B
Biggie
Guest
This denies the essential point that the turn of phrase has been corrupted.
Glenn Beck says to run away from churches who preach social justice?
- Status
E
edwest2
Guest
I don’t know anyone who takes him seriously. His book contained no great ideas, just various vaguely humorous attempts to lampoon certain things, along with Glenn pointing out how stupid he can be at times. I think the media wants him to be popular and spread the good news about Glenn because his publicist sends them press releases. The more often his name gets mentioned, the more (at least they hope) people will tune in.
What is social justice today? How much of what is under that heading falls under Church teaching? If possible, I suggest you visit a library and pick up a copy of Christian Principles and National Problems, a part of The Catholic Social Studies Series.
Here is a quote from the Preface:
“A study of the social problems of American life under the guiding light of the social doctrine of the Church must constitute a vital part of the education of our Catholic high school students today. It will be largely through a well informed Catholic populace that American public opinion will be directed toward the acceptance of the Christian solution of contemporary social evils.”
Where do we stand today as Catholics in a morally relativistic culture. Evil? What evil? And we are constantly encouraged to avoid meddling with government or politics. What guidance is being given to young Catholics today to be effective in all walks of life as adults? At one time, even public schools taught Civics. They were told about their rights and responsibilities so they could become good citizens. That has turned into, Leave me alone, I’ll do what I want.
The Catholic Church’s primary mission is evangelization. Our commission is to spread the Gospel.
God bless,
Ed
C
Carlan
Guest
Here, read Via Dolorosa’s link,
Glenn Beck said last week on his eponymous show that Christians should leave churches that preach “social justice.” Mr. Beck equated the desire for a just society with–wait for it–Nazism and Communism.
I’m begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes.
This means that you would have to leave the Catholic Church, which has long championed that aspect of the Gospel.
The term “social justice” originated way back in the 1800s (and probably predates even that), and has been underlined by the Magisterium and popes since Leo XIII, who began the modern tradition of Catholic social teaching with his encyclical on capital and labor, Rerum Novarum in 1891. Subsequent popes have built on Leo’s work, continuing the church’s meditation on a variety of issues of social justice in such landmark documents as Pope Pius XI’s encyclical on “the reconstruction of the social order,” Quadregismo Anno (1931), Paul VI’s encyclical “on the development of peoples,” Populorum Progressio (1967) and John Paul II’s encyclical “on the social concerns of the church” Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987).
The Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church, published by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, says this:
The Church’s social Magisterium constantly calls for the most classical forms of justice to be respected: commutative, distributive and legal justice. Ever greater importance has been given to social justice., which represents a real development in general justice, the justice that regulates social relationships according to the criterion of observance of the law. Social justice, a requirement related to the social question which today is worldwide in scope, concerns the social, political and economic aspects and, above all, the structural dimension of problems and their respective solutions…
Social justice is not just some silly foreign idea. American Catholics know that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have an Office of Justice, Peace and Human Development. On that website the U.S. bishops say: “At the core of the virtue of solidarity is the pursuit of justice and peace. Our love for all our sisters and brothers demands that we promote peace in a world surrounded by violence and conflict.”
Get it? Social justice is an essential part of Catholic teaching. It’s part of being a Catholic. So Glenn Beck is, in essence, saying “Leave the Catholic church.”
But Glenn Beck is saying something else: “Leave Christianity.” Again and again in the Gospels, Jesus mentions our responsibility to care for the poor, to work on their behalf, to stand with them. In fact, when asked how his followers would be judged he doesn’t say that it will be based on where you worship, or how you pray, or how often you go to church, or even what political party you believe in. He says something quite different: It depends on how you treat the poor.
In the Gospel of Matthew (25) he tells his surprised disciples, that when you are meeting the poor, you are meeting him. They protest. “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.”
But our responsibility to care for “the least of these” does not end with simple charity. Giving someone a handout is an important part of the Christian message. But so is advocating for them. It is not enough simply to help the poor, one must address the structures that keep them that way. Standing up for the rights of the poor is not being a Nazi, it’s being Christian. And Communist, as Mr. Beck suggests? It’s hard not to think of the retort of the great apostle of social justice, Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife, “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.”
The attack on social justice is the tack of those who wish to ignore the concerns the poor and ignore the social structures that foster poverty. It’s not hard to see why people are tempted to do so. How much easier it would be if we didn’t have to worry about the poor!
But ignoring the poor, and ignoring what keeps them poor, is, quite simply, unchristian. For the poor are the church in many ways. When St. Lawrence, in the fourth century, was ordered by the prefect of Rome to turn over the wealth of the church, he presented to him the poor.
Glenn Beck’s desire to detach social justice from the Gospel is a move to detach care for the poor from the Gospel. But a church without the poor, and a church without a desire for a just social world for all, is not the church.
At least not the church of Jesus Christ. Who was, by the way, poor.
The Rev. James Martin, SJ is the author of The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything. A longer version of this post can be found at America magazine’s blog “In All Things.” americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=21159420-3048-741E-7761300524585116
Glenn Beck said last week on his eponymous show that Christians should leave churches that preach “social justice.” Mr. Beck equated the desire for a just society with–wait for it–Nazism and Communism.
I’m begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes.
This means that you would have to leave the Catholic Church, which has long championed that aspect of the Gospel.
The term “social justice” originated way back in the 1800s (and probably predates even that), and has been underlined by the Magisterium and popes since Leo XIII, who began the modern tradition of Catholic social teaching with his encyclical on capital and labor, Rerum Novarum in 1891. Subsequent popes have built on Leo’s work, continuing the church’s meditation on a variety of issues of social justice in such landmark documents as Pope Pius XI’s encyclical on “the reconstruction of the social order,” Quadregismo Anno (1931), Paul VI’s encyclical “on the development of peoples,” Populorum Progressio (1967) and John Paul II’s encyclical “on the social concerns of the church” Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987).
The Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church, published by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, says this:
The Church’s social Magisterium constantly calls for the most classical forms of justice to be respected: commutative, distributive and legal justice. Ever greater importance has been given to social justice., which represents a real development in general justice, the justice that regulates social relationships according to the criterion of observance of the law. Social justice, a requirement related to the social question which today is worldwide in scope, concerns the social, political and economic aspects and, above all, the structural dimension of problems and their respective solutions…
Social justice is not just some silly foreign idea. American Catholics know that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have an Office of Justice, Peace and Human Development. On that website the U.S. bishops say: “At the core of the virtue of solidarity is the pursuit of justice and peace. Our love for all our sisters and brothers demands that we promote peace in a world surrounded by violence and conflict.”
Get it? Social justice is an essential part of Catholic teaching. It’s part of being a Catholic. So Glenn Beck is, in essence, saying “Leave the Catholic church.”
But Glenn Beck is saying something else: “Leave Christianity.” Again and again in the Gospels, Jesus mentions our responsibility to care for the poor, to work on their behalf, to stand with them. In fact, when asked how his followers would be judged he doesn’t say that it will be based on where you worship, or how you pray, or how often you go to church, or even what political party you believe in. He says something quite different: It depends on how you treat the poor.
In the Gospel of Matthew (25) he tells his surprised disciples, that when you are meeting the poor, you are meeting him. They protest. “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.”
But our responsibility to care for “the least of these” does not end with simple charity. Giving someone a handout is an important part of the Christian message. But so is advocating for them. It is not enough simply to help the poor, one must address the structures that keep them that way. Standing up for the rights of the poor is not being a Nazi, it’s being Christian. And Communist, as Mr. Beck suggests? It’s hard not to think of the retort of the great apostle of social justice, Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife, “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.”
The attack on social justice is the tack of those who wish to ignore the concerns the poor and ignore the social structures that foster poverty. It’s not hard to see why people are tempted to do so. How much easier it would be if we didn’t have to worry about the poor!
But ignoring the poor, and ignoring what keeps them poor, is, quite simply, unchristian. For the poor are the church in many ways. When St. Lawrence, in the fourth century, was ordered by the prefect of Rome to turn over the wealth of the church, he presented to him the poor.
Glenn Beck’s desire to detach social justice from the Gospel is a move to detach care for the poor from the Gospel. But a church without the poor, and a church without a desire for a just social world for all, is not the church.
At least not the church of Jesus Christ. Who was, by the way, poor.
The Rev. James Martin, SJ is the author of The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything. A longer version of this post can be found at America magazine’s blog “In All Things.” americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=21159420-3048-741E-7761300524585116
A
Ahimsa
Guest
I’d rather run away from Glenn Beck.
A
adstrinity
Guest
- As far as American History is concerned, I was taught in 5th Grade that it was John Smith (though, looking this up on Yahoo! answers, it wasn’t specified, but, “Jamestown” was, and, another person chimed in that it is also taught in Buddhism).
- Glenn Beck is such an egotistical idiot. He doesn’t say anything EVER, yet, he feels he needs to go on for an hour. I hate how he does the teases about “watch this Friday when I show you…” There’s no need to wait until Friday. If he really wanted us to know, he’d tell us earlier in the week, but, no, ratings. He makes connections that aren’t there and he cries crocadile tears.
- IF he really said this, he has a right to say it. Fools have a right to believe him. Free country. He’s not right, but, it’s a free country.
S
seekerz
Guest
I’m seeing this argument more and more: Jesus commanded us personally to care for the poor (and it’s true - just not the sum total of our obligations to the poor).All my best…
- To call Beck “dangerous”, or a “psychopath” or a “sociopath” (uhm…no. They are not the same thing at all, by the way) shows a very shallow understanding of danger, sociopathy, and psychopathy. The guy gets paid for his opinions, which, contrary to popular myth, nicely sums up the entire history of the American press. If Beck is a danger because of his opinion show, then so is/was Larry King, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Maher, Mother Angelica, Fr. Rutler, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Edward R. Murrow, etc.
- It was St. Paul who said, “those who do not work, should not eat”.
- Jesus commands us, personally, to care for the poor. He never mentions establishing (and funding by confiscatory tax policies) a committee to study the problem; write tax proposals and implement a Keynesian redistributive system in order to stave off economic and social “inequalities” and “injustices”.
- To claim a moral imperative for the welfare state because it is allegedly rooted in Jesus’ social teachings is as blatant a violation of Church/State separation as using His teachings on divorce to repeal no-fault divorce laws.
Maybe it’s just me but I don’t understand how anyone could read the prophets (particularly Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos) and not come away with the distinct impression that nations as a whole (not simply as groups of individuals) are weighed in God’s balance regarding social justice issues…
Separation of Church and state notwithstanding, it would seem only natural for Christians to also want their leaders/government to enact policies supportive of the disadvantaged. This is not to say that one may not legitimately disagree over levels of taxation of forms/degrees of such support, but the idea that it is outside of a government’s role to take measures to help the poor or that this type of help is somehow at odds with Christian charity seems simply ludicrous to me.
What’s the point of praying for good government if we would restrain them from doing what we personally believe are the best forms of good?
G
GodLovesTheSpek
Guest
Mark 12:41-44 from the RSV-CE:
*
41* And he sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the multitude putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 And a poor widow came, and put in two copper coins, which make a penny. 43 And he called his disciples to him, and said to them, “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. 44 For they all contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living.”*
May God give me the Grace to be a charitable poor widow(er).
I would be wary of any “social justice” that ties one to Earth. Heaven is the goal.
*
41* And he sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the multitude putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 And a poor widow came, and put in two copper coins, which make a penny. 43 And he called his disciples to him, and said to them, “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. 44 For they all contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living.”*
May God give me the Grace to be a charitable poor widow(er).
I would be wary of any “social justice” that ties one to Earth. Heaven is the goal.
T
tweetymom
Guest
I have. Sounds like a smart move:thumbsup:
K
Katrina5
Guest
Alrighty then…!All my best…
- To call Beck “dangerous”, or a “psychopath” or a “sociopath” (uhm…no. They are not the same thing at all, by the way) shows a very shallow understanding of danger, sociopathy, and psychopathy. The guy gets paid for his opinions, which, contrary to popular myth, nicely sums up the entire history of the American press. If Beck is a danger because of his opinion show, then so is/was Larry King, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Maher, Mother Angelica, Fr. Rutler, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Edward R. Murrow, etc.
- It was St. Paul who said, “those who do not work, should not eat”.
- Jesus commands us, personally, to care for the poor. He never mentions establishing (and funding by confiscatory tax policies) a committee to study the problem; write tax proposals and implement a Keynesian redistributive system in order to stave off economic and social “inequalities” and “injustices”.
- To claim a moral imperative for the welfare state because it is allegedly rooted in Jesus’ social teachings is as blatant a violation of Church/State separation as using His teachings on divorce to repeal no-fault divorce laws.
My degrees are in Psychology and I think I am qualified to point out a sociopath when I see one. The only difference between a sociopath and a psychopath is the word psychopath is no longer in common usage.
They basically describe someone who is oblivious to the consequences of their behavior, basically has a false persona, does not care about other people, is narcissistic,
and deceives through charm, and has money and power as an end.
Glenn Beck is not qualified to be anything other than an entertainer. But he is fooling people who are ignorant of that.
I called him dangerous, because I think he spurs potential violence in his viewers by the illogical things he puts on his blackboard.
He pretends to be a professor of logic and philosophy.
He is preaching hatred, judgment, and to a viewer who becomes engrossed in his rhetoric, deadly actions.
The fact that he doesn’t see this potential threat is what makes HIM dangerous.
I know he has freedom of speech, but he is in a commercial industry, and when he was losing advertisers in droves last year, this played out as it should in our free country.
I am retired and on Social Security. My career was in Social Work-- helping people who are in difficult circumstances to get back on their feet.
Quoting St Paul to justify letting people suffer because they can’t work, can’t find a job, or judging people as “lazy” because of their situation-- well, go ahead and see where that gets you.
A former friend once used the ‘no workee no eatee’ to ME, seeming to forget that I worked all my life, and that they will retire one day themselves.
I hardly think we have a Welfare State! Welfare programs, which is the field I was in, are a very small percentage of the budget.
Food Stamps help grocers, farmers, food manufacturers. Medicaid helps doctors, hospitals and drug companies. Section 8 helps landlords, real estate developers, utility companies. Welfare (cash) helps other manufacturers and retailers.
So the money going to the ‘Welfare State’ helps people who are in need, as well as the overall economy.
I am sure Glenn Beck makes a LOT OF MONEY, but he could end up in poverty, as many CELEBRITIES do. Then when he needs help, will you quote St Paul to him?
K
Katrina5
Guest
By the Way, Mormons call themselves Christian they do not believe that Christ is Divine, so if his viewpoint is “Christian” he is FOOLING people, which is, sorry to say this yet again, DECEPTIVE and sociopathic.
G
Gia_B
Guest
Just because you have a degree doesn’t mean that you’re analysis is correct. I think that you’re letting your feelings about him get in the way.
I don’t think that you know him well enough to truly say that he doesn’t care about others or the consequences of his actions. Maybe he does care, but in a different way than you do or in a way that you aren’t seeing.
Similarly, how do you know that he doesn’t care about anything other than money and power?
As for the false persona, I’m not seeing it and if you’re going to say that he “deceives through charm” you’re going to have to point out what he says that is so deceitful.
If you don’t like him, just say that you don’t like him. You should know that psychopath is a very serious term, the diagnosis of which requires extensive examination and testing which go beyond merely watching a television show. To call someone that and justifying it with a sentence long definition that you don’t then support with facts/examples just comes off as childish.
When did that ever happen? When did anybody ever kill anybody else because they were inspired by Glenn Beck? When did he ever say that anybody should take “deadly action”?
B
buffalo
Guest
If anyone is paying attention to Beck - here is his main thrust - people read the Constitution. Parents teach the Constitution to your children.
B
Biggie
Guest
I hate to be in a position of defending Glenn Beck in as much as I have detected what I interpret to be an anti Catholic bias in, especially, his earlier broadcasts. But this thread has become a running ad hominem attack with very little consideration for the point he was actually making. His religious beliefs are not pertinent to the point he made, and as for his education and background I don’t see anything there that disqualifies him from expressing an opinion. He has risen to a high podium and has a large audience both in radio and television.
He is addressing the turn of phrase “social justice”. He may as well have also been addressing the turn of phrase “liberation theology” since it shares a perspective with the former. And he is addressing how the terminology is being used by what he identifies as progressives to advance a social agenda that involves the supremacy of the state over the individual.
I can hardly think it comes as news to anyone, including Catholics, that such terminology is used as an umbrella for a variety of liberal causes. Depending on how those terms were used in my parish, I too would explore exactly what was being proposed and might, in fact, change the venue of my Mass attendance on that basis. So I read nothing anti-Catholic in what Mr. Beck said, just something anti-progressive. And very few here have substantively addressed that.
He is addressing the turn of phrase “social justice”. He may as well have also been addressing the turn of phrase “liberation theology” since it shares a perspective with the former. And he is addressing how the terminology is being used by what he identifies as progressives to advance a social agenda that involves the supremacy of the state over the individual.
I can hardly think it comes as news to anyone, including Catholics, that such terminology is used as an umbrella for a variety of liberal causes. Depending on how those terms were used in my parish, I too would explore exactly what was being proposed and might, in fact, change the venue of my Mass attendance on that basis. So I read nothing anti-Catholic in what Mr. Beck said, just something anti-progressive. And very few here have substantively addressed that.
A
andyandely1997
Guest
Where is the morality in passing on all this debt to future generations? Is not this immoral? Also, the article on the Huffington Post from the Rev. James Martin, SJ, is taken from the American Magazine blog. The same magazine that Karl Keating points out is fighting against the changes to the English translation of the Mass along with the National Catholic Reporter in his article “The Mass Is about to Change—for Good”
catholic.com/projects/new_mass_translation.asp
Also, Rev. James Martin, SJ, talks a lot about charity in his article, which is fine, but charity without Christ, is not the social justice of the Church. And government social justice is charity without Christ. Plus, government social justice will not solve the problem. Charity, whether with our time or money, along with the preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ is social justice of the Chruch. We have strayed from evangelization. It is not politically correct. We want to keep our faith private. Did Christ want us to keep our fatih private? " And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15) We need to have courage & not be afraid, " For God hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power, and of love, and of sobriety. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but labour with the gospel, according to the power of God, Who hath delivered us and called us by his holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the times of the world." (Second Timothy 1:7-9)
catholic.com/projects/new_mass_translation.asp
Also, Rev. James Martin, SJ, talks a lot about charity in his article, which is fine, but charity without Christ, is not the social justice of the Church. And government social justice is charity without Christ. Plus, government social justice will not solve the problem. Charity, whether with our time or money, along with the preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ is social justice of the Chruch. We have strayed from evangelization. It is not politically correct. We want to keep our faith private. Did Christ want us to keep our fatih private? " And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15) We need to have courage & not be afraid, " For God hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power, and of love, and of sobriety. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but labour with the gospel, according to the power of God, Who hath delivered us and called us by his holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the times of the world." (Second Timothy 1:7-9)
T
Tigg
Guest
I would imagine that the vague term social justice conjures up different meanings to each of us. The sanctity of life and individual worth and dignity of each is paramount, of course, and we need to provide the essentials of food, clothing and shelter to those in need. But what Beck cautions against is that the term SJ has come to mean equality in every aspect of life, including wealth, and a preferential treatment of the poor over everyone else. This violates the principle of solidarity and is not Catholic teaching. In fact, Pope Leo had quite a bit to say about the evils of “forced” equality as a social ideal:
“ A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. In a society marred by deepening divisions between rich and poor, our tradition recalls the story of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46) and instructs us to put the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.”
Sounds innocent and rather broad, but I believe this is contrary to previous social encyclicals and the term, SJ has become the rallying cry of liberals and progressives, both in Church and government.
So where did this current thinking come from? I think it’s unadulterated Lib Theology from the 60’s. Interestingly enough, I recently attended a retreat given by a progressive priest. I did not know this at the time of registration, of course, but some of the material handed out included a card from the USCCB which says,
“ A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. In a society marred by deepening divisions between rich and poor, our tradition recalls the story of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46) and instructs us to put the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.”
Sounds innocent and rather broad, but I believe this is contrary to previous social encyclicals and the term, SJ has become the rallying cry of liberals and progressives, both in Church and government.
S
seekerz
Guest
What’s wrong with the USCCB quote? Was Jesus a liberal too?
B
Biggie
Guest
To walk in on this, as to the USCCB quote, the question is begged as to whether the divisions between rich and poor are systemic. The proof is not in the pudding, because as Jesus noted, the poor will always be with us.
As to Jesus, was he addressing himself to a state or to a person?
J
Janet1983
Guest
Thank you. I’m not quite as eloquent.
C
Convert66
Guest
Let me say first that I am not a Glenn Beck fan. I’m aware of him, have watched his show fairly regularly for a short span and have watched enough of the “news” about him to glean his perspectives fairly accurately. I find his delivery sometimes amusing, his joy endearing, and his apparent love for his family and his country sincere; but, overall, as for his show, he is wildly inconsistent. His views on Europe and Islam are ignorant and his “shocking revelations”" are often tenuous, at best, or nonexistent. His “libertarianism” isn’t really an informed libertarianism; he is a materialist at heart; he suffers, like most populists, from exaggeration and a bi-polar committment to “us-and-themism”; and even his prescriptions, at times, would continue the very “progressivism” he is railing against. That describes a lot of people I know. I think that may partially explain his appeal.
Seekerz wrote: “Separation of Church and state notwithstanding…(snipped)…but the idea that it is outside of a government’s role to take measures to help the poor or that this type of help is somehow at odds with Christian charity seems simply ludicrous to me.”
Yes, I agree with you. The debate is really over what actually helps, and I agree with Beck when he says centralization is unusually bad policy in most cases. I would describe myself as an enthusiastic subsidiarist.
The Church/State point is wholly a reductio of the “moral argument” that the left often smuggles into questions of economic justice, while simultaneously claiming to be secular relativists. Why should I care about their religious arguments? I want them rather to make the case for state-imposed altruism without an appeal to religious tradition and be consistent.
Katrina writes: “Alrighty then…!
My degrees are in Psychology and I think I am qualified to point out a sociopath when I see one. The only difference between a sociopath and a psychopath is the word psychopath is no longer in common usage.
They basically describe someone who is oblivious to the consequences of their behavior, basically has a false persona, does not care about other people, is narcissistic,
and deceives through charm, and has money and power as an end.”
Sociopaths are highly disorganized and not usually capable of success in normal society. They lack the self-discipline to achieve through sustained efforts. Beck defies this label.
Psycopaths are unusally well-organized; usually well-liked and regarded by society, in general; and rigorously focused. This could be tenuously said about any number of public and successful figures. Beck’s genuine love for his family, and his empathy for an adopted disabled son show far less than narcissistic tendencies. Your degrees notwithstanding, I think your diagnoses need refinement.
Katrina writes: “Glenn Beck is not qualified to be anything other than an entertainer. But he is fooling people who are ignorant of that.”
I do not think he has tried to fool anyone about this. He admits he is self-educated through reading books. He admits he completed only one semester of college. He admits his alcoholism. If anyone is ignorant of any of this, it is because they have not actually paid attention to what he has said publicly and repeatedly.
Katrina writes: “I called him dangerous, because I think he spurs potential violence in his viewers by the illogical things he puts on his blackboard.
He pretends to be a professor of logic and philosophy.
He is preaching hatred, judgment, and to a viewer who becomes engrossed in his rhetoric, deadly actions.
The fact that he doesn’t see this potential threat is what makes HIM dangerous.
I know he has freedom of speech, but he is in a commercial industry, and when he was losing advertisers in droves last year, this played out as it should in our free country.”
Why should I care what you think, Katrina? Make your case. Don’t just assert it to be true without evidence. Prove it.
Katrina writes: “I am retired and on Social Security. My career was in Social Work-- helping people who are in difficult circumstances to get back on their feet.
Quoting St Paul to justify letting people suffer because they can’t work, can’t find a job, or judging people as “lazy” because of their situation-- well, go ahead and see where that gets you.”
Hmm…I quoted St. Paul because you disparagingly attributed the sentiment to someone else. From that, you see fit to describe my quoting of a Saint as somehow to “justify letting people suffer…”
Me thinks thou dost protest too much.
Katrina writes: "I hardly think we have a Welfare State! Welfare programs, which is the field I was in, are a very small percentage of the budget. (snipped)
So the money going to the ‘Welfare State’ helps people who are in need, as well as the overall economy."
I hardly think that roughly 30-35% (including purely public programs and publicly-funded but privately administered programs) of GDP is a “very small percentage of the budget.”
Katrina writes: “I am sure Glenn Beck makes a LOT OF MONEY, but he could end up in poverty, as many CELEBRITIES do. Then when he needs help, will you quote St Paul to him?”
Hard to say, since the odds of my meeting him or any other celebrity are negligible.
In the end, if I were to say that Nancy Pelosi or any other prominent politician is a psychopath, dangerous, inciting violence or unqualified I would be the one accused of being hateful, judgmental, possibly dangerous and likely suspended or banned.
You however, being the compassionate and educated person that you are, can do so without evidence and, apparently, with impugnity.
All my best…
Seekerz wrote: “Separation of Church and state notwithstanding…(snipped)…but the idea that it is outside of a government’s role to take measures to help the poor or that this type of help is somehow at odds with Christian charity seems simply ludicrous to me.”
Yes, I agree with you. The debate is really over what actually helps, and I agree with Beck when he says centralization is unusually bad policy in most cases. I would describe myself as an enthusiastic subsidiarist.
The Church/State point is wholly a reductio of the “moral argument” that the left often smuggles into questions of economic justice, while simultaneously claiming to be secular relativists. Why should I care about their religious arguments? I want them rather to make the case for state-imposed altruism without an appeal to religious tradition and be consistent.
Katrina writes: “Alrighty then…!
My degrees are in Psychology and I think I am qualified to point out a sociopath when I see one. The only difference between a sociopath and a psychopath is the word psychopath is no longer in common usage.
They basically describe someone who is oblivious to the consequences of their behavior, basically has a false persona, does not care about other people, is narcissistic,
and deceives through charm, and has money and power as an end.”
Sociopaths are highly disorganized and not usually capable of success in normal society. They lack the self-discipline to achieve through sustained efforts. Beck defies this label.
Psycopaths are unusally well-organized; usually well-liked and regarded by society, in general; and rigorously focused. This could be tenuously said about any number of public and successful figures. Beck’s genuine love for his family, and his empathy for an adopted disabled son show far less than narcissistic tendencies. Your degrees notwithstanding, I think your diagnoses need refinement.
Katrina writes: “Glenn Beck is not qualified to be anything other than an entertainer. But he is fooling people who are ignorant of that.”
I do not think he has tried to fool anyone about this. He admits he is self-educated through reading books. He admits he completed only one semester of college. He admits his alcoholism. If anyone is ignorant of any of this, it is because they have not actually paid attention to what he has said publicly and repeatedly.
Katrina writes: “I called him dangerous, because I think he spurs potential violence in his viewers by the illogical things he puts on his blackboard.
He pretends to be a professor of logic and philosophy.
He is preaching hatred, judgment, and to a viewer who becomes engrossed in his rhetoric, deadly actions.
The fact that he doesn’t see this potential threat is what makes HIM dangerous.
I know he has freedom of speech, but he is in a commercial industry, and when he was losing advertisers in droves last year, this played out as it should in our free country.”
Why should I care what you think, Katrina? Make your case. Don’t just assert it to be true without evidence. Prove it.
Katrina writes: “I am retired and on Social Security. My career was in Social Work-- helping people who are in difficult circumstances to get back on their feet.
Quoting St Paul to justify letting people suffer because they can’t work, can’t find a job, or judging people as “lazy” because of their situation-- well, go ahead and see where that gets you.”
Hmm…I quoted St. Paul because you disparagingly attributed the sentiment to someone else. From that, you see fit to describe my quoting of a Saint as somehow to “justify letting people suffer…”
Me thinks thou dost protest too much.
Katrina writes: "I hardly think we have a Welfare State! Welfare programs, which is the field I was in, are a very small percentage of the budget. (snipped)
So the money going to the ‘Welfare State’ helps people who are in need, as well as the overall economy."
I hardly think that roughly 30-35% (including purely public programs and publicly-funded but privately administered programs) of GDP is a “very small percentage of the budget.”
Katrina writes: “I am sure Glenn Beck makes a LOT OF MONEY, but he could end up in poverty, as many CELEBRITIES do. Then when he needs help, will you quote St Paul to him?”
Hard to say, since the odds of my meeting him or any other celebrity are negligible.
In the end, if I were to say that Nancy Pelosi or any other prominent politician is a psychopath, dangerous, inciting violence or unqualified I would be the one accused of being hateful, judgmental, possibly dangerous and likely suspended or banned.
You however, being the compassionate and educated person that you are, can do so without evidence and, apparently, with impugnity.
All my best…
C
Carlan
Guest
Biggie, why does it have to be so complicated?
Did not Jesus say it all in the sermon on the mount?
I say Jesus was addressing all of us…in the end it will be judgment of all the nations.
A Government is of the people, by the people and for the people.
God bless and peace to all, Carlan- Status