Am I a dissenter if I reject Catholic teaching on Just Wage and Labor Unions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bartolome_Casas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bartolome_Casas

Guest
To be clear, assume I reject these teachings in full.

In other words, I don’t differ and argue with other about how they might be applied or put into action.

Rather, as a matter of principle I hold that there should be no Just Wage or Minimum Wage legislation.

And, as a matter of principle, I hold that there should be no governmental laws regarding labor unions that force employers, in certain conditions, to allow votes at the workplace for labor union, and that force employers, in certain situations, to enter into collective bargaining with a labor union.

If these are my views, am I a DISSENTER? Am I in opposition to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church? Am I no longer a faithful Catholic?
 
Bartolome_Casas said:
To be clear, assume I reject these teachings in full.

In other words, I don’t differ and argue with other about how they might be applied or put into action.

Rather, as a matter of principle I hold that there should be no Just Wage or Minimum Wage legislation.

And, as a matter of principle, I hold that there should be no governmental laws regarding labor unions that force employers, in certain conditions, to allow votes at the workplace for labor union, and that force employers, in certain situations, to enter into collective bargaining with a labor union.

If these are my views, am I a DISSENTER? Am I in opposition to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church? Am I no longer a faithful Catholic?
Click to expand...
I am not familiar with any teaching of the Ordinary or Extraordinary Magisterium mandating a minimum wage. A just wage (being determined by a number of different factors), yes. But a “minimum wage”? Perhaps you can show me where such an authoritative teaching exists.

Likewise, I am not familiar with a magisterial teaching where an employer is forced to deal with a union in the way you describe. Yes, I am well aware of the doctrine that allows workers to freely associate. Yes, I am well aware of the doctrine that allows these associations of workers to strike, if all other means of problem resolution are confounded. But I sure don’t recall a doctrine that mandates an employer recognize a union. Perhaps you can show me where that specific doctrine is found, as well.

I ask you to fill me in on those doctrines you suggest because the source determines whether or not you must assent to the teaching with divine and Catholic faith or whether you must religiously submit your intellect and will to them.
 
I recommend that you set yourself to reading the encyclicals and other church documents concerning these matters. Once you are more familiar with actual church teaching and not what others may have told you on the topic, then you can see if the positions you currently hold are in opposition to what the church actually teaches.

In general though, we don’t get a pass on social justice issues just because people whose political positions we don’t like have said that they are in favor of what *they think *the church teaches on certain subjects.
 
I think on these issues, it would be okay to disagree. On abortion or birth control it would be wrong to disagree. Those different issues do not have the same weight, and the Church’s teaching is not so strong and unchanging on economic matters as it is on matters of life, for instance.
 
Stellaeres said:
I think on these issues, it would be okay to disagree. On abortion or birth control it would be wrong to disagree. Those different issues do not have the same weight, and the Church’s teaching is not so strong and unchanging on economic matters as it is on matters of life, for instance.
Click to expand...
What if I’m anti-abortion, but also against committing violence on any non-involved parties to stop it?

I.E., what if there was a law that said everyone must pay for our “anti-abortion army” and if you don’t, we’ll lock you up, and if you resist that, we’ll kill you?
 
I think when the church teaches on economics, they often mean well, but honestly don’t know alot about the subject. I’m a staunch Hayek/Friedman guy on the economy.
 
Bartolome_Casas said:
…

… how they might be applied or put into action…

Rather, as a matter of principle I hold that there should be no Just Wage or Minimum Wage legislation.

And, as a matter of principle, I hold that there should be no governmental laws regarding labor unions that force employers, in certain conditions, to allow votes at the workplace for labor union, and that force employers, in certain situations, to enter into collective bargaining with a labor union.

If these are my views, am I a DISSENTER? Am I in opposition to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church? Am I no longer a faithful Catholic?
Click to expand...
I think your comment captured your issue, while “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31). How to practice that is a matter of opinion. So as long as you believe your position achieves this principle you’re not in sin. However if you are incorrect in your position (disordered thought) you could create damage to yourself and others.

I would differ from your position only in regard to whether the principles or precepts of a free market are in place; I see no way to believe such exists today. (Hint: look up salary as a function of school payscale.com/best-colleges/top-us-colleges-graduate-salary-statistics.asp). However I also hold a geographical minimum wage by county is sufficient to offset inequality.

Hope that helps
 
The minimum wage is one of the great hoaxes perpetrated by liberals of the 20th century.
Politicians tell us it is to help the poor. In reality, it hurts the people it is supposed to help.
Everytime the minimum wage has been raised in the USA, prices of basic commodities also raise, thereby reducing the value of the dollar. I am old enough to remember when the minimum wage was $0.50, a coke and a Hershey bar was 5 cents, a 10 oz. glass of draft beer was a dime (Bottled beer was 25 cents a bottle- at a bar), cigarettes were 25 cents a pack and gasoline was 19 cents a gallon. These were the average prices when I left the Navy and started College.
Today, what do these thing cost-as a percentage of the minimum wage? Where is the advantage, except for a cheaper dollar. The sad thing is if you had a $25.00 Savings Bond come to maturity, it would not buy what its original $18.75 purchase would.
 
One of the biggest problems with unions today is that they aren’t really around for the good of workers in all cases, or even in most cases, anymore. Most people aren’t working in sweatshops for $0.09 an hour. I have seen first hand that many union leaders are selfish leaders looking out for themselves. They say it’s for the kids, then turn around and tell teachers they can’t do after-school gardening programs with kids because of contract restrictions. It’s for the kids?

If people are severely marginalized, then yes, they can unionize, but today, “severely marginalized” workers are practically non-existent in my experience.

Also, the church does not teach that you must be able to unionize whenever you want and do whatever you want with your union rites. There are limits there as well. So no, you are not dissenting.
 
Rascalking said:
I think when the church teaches on economics, they often mean well, but honestly don’t know alot about the subject. I’m a staunch Hayek/Friedman guy on the economy.
Click to expand...
I remember His Holiness Pope John Paul II remarking that, to paraphrase, “both capitalism and socialism are good, but there are extremes. We must avoid these extremes and find a balance between the two.”

That’s the type of sentiment that my 9th grade students often express.

So when it comes to economics, I would say that the Vatican has about as much authority as your average 13 year old kid. 😃
 
These are matters, not of revealed truth, but of applying prudential judgment in the keeping of the Lord’s commands. The goal may possibly be the same, but the methods of striving toward those goals may be much different, and both morally allowable. But, the various methods of achieving a certain goal, while possibly remaining morally neutral, are not economically neutral.

Yet, free-market economic theory teaches that the market sets the price, and artificial involvement, such as minimum wage laws, force a value judgment into the equation. As well, minimum wage laws create a certain level of unemployment, since as the cost of engaging in employing persons goes up, the amount of persons employed will necessarily go down. This is both verifiable and observable.
 
George_Stegmeir said:
The minimum wage is one of the great hoaxes perpetrated by liberals of the 20th century.
Politicians tell us it is to help the poor. In reality, it hurts the people it is supposed to help.
Everytime the minimum wage has been raised in the USA, prices of basic commodities also raise, thereby reducing the value of the dollar. I am old enough to remember when the minimum wage was $0.50, a coke and a Hershey bar was 5 cents, a 10 oz. glass of draft beer was a dime (Bottled beer was 25 cents a bottle- at a bar), cigarettes were 25 cents a pack and gasoline was 19 cents a gallon. These were the average prices when I left the Navy and started College.
Today, what do these thing cost-as a percentage of the minimum wage? Where is the advantage, except for a cheaper dollar. The sad thing is if you had a $25.00 Savings Bond come to maturity, it would not buy what its original $18.75 purchase would.
Click to expand...
I think the Church’s teachings on the subject have to be taken in context, and they also need to be viewed relative to time and place. The Church teaches to the whole world. As much as we would like to think every sentence in every teaching is directed at the U.S. particularly, it isn’t so.

If, for example, you think about the various oligarchies in the world, where a handful of wealthy own absolutely everything and no ordinary person has anything more than a starvation wage and perhaps not even that, and where gangs of pistoleros go out and shoot people who try to organize workers, you have to realize that when the Popes or whomever, talk about “living wage” or “right to associate” or even “redistribution” of wealth, there are contexts in which those statements have a very different meaning than they do in the U.S.

Unfortunately, sometimes those statements are seized upon by socialist-minded people in the First World, who think somehow the Church is pushing socialism, when she actually condemns it. Sometimes people think the Church endorses SEIU-type thuggery, or union destruction of whole industries, when she does not.

I enjoyed George Stegemeier’s recounting of past prices and wages. Reminds me of something my grandfather used to say. He lived through the Depression and had a lot of what, to me, were very wise things to say about it. I recall his telling me that he went broke and lost his farm, and hauled firewood to town to sell to people. He received 50 cents/load, and could haul two loads/day; one he cut himself and one for which he paid 25 cents to a guy who didn’t have a truck. The bank, indeed, got his farm, but it didn’t get his Model A pickup.

Anyway, he would buy one meal/day. Cost him a dime. A hamburger was 5 cents and a cup of coffee was 5 cents. One of his sayings was “One penny can make all the difference in the world. It doesn’t matter if a hamburger costs five cents if you only have four cents. Nor does it matter if a hamburger costs $5.00 if you have $5.01 to spend on it.”
 
Mrs_Sally said:
I recommend that you set yourself to reading the encyclicals and other church documents concerning these matters. Once you are more familiar with actual church teaching and not what others may have told you on the topic, then you can see if the positions you currently hold are in opposition to what the church actually teaches.

In general though, we don’t get a pass on social justice issues just because people whose political positions we don’t like have said that they are in favor of what *they think *the church teaches on certain subjects.
Click to expand...
Here is a list of some of the primary Encyclicals which touch upon the subject. Though many cover many other topics as well, they all touch upon the question that you raise in some form.

Rerum Novarum (1891)
Quadragesimo Anno (1931)
Mater et Magistra (1961)
Pacem in Terris (1963)
Gaudium et Spes (1965)
Dignitatis Humanae (1965)
Populorum Progressio (1967)
Humanae Vitae (1968)
Solicitudo Rei Socialis (1987)
Centesimus Annus (1991)
Deus Caritas Est (2005)
Caritas in Veritate (2009)

And:

The Minimum Wage and Catholic Social Teaching
 
Why would the Vatican be ignorant or naive about economics?

I would imagine that the Vatican has access to some of the greatest brains in any field - science, medicine, astronomy, philosophy, history, education, the arts, the media etc. So what grounds would anyone have for thinking/presuming the Vatican is ignorant of human affairs in the economic sphere?

You could say the Vatican shouldn’t teach about sexuality, birth control or the family, since they are celibates. But if you do then you are dissenting from the magisterium of the Church.

Economics and politics are the ground on which the modern world exists. The Church has important and respected views and teachings on economics. The magisterium in this context is just as valid as when the Church pronounces on liturgy.

Just read about John Paul II’s contribution to the downfall of communism and the Soviet system and you will realize just how important the Church’s role is in World history.

It is our duty to get acquainted with the documents of the Church, and learn what she teaches us. Some of it will challenge us (as it should), but in order to be faithful Catholics we cannot dismiss the teaching by saying I’m married why should I listen to the Cardinals or the Pope on Sex and family life, or I’m a business owner, why should I listen to a bunch of priests talking about economics.

What I have found for myself is that when challenged by Church teaching that the best thing is to find out what the Church is really saying and WHY she is saying it.
 
This is really a question of moral theology. To be in favor of unjust wages is a serious sin. How a just wage is to be determined depends upon circumstances; but to oppose it in principle or to say that the Church has no right to speak on the matter is certainly sinful.
 
As I understand it, there is a difference between prudential steps to achieve a goal and the goal itself. Minimum wage or union laws are legislative means toward a particular end: namely, making sure that the economically vulnerable are not exploited.

Obligations to the poor are evident in both the Old and New Testaments. It is fine if you believe that we can better help the vulnerable without minimum wage laws or without unions, but if you contest the proposition that we are obliged to help the poor, sick, and vulnerable, you not merely in intellectual dissent, but in serious spiritual danger.

It is one thing to disagree on how love of neighbor ought to be lived out, but to say that we do not have to love our neighbor is plainly unchristian.
 
VeritasLuxMea
I remember His Holiness Pope John Paul II remarking that, to paraphrase, “both capitalism and socialism are good, but there are extremes. We must avoid these extremes and find a balance between the two.”
Click to expand...
Where is the Reference?

On the contrary, Bl John Paul II condemns socialism as do Pius XI and Leo XIII:
“13. Continuing our reflections, and referring also to what has been said in the Encyclicals Laborem exercens and Sollicitudo rei socialis, we have to add that the fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature. Socialism considers the individual person simply as an element, a molecule within the social organism, so that the good of the individual is completely subordinated to the functioning of the socio-economic mechanism. Socialism likewise maintains that the good of the individual can be realized without reference to his free choice, to the unique and exclusive responsibility which he exercises in the face of good or evil. Man is thus reduced to a series of social relationships, and the concept of the person as the autonomous subject of moral decision disappears, the very subject whose decisions build the social order. From this mistaken conception of the person there arise both a distortion of law, which defines the sphere of the exercise of freedom, and an opposition to private property. A person who is deprived of something he can call “his own”, and of the possibility of earning a living through his own initiative, comes to depend on the social machine and on those who control it. This makes it much more difficult for him to recognize his dignity as a person, and hinders progress towards the building up of an authentic human community.” (Centesimus Annus, 1991, 13).

He strongly affirms free enterprise:
‘CA 42. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.
‘CA 43. The Church has no models to present;’

Bl JPII obviously dislikes the Marxist term “capitalism”.

Bartolome Casas, post #1
Makes a habit of concocting obtuse questions and seems to contribute little to any solutions.

Note above – “The Church has no models to present.”
 
Mrs_Sally said:
I recommend that you set yourself to reading the encyclicals and other church documents concerning these matters. Once you are more familiar with actual church teaching and not what others may have told you on the topic, then you can see if the positions you currently hold are in opposition to what the church actually teaches.

.
Click to expand...
👍 Ditto!
 
There can be no dissent from Church teachings… You must accept just wages… I will pray for you…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top