Italian writer stirs a hornet’s nest with doubts about Pope Francis

[FollowChrist34]

openmind77;12628993:

True capitalism is freedom. You are describing cronyism.

Unfortunately because of original sin, I think capitalism will always be subject to abuse in this way. It is a system built on competition and gaining wealth - that is the goal; to do otherwise is to fail. I support capitalism as a system over socialism/communism, but I also support government regulations and social programs, even to the point where they slow or “harm” the economy for the sake of the common good - i.e., environmental programs, medicare, social security, unemployment benefits, etc. (I think the USCCB is with me on this…also for that matter Benedict, JP II and Chesteron; heck I’d even put Aquinas and Augustine on this list ) A lot of *good *comes from these programs. The ideal should be to strike a balance between economic freedom and the common good. I realize in practice that you will never eliminate injustice or poverty and will almost always go too far one way or the other when trying to hit this balance, but for me anyway that is what you shoot for.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

When you say “freedom,” one thing that comes to mind is a market with no regulations. Is that what you mean? Because I think some regulations are necessary for authentic freedom, but they make the market less free in the sense that regulations prevent people from doing whatever they want. For example, I think a regulation against monopolies serves freedom even though it limits what a corporation can do. And I think there are some products and services that can be legitimately prohibited, such as prostitution, even though that restricts the market in at least one way. Does that seem reasonable to you? Because I get the impression from your posts that you think capitalism means a market with no regulations, and I don’t want to misunderstand you.

I am defining capitalism, not the ideal political system.

I agree that we need regulations. I don’t agree with those who blame capitalism for limiting freedoms.

I also believe that the US and world economies would serve all people better if we had fewer government regulations.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

CHESTERTONRULES;12633072:

Unfortunately because of original sin, I think capitalism will always be subject to abuse in this way. It is a system built on competition and gaining wealth - that is the goal; to do otherwise is to fail. I support capitalism as a system over socialism/communism, but I also support government regulations and social programs, even to the point where they slow or “harm” the economy for the sake of the common good - i.e., environmental programs, medicare, social security, unemployment benefits, etc. (I think the USCCB is with me on this…also for that matter Benedict, JP II and Chesteron; heck I’d even put Aquinas and Augustine on this list ) A lot of *good *

comes from these programs. The ideal should be to strike a balance between economic freedom and the common good. I realize in practice that you will never eliminate injustice or poverty and will almost always go too far one way or the other when trying to hit this balance, but for me anyway that is what you shoot for.

All human systems will be subject to abuse. I believe capitalism is the best system for the most good of the most people.

I believe charity, rather than coercion, is the best way to help low income earners.

I support a safety net for children, the elderly, and the handicapped, but I don’t support life long government programs for those capable of work.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

There has been some animosity among Italians in Rome against Pope Francis.

The main glitch had to do with some local Roman business people, and one issue was the fact that he did not buy his shoes from a particular Roman shoe cobbler as past popes have done, but ordered them from his friend cobbler in Argentina.

Then of course he announced that members of the Mafia were automatically excommunicated and can not use the Church as part of their image, which is probably the most dangerous decision Pope Francis has made yet.

Also, some conservative Italians have been upset with the break in the 455 year tradition of electing Italian Popes, when Pope John Paul II was elected.

They haven’t recovered yet.

So, I’m skeptical of Italian conservatives who are critical of Pope Francis and what their agenda in going public with their criticism might be…

Jim

 

[FollowChrist34]

There has been some animosity among Italians in Rome against Pope Francis.

The main glitch had to do with some local Roman business people, and one issue was the fact that he did not buy his shoes from a particular Roman shoe cobbler as past popes have done, but ordered them from his friend cobbler in Argentina.

Then of course he announced that members of the Mafia were automatically excommunicated and can not use the Church as part of their image, which is probably the most dangerous decision Pope Francis has made yet.

Also, some conservative Italians have been upset with the break in the 455 year tradition of electing Italian Popes, when Pope John Paul II was elected.

They haven’t recovered yet.

So, I’m skeptical of Italian conservatives who are critical of Pope Francis and what their agenda in going public with their criticism might be…

Jim

I think it’s just gossip. This same battle we have here in the US Church between conservatives and liberals - just something to talk and get hyper about. Pretty familiar territory for those of us here at CAF.

 

[Prodigal_40s]

I think he is wrong for advocating greater state control of economies. I think he is wrong for wading into the AGW debate on the side of the left wing alarmists. I think he is wrong for criticizing capitalism, which has pulled more people out of poverty than any other system.

I think he is right that we need to focus on Jesus and to speak boldly about our faith.

I like Pope Francis, but he makes me cringe occasionally.

I also think it is unwise to give interviews to journalists informally because anything he says gets rewritten although there are signs that it’s infused with personal opinion which troubles me

 

[dmar198]

I am defining capitalism, not the ideal political system.

Sure, I think I understand that and I hope I didn’t give another impression. From your post, it seems that your definition of capitalism allows government regulations, and that seems to mean that the government has a responsibility to regulate the economy, at least with some regulations. Is that right? If so, what do you think of regulations prohibiting monopolies, or prohibiting prostitution? If someone said the government has no business regulating anything that happens in the market, and that regulating against a monopoly or against prostitution are none of the government’s business, how would you respond? I would say the government has a responsibility to put regulations in place that prevent at least some immoral business practices. Would you agree?

I agree that we need regulations. I don’t agree with those who blame capitalism for limiting freedoms.

I think the pope was blaming a lack of regulations for limiting freedom, not capitalism itself. Does that seem reasonable?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I think the pope was blaming a lack of regulations for limiting freedom, not capitalism itself. Does that seem reasonable?

I think that is a reasonable position, but I think it is pushing in the wrong direction. I think the number of people living in poverty is much higher due to government intervention. I think we need more capitalism, not less.

 

[dmar198]

I think we need more capitalism, not less.

Now you sound like a distributist, who like to say things like, “The Socialist may object that the present capitalistic regime is unstable, and that we are in danger of revolutions. I admit it. But the reason is not because capitalists exist. The reason is because there are not enough capitalists.”

How do you answer the other questions I posed?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Now you sound like a distributist, who like to say things like, “The Socialist may object that the present capitalistic regime is unstable, and that we are in danger of revolutions. I admit it. But the reason is not because capitalists exist. The reason is because there are not enough capitalists.”

How do you answer the other questions I posed?

I support some regulations. I don’t consider laws against prostitution or drugs to be economically based, so that doesn’t fit into this discussion. (I don’t support regulations that prohibit monopolies. In a free economy a monopoly will only exist if it meets the needs of those wanting their goods or services)

My point regarding the pope’s comments is that he is wrong about how to help the poor. We need more freedom in the marketplace, not more regulation.

 

[Prodigal_40s]

The discussion on this thread highlights what the Church is and what it shouldn’t get involved in. Economic systems whether centrally planned or free market are outside the purview of the Church’s priority. Salvation of souls is the focus

 

[dmar198]

I support some regulations. I don’t consider laws against prostitution or drugs to be economically based, so that doesn’t fit into this discussion.

I agree that prohibitions on prostitution and drugs are not economically based, but morality-based, and I think that’s exactly where the pope is focusing: regulations to prohibit immoral business practices, not to give the government control of industry. For example, in Evangelii Gaudium, the pope seems to say that the role of government reform in the economy is to recall businesses to ethical principles:

“Ethics – a non-ideological ethics – would make it possible to bring about balance and a more humane social order.” (Evangelii Gaudium 57) And: “A financial reform open to such ethical considerations would require a vigorous change of approach on the part of political leaders.” (Evangelii Gaudium 58) And: “[Right now ethics] is felt to be a threat, since it condemns the manipulation and debasement of the person.” (Evangelii Gaudium 57)

I’m not aware of any place where the pope says the State should take over any businesses, or take away the right of business owners to decide between ordinary economic decisions, or centralize those decisions under the dictation of the government, but I do see him calling for governments to halt immoral business practices that harm people. What am I missing?

I don’t support regulations that prohibit monopolies. In a free economy a monopoly will only exist if it meets the needs of those wanting their goods or services

Interesting perspective. I’d love to talk about it sometime, but perhaps not now.

My point regarding the pope’s comments is that he is wrong about how to help the poor. We need more freedom in the marketplace, not more regulation.

I think the two are compatible: if you support regulations that merely prohibit immoral business practices, I think the result is more freedom for everyone. What kind of regulations do you think the pope is talking about?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I I think the two are compatible: if you support regulations that merely prohibit immoral business practices, I think the result is more freedom for everyone. What kind of regulations do you think the pope is talking about?

I think the pope is talking about income redistribution overseen by governments.

 

[dmar198]

I think the pope is talking about income redistribution overseen by governments.

What would be an example of income redistribution, and what is your evidence that the pope supports it? Because I think the quotation I provided indicates that the pope is at least primarily talking about preventing immoral business practices.

 

[Seamus_L]

I’m beginning to expect similar comments from more Bishops, like the one in Antwerp. And unfortunately, I’m also beginning to wonder if these statements will even be addressed, since the one in question has not.

 

[openmind77]

True capitalism is freedom. You are describing cronyism.

So you are saying that the hundreds of companies that were provided slave labor by Hitler were all owned by his cronies? Most of them were publicly traded companies with professional management! They believed in share holder profits they just did not believe in freedom.

Capitalism gives you the right to buy and sell and to private property , it does give a right to vote or an elected government. There is more capitalism in China than in most European countries, there is just no freedom or democracy.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

So you are saying that the hundreds of companies that were provided slave labor by Hitler were all owned by his cronies? Most of them were publicly traded companies with professional management! They believed in share holder profits they just did not believe in freedom.

Capitalism gives you the right to buy and sell and to private property , it does give a right to vote or an elected government. There is more capitalism in China than in most European countries, there is just no freedom or democracy.

You are talking about state intervention. That’s cronyism.

True capitalism, ie. a free market, has nothing to do with government.

 

[openmind77]

You are talking about state intervention. That’s cronyism.

True capitalism, ie. a free market, has nothing to do with government.

Exactly, no one (withou the government) to protect the weak from the rich and powerful. It is just freedom for the powerful to take advantage of the weak if goverment does not intervene.

For the disadvantasged it is the freedom to starve, freedom to be sick, freedom to be exploited by their employers etc. Capitalism only gives you as much freedom as you can afford.
.

 

[Darryl1958]

Crony capitalism, which is not free enterprise, involves collusion between big government and big business in order to enrich themselves at the expense of everybody else in society.

The objective of free enterprise therefore is limited government, and separation of powers in order to diffuse power away from government in order to make it more difficult for big business to collude.

 

[GUYMAN]

Chesterton & Daryl are correct in what they say about crony capitalism, etc. However, I would add that without Christian morality /charity a “Capitalist” society becomes immoral, at least in some respects. I think that’s Openmind’s point.