Author Topic: Flee to the Fields  (Read 35455 times)

Offline otowner98

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
  • Karma: 9
  • Tu ne cede malis
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2010, 08:23:23 AM »
Great thread!  I guess I need to finally get some of my old Belloc books off of the high shelf, and borrow the ones I don't have.

Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2010, 07:47:53 AM »
I've read some Chesterton and always liked the Distributivist stuff I've read.  I even made a point of saying to myself that I need to read Belloc, but never got around to it.  Thanks to this thread I've added "Flee to the Fields" and "Economics for Helen" to my interlibrary loan list.

Also, LVSChant, I wanted to point out that I'm a big fan of chant as well.  Being that I'm Eastern Orthodox, however, my taste in chant runs toward Byzantine and Slavic chants.  Do you ever listen to www.ancientfaithradio.com?

Johngalt, from your username I take it that you're an Ayn Rand fan.  I've always thought her economic and political views were opposed to those of distributivism and more of a form of economic natural selection.  Of course, I haven't read any Rand since college, so I could very well have an incorrect memory.  I'd love to hear your take on Objectivism vs. Distributivism.

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2010, 08:19:06 AM »
Just started listening... thanks for the link. I'm not familiar with Byzantine and Slavic chants, although I like what I'm hearing very much! In the reproaches, which are sung on Good Friday in the Roman rite, there is one portion of the chant that alternates between the Greek and Latin that I believe comes from the Greek tradition.

I have read a couple of Ayn Rand books and find many of her ideas compelling, although I find her complete disdain for anything religious a little off-putting. I tend to overlook that when reading her books to try to glean what is useful to me. That being said... I don't think I would want church hierarchy deciding how our economic system should run. I do appreciate that the teachings they give us for the way we live our lives individually aid us in the choices we make in caring for our less fortunate brothers.


Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #33 on: December 14, 2010, 08:45:44 AM »
Glad you're enjoying the music.

One thing you have to keep in mind about Rand is that she was 12 when the 1917 October Revolution happened in Russia.  At that time there was a lot of anti-clericalism and the Russian Orthodox Church was thought of popularly kind of like the Roman Catholic Church is thought of now in America.  There were a lot of abuses of clerical authority and even though there was a strong leader (St. Tikhon, Patriarch of Moscow) who did all he could to stop abuses and shepherd the Church (as Benedict is currently doing) the intelligentsia viewed the Church as an obsolete institution.  Combine that with the fact that her parents were non-observant Jews (Jews were also persecuted in Russia for centuries) and I think you get where her disdain comes from. 

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #34 on: December 14, 2010, 11:21:07 AM »
@ Amator

Glad to see another prepper interested in these topics.  Regarding the handle and Ayn Rand...I would agree with your assessment about Rand's anti-religious bent.   That obviously had an influence on her.  As a human she is certainly fallible, and I find the objectivist philosophy to be mortally flawed with her "dogma" against religion.  Also, The objectivist view of self interest being the best thing to motivate people, (greed is good) is absolutely wrong, in my opinion as well.  This is where, for me, the austrian/libertarian/objectivist goes awry in the philosophy.  I understand that many people don't like being told what is right and what is wrong, but there is an objective right and wrong.  Teaching objective right and wrong, does not mean that one is incarcerated for conducting the wrong behavior. But to elevate the objectively wrong behavior to equal status (perfectly ok) with the objectively correct behavior, is really more destructive than the incarceration route (it does much greater damage to society, and therefore causes much more human suffering than the jailing of the individual).  I am not condoning "jail" for anything, just giving an example of why separation of Church (objective morality) and State dooms a society, and in fact brings about systems that can and are causing much more human suffering.  I believe we are witnessing this destruction coming at us like a freight train after 40+ years of the snowball rolling down the hill.  Several popes have written encyclicals about this and it is usually referred to the error of relativism (I'm okay, you're ok) and modernism (we know better than those morons like St Thomas Aquinas, et al).  Most people either forget, or can't admit that Western Civilization, which has increased human freedom and happiness, was founded upon Catholicism.  As we move away from the foundation of that society, so the society collapses. 


Back on question...John Galt is the handle because he stopped feeding the system, by "disappearing" from the system, all the while being in plain sight, working as a common janitor and "converting" those that might be converted. 

back on topic...
I hope to get back into some additional works by these folks.  I am amazed how much rich Tradition that we have as Catholics, that is not being taught to us by the current Church leadership.   I wish we could come up with a better term than Distributism for the ideas expressed in so many of these works of that Tradition.  Unfortunately, I think the word conjures up ideas of a welfare program of re-distribution, which makes people retract from having an open mind to the ideas being presented.

hobbs67

  • Guest
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #35 on: December 14, 2010, 11:40:17 AM »
Quote
Yes... from my experience, a large number of Catholics are very supportive of big-spending social programs and redistribution of wealth. Despite the fact that there is a big disconnect between the Church teaching on the sanctity of life and the main political party of socialist policies, somehow a huge number of purportedly devout Catholics support socialized everything, as do many Catholic politicians. I am thinking there must be a big rationalization going on in order to somehow think that the socialist policies override the life issue.

It saddens me, but I seriously doubt the folks you saw in D.C. were plants. Fiscally conservative Catholic is not a label you'll find everyday. haha.


Sorry to jump in late on this part of the discussion, but I must have missed it previously.  The "Social justice" movement is not just in the Catholic Church these days, you can't throw a stcik without hitting a non-denominational Christian pastor pushing the social justice agenda and being coopted by what is essentially socialism and the rebellion of Adam.  Eric Metaxas on Glenn Beck made a great comparison between the church in Germany at the time of the rise of Hitler and the American church today, they are/were filled with people who are nominally christain but don't actually know what the Bible says or what it means, therefore they are easy to uproot and coopt.   

I will make Earth like heaven through my efforts and earn my way to heaven is essentially what it comes down to with the social justice folks and will do it regardless of what the Bible says on the subject.  This and the Eastern mysticism movement, Thomas Merton, Henri Nouwen et al, is in the process of uprooting people from faith all over the place.   

Quote
lvschant -
Quote
However, I do believe that all human beings have God's law written on their hearts, regardless of whether they even acknowledge His existence
.  Very well put, and is the position of the Church, by the way. 


? Though I have not looked it up, I believe that the passage refers to "my people" , God's laws are written on the heart of His people, those who believe, otherwise the heart is filled with deceit...I believe its Paul who write not to judge nonbelievers as they simply don't know any better because they don't have the Holy Spirit.  Am I missing something?   

Quote
In fact, the parents of children who were harmed by priests had the responsibility to their own children and to society in general to file criminal reports against these priests, rather than allowing the Church hierarchy to handle these issues internally. If criminal reports had been filed (as they would have been with any other molester), the issue of bishops covering up these problems wouldn't have even been possible. Priest molesters deserve no more leeway than any other of the slime that is this group of individuals. Just my humble opinion
.

That seems a tad bit unfair and ignores the structures involved.   

Quote
I had a VERY difficult time coming to grasp with the dual nature of the Church....that is the human side which, unfortunately is frail and sinful, versus the divine side, which is infallible.  Sometimes it's hard to separate the two....Ten years ago, I sort of threw my hands up at the Church (of course, the poor catechism didn't help) when these scandals broke out in the US.  That is why Tradition is so important, because if we evaluate all developments in the church in light of Tradition, we will see the things that are not infallible exposed for what they are....human error

I also had a hard time with this but my conclusion was somewhat different. Human structures can be used for good or like on the case of the abuse scandals for evil, but in the end they are just human structures..

Quote
I understand that many people don't like being told what is right and what is wrong, but there is an objective right and wrong.  Teaching objective right and wrong, does not mean that one is incarcerated for conducting the wrong behavior. But to elevate the objectively wrong behavior to equal status (perfectly ok) with the objectively correct behavior, is really more destructive than the incarceration route


Evil will be called good and good will be called evil in the last days. 

Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #36 on: December 14, 2010, 11:57:22 AM »
johngalt,

When I read Atlas Shrugged and watched the film version of The Fountainhead I was going through my own religious awakening and journey from evangelicalism to Orthodoxy.  I was also a freshman in college.  I had so many paradigms shifting in my head at that point that all I essentially got out of Rand was "I, I, I, me me me!"; "Greed is Good"; and a rehash of Karl Marx's "religion is an opiate of the masses".  That and the odd kind of love story between Dagny Taggert and Reardon.  Odd in that the thing that attracted them to each other was that each was so narcissistic they kind of paired up like heroin junkies sometimes do.

I do like some of the other themes of Atlas Shrugged, but I've always tried to maintain a distinction between self reliance and egoism.  As a Christian I feel that ultimately my focus has to be on Christ and Christ-in-me which from what little I've read seems to conflict with Objectivism.  Indeed one of Rand's books is entitled "The Virtue of Selfishness." 

I agree with you about objective right and wrong, but I do think that the forefront issues of today may not be issues in the future.  Take slavery for example.  The Bible and The Church have both never came out and said that slavery is absolutely and always wrong.  Instead, realizing that slavery was fundamental to the economy at that time they instead exhorted masters to treat their slaves well and for slaves to know that while they may be in bondage on Earth that they would be free in Heaven.  Obviously very few feel that way today; as a civilization we have moved beyond slavery.  In that sense I think that while morality itself is objective, the application of morality is always and should remain subjective.

Rather than Distributivism I think there could be an argument for calling that philosophy Localism.  If I remember correctly it is called Distributivism because it espouses that the means of production should be distributed such that there are many independent owners and not large corporations.  This philosphy encourages entreprenuerism, apprenticeships, and reliance not on the government but in our local communities.  I feel that this can plug into the local food and local currency movements and give us an overall vision for life in communities while still being part of the American whole for as long as our system lasts.


hobbs67

  • Guest
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #37 on: December 14, 2010, 12:24:27 PM »
Quote
The Bible and The Church have both never came out and said that slavery is absolutely and always wrong.  Instead, realizing that slavery was fundamental to the economy at that time they instead exhorted masters to treat their slaves well and for slaves to know that while they may be in bondage on Earth that they would be free in Heaven.  Obviously very few feel that way today; as a civilization we have moved beyond slavery.  In that sense I think that while morality itself is objective, the application of morality is always and should remain subjective

Depends which church you are talking about -- William Wilberforce and the american abolitionists come to mind.  I think you are making an assumption about motives, essential to the economy, on the part of the Bible that is untrue and on the part of the church that may or may not be true.

It ties in somewhat with the anti-social justice movement and the understanding of why I think they are off.  Slavery is a product of a fallen world, just as Pilate, all of the bad kings of Israel were and sexually abuse is.  God's laws condemn this stuff either directly or through application, but still allows it to happen until He ultimately will take care of it.  Philemon also is told to treat his slave as a brother in christ Btw.   

     


Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #38 on: December 14, 2010, 01:04:47 PM »

? Though I have not looked it up, I believe that the passage refers to "my people" , God's laws are written on the heart of His people, those who believe, otherwise the heart is filled with deceit...I believe its Paul who write not to judge nonbelievers as they simply don't know any better because they don't have the Holy Spirit.  Am I missing something?    


I realize that C.S. Lewis wasn't Catholic, but his book Mere Christianity gives a very good argument in favor of my point of view. I would have to do some research, but I believe the basis for hope that all people can attain heaven, regardless of their communion with the Catholic church is the idea that God's law is written on all human hearts.
Quote
In fact, the parents of children who were harmed by priests had the responsibility to their own children and to society in general to file criminal reports against these priests, rather than allowing the Church hierarchy to handle these issues internally. If criminal reports had been filed (as they would have been with any other molester), the issue of bishops covering up these problems wouldn't have even been possible. Priest molesters deserve no more leeway than any other of the slime that is this group of individuals. Just my humble opinion
That seems a tad bit unfair and ignores the structures involved.  
Perhaps I am being a bit harsh. The times were different; even reporting to a public authority if the situation did not involve Catholic clergy was less likely in those times. That being said, while Catholics throughout the ages were taught to adhere to the teachings of the Church, we should have the good sense to realize that every person in the clergy is not the embodiment of Catholic ideals. A healthy skepticism would have been warranted in any age.

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #39 on: December 14, 2010, 01:27:41 PM »
Wow, a flurry of activity, I like it!

@Amator
Quote
That and the odd kind of love story between Dagny Taggert and Reardon.  Odd in that the thing that attracted them to each other was that each was so narcissistic they kind of paired up like heroin junkies sometimes do.
I had to stop myself from spitting up my coffee as I read this.  I agree.  There were several points in the novel that I had to "push through" like that.  Especially, when they were almost framed in a positive light by Rand....as if somehow the act of defiling themselves they were "freeing" themselves.  Sort of a version of Original Sin I suppose.

Quote
The Bible and The Church have both never came out and said that slavery is absolutely and always wrong.
I'm pretty certain that The Church has always held slavery to be anathema to The Faith.  That being said, it did exist, and while Catholics were bound to not own slaves, they did acknowledge that it existed and railed against it.  Probably the largest anti slavery push in the US came from the Catholic Church.

@hobbs67
Quote
Human structures can be used for good or like on the case of the abuse scandals for evil, but in the end they are just human structures..
The Church does have a dual nature.  It was founded by God in His Human Person, and therefore is divine, and infallible.  The human element is always fallible.  To ignore, or gloss over the Divine Nature of The Church would be to abrogate Her teaching Authority.

@LvsChant:
Quote
I would have to do some research, but I believe the basis for hope that all people can attain heaven, regardless of their communion with the Catholic church is the idea that God's law is written on all human hearts
God wants all of His Children to be with Him, but gives free will to all.  That by definition, and by God's own words, specifically "It will be shed for you and for many" (Note that the direct translation of pro multis is "for many", not "for all". and "the only way to the Father is through Me") , means that not all will find their way home. Because His fingerprints are on all, they are all called to be in Communion with His Church, or else He would not have established it to reach the ends of the Earth.   That they may be able to attain heaven without communion certainly is possible, because with God all things are possible, but we have no direct evidence of that so we must have Hope, you are correct.  We do have the evidence of Jesus and the Saints. 

hobbs67

  • Guest
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2010, 02:23:40 PM »
Quote
I realize that C.S. Lewis wasn't Catholic, but his book Mere Christianity gives a very good argument in favor of my point of view. I would have to do some research, but I believe the basis for hope that all people can attain heaven, regardless of their communion with the Catholic church is the idea that God's law is written on all human hearts.

All people have the oportunity to attain heaven, yes, because of Jesus, but i don't think its because of application of that section of Scripture.  The passage in question from Jeremiah and Hebrews deals with the new covenant with God's people, you can't have a covenent if one side doesn't agree to the covenant. 

I'll have to look at CS Lewis' point though, as I have never read Mere Christianity.  I have disagreed with CS Lewis in the past so it wouldn't be the first time.

Quote
@hobbs67

Quote
Human structures can be used for good or like on the case of the abuse scandals for evil, but in the end they are just human structures..

Quote
The Church does have a dual nature.  It was founded by God in His Human Person, and therefore is divine, and infallible.  The human element is always fallible.  To ignore, or gloss over the Divine Nature of The Church would be to abrogate Her teaching Authority
.

Ok, I'll be Martin Luther and you can be Thomas Aquinas.  Go.

Actually, I agree that the church has a divine nature, but I define what the church is differently, no "her" involved, and to whom I am responsible to look for teaching.  Men setting up offices and structures have nothing to do with the church to me.

 
Quote
That they may be able to attain heaven without communion certainly is possible, because with God all things are possible, but we have no direct evidence of that so we must have Hope, you are correct.   
   

I agree that allowing for the might of God in all things is important, but think in this case hope for those who are choosing not to believe tends to color my thoughts. 

If I say that God may allow people into heaven who don't accept Jesus because God's plan is bigger than my understanding, then I am essentially believing that Jesus' statements that no one can come to the Father but through me or I am the Way, the truth and the life are not true.  I would be saying that Jesus did not have to die and that there is another way....which is not true obviously. 

Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2010, 02:32:04 PM »
@LvsChant

Quote
That being said, while Catholics throughout the ages were taught to adhere to the teachings of the Church, we should have the good sense to realize that every person in the clergy is not the embodiment of Catholic ideals. A healthy skepticism would have been warranted in any age.

Very good point.  We only hear about the bad priests, cops, firemen, soldiers, etc. in the news and usually those are only 1-2% of the whole yet give all a bad name. 


@Everyone

I think we're having an interesting discussion yet diverging from the actual topic.  Perhaps we should move it to another thread? 

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2010, 04:07:43 PM »
Yes... agreed, amator. We started out by discussing such authors as Belloc, Chesterton and their economic ideas. I think the discussion and contrast of distributism vs. objectivist/libertarian/austrian/socialist/capitalist ideas are so very interesting. Very few non-Catholics have read Belloc and Chesterton, in my experience (fairly few Catholics have read them, in fact).

It is great to discuss the differences and how theology can impact how we view them...

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #43 on: December 14, 2010, 07:05:52 PM »
Quote
If I say that God may allow people into heaven who don't accept Jesus because God's plan is bigger than my understanding, then I am essentially believing that Jesus' statements that no one can come to the Father but through me or I am the Way, the truth and the life are not true.  I would be saying that Jesus did not have to die and that there is another way....which is not true obviously. 

Not accepting Jesus and not having ever heard of Jesus are two completely different things.  Obstinance will certainly not help one be with the Father.  That being said, there is always hope that they may accept Jesus posthumously (think of the Saints who died before Jesus came to Earth in time).

Sorry for the continuation of digression.  Back on topic...

How do we advance the very Catholic principles of getting back to the land and our Catholic roots to the masses?  It makes so much sense that God created the Earth for us and to be separated from it, somehow dehumanizes us all.  It seems to me that this is something that has really been lost for Catholics today.  I think that the "back to the land" movement of any era is people waking up to God's fingerprints, but many times, I think that those going back to the land are led astray into many other directions, and end up losing or never finding the happiness they were searching for.  I think that many threads on this forum would bear this out.  Many people are "waking up", but have serious stumbling blocks with acknowledging/recognizing that God is the one that is waking them up.  As I indicated earlier, they all want to make their own rules, and have no one dictate to them (including God).  Martin Luther even admitted he was wrong on his death bed.  When man is unwilling to submit to any authority at all, then he is unwilling to submit to God's authoity also.  It gets back to original sin, and believing that "you can be like a god".

SO the  question remains, how do you reach those that "get it" somewhat, but are are so "independent" they refuse to submit to the fact that they are not their own creator. 

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #44 on: December 14, 2010, 09:36:24 PM »
I think preppers as a group tend to be very distrustful of authority, particularly governmental authority. It extends in many cases to religious authority, too. This distrust of authority may even be a big part of why many people become interested in preparedness in the first place. The individualism of this group, the independent thinking seem to be part and parcel with preparedness. We have to be willing to not go along with the crowd in order to undertake what we do, to some extent. So... willingness to be obedient to Church rules would seem to many in that mindset to be incompatible with the whole idea of prepping. Many may find those of us who are content and happy with orthodox Catholicism and all that it entails to be quite odd.

While I do try to be obedient to the requirements of my faith, I don't automatically accept everything told to me by a particular member of the clergy to be binding on me. I think seriously about any correction I may be given and logically try to consider whether or not I think it is valid, trying to completely understand the rationale. I think there are times when a member of the clergy may overstep the bounds of their authority (or simply be wrong) as well [I'm not talking about tenets of the faith, of course]. In those cases, I don't think I am bound to obey. Even as members of a religious flock, we can't just be mindless sheep.

And, I find myself completely out of trust for our secular public officials. I think the government has way overstepped the bounds of legitimate authority in so many cases. I realize that we are not the only generation to live under oppressive government (or even close to how bad it has been in other places and times), but my unwillingness to respect this authority is completely different to my feeling about being obedient to the requirements of my faith. My faith tells me to perform corporal acts of mercy, but doesn't specify the how and when and where and force me to do it. The government takes away our rightful freedom in doing ourselves what our faith commands. I think it would be possible for us to have the freedom to live out our faith in several of these different philosophical models. An objectivist government would not prevent me from living freely as a Catholic, for example. Nor would there be any issue with this in the case of libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism. Only the big state philosophies tend to encroach on all our private business and try to mandate how individuals must act in that way, often either preventing us from public expression of our faith, or by forcing us to financially support things that we consider to be immoral. And, I have no interest in forcing others to live how I think best.

I have great hope that this movement "back to the land", whatever the motivation, will lead to more simple lives that are more in tune with a lifestyle that will lend itself to spiritual peace, particularly when we strive less for the material goods of the world, seeking to pare back to only what we can really afford and what we really need. Perhaps the spiritual growth will follow the prepping. I would love to see more small landowners and small companies become the norm and for individuals to be less dependent upon public and private sector large organizations for their livelihoods, a move toward "distributism".

My continuing question remains: with distributism, or libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism... any of the models that mean more freedom for the individuals and less state control, how do we get there from here? Are we doing the right thing in trying to carve out a small piece of a different model for our own families? Will there be enough of us doing it to make a serious difference?

Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2010, 07:14:42 AM »
@LvsChant

I think preppers as a group tend to be very distrustful of authority, particularly governmental authority. It extends in many cases to religious authority, too. This distrust of authority may even be a big part of why many people become interested in preparedness in the first place. The individualism of this group, the independent thinking seem to be part and parcel with preparedness. We have to be willing to not go along with the crowd in order to undertake what we do, to some extent. So... willingness to be obedient to Church rules would seem to many in that mindset to be incompatible with the whole idea of prepping. Many may find those of us who are content and happy with orthodox Catholicism and all that it entails to be quite odd.

While I do try to be obedient to the requirements of my faith, I don't automatically accept everything told to me by a particular member of the clergy to be binding on me. I think seriously about any correction I may be given and logically try to consider whether or not I think it is valid, trying to completely understand the rationale. I think there are times when a member of the clergy may overstep the bounds of their authority (or simply be wrong) as well [I'm not talking about tenets of the faith, of course]. In those cases, I don't think I am bound to obey. Even as members of a religious flock, we can't just be mindless sheep.

I agree 100%.  We Orthodox usually go by "in essentials unity, in non-essentials freedom."  Those parts of our faith that we consider dogma (most notably everything in the Nicene Creed) we say you must believe those things if you desire to be a member of the Church.  But when it comes to individual leaders or issues that have theological opinions but no outright dogma, there is no requirement to believe those things.  To sum up, to be an Orthodox Christian you really need to believe in the Trinity, the resurrection of Christ, etc. but you can believe what you regarding evolution/creationism, purgatory, etc. 

For what it is worth, having been in both Evangelistic and Tradional Authoritarian types of Christian communions, I find that there is more genuine freedom spiritually in the traditional authortarian churches (Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Church of England, etc.).

Quote
I have great hope that this movement "back to the land", whatever the motivation, will lead to more simple lives that are more in tune with a lifestyle that will lend itself to spiritual peace, particularly when we strive less for the material goods of the world, seeking to pare back to only what we can really afford and what we really need. Perhaps the spiritual growth will follow the prepping. I would love to see more small landowners and small companies become the norm and for individuals to be less dependent upon public and private sector large organizations for their livelihoods, a move toward "distributism".

My continuing question remains: with distributism, or libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism... any of the models that mean more freedom for the individuals and less state control, how do we get there from here? Are we doing the right thing in trying to carve out a small piece of a different model for our own families? Will there be enough of us doing it to make a serious difference?

I think it depends on what you mean by "a serious difference".  My hope is to find a place where good land isn't too expensive, find a way to buy 25-50 acres there, and encourage others to buy land and become neighbors as well, eventually forming a grassroots community.  Then maybe we can all pitch in and buy five acres and donate it to have a small monastery built there and have rural services.  As long as I have a good place in the country with a few good neighbors and a church I'll have 90% of what I need to get by. 

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2010, 09:43:40 AM »
LvsChant

I hope I was clear about the authority of the Church.  That is the infallible Magisterium, and not any "person's" opinion.  That is the reason why "ex cathedra" statements are not very common.  Unfortunately, many people confuse the infallibility of the Church with blindly accepting whatever any clergy may tell you.  That is not the case.  The only dogma that is protected by the holy spirit from error is that which is specifically called out, e.g. the tenets of the faith.

The Church (magisterium) has never condoned "forcing" someone to not exercise their faith, as this would be contrary to God's gift of free will.  As a matter of fact, the Church realizes that many, if not most people will reject Christ.  However, this does not mean that those people who reject Christ are "justified" in rejecting Christ and are not called to accept Him. 

This is a very difficult thing to accept...at least it has been for me...due to my upbringing, etc. with a general disdain for authority (which you detailed expertly, by the way).  I really only began to get a handle of it when I had a child.  It really solidified the relationship between God and us as His children.  Free will does mean that individuals have the freedom to do as they will, even if it is contrary to God.  Having the free will to do so does not make it right.  I cannot "force" my child to not behave badly, but if I don't correct their bad behavior and tell them that it is wrong, and why it is wrong, how will they ever learn?  True, some children "turn out" ok without the proper parenting influences, but how many are lost?  We have the authority and responsibility to teach our children right from wrong, just as the Church has the Authority and responsibility to teach all of God's children right from wrong.  When the Church shirks its responsibility and Authority to teach, human suffering increases.

Quote
My continuing question remains: with distributism, or libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism... any of the models that mean more freedom for the individuals and less state control, how do we get there from here? Are we doing the right thing in trying to carve out a small piece of a different model for our own families? Will there be enough of us doing it to make a serious difference?

I think there is no doubt that we are doing the right thing.  The best way to teach is by example.  I think we, as a society must get back to looking at life philisophically.  Part of the problem of the "protestant work ethic" is that it makes us so busy with doing things that we don't have enough time for reflection of deeper thoughts beyond working to buy, make, etc.  Those things are not inherently bad, but as they say, too much of a good thing is bad.  I think that the Church has to take a primary role as the teaching Authority, similar to what it has done with regard to abortion, and lead society out of the swamp.  The Church led us out of the catacombs before, and it will do it again.  I don't think that it will be done by a gaggle of atheists, though, no matter how self reliant and independent they are.  Remember that there were times when only a remnant of the Faithful was left, and it still changed the world for the better. 

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #47 on: December 15, 2010, 11:35:30 AM »
I can't believe I just read this article after I posted above.

The banal language is a bit over the top, but I guess it is used to drive home the point.  I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but his awareness of the problem I think is spot on.

You gotta love the title:  "America: Y Ur Peeps B So Dum?...Ignorance and courage in the age of Lady Gaga"

here's the link

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/12.10/sodum.html

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #48 on: December 15, 2010, 04:03:05 PM »
[mod hat on] No disparaging comments about atheists here, please. This isn't a private, Christians-only forum. We must have respect for others on here in our words and (hopefully) charity towards those of all faiths in our hearts. [/mod hat off]

I am reading the article you linked (about halfway through). I am having difficulty making myself slog through it. I see that the author is highly critical of our materialistic culture, lack of public healthcare and is generally feeling quite superior to all us simple-minded idiots who continue to shop at Walmart (causing sweatshops in Asian countries to flourish). I find his attitude insufferable.

I'm hoping for things to turn up, so I'll continue to read. Anyone else with a similar initial take? Perhaps I am missing the pearls of wisdom under the snarkiness...

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #49 on: December 15, 2010, 07:13:47 PM »
No disparaging comments intended.  Did I use a disparaging phrase?  Gaggle just means a small group.  Charitable....yes I do need reminding sometimes.

I agree with your assessment of the snarkiness of his writing style of the article.  I assumed that it was intentional to prove a point about the superficial nature of the media today.  I didn't get the superior thing about walmart shoppers though.  Most people who shop at walmart can't afford much else, because most of the decent paying manufacturing jobs have gone the way of third world sweat shops.  Walmart didn't always buy from China....as a matter of fact, Sam Walton very much was a buy American guy, but that has changed as they became infected with the common corporatism so common today as they grew to behemoth status.

The main point I thought was funny (in reference to my previous comment) was this statement:
Quote
But politics and money are never going to fill what is essentially a public vacuum that is moral, philosophical and spiritual.


Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #50 on: December 15, 2010, 08:23:11 PM »
OK... it got better later down. I had to take a break and come back to it. I agree with much of what he says, although I also didn't agree with several things...

Quote
(The only successful non-Marxist revolution of the 20th Century was Fidel Castro's Cuban Revolution).

hmmmm


Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #51 on: December 15, 2010, 08:26:28 PM »
THat one made me scratch my head too.   :-\

hobbs67

  • Guest
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #52 on: December 20, 2010, 10:04:46 AM »
Hmm, lots of interesting thoughts here...

Quote
I think that those going back to the land are led astray into many other directions, and end up losing or never finding the happiness they were searching for.  I think that many threads on this forum would bear this out.  Many people are "waking up", but have serious stumbling blocks with acknowledging/recognizing that God is the one that is waking them up.


I think you are right about this point.  Back to the land means nothing if you are not lead by God to go back to the land.  You are just as lost, now just sitting in the country rather than in the city.

Quote
For what it is worth, having been in both Evangelistic and Tradional Authoritarian types of Christian communions, I find that there is more genuine freedom spiritually in the traditional authortarian churches (Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Church of England, etc.).


Yes and no for me.  Man tries to make everyone follow man's rules in most things on earth, including the church.  I went from a stifling rule heavy dead faith Catholic church (that particular church not the faith as a whole) to a stifling Evangelical Church where everyone claimed to have a great faith, but all followed the same society dicated rules and regulations as to what that faith looks liked, polo shirts and fake smiles.  Man is going to try to get you to follow man rather than God wherever you go.

Quote
Martin Luther even admitted he was wrong on his death bed.  When man is unwilling to submit to any authority at all, then he is unwilling to submit to God's authoity also.  It gets back to original sin, and believing that "you can be like a god".


Since I am playing Martin Luther, I will say that this is generally regarded as a myth, but I was only using Luther as a quick reference name since Luther was just a man like you and I.  He was also reportedly virulently anti-semitic, something that I also disagree with.

The question again is not whether there should be submission to authority, but what authority.

Quote
While I do try to be obedient to the requirements of my faith, I don't automatically accept everything told to me by a particular member of the clergy to be binding on me. I think seriously about any correction I may be given and logically try to consider whether or not I think it is valid, trying to completely understand the rationale. I think there are times when a member of the clergy may overstep the bounds of their authority (or simply be wrong) as well [I'm not talking about tenets of the faith, of course]. In those cases, I don't think I am bound to obey. Even as members of a religious flock, we can't just be mindless sheep.


Agreed again -- God certainly doesn't call us to be mindless sheep after all -- He gave us free will to say no after all. 

Quote
Not accepting Jesus and not having ever heard of Jesus are two completely different things.  Obstinance will certainly not help one be with the Father.  That being said, there is always hope that they may accept Jesus posthumously (think of the Saints who died before Jesus came to Earth in time).

Yeah, I agree re not having heard and leave the details of that one to God.  The posthumously argument leads back to the same issue.  Sure, OT people are different as they were living under the previous covenant.  But NT on and you have to ignore scripture to make the argument of posthumously accepting Jesus, Jesus words above and the story of the Rich man and Lazarus for example.

Offline Amator

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: 13
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #53 on: December 28, 2010, 10:48:14 AM »
Went to the library just now and picked up my interlibrary loan copies of "Flee to the Fields" and "Economics for Helen".  I'll post here with my thoughts after finishing them. 

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #54 on: December 28, 2010, 01:11:39 PM »
I'll look forward to your feedback, amator...

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #55 on: January 22, 2011, 08:44:38 PM »
Hope everyone had a Merry Christmas season!

@Hobbs
Quote
The question again is not whether there should be submission to authority, but what authority.

That has been THE question for several hundred years, at least.

Any new insights or feedback on the thread topic?

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #56 on: May 20, 2011, 10:32:32 PM »
http://mises.org/media/1223/The-Trouble-with-Catholic-Social-Teaching

A very interesting talk by Thomas Woods regarding the problem with Catholic social teaching when looking at the science of economics. I think he makes several very good points. It reminds me of Galileo and heliocentric theory... and the difficulty he had with the Church leaders of his time...

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #57 on: June 30, 2011, 10:29:07 AM »
LvsChant

just saw the post, the link is not the same article now, so I can't comment directly on that but...

I wouldn't close the door on heliocentricity just yet...I have vetted his arguments, and they are 100% scientifically accurate....either way, it's interesting.

http://galileowaswrong.blogspot.com/

Just found a new book, and wow, is it amazing.  I think this would be a great read for anyone who would like a better understanding of the true Catholic social teaching (not the post conciliar variety) as it pertains to economics.  It was written in 1939 and details exactly what happens in a capitalistic society as it progresses (with the accumulation of the means of production, and how it leads to a servile state).  I have only read the first few chapters, and need to get more post it notes (just about every page has an excellent point to be referenced).

It is;  "Rural Roads to Security; America's Third Struggle for Freedom" by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Luigi G. Ligutti, LL. D

How about that title!, and in 1939....unfortunately, this was not on the required reading list for my confirmation classes, sure would have saved me a lot of time wandering....

Offline johngalt

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: 28
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #58 on: June 30, 2011, 10:31:07 AM »
Oh, I almost forgot....

The dedication of the book reads:

"Dedicated to the Cause of
BETTER FIELDS,
BETTER HOMES,
BETTER COMMUNITIES,
BETTER HEARTS,
BETTER LIVES."

Sounds familiar... :)

Offline LvsChant

  • Resident Master Mudder
  • Global Moderator
  • Survival Veteran
  • ******
  • Posts: 7240
  • Karma: 603
Re: Flee to the Fields
« Reply #59 on: June 30, 2011, 01:59:59 PM »
http://mises.org/media/4111/Catholic-Social-Teaching-and-the-Austrian-School-Revisited-A-Reply-to-Thomas-Storck

Yes... I couldn't find the original video presentation on the mises site anymore... found this recording of Thomas Woods on the subject again.

I'll check out the book and the link. Thanks, jg. btw... check out Hare of Carebannog's site here: badquaker.com. He has some interesting stuff on there, too, although not necessarily anything to do with Catholic social teaching, of course.