Are liberals correct to like Pope Francis so much?

[Sy_Noe]

“… the suffering multitude, without the means to protect itself relies especially on the protection of the State. Wherefore, since wageworkers are numbered among the great mass of the needy, the State must include them under its special care and foresight.” (Pope Leo XIII On the Condition of Workers, 54.)

The function of the rulers of the State, moreover, is to watch over the community and its parts; but in protecting private individuals in their rights, chief consideration ought to be given to the weak and the poor. (POPE PIUS XI QUADRAGESIMO ANNO)

*Man has the right to live. He has the right to bodily integrity and to the means necessary for the proper development of life, particularly food, clothing, shelter, medical care, rest, and, finally, the necessary social services. In consequence, he has the right to be looked after in the event of illhealth; disability stemming from his work; widowhood; old age; enforced unemployment; or whenever through no fault of his own he is deprived of the means of livelihood. * (Pope John XXIII PACEM IN TERRIS)

*It is the task of the state to provide for the defense and preservation of common goods such as the natural and human environments, which cannot be safeguarded simply by market forces. *(St. John Paul II Centesimus Annus 40)

Wow some good quotes by those Popes. And I think it is the tone of Pope Francis and some of the things he has tried to put back into the mix of Catholic discussion beyond abortion and marriage that many have been drawn to. But he’s not going to change teachings, no.

 

[triumphguy]

Wow some good quotes by those Popes. And I think it is the tone of Pope Francis and some of the things he has tried to put back into the mix of Catholic discussion beyond abortion and marriage that many have been drawn to. But he’s not going to change teachings, no.

Of course he’s not going to change the teaching of the Church precisely because they are ALREADY the teachings of the Church.

The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of social justice concerns going back to Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum: a history which calls for deep social, and institutional change and not just an individual response.

Of course, this goes back to Thomas Aquinas, and ultimately to Matthew 25.

As we know, to be pro-life is not just to be anti-abortion.

 

[Sy_Noe]

He’s not doing his homework if he thinks government can be used to help the poor in the long term…

Sure he has done his homework. He realizes government can play a role too. An institution on earth doesn’t have to be made up of perfect people in order to help the poor. Even the Church has had scandal due to imperfect people in it yet no one suggests it can not too help the poor.

 

[phil19034]

He’s not doing his homework if he thinks government can be used to help the poor in the long term…

And as far as his comments on Obamacare…that’s obvious, but really, what did Catholic leaders expect?

Let me just say this:

If Catholic Leaders in the United States want the government to stay out of their business, then they need to be the ones who think twice about supporting something as anti-market and anti-natural law as government-run health care and then act surprised when the beast turns on them.

That’s what conservatism sees.

Too bad the USCCB didn’t.

I’m going to start this by saying that I’m no a liberal. I’m a conservative, orthodox Catholic - but I’m 100% Catholic first.

With that said, the government CAN be used to help the poor. That’s NOT anti-Conservative and is 100% Catholic.

The difference between the conservatives and liberals on the poor is which part of society is ultimately responsible for helping the poor?

Conservatives feel that the individuals, families and non-profits of society should bare the responsibility because they can best respond to the local circumstances & issues.

Liberals believe that government should bare the responsibility because government can force societal change (which is pretty socialist) and end poverty.

Of course, the problem with the Liberal / socialist view is that government is supposed to serve society, not force its will on society. Additionally, it’s impossible to end poverty. But you can reign in it’s affects. Strong families and religious communities should be taking care of their own, not the faceless government.

Liberals also overvalue education. Yes, education is very important, but it’s not everything. It is a noble, yet naive view to put too much faith that educated people will always do the right thing. This is yet another flaw of the true liberal (the non-socialist liberal)… He believes education is the answer to everything. It’s not. Just because one is highly educated doesn’t mean that one is moral.

Liberals (and socialists) tend to believe that society should be founded on ethics, while conservatives tend to believe that society should be based on morals. The problem with the liberal point of view is this: if society is based on morals, then it will always be ethical. But if society is based on ethics, then it may not always be moral. Abortion, euthanasia, and gay marriage are perfect examples.

So while the non-Catholic conservative camp is far from perfect (it has issues with corporate greed and a tendency to respond to conflict with force), the conservative camp is much more in line with Catholic teaching today than the liberal camp which is basically campaigning now in favor of mortal sin.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

I can promise all of you this.

At the upcoming Synod of the Family, if the church, as expected, does not change it’s doctrine on divorce and communion for the divorced and remarried without annulments, (as an increasing number of prelates of the Church have indicated is the case) then the left’s honeymoon with Pope Francis will be over.