Did The Pope say Property Rights are not Recognized by the Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JohnS

Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
Please, anyone, I really need information and/or clarification about this topic.
 
The pope is quite loose with his language…so I would not get to worked up. And…he also gets taken out of context a lot. Unless he comes out and specifically says he is changing Church teaching, I would not get too worked up.
 
In this article the pope is quoted as saying “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable “
The importance of the word “absolute” in this statement cannot be ignored. The Pope is speaking very precisely here, and needs to be heard precisely. I noticed that the word “absolute” was left out of the the thread title. That is a sign of imprecision, and in this case, leads to a misinterpretation of the Pope’s message. Of course property rights are important. And of course they are not absolute.
 
Please, anyone, I really need information and/or clarification about this topic.
If you are going to spend any amount of time on CAF (while you still can), you are going to have to get used to people taking longer than 10 minutes to provide you with an answer.
I am trying to find out if the Pope strayed in his recent comments
I am not a Catholic, so I find it curious how often people seem to ask questions along the lines of, “Did the pope just say something that is contrary to Catholic teaching?” One could almost believe that there is a whole faction within the Church that is just waiting to catch him out!
 
I am not a Catholic, so I find it curious how often people seem to ask questions along the lines of, “Did the pope just say something that is contrary to Catholic teaching?” One could almost believe that there is a whole faction within the Church that is just waiting to catch him out!
That is because there is a faction that believes he is not the Pope. They believe Pope Benedict is still the rightful Pope based on some idea that once elected to Popedom, you are the Pope until death.
 
Thank you. But I am trying to find out if the Pope strayed in his recent comments
Not sure how you think the Pope “strayed” but the quote you give is a reasonable summary of the Church’s teaching on private property rights - they are important, but they are secondary and limited rights, subject to the common good and the needs of others. The Catechism explains this reasonably well (in the section beginning with para 2400), and there are many other Church documents that talk about it. The doctrine is known as “Universal Destination of Goods”.
 
So @johns are you clear now after reading the indicated section of the catechism?
 
Pope Francis is right. Liberal individualism is opposed to the Gospel. Private ownership is not absolute or strictly individualistic. There is a social aspect to ownership and the use of property that must be ordered to the common good and public authority has a role there. Catholicism is neither Socialist nor Liberal.

Also, clearly “red state media” hasn’t been paying attention. It also seems they cannot see outside the fishbowl of the Liberalism vs. Socialism dichotomy. They’re both bad. In any event, we have never masked this truth, but publicly proclaimed it.

St. John Paul II, Centissimus Annus:
[T]he Church teaches that the possession of material goods is not an absolute right, and that its limits are inscribed in its very nature as a human right.
continued…
 
Last edited:
continued from above, a longer explanation:

Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno
45.First, then, let it be considered as certain and established that neither Leo nor those theologians who have taught under the guidance and authority of the Church have ever denied or questioned the twofold character of ownership, called usually individual or social according as it regards either separate persons or the common good. For they have always unanimously maintained that nature, rather the Creator Himself, has given man the right of private ownership not only that individuals may be able to provide for themselves and their families but also that the goods which the Creator destined for the entire family of mankind may through this institution truly serve this purpose. All this can be achieved in no wise except through the maintenance of a certain and definite order.

46.Accordingly, twin rocks of shipwreck must be carefully avoided. For, as one is wrecked upon, or comes close to, what is known as “individualism” by denying or minimizing the social and public character of the right of property, so by rejecting or minimizing the private and individual character of this same right, one inevitably runs into “collectivism” or at least closely approaches its tenets.

49.It follows from what We have termed the individual and at the same time social character of ownership, that men must consider in this matter not only their own advantage but also the common good. To define these duties in detail when necessity requires and the natural law has not done so, is the function of those in charge of the State. Therefore, public authority, under the guiding light always of the natural and divine law, can determine more accurately upon consideration of the true requirements of the common good, what is permitted and what is not permitted to owners in the use of their property. … Yet when the State brings private ownership into harmony with the needs of the common good, it does not commit a hostile act against private owners but rather does them a friendly service; for it thereby effectively prevents the private possession of goods, which the Author of nature in His most wise providence ordained for the support of human life, from causing intolerable evils and thus rushing to its own destruction; it does not destroy private possessions, but safeguards them; and it does not weaken private property rights, but strengthens them.

57.But not every distribution among human beings of property and wealth is of a character to attain either completely or to a satisfactory degree of perfection the end which God intends. Therefore, the riches that economic-social developments constantly increase ought to be so distributed among individual persons and classes that the common advantage of all, which Leo XIII had praised, will be safeguarded; in other words, that the common good of all society will be kept inviolate. By this law of social justice, one class is forbidden to exclude the other from sharing in the benefits.
 
Last edited:
Property rights are not absolute. This goes back to Aquinas. Pope Francis is entirely in line with Catholic teaching.

I would hesitate taking that site as a source on Church teaching.
 
Prayer about what? Pope Francis is reiterating what the Church has long taught (in the context of modern economies specifically, for more than a hundred years). JPII and Benedict, who were certainly no friends of communism, taught the same.
 
The Pope is correct. The right to private property is not “absolute and untouchable.” It is an important good, but can be overridden by other good things. That’s generally how the Church talks about rights in general, since it’s considerably older than the Enlightenment emphasis on the rights of the individual.
 
In this article the pope is quoted as saying “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable “
I’m pretty sure the keyword in that quote is absolute.
 
Please, anyone, I really need information and/or clarification about this topic.
Use language to your advantage. When reading an article from some propaganda site, look at the words they add, and the words they delete. Or better yet, ignore these political hit sites when it comes to information about the Church.

The Church has always recognized the universal designation of goods, and the right to private property. Therefore, there is no absolute property rights. That very statement should have told you that there must be some for of property rights.

Think of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man has the property right to his house, and his food. However, he has no moral right to feed the scraps to the dog while the beggar at his gate starves. Thus, he went to Hell.

Everyone has the right to property, but not to the point at which humanity suffers. There is no line on this, nor did the Pope try to draw one. He just reminded us that property rights are not absolute.
 
Last edited:
The pope is right on this. It’s true, property rights are not absolute. They are subject to the needs of the common good.

For example, if you stake a claim to a pond, and that pond is the only safe drinking water for a community, you do not have the right to bar people access to drinking water.

You can charge them for maintenance of it.
Bottling it.
Distributing it.
Etc.
 
Video: Pope Francis Takes Off The Mask, Says Christianity Never Recognized Private Property As A Right - Red State Nation

In this article the pope is quoted as saying “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable “

I have seen people going wild over this.

Does anyone know anything about this? Some clarifications perhaps from Rome? Any opinions? Anything? Please chime in

Sorry I cannot post links yet. There is a video there too.
Can a nation state administer a tax on some level? If you answered yes, regardless of the type or size of the tax… congrats, you agree that there is not an absolute and untouchable right to private property
 
Welcome to the forums!

There have been many popes.

Nothing has changed. The Catholic Church has not changed its core teachings.on abortion, gay marriage, and contraception.

It is the same Church it was 2000 years ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top