Difference between SJW and Social Justice in CCC

[mrsdizzyd]

Poppycock!

There are some clear imperatives. http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-te.../seven-themes-of-catholic-social-teaching.cfm

While it is true that there is more than one way to skin a cat, we are not hamstrung by that reality.

The government can be called on to HELP with our social justice imperatives in the same way that Catholic charities do. The government is not going to be able to fully redress our social problems nor should we expect it to, but there is a role that it can play.

 

[Maximilian75]

The government can be called on, but should it?

Again, subsidiarity- parishes and dioceses shoud be pulling their weight

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Im not suggesting that parishes and diocese cease their efforts to help the poor. I’m suggesting that the government can be called upon to step up to the plate as well.

And I think it should be. If the parishes, diocese and government help to feed the poor this is not a bad thing.

 

[Maximilian75]

But I think that should be a last resort.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I think there are many areas in which the need is so great that the last resort is also the first / simultaneous resort.

 

[Ender]

Poppycock!

There are some clear imperatives. http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-te.../seven-themes-of-catholic-social-teaching.cfm

Go through your citation and pull out some of the specific proposals the church calls on us to implement. The only ones you will find will be the ones dealing with intrinsic evils. If you find anything else you can be sure it is not the church calling for it but the individuals involved in writing that particular tract.

If my position is indeed poppycock it should be a simple thing to find at least one such example. Just be sure your example specifies the means we are to implement, and not the ends we are to strive for.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

If my position is indeed poppycock it should be a simple thing to find at least one such example. Just be sure your example specifies the means we are to implement, and not the ends we are to strive for.

I don’t not agree with your opinion as to when government action is ok. On what authority should I agree with you? Is there a church document somewhere that outlines the bounds of government intervention?

An imperative is simply something that is essential or urgent. Things such as feed the poor and protect the dignity of life are imperatives.

 

[Ender]

I don’t not agree with your opinion as to when government action is ok. On what authority should I agree with you? Is there a church document somewhere that outlines the bounds of government intervention?

Since I didn’t make a comment about when government action was acceptable there is nothing for you to agree or disagree with.

An imperative is simply something that is essential or urgent. Things such as feed the poor and protect the dignity of life are imperatives.

Things such as “feeding the poor” and “protecting the dignity of life” are ends, which is precisely the point I’ve been making: the church teaches us the ends toward which we are to strive. She says nothing whatever about the means we should use to attain those ends, but politics is about the implementation of particular means, and about these the church is entirely silent.

Where does the church tell us what policies we are to implement to feed the poor?

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Where does the church tell us what policies we are to implement to feed the poor?

Why does she need to? If we lobby the government to provide financial assistance to help feed the poor have we not done this in pursuit of that end. Is God only please when we use our private monies to feed the poor?

 

[Ender]

Why does she need to? If we lobby the government to provide financial assistance to help feed the poor have we not done this in pursuit of that end. Is God only please when we use our private monies to feed the poor?

But this is precisely what I’ve been talking about. The church doesn’t tell us what policies to implement, nor should she. That is entirely our responsibility. The point is that your policy proposals on how we should help the poor are neither more nor less moral than your opponents proposals.

There is no moral distinction between one set of proposals and the diametrically opposed set, and this is the point that SJWs fail to understand. There is no justification whatever for claiming moral superiority or church support for one approach as against another.

Social problems are rarely moral problems. The only moral question is whether one means to solve the problem; from that point on all the choices - and all the different plans and policies - are prudential.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

There is no moral distinction between one set of proposals and the diametrically opposed set, and this is the point that SJWs fail to understand. There is no justification whatever for claiming moral superiority or church support for one approach as against another.

When did I say anything like this?

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I said that the Church has social justice imperatives.

I said that I believe the government can have a role to play, but that Catholic charities, parishes, and diocese still need to be involved.

I didn’t say any of the things you are accusing SJWs of. Seems like you are attacking a straw man.

 

[Ender]

I didn’t say any of the things you are accusing SJWs of. Seems like you are attacking a straw man.

I made a rather lengthy comment in post #20 about SJWs, to which you responded “Poppycock.” Perhaps you should have read my comments more carefully.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

I didn’t say any of the things you are accusing SJWs of. Seems like you are attacking a straw man.

I made a rather lengthy comment in post #20 about SJWs, to which you responded “Poppycock.” Perhaps you should have read my comments more carefully.

No, I read it. You quoted me thus using me as an example of a SJW (which I am not). I called it poppycock because your words did not fairly characterize mine.

I’ll just leave you with the words of the Church regarding social justice:

1928 Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.

I. RESPECT FOR THE HUMAN PERSON

1929 Social justice can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man. The person represents the ultimate end of society, which is ordered to him:

What is at stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt.35

1930 Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy.36 If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. It is the Church’s role to remind men of good will of these rights and to distinguish them from unwarranted or false claims.

1931 Respect for the human person proceeds by way of respect for the principle that "everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as ‘another self,’ above all bearing in mind his life and the means necessary for living it with dignity."37 No legislation could by itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and selfishness which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies. Such behavior will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a “neighbor,” a brother.

1932 The duty of making oneself a neighbor to others and actively serving them becomes even more urgent when it involves the disadvantaged, in whatever area this may be. "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me."38

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c2a3.htm

 

[Ender]

You quoted me thus using me as an example of a SJW (which I am not).

In my definition an SJW is someone who believes the church supports his proposals for the solution to political (social) problems. Are you saying you don’t believe the church supports your proposals?

I’ll just leave you with the words of the Church regarding social justice:…

Everyone understands that the church supports social justice as an end. The question is where she stands on the means to achieve this end. SJWs claim her support for their means. I claim such support does not exist.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

In my definition an SJW is someone who believes the church supports his proposals for the solution to political (social) problems. Are you saying you don’t believe the church supports your proposal?

I haven’t made any proposals other than to suggest that generally the government can play a role in social justice.

The Catechism says “1930 Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy. 36 If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. It is the Church’s role to remind men of good will of these rights and to distinguish them from unwarranted or false claims.”

Everyone understands that the church supports social justice as an end. The question is where she stands on the means to achieve this end. SJWs claim her support for their means. I claim such support does not exist.

I think CCC is illuminating on this point: “1941 Socio-economic problems can be resolved only with the help of all the forms of solidarity: solidarity of the poor among themselves, between rich and poor, of workers among themselves, between employers and employees in a business, solidarity among nations and peoples. International solidarity is a requirement of the moral order; world peace depends in part upon this.”

So, I’d say that the Church recognizes a limited role for nations and legislation in questions of social justice. I think the CCC is intentionally vague with regards to specifics.

Edited to add: I think the Church is leaving room for people to be guided by the Holy Spirit in terms of how they will use their talents.

If the Holy Spirit moves them to pursue government aid to feed the poor I can’t imagine that the Church would be against it.

 

[redbetta]

I wasn’t aware that the term was in use before then.

 

[Maximilian75]

And, if it was, it had drastically different connotation.

 

[Vonsalza]

I just believe that if we can rightly call upon the government to intervene in abortion we can also rightly call on the government to help us with our other social justice imperatives.

Oh snap!

 

[Vonsalza]

Of course, it doesn’t help that most of the jobs a relatively uneducated person could do and still make a living have been systematically sent to China and Mexico over the last 20 years.

The choice seems to mostly be “go to college so you can make 35k or don’t and become an additional member of the growing Walmart Culture.”