Skip to comments.Did Catholic Monks Make the West Rich?
Posted on 07/25/2012 7:52:25 AM PDT by C19fan
Why is the Western part of the world enjoying wealth and growth, while other countries are left behind in poverty?
A new PhD thesis seeks to find an answer to this question by digging deep into the underlying mechanisms of growth.
One of the clues the thesis follows begins in France in 1098, when a breakaway group of monks formed a new monastic order. Well get back to that, but first we need to delve a little deeper into the underlying factors of wealth and growth.
We are cementing that the monks passed on their cultural values by showing based on the European Values Study that European regions with several Cistercian monasteries still to this day value diligence and moderation more than other regions, says Bentzen.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearscience.com ...
Don’t take this the wrong way, but it was originally settled by both the French AND the Spanish. Check your history books.
Got to take issue with that. The monasteries weren't 'closed down': they were despoiled in the largest act of organized plunder in history. The Nobles colluded with Henry VIII to steal monastic property. The Act of Supremacy was their license to thieve.
There was a huge increase in the building of enormous stately homes after the Great Theft. This is not a coincidence.
It sure as hell wasn’t the Chumash that did.
I was referring to the original 13 colonies. Not too many French and Spanish in Jamestown and Plymouth. You prove my point. Compare north of the Rio Grande and south of that river.
Tee hee...I get it.
And why do you think it matters one damn bit who ORIGINALLY settled here?
I can’t really articulate what qualities make a people successful. But I sure know it when I see it. People who are shallow and crave material things are the losers in the world. They never get ahead. Cultures which the people are always trying show off their glittery clothing and always getting jealous of each other are losers. cultures where theft and violence are common and lying is acceptable are losers. Cultures which people strive for comfort, leisure, and luxery are losers.
As a matter of fact, the monks were absolutely central to the development of science and civilization in the West.
It is common for Protestant-influenced historians to speak of the middle ages as the dark ages, throughout. But in fact there was considerable scientific and technological development during that time. To take one key development, the water wheel and the mill house, which revolutionized society all the way up to the time of the steam engine, was a monastic invention. Likewise, the universities were started by the Church.
A good place to learn about this is Lynn Thorndike, The History of the Middle Ages, or A History of Magic and Experimental Science (8 volumes).
By the way, the first book was printed in a monastery, although Protestants usually take credit for printing.
I tinks the author is a little misguided.
Himnos’ condensed notes say “The “West” or western europeans are the same group that rode to the crusades together to fight the muslims (.... who today are the most backwards and impoverished in the world today). They had a common thread, Christianity. They rode home, had a reformation which was largely codified in the Magna Carta in about 1260, the document which gave us advanced westerners our individuality, our rights to own property, personal rights liberty and freedom. It was this document which gave the individual his rights to have personal property, thus in capital, profit, gain and personal initiative.
Later this same document was the foundation for the US of A , being called the Chrater of Maryland.
This is precisely what Obama is agoainst.... our complete cultural heritage, right down to fighting muslims a thousand years ago. He is against our achievements, religion, progress and advancements.
Show me where islam created anything useful to modern man. Fact is that world stagnated with the advent of Mohammed.
1) rational culture and society
2) respect for private property rights and other natural rights
3) capital markets and capital accumulation
4) technological progress,especially communications, transportation, and energy
Just thought it bears repeating.
The military is the grandmother of invention. A country that guts their military guts their technology base and future wealth. There are so many examples of this, but the biggest example in recent memory is the formerly Great Britain.
No, I don’t prove your point. Do you really need a list? Like I said, read some history. Sheesh.
Go read the original poster’s comments. I was specifically referring to, and replying to them. Look, I don’t mean to sound curt or anything.
He said, “I thank God everyday this country was settled by Englishmen and not the French and Spanish.” But a fair portion of it was indeed settled by both the French and the Spanish. Facts are terribly sturdy things. Neither he, nor you, need react this way to a simple, calm, matter-of-fact statement. I certainly wasn’t trying to take the wind out of his sails. Just clarifying. Take it easy.
Go read the original posters comments. I was specifically referring to, and replying to them.
In other words you took it out of context. Nice.
Don’t look now, but your snark is showing. I took nothing out of context. C19fan said: “I thank God everyday this country was settled by Englishmen and not the French and Spanish.”
Those were his first words of comment on the article HE posted. How did I take those out of context? By quoting them directly and responding to them. May I suggest that you check in a dictionary for the definition of the phrase, “taking out of context?”
1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines its meaning.
2. The circumstances in which an event occurs; a setting.
[Middle English, composition, from Latin contextus, from past participle of contexere, to join together : com-, com- + texere, to weave; see teks- in Indo-European roots.]
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
1. the parts of a piece of writing, speech, etc., that precede and follow a word or passage and contribute to its full meaning it is unfair to quote out of context
2. the conditions and circumstances that are relevant to an event, fact, etc.
[from Latin contextus a putting together, from contexere to interweave, from com- together + texere to weave, braid]
Collins English Dictionary Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003
ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Noun 1. context - discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation
context of use, linguistic context
discourse - extended verbal expression in speech or writing
2. context - the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; “the historical context”
conditions - the set of circumstances that affect someone’s welfare; “hazardous working conditions”; “harsh living conditions”
conditions - the prevailing context that influences the performance or the outcome of a process; “there were wide variations in the conditions of observation”
environment - the totality of surrounding conditions; “he longed for the comfortable environment of his living room”
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.”
Be so good as to explain where I misquoted, or partially quoted in such a manner as to entirely change the meaning of his words, please. I’ll repeat for your benefit: A fair portion of this country’s land was originally settled by both the French and Spanish. I said this in direct response to his words. Any difficulty on understanding that is yours, not mine. I’ve explained myself twice, civilly. Let it be.
i’m not reading all that crap