Does the Church eventually lose every argument on social issues?

[davidmlamb]

Never did I defend “unbridled capitalism” and I would not disagree that the Church opposes it. Nor do I disagree that what is often called “socialism” (e.g., the European model) is not a complete socialist system, but aspects of it imposed onto an otherwise capitalist system.

But I disagree that the U.S. has a totally capitalist system. It’s a long, long way from that. It just doesn’t have quite as many redistributive encrustations on it that some European economies do. But it does have many, and they’re fairly complex and costly.

Consequently, if one truly believes the U.S’s economic system is unbridled capitalism, I would expect one to demonstrate that, rather than just assert it.

Ridgerunner, take a look at post #39 as I responded to a similar question. Then define for me what you think an ideal Capitalist system would be. I have a feeling you consider a Laissez Faire system an ideal Capitalist system.

Peace,
David

 

[GWright]

rock happy:

I could not come up with a single example in which the Church has not eventually been required to change its moral position.

It is currently trying to hold its ground on contraception, gay rights and abortion. It appears to be losing, and even Catholic countries reject Church doctrine. The list of past issues, in which the Church has eventually changed its own teachings and practices in order to conform to changing societal norms, in areas like slavery, money lending, divorce, etc… is a significant one.

Can you think of a social justice issue in which the Church has prevailed over time?

Hi there,

What definitive examples can you give when the Church did change a position?

You mention:

Slavery.

Slavery is an emotive term which immediately causes us top imagine certain circumstances. However, it is actually a very broad term. For example, a hard labour prison sentence could be considered slavery, or an extremely low paid job. So, some examples of ‘slavery’ will always exist in human culture. Though some remain, what has (largely) disappeared is the manifestation of slavery in terms of one persons complete servitude to another, often having being kidnapped or sold into service.

As Church thinking on slavery developed, the notion of a distinction between ‘just’ and ‘unjust’ slavery arose. An example of ‘Just’ slavery might include the aforementioned hard labour, and ‘unjust’ slavery a low paid job or the traditional idea of “a slave”.

There have been several Papal bulls condemning slavery, the earliest in 1435, upon the idea of just/unjust slavery. So really, Church opinion has never ‘changed’, but developed.

As human behaviour and circumstances change over time, the Church must be able to confront new occurrences with eternal truths. For example, the Church condemns the use of condoms, but it didn’t 1,500 years ago. The development isn’t because teaching on condoms ‘changed’, it’s because condoms didn’t exist 1,500 years ago. In this way, many developments are actually wrongly described as ‘changes’ by critics.

By the 6th century AD, it was becoming commonly accepted that slavery - a normal part of human existence for millenia - was incompatible with Christians ideas of charity and love. This change is remarkable when you consider how long slavery was ‘normal’ and fully accepted among humanity.

So I do not see that Church opinion has changed on slavery at all. Rather I see an application of Christian thinking to the human concept of slavery and a corresponding recognition that what we generally (today) understand by “slavery” is wrong. Though,as stated, there may be some legitimate cases where the term ‘slavery’ could be legitimately applied: the aforementioned prison sentence, or the case of POWs being asked to do reasonable work.

This thinking began as early as the 6th century, and ‘unjust’ slavery has been condemned in at least 3 Papal bulls.

Slavery is a very emotive term and brings to mind very specific circumstances. But as stated, it may be applied to a few legitimate circumstances. The inflammatory nature of the term does not often make for a reasoned debate!

It should also be noted that much criticism of the Church is based on what it didn’t say or do, rather what it did. And I expect “POWs” is a better term than “slaves” for the muslims captives who were allegedly rowers on Papal Galleys.

Divorce

What has changed here? Nothing. Catholic understanding of the permanence of marriage has always been maintained, as informed by Christ’s teachings.

Money lending

See here (just found this!)

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0607uan.asp

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner, take a look at post #39 as I responded to a similar question. Then define for me what you think an ideal Capitalist system would be. I have a feeling you consider a Laissez Faire system an ideal Capitalist system.

Peace,
David

No. Not at all.

I don’t really consider “capitalism” a “system”. It’s just “what people do” in the absence of anything preventing it or redirecting it, and in the presence of laws preventing wholesale brigandage and protecting contracts.

I don’t think I could define an ideal capitalist system or have time to attempt that on here. But I would say, for instance, that I do not oppose social security or Medicare. I do, however, think both should be “means tested”. There’s no “trust fund”. It’s “pay as you go” in reality. I see no reason to provide either to those who don’t actually need them.

I do not favor most forms of middle class welfare. Since transfer payment increases from one segment of the earning population always corresponds with both decreases in earnings from labor and in birth rates, I don’t see middle class welfare as legitimate in most situations.

I do favor significantly improving the provision for the most needy; the disabled needy, who cannot help themselves. That situation right now is nothing short of scandalous.

I do favor regulation that is based on practicalities. I do not favor those that are ideology-based and subject to reasonable dispute. I particularly do not favor them when they are entirely the product of the executive, since I do not favor kings generally.

I absolutely do not favor programs that offend the morals of the majority or even a significant portion of the populace. Therefore, I do not favor abortion on demand or homosexual marriage. I might be more conservative than some, but I am not a libertarian.

I do favor subsidiarity in providing necessary services and programs to citizens. But that’s not laissez faire.

I disfavor transfers to the extent that they have a demonstrable negative effect on family formation. We’re seeing the results of that now among the native-born, and drastically so in the remainder of the developed world.

You might think of this as laissez-faire. It appears that the more the government appropriates from citizens, the less is their ability (and perhaps willingness) to donate to others. There is a tendency, which the uber-socialist societies have demonstrated significantly, for religious-based charities to shrink as government-based “charities” burgeon, resulting in religious institutions being forced out and reduced to “private worship”, when we are charged to be charitable and once had greatly more significant religious-based charitable institutions than is now the case. In my opinion, “leaving it to the government” is corrupting, both of individuals and of religious institutions.

In my opinion, the balance has shifted unduly from religious and individual charity to government over the last few decades. Having said that, I do not maintain that there is no governmental role in providing for the needy. There are things government can do that private charities cannot do.

 

[Ridgerunner]

A government bail out to help a corporation become solvent again is hardly Facist. In a Facist society government side of ownership showed up at the work place with guns. I’m sure there are no federal troops keeping the peace at GM. I do believe however that GM paid back a significant portion of their loan and ownership has been transferred back to GM. If this is not the case it is the plan. In a Facist society there is no such plan, just the government showing up with AK-47 to make sure workers stay in line. Moreover, Airbus has joint private and government ownership and is very profitable with no french soldiers with automatic weapons to keep people in line. Instead, the workers of france keep the government in line.

Peace,
David

I’m not sure what you consider a “Fascist society”. Possibly you could define that in a better way than simply saying the government shows up with AKs to keep workers in line. That has definitely not been the rule in those societies we now call “fascist”, and has been far more the case in truly socialist societies.

I would agree that the workers in France at least seem to have more influence on what the government does than is the case here, what with their riots and all. Of course, they earn less, too and have historically been more likely to be chronically unemployed. We are, it must be admitted, getting to that state here as well. But since French GDP/capita is still below that of Alabama, we still do have a way to go.

And the government is still the largest stockholder in GM and is sitting on a loss bigger than Texas. Whenever it takes that market hit, it will be a huge subsidy to GM. It just isn’t presently realized as such. And GM “paid back” government money with another government subsidy.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

Never did I defend “unbridled capitalism” and I would not disagree that the Church opposes it. Nor do I disagree that what is often called “socialism” (e.g., the European model) is not a complete socialist system, but aspects of it imposed onto an otherwise capitalist system.

But I disagree that the U.S. has a totally capitalist system. It’s a long, long way from that. It just doesn’t have quite as many redistributive encrustations on it that some European economies do. But it does have many, and they’re fairly complex and costly.

Consequently, if one truly believes the U.S’s economic system is unbridled capitalism, I would expect one to demonstrate that, rather than just assert it.

The USA had “Unbrideled Capitalism”, aka “Free Market” (unbrideled by laws) Capitalism on (1) Wall Street 1929, (2) in S&L and Finance 10/87, and (3) 2001-2009, all 3 of which Caused Major Worl Economic Collapse, attempted to be saved by massive Public (Tax Payer) bailouts. Pope Leo XIII 1891 Rerum Novarum blamed Centralized Wealth (aka capitalism) for the devastating almost enslavement of cheap labor, as did Blessed Pope John Paul II the Great’s Updated similar New Rerum Novarum.

There are the Examples. The Redistributions in the First and Especially the Last are from the Poorest to the Richest, the Precise opposite of ‘trickle down’. :hey_bud: Rerum Novarum was the Classic, Historic Statement on Just Distribution of Wealth, focused on helping the Poorest, Neediest to Enrich Society en toto.

• (The Opposite of the 2000’s Focused on Enriching the richest/most Profitable few, complete with Chaney’s 2001 Welfare payments to the Richest Few. GE and Exxon Mobile paid Zero taxes the last few years, Received over $50 Million Taxpayer Literal Welfare.) :hey_bud::yukonjoe:npatrol:
  
  That is why there has been a call for a Third Rerum Novarum Update Recently. Incidentally, the Flood of Cheapest (Hispanic) Labor was Sought, advertised for in the 1940’s, 1980’s and 2000’s
  
  The unbrideled, unbiased Facts are Self-Asserting, and Opposite of Catholic Social Concern Policy.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

The European Common Market Socialist system was not “Imposed”, but Popularly Voted For. Highest Standards of Living are in the same Socialist/Capitalist combined systems of Iceland, Norway First, Canada among top 10, and USA down in the 30’s. 3 of my WW II refugee Siblings Returned to Europe, and are doing Far better than I. Theyr Unemployment (Initiated by Our 2009 Financial Implosion) are 100 % Pay for more than 6 months, Preserving Their Economies and infrastructure. There are no Medical costs individual bankruptcies in Europe:thumbsup:; Opposite for Us: Medical Greatest Number.

• Mexico’s Conservative President Addressed Congress recently that they are headed in the same highly successful direction of virtually pre-paid by Taxpayers Universakl Higher Education, and already existing National Pregnancy care, to solve their High Infant death rate.
  
  Casnada’s McGill University Student Tuition is $1100 a year.
• Them thar Kuntries likes they’re Taxes, as we Kuntry boys us-ta say. :yup::tiphat:
  
  PS: Europeans have Leglly Required 30 Day Fully Paid Vacations; French workers Are the Most Productive in the World, if one does not exclude their Maternity, Illness, Unemplyed, Vacation benefits like our Chamber of Commerce does to get us ‘most productive’.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

The Church is right on all social issues whether it “wins” any particular debate or not. It doesn’t matter if the majority of people believe the Church is wrong. What matters is the Truth and the Truth is that the Church is right.

That said, we are living in a time of severe moral poverty. It is very sad. I honestly don’t think it will be too much longer before Jesus returns. But then again, I could easily be wrong as many others have been in the past.

The Catholic Church Wins Every single Morality and Issue Debate, unless deliberatelly drowned out by false propaganda, as done by FOXys, and GOP/TEA Candidates.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The USA had “Unbrideled Capitalism”, aka “Free Market” (unbrideled by laws) Capitalism on (1) Wall Street 1929, (2) in S&L and Finance 10/87, and (3) 2001-2009, all 3 of which Caused Major Worl Economic Collapse, attempted to be saved by massive Public (Tax Payer) bailouts. Pope Leo XIII 1891 Rerum Novarum blamed Centralized Wealth (aka capitalism) for the devastating almost enslavement of cheap labor, as did Blessed Pope John Paul II the Great’s Updated similar New Rerum Novarum.

There are the Examples. The Redistributions in the First and Especially the Last are from the Poorest to the Richest, the Precise opposite of ‘trickle down’. :hey_bud: Rerum Novarum was the Classic, Historic Statement on Just Distribution of Wealth, focused on helping the Poorest, Neediest to Enrich Society en toto.

• (The Opposite of the 2000’s Focused on Enriching the richest/most Profitable few, complete with Chaney’s 2001 Welfare payments to the Richest Few. GE and Exxon Mobile paid Zero taxes the last few years, Received over $50 Million Taxpayer Literal Welfare.) :hey_bud::yukonjoe:npatrol:
  
  That is why there has been a call for a Third Rerum Novarum Update Recently. Incidentally, the Flood of Cheapest (Hispanic) Labor was Sought, advertised for in the 1940’s, 1980’s and 2000’s
  
  The unbrideled, unbiased Facts are Self-Asserting, and Opposite of Catholic Social Concern Policy.

I don’t have time to go over all of this right now, but I was in the financial industry when the S&Ls “melted down”, and it was not for lack of regulation that they did. In fact, if anything, it was the opposite. You may recall that Federal S&Ls had absolutely no choice in the mix of their assets. It was set by regulation. They got caught when savings rates went higher than the loan rates on the loans they HAD to make; specifically home loans. Since usury laws were in effect then in most places, they were caught in a dilemma. Carter deregulated savings rates, which caused disintermediation, and made it worse. There wasn’t a S&L in the country that didn’t lose money during that period, no matter how well run it was. But for regulation, they could have (and probably would have) made adjustable rate loans or just backed away from home loans for awhile. It may be noted as well that regulators strongly discouraged excess liquidity which, again, just made it worse.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There are no Medical costs individual bankruptcies in Europe:thumbsup:; Opposite for Us: Medical Greatest Number.

Certainly not in France, where you pay up front for your medical care and are reimbursed, less deductible, by the government later. If you don’t have the money “up front”, you don’t file bankruptcy later, you just do without. Illegals have to pay up front, but get no reimbursement. So, yes, there are differences.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The European Common Market Socialist system was not “Imposed”, but Popularly Voted For. Highest Standards of Living are in the same Socialist/Capitalist combined systems of Iceland, Norway First, Canada among top 10, and USA down in the 30’s. 3 of my WW II refugee Siblings Returned to Europe, and are doing Far better than I. Theyr Unemployment (Initiated by Our 2009 Financial Implosion) are 100 % Pay for more than 6 months, Preserving Their Economies and infrastructure. There are no Medical costs individual bankruptcies in Europe:thumbsup:; Opposite for Us: Medical Greatest Number.

• Mexico’s Conservative President Addressed Congress recently that they are headed in the same highly successful direction of virtually pre-paid by Taxpayers Universakl Higher Education, and already existing National Pregnancy care, to solve their High Infant death rate.
  
  Casnada’s McGill University Student Tuition is $1100 a year.
• Them thar Kuntries likes they’re Taxes, as we Kuntry boys us-ta say. :yup::tiphat:
  
  PS: Europeans have Leglly Required 30 Day Fully Paid Vacations; French workers Are the Most Productive in the World, if one does not exclude their Maternity, Illness, Unemplyed, Vacation benefits like our Chamber of Commerce does to get us ‘most productive’.

Apparently a good number of those peoples also voted to pay higher taxes than we do as well. That’s a choice. So, when it comes to things like tuition (it’s about comparable to McGill in Montana if you’re a resident, by the way, and it’s not much higher in my state, depending on where you go) the citizen has to decide whether he is going to pay his income on his own child’s education or on the children of others. That’s a choice. It may also have something to do with the reason why Europeans, in general, do not have enough children to sustain the population. That’s also a choice.

More productive or not, French wages are significantly lower than here. The U.S. worker is the highest paid worker in the industrialized countries, depending on how you calculate it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage