Catholic and libertarian? Pope’s top adviser says they’re incompatible

[FollowChrist34]

As an ex-member of the US Libertarian Party for roughly 3 1/2 years, I agree with the papal advisor.

When I was in that party, I saw a lot of atheistic and agnostic utopianism associated with the movement. I also saw an unhealthy obsession with the Paul political family, almost as if Ron Paul was some sort of quasi-messiah. There also seemed to be a modest degree of anti-black racism and Confederate nostalgia (though I admit this was by no means universal to the party).

I also saw ideas that I couldn’t reconcile with Catholicism: for example; the opposition to minimum-wage laws and worker safety laws; the distrust of democracy (a common saying was, “democracy is the tyranny of the majority”); and the complete destruction (not just reform) of government welfare systems such as food stamps, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (some of which my family has depended on at times).

Yep, I think you’re probably right - I have a tough time with the Catholic/libertarian thing too. Kind of like being Catholic and supporting gay marriage or abortion . It happens though. I’ll give the libertarians a little more slack - I do think government is overreaching right now and it is getting problematic. But I want to control it, not eliminate social programs, environmental regulations, etc. And I want the government to protect the family (i.e. defend traditional marriage through legislation), outlaw or severely restrict abortion, protect the environment. Problem is no government will ever do all of those things. So people choose what they choose. I am an independent; but I would vote for Rand Paul over Hillary Clinton, no question there.

 

[Seraphim73]

For some, it means property rights are more important than individual rights.

Well they really are the same thing aren’t they? If I don’t have a right to the fruits of my labor I don’t have any rights really.

For others, it means individual rights are more important than societal rights.

There can be no such thing as societal rights without the violation of individual rights. They are completely incompatible. One says I have a right to my own life, liberty and property. The other says that you have a right to my life, liberty and property. It’s nothing but slavery and servitude wrapped up in flowery language.

 

[Seraphim73]

And looking deeper into what the party teaches of corporations, maybe i need to stop affiliating myself as libertarian…i still consider myself pseudo anarchist. No companies, no government. Just the family, the Church, and God. I call it Catholic Anarchism.

Well that’s simply just not reality. It fails to recognize basic human nature. Humans are by their very nature social creatures. When they inevitably form communities they also inevitably provide for such thing as common defense and common welfare. That is by definition government.

 

[Seraphim73]

Cardinal Mariadiaga is absolutely correct. Christ, St. Paul and all of scripture teach that among fallen man, an earthly government is necessary and legitimate. I challenge anyone here to quote me ONE New Testament scripture (or one Church Father) that teaches that political liberty is the highest good. The “liberty” taught in the scriputres and the Fathers is the liberty from sin and injustice. Rather, read Sts Ambrose, Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas: they ALL teach the legitimacy of the earthly government, and the legitmiacy of governmental powers far beyond those any contemporary libertarian would recognize. Aquinas, for example, taught the concepts of just wages and prices. Libertarians, along with most so-called “conservatives” don’t even recognize the legitimacy of the concepts of just wages and prices, much less their enforcement by government.

Modern libertarianism derives not from any scripture or Catholic or Orthodox teaching, but from the secular, Deist and liberal Protestant thinkers of the 17th and 18th centuries, such as David Hume and Adam Smith. At its core it is antiChristian, because it denies the effects of original sin and posits that fallen Man can govern himself.

It’s certainly not anti-Christian. It’s an acceptance of basic human nature as it really is, not as how we wish it to be. Who decides what is a “just” wage or a “just” price. Do you decide that or does someone else decide that for you? Setting platitudes and musing about what people from a completely different era think the reality is if you really care about the poor and want to help people and pull them out of poverty there is no system yet devised by human beings that does that better then laissez-faire economics. That is a completely incontrovertible fact of history.

 

[livingwordunity]

Without being able to see a complete version of it on the Vatican’s official website I have to treat the article as hearsay.

 

[sallybutler]

Well that’s simply just not reality. It fails to recognize basic human nature. Humans are by their very nature social creatures. When they inevitably form communities they also inevitably provide for such thing as common defense and common welfare. That is by definition government.

I agree. A Libertarian government will be just as good/bad as a Republican government or a Democrat government. Because they are made up of people making the rules (and a lack of codified rules are still rules).

 

[sallybutler]

Well they really are the same thing aren’t they? If I don’t have a right to the fruits of my labor I don’t have any rights really.

There can be no such thing as societal rights without the violation of individual rights. They are completely incompatible. One says I have a right to my own life, liberty and property. The other says that you have a right to my life, liberty and property. It’s nothing but slavery and servitude wrapped up in flowery language.

And this is the basic problem. Where does one person’s rights end and another’s begin. Do I have a right to do whatever I want with my property? Sure, if it doesn’t affect anyone else. But it will almost affect someone else.

If I build a 20 story building in a residential neighborhood or put an adult bookstore on my property which happens to be next to a school, why shouldn’t I be allowed to do that. If you say I can’t, aren’t you violating my rights? And no, these are not ridiculous examples, these are zoning laws that exist. These are examples of societal rights ‘violating’ individual rights.

 

[Bklynguy]

I don’t really disagree. Most libertarians I have seen are like thumb sucking three year olds. “I want to do it MY way…don’t TELL ME WHAT TO DO!!!”

 

[TEPO]

I don’t really disagree. Most libertarians I have seen are like thumb sucking three year olds. “I want to do it MY way…don’t TELL ME WHAT TO DO!!!”

God forbid citizens be free to make choices on their own. Maybe you’re right. Maybe there ought to be laws regarding every situation under the sun, and those laws should be set up by the people who fund the most powerful political majority in office in order to serve their needs in gaining the greatest maximum potential for power.

That sounds fun. What would be even better would be to go global with it. . Let us begin by offering the Muslim Brotherhood a percentage of our savings -if they could gain power, we’d have a system that enforces global Sharia law with the heaviest of hands.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

It’s certainly not anti-Christian. It’s an acceptance of basic human nature as it really is, not as how we wish it to be. Who decides what is a “just” wage or a “just” price. Do you decide that or does someone else decide that for you? Setting platitudes and musing about what people from a completely different era think the reality is if you really care about the poor and want to help people and pull them out of poverty there is no system yet devised by human beings that does that better then laissez-faire economics. That is a completely incontrovertible fact of history.

“Who decides?” Ideally you have a government that is motivated by Christian principles of justice, but most often that isn’t the case, so , as with so many other things, it becomes a matter of practicalities. But that in no way detracts from the legitimacy of the ideas of just prices and wages. I’m sorry to see that you seem to be dismissive of these ideas, my Orthodox brother. Perhaps you buy into modern Protestant-influenced notions that somehow economics and business are realms apart from Christian notions of justice and morality. That is an idea completely alien to Orthodoxy. I urge you to read St Basil the Great’s and St John Chrysostom’s writings on social justice, they will make anything I say look like Milton Friedman in comparison. But then you indicate you are willing to dismiss them also as being “from another age”. Really? Is that an attitude for an Orthodox believer to take? Those who want to dismiss ancient and Patristic teaching on sexual morality often do the same thing “Oh they were from a different time, that doesn’t apply to us”. It seems to me you want to do that with economics.

As to the track record of laissez-faire capitalism, we are seeing that now coming to fruition here in America: a growing gap between rich and poor, an economy based on consumerism and investment swindles, a fetishism with technology, and a disdain for any “noneconomic” values, such as traditional religion and the traditional family, and an increasing disdain for the value of life itself (abortion, gun culture).

 

[Mulligan2]

There can be no such thing as societal rights without the violation of individual rights. They are completely incompatible.

You are absolutely correct. In my experience, the vast majority of people fail to realize this.

 

[TEPO]

“Who decides?” Ideally you have a government that is motivated by Christian principles of justice, but most often that isn’t the case, so , as with so many other things, it becomes a matter of practicalities. But that in no way detracts from the legitimacy of the ideas of just prices and wages. I’m sorry to see that you seem to be dismissive of these ideas, my Orthodox brother. Perhaps you buy into modern Protestant-influenced notions that somehow economics and business are realms apart from Christian notions of justice and morality. That is an idea completely alien to Orthodoxy. I urge you to read St Basil the Great’s and St John Chrysostom’s writings on social justice, they will make anything I say look like Milton Friedman in comparison. But then you indicate you are willing to dismiss them also as being “from another age”. Really? Is that an attitude for an Orthodox believer to take? Those who want to dismiss ancient and Patristic teaching on sexual morality often do the same thing “Oh they were from a different time, that doesn’t apply to us”. It seems to me you want to do that with economics.

As to the track record of laissez-faire capitalism, we are seeing that now coming to fruition here in America: a growing gap between rich and poor, an economy based on consumerism and investment swindles, a fetishism with technology, and a disdain for any “noneconomic” values, such as traditional religion and the traditional family, and an increasing disdain for the value of life itself (abortion, gun culture).

This growing gap between the rich and the poor in America is mostly fabrication. You should go to China. There, from what I’ve been told by a Chinese man, you will find a real gap between rich and poor.

Also, I disagree that economics and business realms being separated from Christian notions of morality and Justice are “Protestant-influenced”. I would say they are greed influenced or atheist.

 

[ProVobis]

There can be no such thing as societal rights without the violation of individual rights. They are completely incompatible. One says I have a right to my own life, liberty and property. The other says that you have a right to my life, liberty and property. It’s nothing but slavery and servitude wrapped up in flowery language.

I remember Ayn Rand arguing the point that only individuals have rights and to the extent they don’t violate others’ rights. Groups and organizations do not have rights per se. Introduction of societal rights only implies the introduction of force and possible violence, totally against the libertarian position. As well as humanity itself IMO.

 

[ProVobis]

As to the track record of laissez-faire capitalism,

A $17 trillion debt suggests otherwise.

 

[KevJohn]

They are totally compatible. Why on earth would they not be? I am both catholic and libertarian. You could call be an anarchist but that doesnt offend me. WHY are they not compatible. My faith and my political beliefs support each other TREMENDOUSLY.

because libertarianism proclaims that man has no higher authority than himself, or in certain circumstances the state. Catholicism knows that man is subject to both Christ and His Bride.

 

[Melvin]

I’m not sure what this means…but I might be one of those the Cardinal is talking about. I refuse to accept either the inevitability or the justness of economic slavery to the State, just because the State claims the right to my hard-earned living in order to “care for the poor.” I refuse to accept the “axiom” that the State has the RIGHT to strip me of my income, simply because the State exists and has the military and police power to do so.

Such may have been the case when men were considered little more than chattel, living at the whim and under the boots of the “royal class.” But here in America, that class was not supposed to exist. We were supposed to have been a free people, not the subjects of our government, but its masters. When Jesus said, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s,” he referred to the ownership of the land and the people by a King. That was not supposed to have been our status. Perhaps the Church disagrees with our right to be free.

Sometimes, I wonder how much Catholic teaching has contributed to the loss of our liberties, and the conversion of our once free society into a de-facto socialist State. God knows, politicians seem to love to throw around Catholic terminology when it suits their purposes…especially when it comes to further stripping Americans of their income, culture, and freedoms.

 

[Path_Finder]

Libertarian Ideals to me seem to tie into the concept of “free will” which was given to us by God.

But unfortunately, I don’t think a lot of people exercise their free will wisely. But in ways I do see it’s not for me to decide for others. There needs to be a balance and people indeed do need to make their wise choices.

 

[Seraphim73]

“Who decides?” Ideally you have a government that is motivated by Christian principles of justice, but most often that isn’t the case, so , as with so many other things, it becomes a matter of practicalities. But that in no way detracts from the legitimacy of the ideas of just prices and wages. I’m sorry to see that you seem to be dismissive of these ideas, my Orthodox brother. Perhaps you buy into modern Protestant-influenced notions that somehow economics and business are realms apart from Christian notions of justice and morality. That is an idea completely alien to Orthodoxy. I urge you to read St Basil the Great’s and St John Chrysostom’s writings on social justice, they will make anything I say look like Milton Friedman in comparison. But then you indicate you are willing to dismiss them also as being “from another age”. Really? Is that an attitude for an Orthodox believer to take? Those who want to dismiss ancient and Patristic teaching on sexual morality often do the same thing “Oh they were from a different time, that doesn’t apply to us”. It seems to me you want to do that with economics.

As to the track record of laissez-faire capitalism, we are seeing that now coming to fruition here in America: a growing gap between rich and poor, an economy based on consumerism and investment swindles, a fetishism with technology, and a disdain for any “noneconomic” values, such as traditional religion and the traditional family, and an increasing disdain for the value of life itself (abortion, gun culture).

The Fathers were great theologians and great ascetics. They were not economist. They were speaking out of concern for the poor in a very specific cultural milieu, one where the gap between rich and poor was genuinely staggering and unbridgeable. One where the poor were taken advantage of and perpetually held down by a wealthy aristocracy.

Although that is still reality in many parts of the world today it is not reality in places where generally free markets exist. Here in the United States the poor for the most part have cell phones, cars and large flat panel televisions. They may not have large amounts of disposable income but by any historical measure they are anything but poor. Also we must never discount the fact that there is tremendous mobility in our economy. Most people in the lower income brackets work themselves out of it and most of the people in the higher income brackets fall out of it at some point during their lives.

As to your final point about laissez-faire capitalism here in America the reality is exactly opposite of what you say. The greater the government interference in the economy the greater the gap between rich and poor becomes. The U.S. has been slowly and steadily eroding the free market principles that led to it’s great wealth. Think about where in the world the largest gap between rich and poor exist. Without exception the places with the highest level of government control have the highest and most rigid class differences. Do you really think a poor person in Cuba has any real chance of working their way out of poverty? Why do their literally risk their lives to come to America? The answer is simple and clear for anyone to see.

 

[Seraphim73]

“Who decides?” Ideally you have a government that is motivated by Christian principles of justice, but most often that isn’t the case, so , as with so many other things, it becomes a matter of practicalities.

Sorry for the second post. A “government” isn’t motivated by anything. A government can no more be motivated than my keyboard. A government is made up of people and there is nothing more predictable on this earth than the fact that people as a whole are motivated by their own self interest. That is the great beauty of free market capitalism. Millions of people each pursuing their self interest, through no intention of their own, wind up benefiting others and society as a whole.

That is also the great danger in devising systems of government. People will inevitably pursue power. That is the danger our founders sought to mitigate through separation of powers. Make no mistake, a paper constitution is completely useless to prevent tyranny. It’s only through separation of powers and disparate groups of people competing with each other for that power that our individual liberty is preserved.

 

[ishii]

From the article:

“*This economy kills" *

Trickle-down economics, he said, is “a deception,” and he declared that the “invisible hand” of the free market — the famous theory advanced by the 18th-century philosopher Adam Smith — was instead being used as a cruel trick to exploit the poor.

"growing inequality is creating “a powder keg that is as dangerous as the environmental crisis the world is facing today.”

“today’s free market system is “a new idol” that is increasing inequality and excluding the poor.”

While billed as a conference on the compatibility of Catholicism and libertarianism, it seemed more like a critique of conservatism in general. The problem with all of these types of speeches or conferences is that they do not get specific: they use politically loaded phrases like “trickle-down” and use hyperbolic language like “this economy kills.” But they don’t get specific. What does this mean “the elimination of the structural causes for poverty is a matter of urgency that can no longer be postponed” in relation to libertarian or free market economics?

Does the advisor believe that the government must step in to solve these problems of inequality? Is he aware of the track record of the government since the Great Society programs - created to “eliminate poverty” in the 1960’s (which ended up creating more poor people) ? I pose these questions not because I have some kind of blind faith in the free market to solve all the problems of society. No doubt we have inequalities in our society which need to be addressed. But how best to address them? Its one thing to criticize a set of political/economic beliefs, but if they haven’t really been tried in the manner that the proponents of those beliefs would want, is the criticism fair? Do we really have a free market/libertarian society in America? Seems we have a monolithic welfare state which could be the cause of many of the problems which the advisor mentions - income inequality, poverty, etc.

That said, it is nice to see stories like the one below, which show that our society still offers people hope and opportunity - courtesy of the free-market:

“A student whose childhood was filled with violence, bullets, and bombs says he’s now living the American dream thanks to a local retail giant”

“Ramon Penaranda grew up in Cucuta, Colombia where he says he didn’t have as many opportunities as he does now in Seattle"”

That just happens in Colombia, people randomly get killed," he said.

Ramon plans to go to dentistry school:

"This is something that I have always wanted to do, it is something that I thought was unattainable when I lived in Colombia," said Penaranda

To me that says a great deal more about the positive aspects of our society than the conference at Catholic U.

komonews.com/news/local/262259701.html

Ishii