Sunday, February 7, 2021
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe
Posts
Comments
Favored Online Resources
Most Popular Posts
-
Is the male-only priesthood a discipline or essential to the nature of being a priest? Sr. Vassa (again unflinchingly taking up a contentiou... -
Sister Vassa recently posted an advice piece to her Facebook page (the letter itself has been removed from Facebook and she is actively b... -
NEW YORK: July 12, 2013 ( ROCOR ) - An Extraordinary Session of the Synod of Bishops is Held On Wednesday, July 10, 2013, an extraordinar... -
When the official letter makes it to the metropolitan website, I'll make the necessary updates below. GREEK ORTHODOX METROPOLIS OF DE...
-
This was sent to me and deserves a read. You can read the Calivas article here . We can all agree that we are living in unusual times. Howev...
-
It should not be a surprise, with the advent of the new Divine Liturgy texts approved by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, that the peoples' ...
-
Bishop Innokenty of Ussuri, a vicar of the Vladivostok diocese, visited the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea from October 9 through... -
This is sadly part of a very common occurrence in Kosovo. Vandals enter churches, set them on fire, then they urinate and defecate in them. ...
If only we could get more discussion at this sort of level! Good effort Jonathan Pageau!
ReplyDeleteHowever I am disappointed in his emphasis here. He is right about what science is (i.e. a tool and not a moral or meaning story) and how it is used and abused. Scient*ism* is real and this false religion is asserted by politicians, scientists, and all sort of people in our culture.
His error is the straw man he sets up: that an ill defined and overemphasized "safety", and thus an idealism and even tyranny, is the presupposition for lockdowns and other measures our governments have taken in response to this pandemic. As a philosophically minded thinker and someone all too aware of *symbolism*, I am surprised at Jonathan's caricature here. Yes, an all too easy scientism has been used but this is typical of any and all political and religious controversies in our culture.
I even think this false scientism is somewhat understandable, given the unexamined presuppositions and moralism of the other side - the libertarian individualism of those who do not want to bother with the inconvenience of masks and economic contraction. An anti-Christian individualism is deadly in all it's forms, from the "pro-choice" holocaust of the unborn on the left to the false weighing of economic hardship/contraction due to prudential pandemic measures in otherwise very rich societies by the right.
I also note that Jonathan asserted the belief common on the right that as a society we could have walled off the elderly and weak, and the young and strong could have gone about their business more or less as normal. So a good effort, but Jonathan needs to do more work on this issue and examine his own presuppositions more closely.
Agreed on valid criticisms plus strawmen. The issue of perception of risk is a huge one and I have not seen it dealt with satisfactorily and to that extent I am open to being persuaded. I think people who think this has been an overreaction are underestimating the risks, and Pageau doesn't so that side any favours by not bringing up a quantitative argument. And btw where is Christ in this? Is he in the crowded unmasked church or is He in the love of neighbour? Here I am unpersuaded too. I followed his voice to where I am today and I'm not hearing that voice much, certainly not from those anathematizing bishops.
ReplyDeleteAt this point, we just need to transition to machine liturgies and away from all those infectious buildings and people. A bishop can preside via Zoom from a a sterile cathedral which no one but he is allowed to enter and the priests and deacons can get real jobs.
ReplyDeletehttps://frsergei.wordpress.com/2020/05/10/on-the-closure-of-churches-3/
Honestly it seems fairly obvious that we’re past the point of discussion on this as a global society. You’re either terrified and glued to the latest contradictory measures, masks are useless, wait no they’re essential, it’s airborne and can travel on any surface, just kidding. Social distancing will save you, but you can’t use it to do things like church, just Walmart and liquor stores.
ReplyDeleteOr you aren’t buying it.
I have yet to see a single person switch sides after the first couple months.
The Great Reset is happening like it or not, so I guess at least we can see who stands where.
⛑ God is our only Hope ⛑
ReplyDeleteCesar, God is always present and so is is holy Providence.
ReplyDeleteThe problem isn't science or more correctly, "the sciences", but the degree of illiteracy regarding these and the magical belief that facts matter more than wisdom. Thanks to our deacons, we know we need both truth and wisdom, but generally choose to not "attend".
ReplyDeleteBut if many might agree that two of the most dangerous words in sequence are, "Scientists say...." I might also suggest that the real problem is the attempt by so many of us to end discussions of opposing points of view with false monoliths. Fact is, some of us may remember the frustration of sitting at the dinner table when we were kids, and the authorities (parents) put an end to a promising venture somewhere on our own. Sometimes, the kid idea is a good thing and sometimes its not, but more often than not, if it required parental consent, it just wasn't happening. "What merits? I'm outta gas, kid. Can't you see that?" Another case where "seen and not heard" hadn't quite morphed by the 1960's and 1970's into "heard but not acknowledged". Usually, to get heard, you had to have earned some street cred... and street cred is something the short stuff kids are... well, short on.
By contrast, the sciences have been very good at claiming their well-earned street cred in making the wonders of the modern world while dodging the rest... the "stuff" that came along with it that we now seek to find a new, better modern world where we can escape all those less thrilling byproducts... er... consequences. Failing to see that this journey from promise to reality not just a matter for the sciences - but also in our faith traditions and indeed the whole of our lives as well - is the only reason why discussions of this sort gain any traction among us: selective observation makes for good stories of "us" as the heroes of the fable... whichever one we're choosing to tell. And after all, who doesn't appreciate a magical story? This particular example? Um... er... it's just not compelling.
"Failing to see that this journey from promise to reality not just a matter for the sciences - but also in our faith traditions and indeed the whole of our lives as well - is the only reason why discussions of this sort gain any traction among us: selective observation makes for good stories of "us" as the heroes of the fable... whichever one we're choosing to tell..."
DeleteWell stated.
"This particular example? Um... er... it's just not compelling."
Which example - Pageau's?
Yes, Pageau's.
DeleteThis just in folks, from the CDC, it turns out you need to wear not one, but *TWO* masks in order to be safe. So it turns out even if you’ve faithfully worn 1 mask this entire time, you were actually a super spreader, and have killed countless. You heartless people.
ReplyDeleteWe were all joking about wearing two masks last week and like a terrible sitcom they declare it the only safe way to live this week, there’s no end to this nonsense.
No one claimed any of that.
DeleteTwo masks is a practical suggestion for increasing protection and filtration significantly vs a single mask. There are even better options, as far as effectiveness, but this seems like a fair compromise.
https://www.cell.com/med/pdf/S2666-6340(20)30072-6.pdf
That said I'm only wearing one mask where required as long as I can. But I can appreciate the rationale of the recommendation.
Personally I think 3 masks is the only responsible way to go outside now. It’s a wonder humanity has survived all this time without wearing double chin diapers every flu season.
DeleteI'm with Sojourner: I find if you wear 185 masks, you create enough of a bumper ahead of your head that you can actually be certain no one will come within the 6 foot social distancing standard. They literally get bumped off. Meantime, gives my neck a workout and keeps me from saying anything as foolish as I usually do.
DeleteThe State has managed to convince humans who evolved gracile, expressive faces over millenia that masks rated for sheetrock dust (but not spray paint) are all that stands between them and death. And that homo sapiens, a creature that evolved high tactile sense and pack-instinct, are biological weapons to each other.
ReplyDelete“You clearly don’t care about saving lives!” Lets just ignore all the suicides, domestic abuse, drug abuse, massive increase in poverty and starvation worldwide, and rise of fascism as a result of lockdowns. Or the fact that States and countries that didn’t lock down at all are far better off. After all, even tho less people died in 2020 than the last 5 years, we must give up everything until our cancel culture erases disease and death!
Delete"...After all, even tho less people died in 2020 than the last 5 years..."
DeleteI have yet to see this error (among the other right wing/libertarian/individualistic conspiracy you offer). For USA at least, 2020 excess mortality was up (not down) by about 12%. March 19 to March 20 (12 months) excess mortality is on track to be 15% or more. So about 400,000 excess deaths than if this had been a "normal" year.
Ah yes proven increased suicide, abuse, poverty, and starvation, conspiracy theories. Florida, Sweden etc being totally fine in spite of not using draconian unscientific lockdowns, conspiracy.
DeleteIt’s okay, if you’re fine with this you have lots to look forward to, the charade looks to continue indefinitely. Personally looking forward to next year when 4 masks will be required and it will be revealed that 7 and 1/2 feet social distancing is required, except in Walmart lines.