How would a country completely based on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ would be?

  • Thread starter Thread starter imo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Besides that, what it means being poor has changed a lot. Today, a “poor” person in America is eating McDonald’s, in the Middle Ages, poor meant starve. I don’t think the Catholic ladies of the past would help all the self considering poor of today.
 
I think you really over-exaggerated imo’s point. There is beauty in raising a child that I feel a lot of women are missing out on. If a hundred women were taught the beauty of raising a child and ninety-nine of them still wanted to work instead then so be it. The Church would have to live with it and work on the next one hundred women. Freewill rules.
 
Cont’d from previous post

(Our Lord’s Programme) Fifthly

The Divine Plan for order calls for wide diffusion of ownership of property, in order to facilitate families in procuring the sufficiency of material goods required for the virtuous life of their members as human persons, and for Unions of owners and workers in Guilds or Corporations, reflecting the solidarity of the Mystical Body in economic organization.

(Our Lord’s Programme) Sixthly

The Divine Plan for order calls for a monetary system so arranged as to facilitate the production and exchange of material goods in view of the virtuous life of Members of Christ in happy families.

Finally

Our Lord Jesus Christ wants all His Members to grasp the Programme for Order laid down by His Father and unite with Himself in the central act of submission to the Holy Trinity, the Holy Mass. In this sacrifice, the re-presentation of Calvary, all Catholics profess their willingness to respect God’s Rights and their readiness to strive, as a united body, to mould society in accordance with Our Lord’s Programme for Order.

Source: Fahey, Rev. Denis, C.Ss.P. The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World. Palmdale, CA: Christian Book Club of America. 1943, reprinted 1993 by Angelus Press, Kansas City, MO. 142 pp.
N.B. This poor priest fought tirelessly for the Social Kingship of Christ, which was “politically incorrect” even in the 1940s. He has been unjustly maligned as anti-Semitic. If one reads the book, one will discover that this is totally false. (I’ve read the book.)
 
imo said:
Besides that, what it means being poor has changed a lot. Today, a “poor” person in America is eating McDonald’s, in the Middle Ages, poor meant starve. I don’t think the Catholic ladies of the past would help all the self considering poor of today.
Click to expand...
Catholics aren’t called to make value judgements like that though and it is a worrying prospect that a Catholic State would determine who wasn’t poor enough to warrant assistance.

Further to that, I believe that a Catholic State would inevitably fall into making value judgements about what is good and what is evil rather than putting the common good first to determine what is legal and illegal.

Would a Catholic State be able to respect this truth spoken by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either – but right through every human heart – and through all human hearts. … And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. ”
 
twf said:
I don’t understand why so many “traditionalist” Catholics are so deadset against social welfare programs.
Click to expand...
I think you are mistaking “traditionalist” Catholics with Evangelical Christians and their rugged individualism. Catholics have always promoted ways to help the poor. Catholics may oppose those dirty little strings that are attached to the social programs that certain liberals (as well as certain conservatives) add to the legislative bill. We need the line item veto!
 
Emeraldlady said:
However, the type of Catholics who support this idea of a Catholic State also seem to be highly motivated against systems that help the poor and vulnerable, such as affordable healthcare for everyone and welfare support.
Click to expand...
Affordable healthcare for the poor was opposed by many Catholics because it had the dirty little string attached to it that would include abortions and a few other bad ideas but take them out and you’ll get Catholics voting yes to affordable healthcare for the poor.
 
hvizsgyak said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
However, the type of Catholics who support this idea of a Catholic State also seem to be highly motivated against systems that help the poor and vulnerable, such as affordable healthcare for everyone and welfare support.
Click to expand...
Affordable healthcare for the poor was opposed by many Catholics because it had the dirty little string attached to it that would include abortions and a few other bad ideas but take them out and you’ll get Catholics voting yes to affordable healthcare for the poor.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree. Their mantra is “health care is not a right but a privilege”, an attitude that links healthcare to wealth.
 
imo said:
I would like to know from you what important and interesting laws and policies a country 100% governed in the traditional principles of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ,
Click to expand...
Read Revelation…it describes exactly what it would be like…although the “ultimate goal of saving souls” would no longer be an issue, and all will be honoring God.
 
Those of us who are Traditionist Catholics and highly promote affordable healthcare will have to work harder to let other Catholics know that healthcare is a necessity and it should be affordable to everyone no matter what their economic situation is. The Church doesn’t teach healthcare is a privilege but I feel some in the Church do believe that and they learn that from external sources other than the Church. I think the tide is turning away from that train of thought; hopefully sooner than later.
 
You don’t know about distributism?

You should read Rerum Novarum.
 
Are you serious!!! Just look up in Iran what is the status of political opponents (hint… google Evin Prison), some of the religious minorities (hint google Baha’i persecution) and people committing common crimes (hint google public hanging and stoning). Nice right?
 
Emeraldlady said:
Note well: a Catholic social system would not necessarily have to be a monarchy. Might be helpful, but not absolutely needed.
Click to expand...
Monarchy, or at least hereditary elites, would probably work best. An electorate informed by Catholic principles, and recognizing Christ as King, could be counted upon to use democracy to apply these principles and to elect leaders who would rule wisely and with goodness and holiness. I would hate to see dictatorships arise.
aroosi said:
Are you serious!!! Just look up in Iran what is the status of political opponents (hint… google Evin Prison), some of the religious minorities (hint google Baha’i persecution) and people committing common crimes (hint google public hanging and stoning). Nice right?
Click to expand...
@Pitcairn17 set me right on this. Iran isn’t a model we’d want to emulate. I was interpreting “mild Iran” as being, mutatis mutandis, a Catholic social order that would function in accord with papal social principles, with the Church having a prominent teaching role but not directly involved with the government. Many people in Iran may have good, decent, happy lives, but some obviously do not, and are subjected to punishments and atrocities that could never exist in a Catholic social order.
Click to expand...
 
This sounds like a real swell idea, but it’s completely unworkable in the real world.
Once actual, sinful people got their hands on it , even if they had the highest ideals and good intentions, it would quickly crash and burn, prolly within the first twenty years.
 
It’s an unavoidable question. There are only so many resources to go around, and while we must help those who genuinely in need, if people abuse the system, they will overwhelm the ability of the public to support them. The Scriptures expect the able-bodied poor to glean, and command that farmers not harvest the edges and corners of their fields, nor go back over them a second time, that the poor may have gleanings.
 
imo said:
Besides that, what it means being poor has changed a lot. Today, a “poor” person in America is eating McDonald’s, in the Middle Ages, poor meant starve. I don’t think the Catholic ladies of the past would help all the self considering poor of today.
Click to expand...
That’s not exactly a virtuous attitude.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top