Glenn Beck says to run away from churches who preach social justice?

[pnewton]

Thank you for the compliment. In my previous post I made a statement about coerced charity. It was rather strong, but do you believe it is true? If it is true, then how can any Christian support such an approach?

It is a good question. We have the example of Jesus who gave the temple tax. That was also a coerced charity. We have the teaching of rendering unto Caesar. The disagreement comes over what is the job of Caesar. There is nothing immoral about believing that society can act through its elected leaders to provide emergency medical services, ambulances and medics, provided by tax dollars. It is also widely accepted that the State can collect taxes to provide housing for orphans who have no one else to care for them. The question for almost everyone is where to draw the line, not whether the State should collect any tax or do anything for anyone.

For me, the line is in the way taxes are collected. I could accept a democratic process without viewing it as theft if at least everyone paid some federal income tax. When people vote on how a pool of money is spent that they contributed nothing to , that is when I see it as immoral. That is only my standard and involves more moral teaching than I have mentioned here.

 

[catharina]

It is a good question. We have the example of Jesus who gave the temple tax. That was also a coerced charity. We have the teaching of rendering unto Caesar. The disagreement comes over what is the job of Caesar. There is nothing immoral about believing that society can act through its elected leaders to provide emergency medical services, ambulances and medics, provided by tax dollars. YES.
It is also widely accepted that the State can collect taxes to provide housing for orphans who have no one else to care for them. The question for almost everyone is where to draw the line, not whether the State should collect any tax or do anything for anyone.

For me, the line is in the way taxes are collected. I could accept a democratic process without viewing it as theft if at least everyone paid some federal income tax. When people vote on how a pool of money is spent that they contributed nothing to , that is when I see it as immoral. YES.
That is only my standard and involves more moral teaching than I have mentioned here.

 

[NEWCATHOLICJEFF]

Glenn Beck is an entertainer, and if people make decisions based on his opinions they are as moronic as those who follow Sean Penn or George Clooney. Regarding the preaching of social justice…I had the opportunity to teach the social justice segment to the RCIA class in my parish. What is interesting to me is the tendency for people to politicize this philosophy. In my experience, people like to toss around words like “fairness” and “greed” and “rich” and “poor” - it all comes down to money. If you read the Catechism, and if you do your research, you will understand that what the Church teaches is personal responsibility.

**
Matthew 12:35**

"The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

It is a good question. We have the example of Jesus who gave the temple tax. That was also a coerced charity. We have the teaching of rendering unto Caesar. The disagreement comes over what is the job of Caesar. There is nothing immoral about believing that society can act through its elected leaders to provide emergency medical services, ambulances and medics, provided by tax dollars. It is also widely accepted that the State can collect taxes to provide housing for orphans who have no one else to care for them. The question for almost everyone is where to draw the line, not whether the State should collect any tax or do anything for anyone.

For me, the line is in the way taxes are collected. I could accept a democratic process without viewing it as theft if at least everyone paid some federal income tax. When people vote on how a pool of money is spent that they contributed nothing to , that is when I see it as immoral. That is only my standard and involves more moral teaching than I have mentioned here.

That’s one of the problems, especially with a progressive tax system. For example, 5% of the population may pay 50% of the taxes, but at the end of the day, still only have 5% of the vote.

In the US, I belive roughly 50% of the income earners pay 99% of the taxes. And, I believe only 40% are net tax payers.

 

[sedonaman]

… Aren’t we, as Catholics, dedicated to social justice? … Isn’t this what we are all about?

It all depends on what you mean by “social justice”. I am a Vincentian, and the Society is committed to helping the poor with the necessities of life, i.e., food, shelter, utilities, medical bills, etc. However, every human endeavor, it would seem, has its point of diminishing returns; and as a result, I have seen this commitment exercised to a fault. A good example is the caseworker who paid for a young woman’s bus ticket to Los Angeles so she could be near her boyfriend who was in jail. This lack of better judgement is due to an incorrect interpretation of the Vincentian policy of non-judgementalism resulting in its being taken to the extreme. Where is the social justice to be gained by exacerbating a self-destructive behavior? We all know Catholics who supported Øbama in the last campaign because in their minds his promises of “social justice” as they perceived them over-rode abortion. Likewise, there are Catholics who sincerely believe that government ownership of the means of production is necessary to achieve the social justice of economic equality.

Because everyone’s definition is different, I don’t see how it can be what the Church is “all about”. A better approach, at least in my mind, would be to work on the obvious social injustices that, with the Church’s guidance, we can agree are injustices, and let the rest go.

I generally don’t watch Glenn Beck, but I happened to catch this particular show; and what I think he was urging people to avoid are churches that have the extreme, Leftist notions of social “justice”. We should keep in mind that the Bolsheviks did not topple the Russian monarchy just to establish gulags; they did it for social justice.

 

[sedonaman]

…
In the US, I belive roughly 50% of the income earners pay 99% of the taxes. And, I believe only 40% are net tax payers.

These seem like contradictory statements. Can you elaborate? Thx.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

These seem like contradictory statements. Can you elaborate? Thx.

50% of income earners accunt for 99% of the tax revenue. This is because we have a progressive tax system where people who earn more pay more.

I thought I read that 40% or so were net tax payers in the end. Meaning they paid more in taxes than they used/recieved in entitlements (i.e. they didn’t take social security, don’t use public schools, etc)

 

[sedonaman]

Thoughts on Rev. Kevin E. McKenna’s You Did It For Me, re: “social justice”

In his book, Rev. Kevin E. McKenna sets out to explain how we Catholics have an obligation to increase social justice. He does not define “social justice” in so many words but through a theme that the deficiencies of society have brought about decreased social justice. He appears to assume that people suffer generally through no fault of their own. Yes, there are shortcomings in our society as there are in any social order since we humans are imperfect, and some members do suffer because of those shortcomings and through no fault of their own. I have a few concerns about his conclusions.

My first concern is that these deficiencies have two sides to their equation, and that he addresses only one and not the other: some individuals suffer through bad choices they have freely made throughout their lives against the advice, guidance, authority, etc. of superiors in positions of responsibility.

My second concern is his failure to recognize that by attempting to increase social justice, we might actually be reducing it by more than an equal amount. (It would be bad enough if the net results were a wash, but a loss coming after an expenditure of effort and resources would be grossly irresponsible.) This is what some refer to as “unintended consequences.”

My third concern is that some of the church’s teachings seem to be mutually exclusive. Examples are, people should be free, but incomes must be equalized; there should be full employment but a resisting of “consumption”.

My fourth concern is his failure to factor in human nature. An equality based on outcomes is not what people want, nor is it desirable for the community as a whole. A very wealthy British gentleman, upon hearing talk of “equality” from his children home on college break, asked his butler if he thought people should be equal. The butler replied, “Heavens no, sir! I don’t want to be equal to a footman!”

Finally, my personal observation has been that the Church, under pressure to conform to changing society, has neglected some of its most important teachings. The Church in general, and the bishops in particular, are charged with the holy task of molding consciences, saving souls, and transforming the culture through the propagation of Christian truths, not to be changed by the culture. There is nothing new under the sun when it comes to human nature, and much social justice has been lost by individuals’ adoption of what use to be taboo by being convinced by the pseudo-intellectual thought of the day. Therefore, rather than running around plugging up small leaks near the top of the dam and ignoring the big one at the bottom, I propose that we fix “The Big Lie” first; we might then find that a lot of social injustices will solve themselves.

[To be continued]

 

[catharina]

It all depends on what you mean by “social justice”. I am a Vincentian, and the Society is committed to helping the poor with the necessities of life, i.e., food, shelter, utilities, medical bills, etc. However, every human endeavor, it would seem, has its point of diminishing returns; and as a result, I have seen this commitment exercised to a fault. A good example is the caseworker who paid for a young woman’s bus ticket to Los Angeles so she could be near her boyfriend who was in jail. This lack of better judgement is due to an incorrect interpretation of the Vincentian policy of non-judgementalism resulting in its being taken to the extreme. Where is the social justice to be gained by exacerbating a self-destructive behavior? We all know Catholics who supported Øbama in the last campaign because in their minds his promises of “social justice” as they perceived them over-rode abortion. Likewise, there are Catholics who sincerely believe that government ownership of the means of production is necessary to achieve the social justice of economic equality.

Because everyone’s definition is different, I don’t see how it can be what the Church is “all about”. A better approach, at least in my mind, would be to work on the obvious social injustices that, with the Church’s guidance, we can agree are injustices, and let the rest go.

I generally don’t watch Glenn Beck, but I happened to catch this particular show; and what I think he was urging people to avoid are churches that have the extreme, Leftist notions of social “justice”. We should keep in mind that the Bolsheviks did not topple the Russian monarchy just to establish gulags; they did it for social justice.

As the term “social justice” can mean different things to different people, so can the descriptive “Vincentian.” In what sense are you a Vincentian? Are you a priest in the Congregation of the Mission? Are you a member of the St.VdP Society? Are you a Vincentian seminarian? Please clarify.

Thank you.

 

[sedonaman]

50% of income earners account for 99% of the tax revenue. This is because we have a progressive tax system where people who earn more pay more.

About 15 years ago, I did an analysis of some data on the IRS website. At that time, the median income was about $23,000, meaning 50% of returns were below and 50% were above. Note that this data was in regard to returns, not individual taxpayers. The results were that 96% of returns showed a payment of some tax; whereas only 4% showed no taxes owed. So, your figures of 50% / 90% are probably not that far off, if they refer to tax returns and not earners.

I thought I read that 40% or so were net tax payers in the end. Meaning they paid more in taxes than they used/received in entitlements (i.e. they didn’t take social security, don’t use public schools, etc)

I think this is dubious at best because we all use facilities and services provided by government [police, fire, defense, streets and highways, etc.]. Even those without children use schools to the extent that society is bettered by an educated populace.

 

[sedonaman]

As the term “social justice” can mean different things to different people, so can the descriptive “Vincentian.” In what sense are you a Vincentian? Are you a priest in the Congregation of the Mission? Are you a member of the St.VdP Society? Are you a Vincentian seminarian? Please clarify.

Thank you.

I am a member of the Society of St.Vincent de Paul. I have never heard of it used any other way.

 

[SpaceNeedle]

I am a member of the Society of St.Vincent de Paul. I have never heard of it used any other way.

I too am a Vincentian…as members of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, this is how we refer to ourselves, and the spirit for which we strive.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

About 15 years ago, I did an analysis of some data on the IRS website. At that time, the median income was about $23,000, meaning 50% of returns were below and 50% were above. Note that this data was in regard to returns, not individual taxpayers. The results were that 96% of returns showed a payment of some tax; whereas only 4% showed no taxes owed. So, your figures of 50% / 90% are probably not that far off, if they refer to tax returns and not earners.

I think this is dubious at best because we all use facilities and services provided by government [police, fire, defense, streets and highways, etc.]. Even those without children use schools to the extent that society is bettered by an educated populace.

Thanks for the clarifications - my terminology is a bit off - however - I think the point I was trying to make was valid, in light of my mistakes.

 

[SpaceNeedle]

Because everyone’s definition is different, I don’t see how it can be what the Church is “all about”. A better approach, at least in my mind, would be to work on the obvious social injustices that, with the Church’s guidance, we can agree are injustices, and let the rest go.

Excellent point.

I generally don’t watch Glenn Beck, but I happened to catch this particular show; and what I think he was urging people to avoid are churches that have the extreme, Leftist notions of social “justice”. We should keep in mind that the Bolsheviks did not topple the Russian monarchy just to establish gulags; they did it for social justice.

I didn’t take it quite as well as you did. Ideally, I would have liked to have perceived it as you did, but alas, did not.

 

[catharina]

I am a member of the Society of St.Vincent de Paul. I have never heard of it used any other way.

Thanks for the answer. I’ve never heard the word used as you use it.

It’s often used as a descriptive to “name” the Vincentian Family. In that sense, it includes the Vincentian priests and brothers (CM), the Daughters of Charity (DC), the St. VdP Society and various others. Used alone (as in "a Vincentian) it usually refers to a Vincentian priest, that is, a member of the Congregation of the Mission.

famvin.org/en/

Even more specifically:

famvin.org/en/vincentian-family

 

[sedonaman]

Thoughts on Rev. Kevin E. McKenna’s You Did It For Me, re: “social justice” [continued]

Individual Rights and Responsibilities

Society, through government, has established a K-12 public educational system throughout the country. There is even night school for those who did not finish. There are community colleges that offer remedial instruction, vocational courses, and transfer-level courses to four-year colleges. The unemployment office has a federal grant program to train the chronically unemployed and re-train those who have been displaced because of job obsolescence, as do some employers. There is NO shortage of educational opportunities in this country. What about the individual’s responsibility to avail himself of those opportunities in order to utilize his skills and abilities to “participate” in the economy? McKenna makes no mention of any such responsibility.

Part of Catholic teaching is that everyone has an obligation to work, and children are no exception. That is not to say they must engage in paid labor, but to point out that their work is to attend school, study, learn, and do their homework. All children, both rich and poor, are offered immense wealth in the form of education, often at great sacrifice by their tax-paying parents; and for individual students, through willful recalcitrance, to squander that wealth is also a great social injustice. Where does McKenna recognize that?

There are those who refuse to accept authority. We have all seen them: all their lives, they have defied their parents, defied their teachers, defied civil authorities, defied their employers, defied Church teachings. From the pre-school brat to the man who can’t get a job because he won’t cut his hair because, in his own words, “No one can tell me what to do.” This behavior his completely contrary to our Church’s teaching to respect legitimate authority.* The consequences of such behavior are necessarily a low standard of living [who will employ a person who lacks the most basic skills or will not carry out instructions?]. This is not to say these types do not need our help; but to blame their condition on a “lack” of social justice [a.k.a., “it’s all society’s fault”] is to misplace the blame and to commit resources to solving the wrong problem.

Particular scorn is reserved for the ‘60s generation whose members, by their sheer numbers, sought to defy society, simply for the sake of defiance, by re-designing it after their own image. They continue to have a profoundly negative effect on America’s concept of morality. Think of the immense human pride that is required for a single generation to convince itself that it knows more than all the collective knowledge of all of Western Civilization distilled down through 200 generations! Yet, its only accomplishment was to put a different spin on ancient sin in an attempt to give it respectability. The message of that generation to its members was, “You don’t have to care what others think of you; consequently, you don’t have to care about them.”

Also, sometime during the 1960s, the American culture passed a “cross-over” point. Prior to that, individuals felt a need to “pull their own weight” and avoid becoming a burden to society, and consequently, there was great social pressure for individuals to work.** After that, there was no stigma to sloth; indeed, admiration for the rogue who “beat the system” generated [surprise!] more rogues! They are those who, attempting to avoid personal responsibility, “mine” the system: the welfare queen who drew 32 checks from 32 different welfare offices and lived with her lover in a luxury home and had four luxury cars in the garage. [Heaven forbid that we should be judgmental!]

In a quest to increase social justice, we must be careful not compound that which we are trying to reduce. And without the willful cooperation of individual members, attempts to increase social justice will amount to no more than so much sand shoveled against a tsunami.

• Pope Leo XIII, LIBERTAS, June 20, 1888
  ** Pope John Paul II, “Work is for man; man is not for work.”

 

[catharina]

Thoughts on Rev. Kevin E. McKenna’s You Did It For Me, re: “social justice” [continued]

… From the pre-school brat to the man who can’t get a job because he won’t cut his hair because, in his own words, “No one can tell me what to do.” …

• Pope Leo XIII, LIBERTAS, June 20, 1888
  ** Pope John Paul II, “Work is for man; man is not for work.”

**
The bolded term is not a usage you learned:
from Pope Leo XlII’s writings;
the guidance offered to all of us by Pope John Paul II; or
the instructions given to members of the St. Vincent de Paul Society.
Guessing that Father McKenna did not inspire the term either.**

**RATHER:

“Suffer the little children to come unto Me … .”**

 

[csuliman]

Glen Beck is a paranoid idiot. I am a free-speech absolutist so I bless his ability to speak his mind. However, how such an ignorant, paranoid and illogical man could command an hour every night on a national network is beyond me.

 

[4elise]

Glen Beck is a paranoid idiot. I am a free-speech absolutist so I bless his ability to speak his mind. However, how such an ignorant, paranoid and illogical man could command an hour every night on a national network is beyond me.

And… have his comments defended and or explained by many of his viewers

 

[ComputerGeek25]

**
The bolded term is not** a usage you learned:
from Pope Leo XlII’s writings;
the guidance offered to all of us by Pope John Paul II; or
the instructions given to members of the St. Vincent de Paul Society.
Guessing that Father McKenna did not inspire the term either.

**RATHER:

“Suffer the little children to come unto Me … .”**

He brings up several other valid points, though.