The Fred Martinez Report

Posts

Mary M. Keys has suggested...that while Charles De Koninck...De Koninck focused on a more traditional reading of rational nature, while Maritain [my read: Kantian autonomy] sought to secure the autonomy of the individual and personal freedom

Mary M. Keys has suggested that while Charles De Koninck and Jacques Maritain both addressed the common good, they did so from different foundational emphases: De Koninck focused on a more traditional reading of rational nature , while Maritain sought to secure the autonomy of the individual and personal freedom

From personalism to liberalism? Villey & Lamont & Kraynak show it appears to be disguised Kantianism and NOT>: Carrying this logic one step further, it may also be possible to challenge the assumption that the conception of human rights that prevails today is indeed as internally homogenous as Moyn suggests when he claims that, after the “death of Christian Europe” human rights were reinvented along the lines of an essentially neo-Kantian philosophy. Perhaps if human rights remain so widely discussed and influential today it is precisely because the basic tension we uncovered at the heart of Maritain’s thought—between a Christian (or conservative) conception of human rights and a liberal or individualist one—remains yet to be resolved.

https://tif.ssrc.org/2015/06/11/from-personalism-to-liberalism/#:~:text=Maritain's%20starting%20point%20is%20the,ground%20is%20always%20the%20same. personalism to liberalism? by Carlo Invernizzi Accetti June 11, 2015 Print In his paper “ Personalism, Community and the Origins of Human Rights ,” Samuel Moyn argues that a relatively understudied current of Catholic political thought—known as personalism—played a key role in the affirmation of human rights as today’s dominant ideological framework. This may initially appear surprising given the well-known opposition of traditional Catholic social doctrine to the values normally associated with liberalism, modernity and the French Revolution. 1 Moyn’s argument, however, is that Catholic political thought underwent a transformation in the middle of the twentieth century, developing a distinctive doctrine of human rights on the basis of a concept of the human “person,” which turned out to be crucial for the inscription of human ri...

Google AL: Maritain sought to secure the autonomy of the individual and personal freedom.

Jacques Maritain defined freedom of choice (free will) as a means, not an end, that should be used to attain " freedom of autonomy " or "freedom of exultation" (independence/mastery of self). He argued that true freedom is the expansion of the human person, achieved when freedom of choice is used to align oneself with goodness. Key aspects of Maritain's distinction: Freedom of Choice (Freedom from Necessity): This is the basic, initial freedom of the will to choose between alternatives, including the ability to choose evil. Freedom of Autonomy (Terminal Freedom/Exultation): This is the higher, ultimate freedom that comes with spiritual and moral maturity, where one acts according to their own rational nature in accordance with the good. The Goal: The purpose of freedom of choice is to be used, through correct moral decisions, to conquer or achieve this state of full autonomy, or independence from external constraints and internal disorder...

Mary M. Keys has suggested that while Charles De Koninck and Jacques Maritain both addressed the common good, they did so from different foundational emphases: De Koninck focused on a more traditional reading of rational nature, while Maritain sought to secure the autonomy of the individual and personal freedom.

Google AI: The "Ripperger" Perspective: Father Chad Ripperger and other traditionalists often critique Maritain’s "Integral Humanism" for potentially opening the door to a secularized love. From a Thomistic standpoint frequently cited by Father Ripperger, loving a neighbor solely for humanistic reasons (not for God's sake) is a purely natural virtue rather than the supernatural virtue of charity required for salvation. The Problem of Secular Humanism: Critics like Ripperger argue that when "love of neighbor" is divorced from "love of God," it becomes a "partial humanism" that eventually loses the true understanding of the human person. For more on these distinctions, you can review traditional Catholic teachings on the Virtue of Charity provided by the Holy See.

The "Ripperger" Perspective: Father Chad Ripperger and other traditionalists often critique Maritain’s "Integral Humanism" for potentially opening the door to a secularized love. From a Thomistic standpoint frequently cited by Father Ripperger, loving a neighbor solely for humanistic reasons (not for God's sake) is a purely natural virtue rather than the supernatural virtue of charity required for salvation. The Problem of Secular Humanism: Critics like Ripperger argue that when "love of neighbor" is divorced from "love of God," it becomes a "partial humanism" that eventually loses the true understanding of the human person. For more on these distinctions, you can review traditional Catholic teachings on the Virtue of Charity provided by the Holy See .

Google AL: Integral Humanism vs. Secular Humanism: Maritain proposed an "Integral Humanism" that integrates human autonomy with divine grace. However, critics like Ripperger argue this compromise with "Enlightenment modernity" risks subordinating the spiritual to the political. In Ripperger's view, true love for a neighbor cannot exist "outside of God" because without God, there is no objective moral basis for the neighbor's value.

To approach "anything outside of human autonomy"—particularly in the context of Jacques Maritain and Father Chad Ripperger—is to move from the natural plane of human self-governance to the supernatural plane of divine dependence. The Problem of Autonomy: Maritain argues that modern man often seeks an "anthropocentric humanism" where the individual's will becomes a "little pointless 'god'". In this state, love of neighbor is based on natural sentiment rather than a divine mandate, which Father Ripperger critiques as a failure to engage the virtue of charity —a virtue that must be directed toward God as its primary object. The "10th Street" Analogy: While Maritain did not famously use a "10th Street" metaphor, his philosophy often deals with the "intersection" of the temporal and spiritual . For traditionalists like Ripperger, staying only on the "street" of human autonomy (the temporal) is a pa...

Jacques Maritain did NOT do the world a favor by introducing his “Human Integralism” which worked to seek a peaceful compromise between communism and Catholicism. This basic ill-formed philosophy is arguably the underpinning of documents like Gaudium et Spes. Communism knows only one mode: DESTROY. It should have been rebuked at V2

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2023/05/19/can-catholicism-be-passed-on-without-catholic-culture/#:~:text=Jacques%20Maritain%20did%20NOT%20do,seek%20a%20peaceful%20compromise%20between Mark Tabish May 22, 2023 at 6:08 am Sadly, contributing greatly to this crisis is the modernist “Church of Accompaniment”. The church cannot “accompany” a world gone mad; a world rebelling against the most fundamental natural law realities like a binary sex complementarity. We need to see the world today as Catholics of yesteryear viewed the Protestant Rebellion, which gave rise to the Counsel of Trent. What I suspect I am saying is that the Church NEEDS to find its enemies again in order to shore up its own identity. Satan has been dismissed, hell is now just a little longer stay perhaps than purgatory, the most sinful and scandalous get “canonized” in the mass when passing from this life; confession lines? Hardly. When was that last time your Priest spoke of Justice? I’ll bet he waxed eloquently ab...

In his harsh criticism of the notion of subjective right (SR), Michel Villey argued that (A) the SR did not exist in Roman law, but that (B) emerged at the dawn of Western modernity as the main legal consequence of nominalism that William de Ockham introduced in philosophy and theology. And, furthermore, that (C) in Ockham it would be possible to already find a legal theory in which the SR appears as the main meaning of the law. Each of these historical theses has been strongly discussed and almost all have been overcome. However, this article attempts to show that, beyond his historical inaccuracies, Villey was right in the central philosophical core of his thesis: the necessary association between nominalism and the notion of SR that has been imposed on legal modernity Although the discussion about the history of this concept is lengthy and exceeds the scope and intention of these pages, it is necessary to acknowledge that the author who most stimulated this discussion during the 20th century was Michel Villey. The core of the thesis defended by Villey consisted of the assertions that (a) subjective rights did not exist in Roman law,6 and that, instead, (b) they emerged at the dawn of Western modernity as the main legal consequence of the nominalism introduced into philosophy and theology, definitively, by William of Ockham.7 Furthermore, Villey maintains that (c) a legal theory can already be found in Ockham's work.

https://forum-phil.pusc.it/article/view/33/32 Aunque la discusión sobre la historia de esta noción es larga y excede las po- sibilidades e intención de estas páginas, es menester reconocer que el autor que más animó esta discusión durante el pasado siglo XX fue Michel Villey. Y el nú- cleo de la tesis defendida por Villey consistía en las armaciones de que, (a) el derecho subjetivo no existía en el Derecho Romano 6 y que, en cambio, (b) surge en los albores de la modernidad occidental como la principal consecuencia jurí- dica del nominalismo que introduce en la losofía y la teología, denitivamente, Guillermo de Ockham 7 . Es más, sostiene Villey que (c) ya en Ockham es posi- ble encontrar una teoría jurídica

Fernando Play... latest and enters Ibn Hud the Red

Scene 4 The big imposing Gonzalo Ruiz and a group of soldiers carrying long make sift ladders follow Fernando creeping quietly forward with crickets singing in the background. Fernando: Sing, little creatures of God, sing, cover the sound of our hidden advance to the great walls of Quesada sitted on a high hill and steep ridges. They arrive at a great wall. Army Captain Gonzalo Ruiz: The guards on the wall are still not aware of us. I will be the first up the ladder. The king must guarded well while I climb. Suddenly Fernando thrusts aside Ruiz and lays his hands upon a rung and set it against the and starts climbing. Fade out. Fernando climbing over wall. Two Moor guards with scimitars swords attack him from behind. He turns with his sword flying and the first tumbles over the wall and the second after a brief sword play falls to the ground. More Moor soldiers are rushing in as Ruiz and other climb over the wall and join the fight. The king goes headlong straight in the attacker with ...