Dissent From Catholic Social Teaching: A Study In Irony - Inside The Vatican

[Ender]

What you just described can be viewed as a loophole to the Gospel purpose. Reasonable minds can differ negates the Catechism, because it allows colorful and creative interpretation?

What I described should in fact be seen as the truth: the application of moral doctrines to specific social problems is in fact a prudential judgment about which reasonable people can justly disagree. Take the minimum wage.

Where in scripture or any encyclical should we look to see what that wage should be set to? If this is a moral question then surely it should be the same in California as in Mississippi since morality does not change with time or place. If, however, you argue that the cost of living in California is significantly higher than in Mississippi so the wage shouldn’t be the same then you are arguing my position: it is a judgment based on our perception of economic realities.

So, what should the minimum wage be set to? Give us a number $10/hr? $12.50/hr? $17.43/hr? This ought to make it clear that these decisions are not based on understanding our moral obligations, but are rather based on our understanding of the economic effects such choices will have.

What I see, and what constitutes one of our weaknesses, is that by defining something as prudential( no objection to the definition …) and then jumping to the general concept say “ feed the hungry” ( no objection to that either) , we are not really getting into the mind of the Church .

What I have strenuously objected to is the characterization of conservatives/Republicans/the Right as dissenting from Church teaching because of disagreements over policies. At its core it is judgmental and uncharitable; it is nothing less than claiming “I want to do good. You oppose me because you prefer evil.”

I am as suspicious of interpretations of “the mind of the church” as I am of “the spirit of Vatican II”. The church either says things or she doesn’t, and I am as disinclined to accept someone’s interpretations of what she hasn’t said as I would be to accept the divination of tea leaves and chicken entrails.

We can discuss what the church has said and what it means. We’ll not get far discussing the implications of what she hasn’t said.

 

[Crocus]

How do you judge people to be dissenting? Because you disagree with their policy decisions?

Thanks for your interest; I think you have made your point several times. I was responding to another’s first post on this thread.

One of the things I do support unions doing is managing their members’ pension funds, but the trouble is that many unions are corrupt, more interested in what benefits the union leadership than what is in the best interests of the members

Unions get a bad name when some go wrong but they are not any more corrupt than some big corporations, or individuals anywhere, looking for personal advantage out of the vulnerability of others.

And in exchange, the Standard Deduction was doubled and the rates were lowered.

Subtle change, helps couples with no children while seemingly not affecting families with children; long term effects, not so much. Meanwhile we get distracted grasping at the pennies, as the dollars rise elsewhere.

 

[graciew]

As far as politics, I am not American but it is fair to say we have similar issues where I live so, I understand how polarized things can get…Today precisely we are having a new president and change of authorities. Both the departing and incoming President were invited together to a Mass by our Archbishop yesterday. Neat. Almost a miracle if you ask to see some peaceful attitude watching them together. It has been like rowing in jelly and we are really in a very bad overall situation,
As far as the mind of the Church and your reservations about V2, we can at any time go to the suggested document by St John Paul II. ( not as tool to be used against anyone or each other ) but as to keep learning and improve our understanding together.And it will be helpful for all I think .Not partisan but as a family to keep moving forward
I ll be back later. My glasses broke and as you can imagine…I am lost without them to read
Thank you very much.

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

You are free to think this philosophy condemns capitalism.
When profits are used for providing research & development
for greater employment or things for the common good it’s a good thing.
Jacob in the Holy Bible, from a small amount of spotted sheep,
to more. Part of the way God used him as an instrument.
~
Whatever human based law you would use to replace corporate law
would fall into human foibles.
~
There are so many reasons that I cannot find your argument objective
as to condemning capitalism. Especially since the only Ex Cathedra,
binding things from the Church exhort on how bartering systems are used.
I do recollect phrases like ‘unbridled’ capitalism and collectivism; but
I’m not certain if it’s from the documents themselves or credible writings
referring to them.
~
From all I’ve heard from credible sources, like Bishop Fulton J. Sheen,
who actually did criticize the abuses capitalists take not capitalism itself,
the preponderance of objective faith and reason does not condemn capitalism as an institution of providing for families and good & services for the common good. It depends on how individuals and groups use it.
~
Things like the institution of slavery or the institution of murdering thousands upon thousands of helpless human beings daily in the world right now, as a matter of convenience are condemned by the Church as grave moral evils. The Church exhorts equal opportunity for the dignity of workers and providing for the common good within any economic system down through the ages.
~
Peace.

 

[Crocus]

And of your list, several of the injustices are self-inflicted on the part of the homeless. The addict has to want to quit in order to be able to, and the felon is to blame for his own plight. We should help them, but they need purpose of amendment in order for any help to succeed.

The system was broken long before these people got to that point. Doctrine is radical in assigning due responsibility and care to their neighbors, irrespective of when or if they find the strength to change.

There is no Catholic social policy in the sense of requiring this or that particular approach, which is why there could never be such a thing as a Catholic political party. There is Catholic social teaching which provides the objectives (feed the hungry, heal the sick, care for the poor…) but conservatives and liberals are equally free to act on their convictions as to what policies work best to achieve the goals and guidelines the church sets.

This is a new claim. Interestingly, Netherlands and Germany and some other countries do have such political parties, specifically named. Somehow these countries have managed to achieve wages sufficient to live (and support systems for those unable to work), for most if not all.

 

[Ender]

This is a new claim. Interestingly, Netherlands and Germany and some other countries do have such political parties, specifically named. Somehow these countries have managed to achieve wages sufficient to live (and support systems for those unable to work), for most if not all.

That a party calls itself Catholic is not meaningful. I said a Catholic party could not exist because there is no Catholic position on the great majority of political issues. The church has no specific positions on policies for the simple reason that those are actually the responsibility of the laity to determine.

 

[Crocus]

So, what should the minimum wage be set to?

A dinarius. What it takes to “buy your bread” for the day.

the responsibility of the laity to determine.

The laity who actually do something about the present normalization of poverty, marginalization of the poor for profit and more profit; those are his neighbors (story of Good Samaritan, just splainin’ the reference ).

 

[mythbuster1]

My point is that workers are neither enslaved nor stupid. They hire themselves out because they find it more advantageous to do so than to start a business or freelance. It’s perfectly legal to move out into the woods and live off the land, but most people don’t want to because it requires hard labor just to eek out a subsistence-level income. In a tight labor market, such as we have now, businesses can’t lowball their employees, because if they tried, the employees would quit and go work for someone who will pay them what they’re worth or go into business for themselves.

 

[mythbuster1]

And that’s why the solution to corrupt unions is competition. If the workers could replace unions easily, the unions would be forced to act in the interests of their members.

 

[pnewton]

• One cannot claim that a person is dissenting from CST just from a prudential choice he has made.
• To judge a person’s choice to be contrary to CST without knowing his motivation is to commit the error of rash judgment. It is also to fail the fundamental obligation of charity.

I will agree with the latter, not the former. A choice can ignore all since of morality, as can a person. I can most definitely claim that choices that oppress the poor, the stranger, children, etc., have no element of moral justice, as with immigration laws that favor the rich, or in the case of the first lady, the beautiful. I can say cutting off food to children in legitimate need in hope that their parents will get off drugs and pull themselves up are devoid of social justice.

Hey, I just did. More to the point, our own bishops comment on this sort of problem all the time. Do you not think any of them know a thing or two about Catholicism?

 

[Ender]

I can most definitely claim that choices that oppress the poor, the stranger, children, etc., have no element of moral justice

You may certainly claim that in your opinion those choices will have that effect. What you cannot know, however, is whether I believe the same thing. If I make choices that turn out badly is that a sin, or just a mistake? How can you justly claim my choice is immoral if you don’t know why I made it? Why aren’t you content to call me uninformed, misinformed, misled, or just plain ignorant? Why does the left always go right to evil? This is a failure of one’s obligation in charity to assume the best of another. To assume someone’s proposals are evil is to assume the worst.

…our own bishops comment on this sort of problem all the time. Do you not think any of them know a thing or two about Catholicism?

What they know about Catholicism is immaterial beside the question of what they know about economics, immigration, labor laws, gun laws, and the entire panoply of political issues. Wanting to do the right thing is no guarantee that one knows what that is, just ask any parent. Frankly, the political opinions of bishops are pretty irrelevant, and they damage their own authority by venturing into politics.

…it is a mistake for bishops to squander their credibility as teachers of faith and morals by issuing pronouncements, especially politically partisan pronouncements, on matters beyond their competence as bishops. These are typically matters of prudential judgment on which Catholics (and others) of equal intelligence and good will can and do disagree. (Fr. Richard Neuhaus)

 

[Maximus1]

I am suspicious your argument negates the Gospel teaching. When a few individuals have more than 150 million, that fact is in contravention of the Gospel.
When 23 individuals( a decent family gathering at Thanksgiving) have more than 1.3 billion people, that is a reality in derogation of the Gospel. That is sign we are once again in a gilded age in America.
When you understand political arguments, your argument resembles that of relativism–. And any approach a few can share makes it in conformity with the Gospel. When clearly it isn’t.

 

[Maximus1]

If I were cynical and my name was scrooge, I would interpret your last quote:
We can agree on Abortion, because I am 80, and unaffected, and it won’t cost me a dime, and all I have to do is say I am do something. …bam! I am Pius.
But all of these social justice ideas will cost me money, so I exercise my Prudential judgement for another tax cut for wealthy people.

 

[Maximus1]

Give away your worldly goods to the poor, then come follow me. Mark.
Your argument was already made in Mark and Jesus gave this response.
I think it illustrates how far removed our rational is from the Gospel.
We shouldn’t try to suggest we are nearly following things when we are not

 

[Maximus1]

Actual it tells you much more than that.
In fairness it tells us to love our enemies and I think people are more likely to think Jesus really didn’t mean it, than comply.

 

[Ender]

I am suspicious your argument negates the Gospel teaching. When a few individuals have more than 150 million, that fact I in contravention of the Gospel.

In no way is my argument contrary to the gospel, nor am I suggesting there aren’t a lot of selfish, greedy people in the world. What I am saying is that you cannot tell simply from what proposal a person supports whether he is evil or just mistaken…and this is quite apart from knowing that he is in fact wrong in the first place.

When you understand political arguments, your argument resembles that of relativism

If you assumed the best of your political opponents the worst you could believe about them is that they simply don’t know what they’re doing. If you start by assuming they are evil you have failed your moral obligation regardless of what is true of them.

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way…

But all of these social justice ideas will cost me money, so I exercise my Prudential judgement for another tax cut for wealthy people.

We have been given free will, but that doesn’t mean all our choices are acceptable simply because that freedom exists. We have the freedom as well as the obligation of making prudential choices in regard to our political policies; I have never suggested that all of those choices are valid simply because they are ours to make. All I have said is you can’t distinguish what choices are moral and which are immoral solely on the basis of what has been proposed because you cannot know what motivates them.

 

[pnewton]

I am suspicious your argument negates the Gospel teaching. When a few individuals have more than 150 million, that fact I in contravention of the Gospel.
When 23 individuals( a decent family gathering at Thanksgiving) have more than 1.3 billion people, that is a reality in derogation of the Gospel. That is sign we are once again in a gilded age in America.

I think Catholic should read either the parable of the sheep or the goats, or that of Lazarus and the rich man, each Thanksgiving, and before each election. We are missing a great deal in our American hypocrisy.

If I were cynical and my name was scrooge, I would interpret your last quote:
We can agree on Abortion, because I am 80, and unaffected, and it won’t cost me a dime, and all I have to do is say I am do something. …bam! I am Pius.
But all of these social justice ideas will cost me money, so I exercise my Prudential judgement for another tax cut for wealthy people.

Divorcing abortion from social justice is a serious error among conservationism in the United States. Again, let those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, understand why the Church teaches social justice, not just what.

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

Divorcing abortion from social justice is a serious error among conservationism in the United States. Again, let those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, understand why the Church teaches social justice, not just what.

This statement sure confuses me. I don’t classify myself as ‘conservative’ and certainly not ‘liberal’ but a proponent for Biblical justice for all not matter how weak or helpless or perceived worthiness. But certain shouted policies definitely marginalize the Sacredness of Life of especially weak and helpless
children in the womb or many times just outside of the womb. The is mostly espoused my leftists,
not those who adhere to being conservative.
And the usage of ‘prudential judgement’ is so often misunderstood in relation to grave moral evils like
sanctioned mass murder of thousands upon thousands of helpless children by granting power to those who state this will be their policy and agenda, along side teaching grave moral evils to children in schools that not only depart from Jesus Christ’s Teachings, therefore Church Teachings, but here in the
U.S.A. from Nature’s Laws given by our Creator and the God of Nature mentioned in the Declaration
of Independence. Giving power the proponents not only hurts current law makers but stacks the deck
in the judiciary with often a decade or decades of effect with relativist revisionists.
The magnitude of the effect of what we are experiencing now is due to giving into this in the past.
It only aids and abets policies to continue that seduce children’s minds in education and other venues.
~
It diminishes the exhortation of asserting as best we can the Soveriegnty of Jesus Christ in every
venue of society from the 1925 Encyclical, " QUAS PRIMAS. ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON THE FEAST OF CHRIST THE KING."
~
The focus on material justice blaming economic systems not condemned by the Church, or profits,
or the wealth for a type of class warfare, even in the name of Jesus Christ beloved Redeemer is nothing new. And doing this along side diminishing compassionate assertive fostering growing
in objective virtue is a proclaimed tactic of enemies of The Church. Painting doing this, instead of how some do this as ‘judgmental’ or ‘pointing fingers’ or ‘accusatory.’
~ (cont…)

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

There is nothing new under the sun.
It is so similar to the story of Cain and Abel. Cain could have bartered to give a heartfelt offering to God, but he choose murder instead. Part of The Roman Empire’s propaganda was fueled by
‘bread’ (earthly needs) and/or ‘circuses’ (entertainment - which mocked the Christians they killed in the arena). The victimology in open societies ended up falling mostly on helpless children who can’t speak for themselves. And the passive aggressive minimizing or criticizing the Sacredness of Life Witness,
as ‘one issue’ or nagging. Abolitionists for slavery, and those working for Civil Rights for equal opportunity suffered from similar tactics, (i.e. what about all these other issues?).
~
The use of other social concerns like the promises of entitlements to the poor which often fail fostering a cycle of dependency because not enough encouragement or programs to provide ways to provide for one’s self, and other social concerns often purposely distorted for use in propaganda to foster an emotionally charged response - to justify not opposing the sanctioned mass murder of the helpless, as many at every stewardship level in The Church not helped much at all by the biased media have taught; often opposed by well meaning or sometimes political minded agendas of others in every stewardship level in The Church and other places.
~
Our battle is not against flesh and blood but against the spiritual forces of darkness in high places. And historically these dark forces provide for human sacrifice in one way or another. This damages souls very much, and consciences get fostered and encouraged by the status quo and put in great peril.
~
Peace.

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

God Bless all here. May we each receive Grace to grow in God’s Ways and virtue.
I must discipline myself to not reply here anymore.
So many discussion points here, (I’ve failed, too), give subjective interpretations of Scripture, other Church writings, and other citations as if it is an objective all inclusive interpretation to apply toward someone’s take on an issue.
Too many generalities, also.
The scandals and rampant abuses of the middle ages weren’t because of their economy. It was because of lack of teaching assertively, compassionately, objectively The Gospel in word and deep that gave rise to them. Now a days in powerful open societies the allowed to grow educational, media, and other venue bias set up a darkness that is difficult for many to see through, even though credible hard working witness of the twentieth century told us what is transpiring. (i.e. Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, Dietrich and Alice von Hildebrand, John Cardinal O’Conner, Mother Teresa in her way, Mother Angelica, and more.) Thank God for those who by Grace have trained themselves to counter the emotionalism, ‘straw man,’ ‘gas lighting,’ ‘changing the narrative,’ tactics so prevalent to justify such an anti-Gospel bias status quo or make it worse.
~
Immense Grave moral evils and atrocities are set aside or in contrast to the enormity ‘hushed’ by some to make it ‘about the discussion’ or ‘it’s too divisive & polarizing’ than the actual objective truths. Without objective family virtues with family as the fundamental building block of society, whereby the ideals are derided with emotional discussion points as judgmental, ideals that were much more pervasively accepted as ideals amidst humankind’s failings - we will continue to reap what we sow.
~
Letting those who foster and encourage the status quo or make it worse rise to power, the venues of society will continue to be biased with things that by and large were ‘unthinkable’ in the past. Justice simply will not grow in this environment. It stays rampant because those who foster it keep getting so much approval using their rhetorical skills being adept at knowing human behavior like the advertising industry.
Bishop Sheen said in a radio address before 1950 that the devil will not come in a red cape and horns, but diminish the conveying in growing in objective virtue along side a so called ‘new’ humanitarianism. He said the Remnant Church must not loose strength and hope amidst this ‘mimic’ Church that most will not recognize because it came upon us gradually, in almost imperceptible steps as it was happening. If this doesn’t describe our day, I don’t know what does. I pray it doesn’t get worse. Many said do not loose site that Jesus Christ plans a Triumph for The Church after these trials.
~
I don’t know anyone’s heart at any stewardship level in the Church. But I see the fruits of those who by their witness foster and encourage the mimic Church prophesied by Sheen.
~
Peace.