S
Sachsen
Guest
That’s lovely. May the Lord bless them and their work.
Is the "Social Justice" gospel an idol?
- Thread starter po18guy
- Start date
- Status
A
Annie
Guest
What the missionaries did first, and every day thereafter, was to worship God.
1 Cor 13:3 And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
The topic of the thread is the article in the OP, in which Mnsgr Pope explains that putting “good works” before Christ is to idolize social justice. He is in no way denigrating good works. What do you think about the ideas in that article?
1 Cor 13:3 And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
The topic of the thread is the article in the OP, in which Mnsgr Pope explains that putting “good works” before Christ is to idolize social justice. He is in no way denigrating good works. What do you think about the ideas in that article?
Last edited:
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Thanks Annie.
What is the ABC that the Gates Foundation is pushing?
Do you mean the ABC to network or is it referring to something else?
Even if the people who for genuine reasons help Gods poor have no thought of God,if they are doing it for compassions sake,then aren’t they doing Gods work anyway regardless of whether they consider themselves atheist or agnostic etc?
I understand that if the person or organisation “helps” a poor person due to self serving reasons that you mentioned like tax breaks,to push an agenda about gay relationships,or to impose their own power then that would be bad.
At the same time if a rich person did it just due to feeling discomfort at their own riches,isn’t that a good thing?
Even if they don’t fully understand their own motives,another person will be warm or fed due to their actions.
Also,just say there was a certain agnostic and a certain Christian-if that certain agnostic helps someone for compassions sake aren’t they in a way “better” than if that certain Christian who helped them only because they see Jesus in then?
Ie:shouldn’t they care about the person in front of them too and not only when/if they identify them as if they were Jesus?
What would happen if they stopped being a Christian and stopped believing in Jesus-would their compassion go away too and they would stop caring about/helping people in need?
What is the ABC that the Gates Foundation is pushing?
Do you mean the ABC to network or is it referring to something else?
Even if the people who for genuine reasons help Gods poor have no thought of God,if they are doing it for compassions sake,then aren’t they doing Gods work anyway regardless of whether they consider themselves atheist or agnostic etc?
I understand that if the person or organisation “helps” a poor person due to self serving reasons that you mentioned like tax breaks,to push an agenda about gay relationships,or to impose their own power then that would be bad.
At the same time if a rich person did it just due to feeling discomfort at their own riches,isn’t that a good thing?
Even if they don’t fully understand their own motives,another person will be warm or fed due to their actions.
Also,just say there was a certain agnostic and a certain Christian-if that certain agnostic helps someone for compassions sake aren’t they in a way “better” than if that certain Christian who helped them only because they see Jesus in then?
Ie:shouldn’t they care about the person in front of them too and not only when/if they identify them as if they were Jesus?
What would happen if they stopped being a Christian and stopped believing in Jesus-would their compassion go away too and they would stop caring about/helping people in need?
po18guy
Well-known member
Faith and charity are inseparable - except since the 1960s, when social activism began to take over. We answer to Christ at our judgment. He will ask what we did with the “good news” of His death and resurrection to eternal life. If we answer, “Well, I fed a lot of people”, or “I helped build housing for the poor” - but not a peep about the Gospel, will He be pleased enough to say “Well done, good and faithful servant”?
That is the point of keeping everything in proper order, proper perspective. We are not a faith of either/or - a false forced choice. We believe fervently in both (this) and (that). As it is with taking scripture verses out of context, if we perform good works outside of the context of the Gospel, we make both those works vain (empty) as well as our faith vain.
That is the point of keeping everything in proper order, proper perspective. We are not a faith of either/or - a false forced choice. We believe fervently in both (this) and (that). As it is with taking scripture verses out of context, if we perform good works outside of the context of the Gospel, we make both those works vain (empty) as well as our faith vain.
A
Annie
Guest
ABC means artificial birth control. Sorry, I forgot not everyone knows that.
The Msgr was talking about Catholics who put Christ second to social justice issues, which, logically speaking, is idolatry.
This is an exhortation not to do that ourselves, and an explanation of what some people are doing.
Some of your examples take a consequentialist approach: if a poor person is helped, what difference does the motivation of the person helping matter? The point is that the act makes a difference to the person doing the helping also.
If the helper is not growing in holiness, then for him, the action is spiritually useless. And if he is not helping people for God, then he is not doing God’s work; although God’s will may be being done, it is only imperfectly done.
Your write: if that certain agnostic helps someone for compassions sake aren’t they in a way “better” than if that certain Christian who helped them only because they see Jesus in then?
The agnostic who helps for compassion’s sake alone is doing only something “even a pagan would do.” The Christian who acts because he sees Christ in the person in need is doing more, not only. He is also elevating the person in need in a way that the agnostic can not. The Christian sees the person in front of him more fully by seeing Christ in him than the agnostic can.
You write: What would happen if they stopped being a Christian and stopped believing in Jesus-would their compassion go away too and they would stop caring about/helping people in need?
Not necessarily; he might descend to having only compassion, and this situation is precisely the danger that the author of the original article is warning against.
The Msgr was talking about Catholics who put Christ second to social justice issues, which, logically speaking, is idolatry.
This is an exhortation not to do that ourselves, and an explanation of what some people are doing.
Some of your examples take a consequentialist approach: if a poor person is helped, what difference does the motivation of the person helping matter? The point is that the act makes a difference to the person doing the helping also.
If the helper is not growing in holiness, then for him, the action is spiritually useless. And if he is not helping people for God, then he is not doing God’s work; although God’s will may be being done, it is only imperfectly done.
Your write: if that certain agnostic helps someone for compassions sake aren’t they in a way “better” than if that certain Christian who helped them only because they see Jesus in then?
The agnostic who helps for compassion’s sake alone is doing only something “even a pagan would do.” The Christian who acts because he sees Christ in the person in need is doing more, not only. He is also elevating the person in need in a way that the agnostic can not. The Christian sees the person in front of him more fully by seeing Christ in him than the agnostic can.
You write: What would happen if they stopped being a Christian and stopped believing in Jesus-would their compassion go away too and they would stop caring about/helping people in need?
Not necessarily; he might descend to having only compassion, and this situation is precisely the danger that the author of the original article is warning against.
R
Rozellelily
Guest
I don’t think he does make a clear distinction between the two + because,theoretically,even if they wanted to,and even if they fed the poor a lie that the US standard of living is the ideal-after collecting donations for these people they are still nowhere near rich.
Also tbh,I think the references some people make using the word “westerners” shows great ignorance of cultures.
My background is Bosnian Croatian (South Eastern Europe).
There,families are usually living the “simple life” but it is also classed as western country because it is not in Africa or Middle East etc.
It is nothing like USA though.There is strong focus on families,the culture is approx 70% collectivist & 30% individualism unlike the USA which is roughly 90% individualistic so there is a strong focus on family,culture + people helping each other,religion is tied in with national identity etc…
There is not a strong focus on individualistic me me me like can be in US.
I think the Cardinal would be more accurate/more informed if instead of using a “broad term” western culture,he instead used the term Americanised mentality or Anglo Saxon.
In Bosnia/Croatia,most people are living basically and living the “the simple life” but there are also some individuals who are in great poverty,under great stress and don’t know how they will next week feed their children or pay their bills.
While this is my culture background,I am living in Australia-a relatively prosperous country.
However,even here there are a good number of people who also live in great poverty,under great stress and can’t pay the bills.
I’m not referring to living a simple existence,but living in poverty.Their waking hours are consumed with figuring out how to live another day or another month.
It is these people (whether in Bosnia or Australia etc) that charities or “social justice”,if you will, are usually directed to,not people who are just living simple with no excesses.
Also tbh,I think the references some people make using the word “westerners” shows great ignorance of cultures.
My background is Bosnian Croatian (South Eastern Europe).
There,families are usually living the “simple life” but it is also classed as western country because it is not in Africa or Middle East etc.
It is nothing like USA though.There is strong focus on families,the culture is approx 70% collectivist & 30% individualism unlike the USA which is roughly 90% individualistic so there is a strong focus on family,culture + people helping each other,religion is tied in with national identity etc…
There is not a strong focus on individualistic me me me like can be in US.
I think the Cardinal would be more accurate/more informed if instead of using a “broad term” western culture,he instead used the term Americanised mentality or Anglo Saxon.
In Bosnia/Croatia,most people are living basically and living the “the simple life” but there are also some individuals who are in great poverty,under great stress and don’t know how they will next week feed their children or pay their bills.
While this is my culture background,I am living in Australia-a relatively prosperous country.
However,even here there are a good number of people who also live in great poverty,under great stress and can’t pay the bills.
I’m not referring to living a simple existence,but living in poverty.Their waking hours are consumed with figuring out how to live another day or another month.
It is these people (whether in Bosnia or Australia etc) that charities or “social justice”,if you will, are usually directed to,not people who are just living simple with no excesses.
R
Rozellelily
Guest
@Annie
I agree with you about the cost of living in countries like US or Australia but I don’t know what the cause of that is?
Due to the high cost of living + high rent prices,there are some people in Sydney living on the poverty line who are having to be vegetarians not by choice because they have to choose between paying their rent or buying meat.
The other choice would be cheaper rent further from the city,make a 2.5 hour commute to work + back and rarely see family.
Or live in the country where there is cheap rent but no jobs.
So I agree that living in places like Sydney (maybe US) too can sometimes “suck”.
Also there are cultural problems/differences like Australia society does not really value housewives/stay at home mums.
Also overwork,unbalance is often encouraged in places like Sydney Australia or US but isn’t that the bosses fault?
They want a chimpanzee and if a person refuses to “be their monkey” they will just find another willing and that person will be left jobless.
So I agree that all this is many problem in highly developed country that needs to be fixed,but to me this seems as different issue than helping the poor because simple life is better than rat race but it is very poor that people are helping not “simple life/no extras poor”.
I agree with you about the cost of living in countries like US or Australia but I don’t know what the cause of that is?
Due to the high cost of living + high rent prices,there are some people in Sydney living on the poverty line who are having to be vegetarians not by choice because they have to choose between paying their rent or buying meat.
The other choice would be cheaper rent further from the city,make a 2.5 hour commute to work + back and rarely see family.
Or live in the country where there is cheap rent but no jobs.
So I agree that living in places like Sydney (maybe US) too can sometimes “suck”.
Also there are cultural problems/differences like Australia society does not really value housewives/stay at home mums.
Also overwork,unbalance is often encouraged in places like Sydney Australia or US but isn’t that the bosses fault?
They want a chimpanzee and if a person refuses to “be their monkey” they will just find another willing and that person will be left jobless.
So I agree that all this is many problem in highly developed country that needs to be fixed,but to me this seems as different issue than helping the poor because simple life is better than rat race but it is very poor that people are helping not “simple life/no extras poor”.
A
Annie
Guest
Well, this is a little bit tricky because there are a few points involved.
One is that many international commentators do not consider the nations formerly in the sphere of the Soviet Union as being part of “the West” when discussing current affairs. They are thinking about Western Europe as opposed to Eastern Europe, and including the US, Australia, and NZ. I agree that nowadays, the West is heavy on the English-speakers, but he is from French Guinea, so he may see more French involvement than you or I do, and he is now in Rome, where there is some Italian influence
It sounds like you are describing the people in Bosnia and Croatia as the type of people Cardinal Sarah is calling the poor, those who do not have a lot and so must work with others and turn to others for help and support.
Cardinal Sarah says that this increases human interaction which is a good thing, and that trying to eliminate this type of situation would lead to a reduction in human interaction. In this and other respects, poverty can be seen as a virtue rather than some sort of evil which must be gotten rid of.
Cardinal Sarah also knows a lot about what is happening in Africa, and while there is a lot of material aid given to the destitute, as you say, there are also programs targeting the merely poor. For example, one set of programs works on educating women to the neglect of men, both on the excuse that woman are more responsible and that educated women have fewer babies.
Here I am speaking about major programs like those funded by the UN and groups like the Gates Foundation. I also see this “directing” going on among the not-quite destitute in rural areas in the US.
One is that many international commentators do not consider the nations formerly in the sphere of the Soviet Union as being part of “the West” when discussing current affairs. They are thinking about Western Europe as opposed to Eastern Europe, and including the US, Australia, and NZ. I agree that nowadays, the West is heavy on the English-speakers, but he is from French Guinea, so he may see more French involvement than you or I do, and he is now in Rome, where there is some Italian influence
It sounds like you are describing the people in Bosnia and Croatia as the type of people Cardinal Sarah is calling the poor, those who do not have a lot and so must work with others and turn to others for help and support.
Cardinal Sarah says that this increases human interaction which is a good thing, and that trying to eliminate this type of situation would lead to a reduction in human interaction. In this and other respects, poverty can be seen as a virtue rather than some sort of evil which must be gotten rid of.
Cardinal Sarah also knows a lot about what is happening in Africa, and while there is a lot of material aid given to the destitute, as you say, there are also programs targeting the merely poor. For example, one set of programs works on educating women to the neglect of men, both on the excuse that woman are more responsible and that educated women have fewer babies.
Here I am speaking about major programs like those funded by the UN and groups like the Gates Foundation. I also see this “directing” going on among the not-quite destitute in rural areas in the US.
A
Annie
Guest
Yes, you are right: I mentioned the issue of expensive lives in the US but that subject is really a distraction from the topic of this thread. Sorry about that 
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Thanks Annie.
Bosnia and Croatia is not part of the former Soviet Union but thats besides the point.They’re all Slavic cultures though so share much similarities.
I understand,and agree with,Cardinal Sarah’s concerns in theory,but I’m not sure in practice how many of these charities or social justice programmes are really directed towards people who are just living the “simple life” (what the Cardinal calls poor) as opposed to helping the destitute/very poor.
I’m aware though that I’m coming from a perspective that when I think of charities or social justice programs that what comes to my mind are initiatives from Australia or one from my euro background so perhaps there are other types of charities that I’m not aware of that are “targeting” towards the non very poor.
Regarding the one you mentioned being targeted towards the African women,it seems like a tricky area because on on hand if they are neglected or “abandoned” by men,they might be left with many children that they are not in a financial position to look after.
On the other hand though,if the charitie programs solution is for them just to not welcome having children,or too much focus just on condoms,then it’s not a very Catholic solution either and it could be said that are “pushing an agenda”.
If African women really are more responsible,then I think a Christian charity approach would/should be to try to educate the men how to be more moral and responsible,to respect women more,and not just think about sex and immediate gratification etc?
Unfortunately I don’t know much about rural areas of USA, but if they have issues with drought or farming issues then wouldn’t it be good to help them?
In Australia there are some farmers who have committed suicide because they couldn’t cope with farming conditions due to droughts and couldn’t make a living etc.
Bosnia and Croatia is not part of the former Soviet Union but thats besides the point.They’re all Slavic cultures though so share much similarities.
I understand,and agree with,Cardinal Sarah’s concerns in theory,but I’m not sure in practice how many of these charities or social justice programmes are really directed towards people who are just living the “simple life” (what the Cardinal calls poor) as opposed to helping the destitute/very poor.
I’m aware though that I’m coming from a perspective that when I think of charities or social justice programs that what comes to my mind are initiatives from Australia or one from my euro background so perhaps there are other types of charities that I’m not aware of that are “targeting” towards the non very poor.
Regarding the one you mentioned being targeted towards the African women,it seems like a tricky area because on on hand if they are neglected or “abandoned” by men,they might be left with many children that they are not in a financial position to look after.
On the other hand though,if the charitie programs solution is for them just to not welcome having children,or too much focus just on condoms,then it’s not a very Catholic solution either and it could be said that are “pushing an agenda”.
If African women really are more responsible,then I think a Christian charity approach would/should be to try to educate the men how to be more moral and responsible,to respect women more,and not just think about sex and immediate gratification etc?
Unfortunately I don’t know much about rural areas of USA, but if they have issues with drought or farming issues then wouldn’t it be good to help them?
In Australia there are some farmers who have committed suicide because they couldn’t cope with farming conditions due to droughts and couldn’t make a living etc.
R
Rozellelily
Guest
The concern I have with the thread topic or the linked articles, is the possibility that it could be interpreted as minimalising the need to help people in need.
With so many people living life just being self absorbed,and including some Catholics who go to church but don’t necessarily help others,I think that any time that somebody sincerely helps someone who is homeless or is in great difficulty is a good thing and of merit (providing that they aren’t pushing a political agenda).
I find it hard to distinguish between Catholic charity/helping someone because of Jesus vs helping someone due to compassions sake.
Perhaps this is due to me being only Catholic Baptisted but not full follower/not had first communion etc?
Even if Catholics should help people due to seeing Jesus in them,is it agreed upon that when non Christians help someone (without an agenda) that it is still a good thing to be encouraged?
I remember reading an article from the Pope where he said for people who don’t believe that we should “meet one another doing good”.
Also, and I know that the term social justice is such a broad term which can mean many things,but isn’t it the case that some people who are helping others through “social justice” (when done the right way) are actually being inspired by God?
I thought Gods Holy Spirit could “work” on all people,not just Christians or have I misunderstood that?
I recognise though that there’s a difference between just giving someone a material item vs actually caring about them.
Eg
erson A might volunteer in a homeless kitchen,hand out food and then go home.
Person B may do the same thing but really talk to the people that are homeless,listen to their feelings,treat them with dignity,be a genuine friend and give them a hug.
Person A is helping in a way but it can seem a bit cold or pretentious sometimes?
OP:if many of the African people you mentioned charities helping chose not to become Catholic Christians would you still believe in helping them materialistically or do you believe those charities should move on to another nation which was open to spiritual conversion?
Regarding the nuns interview,isn’t it because often the only way people are receptive these days to Christianity (at least is the case in Australia) is through “lived Christianity”?
Ie:if anyone talks about Jesus or Christianity most people with seeing here as proselytising and aren’t really interesting because it is quite a liberal country.
With so many people living life just being self absorbed,and including some Catholics who go to church but don’t necessarily help others,I think that any time that somebody sincerely helps someone who is homeless or is in great difficulty is a good thing and of merit (providing that they aren’t pushing a political agenda).
I find it hard to distinguish between Catholic charity/helping someone because of Jesus vs helping someone due to compassions sake.
Perhaps this is due to me being only Catholic Baptisted but not full follower/not had first communion etc?
Even if Catholics should help people due to seeing Jesus in them,is it agreed upon that when non Christians help someone (without an agenda) that it is still a good thing to be encouraged?
I remember reading an article from the Pope where he said for people who don’t believe that we should “meet one another doing good”.
Also, and I know that the term social justice is such a broad term which can mean many things,but isn’t it the case that some people who are helping others through “social justice” (when done the right way) are actually being inspired by God?
I thought Gods Holy Spirit could “work” on all people,not just Christians or have I misunderstood that?
I recognise though that there’s a difference between just giving someone a material item vs actually caring about them.
Eg
erson A might volunteer in a homeless kitchen,hand out food and then go home.Person B may do the same thing but really talk to the people that are homeless,listen to their feelings,treat them with dignity,be a genuine friend and give them a hug.
Person A is helping in a way but it can seem a bit cold or pretentious sometimes?
OP:if many of the African people you mentioned charities helping chose not to become Catholic Christians would you still believe in helping them materialistically or do you believe those charities should move on to another nation which was open to spiritual conversion?
Regarding the nuns interview,isn’t it because often the only way people are receptive these days to Christianity (at least is the case in Australia) is through “lived Christianity”?
Ie:if anyone talks about Jesus or Christianity most people with seeing here as proselytising and aren’t really interesting because it is quite a liberal country.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Do those with devotion to the Rosary make it an idol?
What about ham fisted apologetics, an idol?
How about people in the Charismatic movement, does it become an idol?
Acting as liturgy police? The little badge becomes an idol?
Anti abortion protests, an idol?
Of course, people can tend to put their pet devotion on a pedestal
My answer is you show me your faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works.
What about ham fisted apologetics, an idol?
How about people in the Charismatic movement, does it become an idol?
Acting as liturgy police? The little badge becomes an idol?
Anti abortion protests, an idol?
Of course, people can tend to put their pet devotion on a pedestal
My answer is you show me your faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works.
Last edited:
S
stpurl
Guest
But it seems as if good works, in this sense, becomes the only item that is good whether done with proper intent or not. . .and surely that can’t be the case?
I mean, look at the pharisee and the tax collector. The pharisee paid tithes on everything, did all sorts of ‘good’, but the tax collector just prayed to be forgiven. and tax collectors had money (one reason they were despised by their fellow Jews, because they accepted that money and were tacitly defrauding their own people). There was nothing there indicating that the tax collector was going to make restitution or stop working for the Romans. . . so ‘good work wise’, it seems as if good works alone, done for the ‘wrong reason’, can be just as much of an idol as doing other subjectively ‘good’ things for same. . .
I mean, look at the pharisee and the tax collector. The pharisee paid tithes on everything, did all sorts of ‘good’, but the tax collector just prayed to be forgiven. and tax collectors had money (one reason they were despised by their fellow Jews, because they accepted that money and were tacitly defrauding their own people). There was nothing there indicating that the tax collector was going to make restitution or stop working for the Romans. . . so ‘good work wise’, it seems as if good works alone, done for the ‘wrong reason’, can be just as much of an idol as doing other subjectively ‘good’ things for same. . .
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Matthew 5:16, the passage I quoted above from James combined with St Paul’s words from 1 Corinthians 13 give us the guidance we need.
This little light of mine, I’m going to let it shine, with love.
This little light of mine, I’m going to let it shine, with love.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Not an idol, it is nothing:
If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal.
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.
A
Annie
Guest
You seem to be misunderstanding Msgr Pope’s point. His point is not that we should not help the poor, but that we should not allow our desire to help the poor to take first place instead of God.
And we can see this happening a lot. People say, we can get all this government money and help lots more poor people if we tell pregnant woman they can get abortions… if we pay for contraception… if we also distribute condoms…
And then they do it.
Rozellelily made this interesting point:
This in no way implies that helping the poor for love of Christ is a bad thing.
And we can see this happening a lot. People say, we can get all this government money and help lots more poor people if we tell pregnant woman they can get abortions… if we pay for contraception… if we also distribute condoms…
And then they do it.
Rozellelily made this interesting point:
and we see this happening. People who are religious and very interested in helping the poor put God second and eventually drift away from their faith because they focus on helping the poor over worshipping God.
This in no way implies that helping the poor for love of Christ is a bad thing.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Err, that is quite the accusation! Maybe you mis-typed?
A
Annie
Guest
Not everyone, just some people.
G
graciew
Guest
It won t happen ,Rozelleilily…we have our priests and Bishops and the Pope to remind us…
Monsignor is addressing this flock. It is possible that if say you or I post what our Bishop has said,some of it will be lost to us as foreign audience.
Sounds like we can rely on Divine Providence more than in our " structures" and " .dependances" to serve. God will provide…
That is what stays in me at least, at the bottom of the message Monsignor sent. All good.
Last edited:
- Status