Skip to main content

5 Thoughts For Today

5. Go Cards!

4. When Fred Noltie blogs, the people benefit. All too brief and infrequent, my friend! I shall pray that other mindless toils are destroyed, as God wills.

3. We're observing a Feast of St. Louis IX, King of France. If I were half as good as King Louis, everyone I know would be better off.

2. Pope Leo XIII=Awesome.

1. New pick-up line: "I read Rerum Novarum, and it changed my life." No, seriously.

Comments

Barrett Turner said…
Care to say more about #1?
Jason said…
I would say that I no longer believe that the Church staking a position between unfettered capitalism and socialism is a rhetorical ploy. There is enough anthropological insight and invitation to further reflection on this alone to occupy our brightest minds. And it will not be a fruitless pursuit. I found 44-45 particularly interesting.
Barrett Turner said…
Yes, the consistent call for wages to enable family life struck me, too. Pius XI reiterates and expands upon the teaching in Quadragesimo anno. Leading up to Leo, it was very common for wages to be so low relative to the cost of living that both father and mother had to work and also the children as early as six years old.

One of Leo's inspirations on the social question was Leon Harmel, an entrepreneur/industrialist in a rural area of northern France. He had a complex pay scale. He paid based on the type of work done, the time worked, and the quality of the worker's output. Then he would add additional pay in the form of a stipend for fathers in order that the mothers did not have to work. As a result, most of the wives at his factory did not need to work and could care for the children and the household.

That would not work in American today, I am afraid, because I think it is against the law to pay more to a family man than what one would pay to a single man doing the same work. Economically, this tends to exclude the family from the big picture of exchange, for all workers are from the point of view of capital just social atoms! This is reinforced with wages become lower and couples choose to work instead of having children. Then the cost of living rises to capture more of the couple's joint earnings, etc. So it seems to me, as an amateur to the modern economics side of things.

Later encyclicals call for creative ways of fixing economies which do not give a family wage, such as government stipends for mothers.

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...