A question for conservative catholics!

[djames99]

Society in spite of good intentions can set it’s own rules. Catholics look to the Church to determine proper moral choices that benefits the collective as a whole, which may or may not find agreement with society.

In fact, society is even dependent on the Catholic’s choices, especially so in a decadent and chaotic society where examples of stable, rock solid moral foundations in Divine principles is wanting.

This is why a Catholic cannot be categorized politically, since he makes and acts out that choice determined in Law. And so it is that the critique becomes one of God and his offering.

 

[someperson555]

You’ve summarized the “distributist” position very nicely!

Edwin

good! i really like distributionism, but what most catholics seem to overlook is that even distributionism would automatically entail some government confiscations and redistributions. since the basic principle of distributionism is everyone owning their own labour.
thats why either way there needs to be government regulations.

 

[someperson555]

There are over 2 billion “christians” of all denominations and sects in the world. 2 billion in the RCC alone, last time I saw the numbers. While many are in poverty, many others are not. Why is the need not being met by private charity efforts? Is it greed? Is it laziness? Is it dependence on government to the point where we think we don’t have to do anything anymore except pay taxes? I submit to you that the needs of the less fortunate are not being met by private charity efforts because we passed the obligation on to government. I am in great need myself: I’d rather be able to go to my Church and get a donation or even a loan to pay my rent that I am a month late on because of recent unemployment instead of going to the welfare office. *Why can’t I do that? *

-Chris

this is capitalist non sequitur.
asserting that private charities would be able to meet the needs of the public “if only government programs were cut” is quite frankly absurd.
if this would be the case then why is it that people were starving and dying in the early 1900s in america? there were almost no government regulations then. you must understand that there was a reason that people called for regulations and welfare programs in the first place. if the needs were being met by private charities then no one would have ever called for welfare programs in the first place.

the argument that government programs are somehow preventing private charities from helping people is just a capitalist ploy.
look what happened when the tax cuts were renewed, wall street was making record profits yet they did not spend the money on job creation or raising wages, they just hoarded it.

 

[TEPO]

We of one mind and spirit are not differentiated along partisan lines.

Excellent post!

I would just like to add that there is no such thing as a “conservative Catholic”, just as there is no such thing as a “liberal Catholic”. There are only orthodox and unorthodox Cathilics.

I say this in regards to the title of this thread.

 

[TEPO]

this is capitalist non sequitur.
asserting that private charities would be able to meet the needs of the public “if only government programs were cut” is quite frankly absurd.
if this would be the case then why is it that people were starving and dying in the early 1900s in america? there were almost no government regulations then. you must understand that there was a reason that people called for regulations and welfare programs in the first place. if the needs were being met by private charities then no one would have ever called for welfare programs in the first place.

the argument that government programs are somehow preventing private charities from helping people is just a capitalist ploy.
look what happened when the tax cuts were renewed, wall street was making record profits yet they did not spend the money on job creation or raising wages, they just hoarded it.

I think Catholics should not over-emphasize charity. It is not more important than any of the other 6 virtues. I think a perfect balance of the 7 is the best way to go.

 

[ahollars]

Saint Maximilian Kolbe on Catholic Social Teaching and the Distribution of Wealth

When he sees the luxurious residence or the charming country house of a wealthy person, a poor workingman often asks himself: “Why is there such inequality in the world?”

How many volumes have been written about equality among men! How much blood has been spilled for this idea! And yet, in spite of it all, we still have the rich and the poor…

Let us imagine that one day all the inhabitants of the world would assemble to put into effect this sharing of all goods; and that in fact each person, granted that the world is very big, received an exactly equal portion of the wealth existing on earth.

Then what? That very evening one man might say, “Today I worked hard: now I am going to take rest.” Another might state, “I understand this sharing of goods well; so let’s drink and celebrate such an extraordinary happening.” On the other hand, another might say, “Now I am going to set to work with a will so as to reap the greatest benefit I can from what I have received.” And so, starting on the next day, the first man would have only the amount given him; the second would have less, and the third would have increased his.

Then what do we do? Start redistributing the wealth all over again?

Even if everybody began to work right away with all his might and at the same time, the results would not be identical for all. There are, in fact, different kinds of work which are unequally productive; nor do all workers enjoy the same identical capacities. This leads to a diversity of results achieved, and consequently to differences in people’s profits.

 

[april32010]

. One fellow I knew from Cameroon said that it is not uncommon for a man to die there without having ever worked a day in his life.

Cameroon life expectancy at birth is estimated to be 54.71 years in 2012.why is that ,its not from working themselves to death.

 

[bri89]

Conservative Catholics IN AMERICA oppose socialism. That is because Republicans have a similar stance on social issues as the church so most if not all “conservative Catholics” are also Republican. Since conservative Catholics are very likely to pick a belief system and subscribe to it 100% (their beliefs that the church cannot err) they believe that the Republican party is right pretty much 100% of the time. And the Republican part is against socialism. Very simple really.

You should check the gun law thread. Almost everyone was for gun rights because American Catholics are Republicans and Republicans are for gun control. If you polled European Catholics the polls would be reversed, guaranteed.

To be a conservative Catholic you have to have the mindset of sticking with your team. You have to have the mindset that everything the Catholic Church does is right or good and the same can be said about the Republican party.

:thumbsup:True. Somehow only in the United States does Christianity translate to a kind of staunch fiscal conservatism. Most Catholic hispanic immigrants to this country vote democratic. The conservative views espoused on here on the subject of the poor are much more calvinistic than catholic. The calvinistic view of the poor has prevailed in this country since our earliest history; the doctrine of predestination, the ethos of work, and emphasis on individual responsibility have served to marginalize and indict the poor. The belief that success is the result of virtue and hard work and poverty the result of moral failure is a thoroughly American view. American assumptions inherited from the puritanistic/calvinistic legacy: satan uses idle hands, industry and worldy success are always good, idleness and recreation are always bad, poverty is usually the result of some kind of moral deficiency, rich people are usually good and hard working, God helps those who help themselves etc.

 

[april32010]

Most Catholic hispanic immigrants to this country vote democratic…

so do many native born. .most are culturally Catholic,same as native born.