Are politically liberal Catholics happy with the Pope's new encyclical?

[lynnvinc]

False.

Capitalism didn’t exist until the 18th Century.
Marxism didn’t exist until the 19th Century.

The monasteries were not “free enterprise.”

The idea of Free Enterprise didn’t exist until Adam Smith and his “lassiez faire” economics letting the “invisible hand” work on the economy.

And the so-called “rich” of Jesus’s day, including King Herod, were quite a bit poorer than the middle class Americans of today.

So instead of “It is more difficult for a rich man to enter heaven than for a camle to enter thru the eye of the needle [even if this refers to a small portal into Jerusalem]” for today’s standards it should be “It is more difficult for a middle class American to enter into heaven than for an elephant to enter thru the eye of the needle.”

OMG, then who can be saved?..

 

[lynnvinc]

Have you ever heard of the School of Salamanca?

There might not have been free enterprise as we think of it today, but the ideas behind the free market were already there thanks to various Jesuits and Dominicans.

Yes, St. John of the Cross attended the University of Salamanca, and they pretty much ostracized him because of his asceticism

 

[lynnvinc]

Let’s please get over this “the Church is gung-ho over capitalism,” ergo liberals are going to be unhappy with what the popes write.

Pope Francis’s first words as Pope were about how we need to protect creation.

Life, the biological-ecological systems, is fundamental and foundational; the economy (production, distribution, and exchange of goods and services) is merely contingent and instrumental, and as papal writings suggest, should serve the common good.

Grocery stores and industries, as wonderful as they are, would be utterly useless without food and without live people.

 

[lynnvinc]

This just caught my eye from “Nation of Change,” since the topic of capitalism has been injected into the discussion of Lumen Fidei - and it pretty much jives with Caritas en Veritate in certain respects:

“Obscenties of Capitalism” – nationofchange.org/obscenities-capitalism-1373888196

But to be fair and leave this on a positive note, capitalism can be good if done right – I also just read about a favorite author of mine, Paul Hawken, a business & sustainability expert with great ideas (see esp natcap.org ) for lowering our energy consumption, greenhouse gases, and other pollution by 75%+ without lowering productivity or living standards. He was just appointed to a faculty position at Presidio College to teach on business and sustainability: presidioedu.org/about/news-events/press-releases/paul-hawken-joins-faculty

Hawken has authored articles, op-eds, and peer-reviewed papers, and has written seven books including four national bestsellers, The Next Economy (Ballantine 1983), Growing a Business (Simon and Schuster 1987), The Ecology of Commerce (HarperCollins 1993) and Blessed Unrest (Viking, 2007). Paul Hawken was voted in 2012 as the #1 author on business and the environment by professors in 67 business schools and the #1 person who influenced their career by Chief Sustainability Officers in corporate America. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution (Little Brown, September 1999), co-authored with Amory Lovins, has been read and referred to by several heads of state including President Bill Clinton who called it one of the five most important books in the world today. His books have been published in over 50 countries in 29 languages. Growing a Business became the basis of a 17-part PBS series, which Hawken hosted and produced. The program, which explored the challenges and pitfalls of starting and operating socially responsive companies, was shown on television in 115 countries and watched by over 100 million people. Hawken has been awarded seven honorary doctorates.

Thank you for the world so sweet,
Thank you for the food we eat,
Thank you for the birds that sing,
Thank you, God, for everything.

I saw that poem in a store thru my teary eyes when I was going thru an extremely terrible and painful experience in my life. I bought it and keep it next to my bed.

Let the light of faith shine and heal all wounds.

 

[Abu]

triumphguy #98
Free enterprise didn’t exist until there was a free market, with free labour and free trade.
These things did not exist, despite what your authors state.

Repeating conjecture and myopically denying what knowledgeable authors reveal, against the facts, reveals tilting at windmills.

“Augustine also ruled that price was a function not simply of the seller’s costs, but also of the buyer’s desire for the item sold. In this way Augustine gave legitimacy not merely to merchants but to the eventual deep involvement of the Church in the birth of capitalism when it earliest forms began to appear in about the ninth century on the great estates belonging to monastic orders.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, p 58; cites Lewis Mumford, 1967, The Myth of the Machine, Vol 1].

Stark notes (p 58) that “this was not merely a sort of proto-capitalism involving only the ‘institutional preconditions of capitalism… but a version of the developed characteristics of capitalism itself.’ Collins referred to this as ‘religious capitalism,’ adding that the dynamism of the medieval economy was primarily that of the Church.’ ” [Randall Collins, op. cit. p 47-52].

lynnvinc #102
Let’s please get over this “the Church is gung-ho over capitalism,”

Instead of concentrating on a term – “capitalism” – try concentrating on the Church’s teaching on free enterprise – as recommended by the acknowledged St John Paul II that it is ‘more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.’

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has, after all, shown the way: “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

So yes, people, are greedy and selfish and that is precisely why society is beset by so many problems, and the bureaucracy of the State is no solution, only the practice of free enterprise by those possessing the virtues of prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance will help society.

That’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and worse crimes. That’s why we have the Catholic Church to guide us – She who invented charity in the West. It’s time to face reality.

As to the state of mankind “individuals”], Fr James V Schall, S.J., in Does Catholicism Still Exist?, Alba House 1994, p 198, also succinctly points out: “But now that capitalism is successful, mankind again realizes the insufficiency of material possessions of themselves. Nothing higher is around to live for or even to die for, so that mankind will become bored. This boredom can easily lead to a decline and fall mentality, a lapse into moral and cultural decadence. Drugs ands dissipation are seen as directly related to this malaise.” Precisely – what Benedict XVI has described as “secularism” and “moral relativism”.

Fr James V Schall, S.J., explains how poverty is overcome, p 184-185:
“Since the Catholic Church wants poverty confronted, since She wants this confrontation to be done justly and with the interest and cooperation of the workers and the poor, She has had to acknowledge, as did the socialist systems themselves, that there are certain ways that must be employed if mankind is to meet its economic problems. These ways can be known and imitated, but they must include a juridical system, profit, enterprise, knowledge, exchange, a market, voluntary organisations, a relatively independent economy, private property, and respect for work and excellence.”

No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

 

[triumphguy]

Repeating conjecture and myopically denying what knowledgeable authors reveal, against the facts, reveals tilting at windmills.

“Augustine also ruled that price was a function not simply of the seller’s costs, but also of the buyer’s desire for the item sold. In this way Augustine gave legitimacy not merely to merchants but to the eventual deep involvement of the Church in the birth of capitalism when it earliest forms began to appear in about the ninth century on the great estates belonging to monastic orders.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, p 58; cites Lewis Mumford, 1967, The Myth of the Machine, Vol 1].

Stark notes (p 58) that “this was not merely a sort of proto-capitalism involving only the ‘institutional preconditions of capitalism… but a version of the developed characteristics of capitalism itself.’ Collins referred to this as ‘religious capitalism,’ adding that the dynamism of the medieval economy was primarily that of the Church.’ ” [Randall Collins, op. cit. p 47-52]…

I don’t care who you quote: I’ll go with the original and best - Adam Smith: I’m sorry to repeat myself, but you need a free market (which did not exit in medieval times), free labour (which most definitely did not exit), and free trade (which also did not exist) in order for capitalism to exist.

Religious capitalism, incipient capitalism, emergent capitalism, proto-capitalism are not capitalism.

That the monasteries exercised some kind of economic influence on their environment is beyond quest, and is one of the reasons why so many became targets for dissolution.

As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry,** he intends only his own security;** and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value,** he intends only his own gain**, and he is in this, as in many other eases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it. Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 2a, p. 456, edited by R. H. Cambell and A. S. Skinner, Oxford: Claredon Press.

Capitalism is based solely on unregulated self interest.

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.Smith, A., Op. Cit

 

[djames99]

“The first setting in which faith enlightens the human city is the family. I think first and foremost of the stable union of man and woman in marriage.” - Lumen Fidei, Pope Francis

Because I think it went something like this for them:

http://blog.themistrading.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lucy.jpg

Viewing Catholics as sharing parties may be convenient. It gives us a democratic aire, and soothes the conscience of any responsibility for the adoption of various viewpoints in non conformance of Church doctrine, or in line with secular views or bogus religions. We metaphorically sit in a Senate chair either passing or refusing a bill that is presented. This is not our jurisdiction.

The reality is, a more accurate description of various groups in the Catholic Church can be differentiated by either those who agree or disagree with Authority.

At least now in the latter portrayal, we can more easily determine who conforms to Christ’s teachings and who are not, and this is what concerns all Catholics and needs to be addressed.

Catholics should not buy into the “party” classification. That we all agree and conform to infallible teachings and Deposit of Faith is a characteristic of being Catholic, and sets us apart from those religions where various partisan views are the norm.

 

[Abu]

triumphguy #105
Religious capitalism, incipient capitalism, emergent capitalism, proto-capitalism are not capitalism.
Capitalism is based solely on unregulated self interest.

Ayn Rand’s definition and meaning of “uncontrolled and unregulated” is quite unacceptable as the State has the right and duty to make wise laws, and that’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and against monopolies as people can, and some do, undermine the common good, and the primary role of government is to support families in solidarity, and the role of the Church in subsidiarity and, yes, the common good.

As Dr Chafuen states: “The objective of policy, according to the Medieval Doctors, is to favour the common good. This is in agreement with the principle that the general welfare is more important than individual interest.” Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986, p 159-160].

Apart from the reality, clearly shown, that free enterprise is based on the sound moral principles developed through St Augustine, the fruits of the Catholic monastics and the Catholic Late Scholastics, Adam Smith recognised these values.

“Seventeen years before The Wealth of Nations, Smith wrote The Theory of Moral Sentiments, in which he brilliantly argued that humans are social animals, and that their moral ideas and actions are an inherent aspect of their nature. Smith believed that if people were left free to live their lives as they saw fit but were forbidden to use force or fraud, mankind would naturally form a rich and fulfilling community.”
*The Road To Freedom (How To Win The Fight For Free Enterprise), *Arthur C Brooks, Basic Books, 2012, p 11-12].

The evil of price fixing was recognised by Adam Smith: “People of the same trade seldom meet together even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. Sálvio M Soares (MetaLibri, 2007), v.1.0s., quoted in The Road To Freedom, Arthur C Brooks, Basic Books, p 120].

It is only the development of the economic laws of cause and effect by the Catholic Late Scholastics based on faith and reason, and from which Adam Smith drew and developed, which enabled the enrichment of untold millions from the poverty before the enterprises that came with the “Industrial Revolution”.

“So by no later than the thirteenth century, the leading Christian theologians had fully debated the primary aspects of emerging capitalism – profits, property rights , credit, lending and the like….it was the active participation of then great [monastic] houses that caused monastic theologians to reconsider the morality of commerce…”

“The Church didn’t stand in the way – rather it both justified and took an active role in the Commercial Revolution of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Had this not occurred, the West may have ended up much like the nations of Islam.”
The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, 2005, p 66-67]

 

[triumphguy]

Stark’s book has some very vocal critics.

I often quote “How the Irish Saved Civilization” by Thomas Cahill. I love the book. It’s a refreshing read and adds some insight, but it’s not strictly true. It’s truish. But it would be demolished by a real historian.

Ditto Rodney Stark.

The Church did not invent Capitalism. : apparently according to some pretty high up guys in Rome unfettered or unregulated Capitalism has many evil consequences.

Though… fettered and regulated Capitalism is not really Capitalism…

What the Church promoted from the middle ages was the right to own property, and while things like lending with interest etc were discussed and sometimes utilized the 3 freedoms intrinsic to Capitalism were not available until hundreds of years later.

Freedom of Labour. Free Market. Free trade. Nor were people able to exercise their own economic freedom is pursuit of their self interest until feudal times passed away.

Anyhoo this is interesting and all, but kinda off topic.

 

[lynnvinc]

“The first setting in which faith enlightens the human city is the family. I think first and foremost of the stable union of man and woman in marriage.” - Lumen Fidei, Pope Francis

That’s very true, and it is also true that our families are pretty much in shambles. No lifelong commitments anymore. I think our culture has taught us wrongly that we are to pursue happiness…so one little unpleasant argument and it’s divorce time, assuming the couple is even married.

We are to pursue holiness, and be thankful for the disciplines and hairshirts God provides us (like our spouses seem to be at times) so we can spiritually progress, and have our faith, hope, and charity strengthened thru grace.

But I don’t see how this relates to liberal or conservative philosophies, both of which promote individualism & self-centeredness, going against stable families, perhaps conservatism promoting this more.

But maybe conservatives tend to be more happy with the encyclical because many feel fine simply saying “faith, faith” without really practicing it, while liberals may be less happy with it because they understand that realistically speaking faith is difficult and demanding, and they don’t really feel up to it.

 

[lynnvinc]

Stark’s book has some very vocal critics.

I often quote “How the Irish Saved Civilization” by Thomas Cahill. I love the book. It’s a refreshing read and adds some insight, but it’s not strictly true. It’s truish. But it would be demolished by a real historian.

Ditto Rodney Stark.

The Church did not invent Capitalism. : apparently according to some pretty high up guys in Rome unfettered or unregulated Capitalism has many evil consequences.

Though… fettered and regulated Capitalism is not really Capitalism…

What the Church promoted from the middle ages was the right to own property, and while things like lending with interest etc were discussed and sometimes utilized the 3 freedoms intrinsic to Capitalism were not available until hundreds of years later.

Freedom of Labour. Free Market. Free trade. Nor were people able to exercise their own economic freedom is pursuit of their self interest until feudal times passed away.

Anyhoo this is interesting and all, but kinda off topic.

This is an interesting discussion. The way I learned about the rise of capitalism in sociology was Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

It’s very interesting bec I was reared a Presbyterian, and Weber suggests it is the Calvinists who started us on the path to capitalist ideology.

They focus on the Parable of the Talents (and I remember this in Sunday school), with the idea that we have to put our talents (money, skills) to work or face hell. And also that only a few elect will enter heaven. So the only way they had some inkling re who was saved was by their hard work and wealth, since spending on fancy things and debauchery was out for the elect (it was sort of like living an austere monastic life, but out in the world). Poverty was a sign of wrong living, and there was no idea that wealth should be spent to help the poor. It was very different from Catholicism.

This eventually led to the foundations of capitalism – hard work, entrepreneurship, investing capital to make more capital, and disregard for the poor, sans faith and spiritual pursuits.

But what’s weird is that I’ve always had a mild disdain for brutish capitalism and wealth, being more religious and faith oriented – and reading the Bible on my own and realizing Jesus had a lot to say about the poor in a positive light. However, I have been very much an environmentalist since early childhood (which seems to be opposite of industrial capitalist destruction of the earth), so I had to really analyze this Calvinist thing…and later came to understand that it could also be the roots for my environmentalism: God gave us creation, and as good stewards we have to leave this world a better place, and certainly not a worse place, or face hell.

 

[triumphguy]

This is an interesting discussion. The way I learned about the rise of capitalism in sociology was Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

It’s very interesting bec I was reared a Presbyterian, and Weber suggests it is the Calvinists who started us on the path to capitalist ideology.

They focus on the Parable of the Talents (and I remember this in Sunday school), with the idea that we have to put our talents (money, skills) to work or face hell. And also that only a few elect will enter heaven. So the only way they had some inkling re who was saved was by their hard work and wealth, since spending on fancy things and debauchery was out for the elect (it was sort of like living an austere monastic life, but out in the world). Poverty was a sign of wrong living, and there was no idea that wealth should be spent to help the poor. It was very different from Catholicism.

This eventually led to the foundations of capitalism – hard work, entrepreneurship, investing capital to make more capital, and disregard for the poor, sans faith and spiritual pursuits.

But what’s weird is that I’ve always had a mild disdain for brutish capitalism and wealth, being more religious and faith oriented – and reading the Bible on my own and realizing Jesus had a lot to say about the poor in a positive light. However, I have been very much an environmentalist since early childhood (which seems to be opposite of industrial capitalist destruction of the earth), so I had to really analyze this Calvinist thing…and later came to understand that it could also be the roots for my environmentalism: God gave us creation, and as good stewards we have to leave this world a better place, and certainly not a worse place, or face hell.

And when I was at school in the UK it was pointed out on more than one occasion that the Catholic European countries had economies that were perennially in shambles, and it was the protestant/northern European countries, and North America that had burgeoning economies due to the protestant work ethic.

No doubt in 40 or 50 years when China’s economy hits parity with the USA it will be “discovered” that the Chinese invented capitalism along with gunpowder, pasta and soccer.

 

[lynnvinc]

And when I was at school in the UK it was pointed out on more than one occasion that the Catholic European countries had economies that were perennially in shambles, and it was the protestant/northern European countries, and North America that had burgeoning economies due to the protestant work ethic.

No doubt in 40 or 50 years when China’s economy hits parity with the USA it will be “discovered” that the Chinese invented capitalism along with gunpowder, pasta and soccer.

Very interesting, bec I read a psychological study many decades ago that had the Chinese personality closest to the American personality – with the European and Latin American personalities very different. So I can see it: the Chinese invented capitalism, and it came to the US in the decades before the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which was enacted bec they were so much better capitalists than other Americans. And they were the ones who taught capitalism to the Americans.

Also it is interesting about “Catholic countries,” bec my husband’s uncle was a parish priest in India, and he tended to use the allotted parish money to help the poor, so he considered himself a failure for never properly maintaining or builidng up the finances of his assigned parishes. I consider him almost a saint. When we celebrated his golden jubilee as a priest, he had 2 cassocks that were in shambles, which is all he wore except for some even worse pajama clothes underneath. We had some made for him, but he felt bad, since he said he would be dying soon so we shouldn’t waste the money.

Also Durkheim, another sociologist, pointed out how Protestant countries had higher suicide rates than Catholic countries because they were more tied into individualism, wealth pursuits, and “anomie” (normlessness, freedom from constrictions) & less into community and tie in to the Church that Catholics have; also that the rich have higher suicide rates than the poor. Sort of reminding me how lots of big businessmen committed suicide during the Great Depression. I think this is pertinent to the OP, since faith is a big factor in helping people cope, and without faith, things seem hopeless. Faith is more important than money.

BTW, I almost forgot. When we were visiting a friend in Munster, Germany, she (a good Catholic) told us how her university had once been the bishop’s palace, and that the open space between the palace and the town was kept cleared so the bishop’s militia could shoot the townspeople (I suppose using that Chinese gun powder) who were becoming wealthy during the pre-Reformation era with the rise of merchants, guilds, trade and commerce, etc. – sort of the beginnings of capitalism – I guess because they seemed to be getting more wealthy and powerful than the Church, or seemed to be a threat to the Church’s authority.

At any rate that visit really brought to life the Reformation and various economic forces behind it.

And Luther’s famous focus on “Faith alone” – which almost sounds like many of the conservative Catholics of today who think works are not important, only faith. While our Catholic Church teaches us that faith without works is thoroughly lifeless.

 

[qui_est_ce]

And Luther’s famous focus on “Faith alone” – which almost sounds like many of the conservative Catholics of today who think works are not important, only faith. While our Catholic Church teaches us that faith without works is thoroughly lifeless.

WHAT???

 

[Abu]

lynnvinc #110
The way I learned about the rise of capitalism in sociology was Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
…the foundations of capitalism – hard work, entrepreneurship, investing capital to make more capital, and disregard for the poor, sans faith and spiritual pursuits.

No wonder such understanding is skewed.

That fallacy was widely spread by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, and still believed by many today, It is obviously wrong, because the fact is that free enterprise arose in Europe centuries before the Protestant Revolt. Free enterprise developed first only in Europe – the first example of free enterprise arose in the great Catholic monasteries.

The Catholic “ethic” is the reason Europeans excelled at metallurgy, shipbuilding, and farming. Weber’s thesis is based on what he considers “self-evidence” without any proof and seems to have been based on the smug anti-Catholicism of his time and place, only citing Martin Offenbacher’s “findings” now exposed as incorrect by George Becker , 2000,1997.(Cf. Stark, p 239, 254).

Henry Pirenne noted much literature that “established the fact that all of the essential features of capitalism – individual enterprise, advances in credit, commercial profits, speculation, etc. – are found from the twelfth century on in the city republics of Italy,-- Venice, Genoa, or Florence.” (1958—Cf. Stark, p xii).

Fernand Braudel: “All historians have opposed this tenuous theory [the Protestant ethic],… it is clearly false. The northern countries took over the place that earlier had been so long and brilliantly occupied by the old capitalist centers of the Mediterranean. They invented nothing, either in technology or business management.” (1977, p 66-67. Cf Stark, p xii).
The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 55].

A “disregard for the poor” is certainly not part of the Catholicism from which the great free enterprise system was born and which has enabled millions to rise above poverty.

Persisting in trying to link “the foundations of capitalism” to a “disregard for the poor, sans faith and spiritual pursuits” is a fool’s game as it is individuals who may be greedy or charitable, virtuous or wayward, faithful and spiritual or unfaithful and worldly.

As Fr James Sadowsky, S.J., explains:
“…wealth is produced and wealth is exchanged. Period. So there are no distributors. If there is no distribution process on the market, how can there be an unjust process of distribution or – for that matter – a just process? Again, if there are no distributors, there can be no unjust distributors. The different holdings that result from the process of production and exchange will depend entirely on the justice of those processes.” (The Christian Response to Poverty, London: The Social Affairs Unit, 1985, 9)

The revered Fr James V Schall, S.J., in Does The Catholic Church Still Exist?, Alba House 1994, points out re Centesimus Annus that “The very meaning of ‘options for the poor’ need no longer be ideological in overtones but directed instead to the very real possibilities for a poor people to overcome their own problems with the intelligent aid of those who know how to produce wealth in the first place.’ (p 178).

 

[triumphguy]

Fernand Braudel: “All historians have opposed this tenuous theory [the Protestant ethic],… it is clearly false. The northern countries took over the place that earlier had been so long and brilliantly occupied by the old capitalist centers of the Mediterranean. They invented nothing, either in technology or business management.” (1977, p 66-67. Cf Stark, p xii).
[The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 55].

So Catholicism is responsible for the industrial revolution too?

And see this about Baudel:

Capitalists in Spite of Themselves : Elite Conflict and European Transitions …
By Albany Richard Lachmann Associate Professor of Sociology SUNY

 

[qui_est_ce]

No wonder such understanding is skewed.

:tiphat:

Thank you.

 

[Abu]

St Benedict required his monks to pray, speculate and work. “In this combination the groundwork was laid for the revolution in science, discovery and invention, which distinguishes modern man from the ancient.”

“In Greco-Roman society:
…work was the lot of slaves, and any free man who dirtied his hands with it, even in the most casual way demeaned himself. The provision of Benedict, himself an aristocrat, that his monks should work in the fields and shops therefore marks a revolutionary of the traditional attitude toward labor…

“The Catholic tradition has always recognised the risks and rewards of entrepreneurship. The rewards and of entrepreneurship provide benefits not only for the entrepreneur but for the whole community. Entrepreneurship is a social activity.”
[Foreword I by John Roskam of the Institute of Public Affairs, to *Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Connor Court Publishing, 2011].

“In The Spirit of Enterprise, George Gilder…critiques Adam Smith’s ‘concept of the economy as a great invisibly guided “machine” in which capitalists are tools of the “market”.

“In rejecting the notion that the entrepreneur is simply an instrument of the market, Gilder expounds for us what Kirzner means by alertness. The entrepreneur is protagonist, a man who creates and sustains ,markets by developing business opportunities. All of this is far removed from the ‘unintentional’ and ‘unknowing’ entrepreneur Smith portrays. Rather the entrepreneur’s activity is intelligent and focused.”
[Fr Percy, op. cit. p 21].

As Rodney Stark has shown, all of the essential features of capitalism – individual enterprise, advances in credit, commercial profits, speculation, were present under and through Catholicism, and the Catholic “ethic” is the reason Europeans excelled at metallurgy, shipbuilding, and farming. Blast furnaces were widely adopted in England by the middle of the sixteenth century and the “unparalleled levels of freedom” in England…with the longest tradition of individual liberty” based on faith in progress and reason encouraged the Industrial Revolution.

 

[qui_est_ce]

A “disregard for the poor” is certainly not part of the Catholicism from which the great free enterprise system was born and which has enabled millions to rise above poverty.

Persisting in trying to link “the foundations of capitalism” to a “disregard for the poor, sans faith and spiritual pursuits” is a fool’s game **as it is individuals who may be greedy or charitable, virtuous or wayward, faithful and spiritual or unfaithful and worldly. **

No other system of commerce has helped the poor as has capitalism and free enterprise. Communism and Socialism have proven failures. One has only to look at Venezuela, Cuba, the Ost-Zone, and especially North Korea.

What did Communism do for the poor except make them poorer and strip them of their faith? Even in Communist countries, there exists a black market, capitalism. Produce from workers’ gardens are more bounteous than that from the State Farms.

We humans have an innate need for freedom of self expression. Looking at slave quarters in the South, one recognizes almost immediately that most of them are far better than those of the homesteaders in the “new frontier.” Most slaves were better fed than the pioneers of the Midwest. Yet the slaves longed for personal self. They dug holes in the ground to hide various personal effects. After the Civil War, many of these slaves came north to seek a new life in an unknown world and circumstance.

Most of all, humans yearn for respect and opportunity. That is what this country was built on.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Capitalism is based solely on unregulated self interest.

Well, I don’t think all people agree with that definition. “Capitalism” is pretty vague. Or else Centesimus Annus wouldn’t have said other countries should adopt capitalism:

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”.

I think the Church has played a large role throughout history with this kind of capitalism. But then again, the Encyclical says maybe there are more appropriate terms for this than capitalism, which is often thought of as a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious.