 120.
As far as I can tell, the pope never decided which proposition controls. If he did, please cite it to me. Both propositions are from the same document and of equal weight.
Doesn't matter, the Pope can do whatever he wants (on this matter). The law cannot bind the Pope, because the law is an instrument of the Pope. He has supreme unlimited absolute authority over the rules for creating cardinals, and can change or ignore them as he sees fit. He cannot be bound by his own authority or the authority of his predecessors.
They go over this in detail at about 35 minutes into the podcast
But…which pope decided on who the electors are here?
Francis
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link