S
stinkcat_14
Guest
I think to bring up socialism in this thread is irrelevant because there is no likely policy that could be enacted because of this encyclical that would violate Church teaching.
- Status
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Your article does say these things, but their citations to the Pope don’t. What your article does, and which you adopt, is the writer’s judgment that such critiques as “oppressing the poor” are somehow inherent to capitalism generally and a mixed system like that of the U.S. specifically. The papal citations never say that. This article is just one more despicable leftist attempt to cast Catholicism as a left wing political party.
One should have more respect for Catholicism, and the Pope, than that.
T
Thomas_White
Guest
The science behind climate change and global warning is settled, and it is no longer a legitimate scientific debate. Any dispute is political.
But I assure you, neither the science behind Humanae Vitae nor the sentiment of Catholic bishops was anything but settled. Nevertheless, it was a papal encyclical, and Catholic politicians did not get a free pass for opposing a teaching of the Church.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
People can read the three articles cited.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
There is no enunciation of actual policy at all. It’s a recitation of principles, sullied in my opinion, by the seeming assumption that MMGW theory, in all its western interpretations, (exists, is caused by fossil fuels, portends disaster, requires draconian cures) is a solid fact. Possibly the Pope really believes it exists, is caused by fossil fuel use and portends disaster because of their use worldwide. But the “cure” policy isn’t there.
But that’s not unusual, because churchmen very rarely espouse particular political remedies even when they think something requires remediation.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I didn’t, and admit I only read the first one. It was a left wing misrepresentation of what the Pope said. Like ipecac, those can only be taken in moderation, so I left the other two for anyone who actually wants to read leftist propaganda.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
If a person did not read the articles, she would not know whether or not they are “leftist propaganda”.
Anyone can read the articles cited, and see whether or not they accurately represent some of the views of the current Pope.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
C’mon, T, do you really think we would expect you to cite anything else?
If people want to know what the Pope thinks, they should read what he says, not what some leftist propaganda organ says he meant.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
I agree that the encyclical didn’t say anything about policy, but in one of our many myriad discussions on the encyclical on these forums, someone brought up socialism as being condemned by the Church. My point is a lot of what is called socialism on these forums, is not really socialism. It is big government, which in my opinion if foolish, but it is not socialism.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
You mean like Fox News? Not too many people other than the very extreme right believe that Fox News is a leftist propaganda organ.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Generally speaking, socialism isn’t socialism either. It is invariably just another process by which the powerful gain wealth and privilege at the expense of the majority of folks. One could say the same about mixed capitalist economies, except that in the latter, one at least has a shot at the ladder because “capitalist” power has to be indirect, whereas “socialist” power is directly coercive.
It may seem overly cynical to assert that the objectives of the powerful in both are the same, but that the means are different.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I will have to agree with my friend from Missouri. Those articles are a misrepresentation of the Pope’s position. The fact that some people want to label him a socialist or anti-capitalist is neither here nor there. He is neither. This is not to ignore this pope’s unmistakeable preference for calling the well-to-do to task for taking responsibility for the poor over other issues that some wish he would address instead.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Not many people claim Fox is a leftist organization. I agree. I will agree, however, that some conservative pundits claim Pope Francis is a socialist or a Marxist. I have not, however, seen those on Fox say it. Of course, so many of them are Catholic, I doubt they would say it even if they believed it.
With protestants, it’s different. Some of the conservative protestants are very critical of this latest encyclical, and accuse the Pope of being political. Limbaugh, I am told, actually did call the Pope a Marxist.
But I don’t expect protestants to really understand Church teaching and the nature of that which is a statement of doctrine and that which is the personal opinion of a churchman. And it’s too bad that it’s that way, though it’s probably inevitable. Protestants who are liberals will, and probably do, want to represent the Pope’s belief in MMGW as being doctrinal, and binding on Catholic conscience. Protestants who are not liberals will, I believe, be appalled to think that’s what the Pope is saying. I have already been confronted by that, and expect a good deal more of it.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
As much as it may come as a surprise to you, I also wish Catholic churchmen, including the Pope, would be very definite about the duty to care for the truly poor. I don’t think they do. Nor do I think, by and large, that they present any practical guidance to people in avoiding excessive consumerism. I will have to except my own bishop, at least in part, from the first comment. He actually did start a diocesan-wide program that provides direct services to the poor, including unwed mothers, and he’s rather good at raising money from the faithful to support it. Maybe he’ll come down harder on consumerism than he has done so far, but he might be defering that for now. One step at a time, maybe. I will add that he discouraged contributions to CCHD, and I commend him for that, since CCHD mainly gives money to other organizations that are not Catholic. He openly said he preferred that we donate to Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri. Just like that.
But seriously, when is the last time anyone has heard a priest or bishop encourage people to buy a used car instead of a new one and even give half the difference to, say, some seminary in Africa or one of those person-to-person support programs some of the religious orders run? When?
When has anybody heard a priest or bishop tell young couples that, say, a young man should see more beauty in a young woman who wears “off the rack” clothing and buying her purse on ebay instead of blowing money on name brands, and giving 1/4 of the difference to, say, the Sisters of Life? When?
Generalities are worthless. When we hear priests or bishops talk about “social justice” that’s all just vague, virtually meaningless, and political-sounding cant. What about actual, living practicalities? I’m a country guy, born and raised, and go to rural parishes because I prefer them. Birds of a feather, I guess. Return to type. But have I ever heard a priest exhort ranchers to donate so much as one 1300 lb steer to “The Kitchen”? (a refuge for the homeless in Springfield, complete with cafeteria) Nope. Never. Maybe I just missed that homily. Yes, yes, yes, that steer is worth almost $2500 at the stockyard. But if your hay and vet bill and land is paid for and you have 200 of them? There are those who do.
And if you’re corporate and pretty well up the ladder, why not vacation in the Black Hills instead of St. Bart’s and give half the difference to the Hawthorne Dominicans who take care of terminal cancer patients?
And if you are a factory line worker, have you ever heard a priest or bishop tell you it would be a charity to your wife and kids if you drank two beers at home instead of six at the bar with your buddies and gave the price of even one beer to the Church?
Maybe others hear that sort of thing all the time. But I don’t. What I hear (except from Bp. Johnston, God bless him) is “social justice, social justice, social justice” as a vague, political-sounding generality. I don’t even know what that means.
I’ll quit on this now. Sorry about the rant.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I’m going to break my promise to shut up.
Several months ago, Bp Johnston sent out invitations to a dinner to various people in the diocese. I’m sure he knew who had money, though he did invite some people of ordinary means like me.
The dinner was nice, if a bit spare, and he spoke, and it was all pretty nice. In the entranceway was a table with all sorts of really fancy desserts on it. At a point, he announced that he was going to auction them off. The very first one, a very nice cake, but still just a cake, went for $5,000.00. The successful bidder proceeded to cut it up and pass the pieces around to people at his table and another one. Various items went for thousands or for a couple of hundred. The bidding almost seemed staged to allow some to buy at less staggering prices. Probably the truly rich (and boy there were some) backed off so all could buy, but stayed in just enough to put serious money in the coffer. All successful bidders passed their loot around, including the plate of cookies that went for something between $100 and $200. It was all for support of the unwed mothers’ home in Springfield, and people were glad to do it. The laughing and the comaraderie were infectious. Oh yes, Catholic Charities did charge for the dinner, but it was a nice dinner, and who wouldn’t pay for it even if it was a bowl of chili?
Practical things. Practical. No mention of “social justice” in the whole event. No condemnation of “the rich”, no shaming anybody, no high-flown language, no political anything. Were we being had in a way? I mean, $5000 for a cake? Sure we were all being had. But if you’re willing to be “had” are you really being “had”?
I enjoyed it, and hope I get invited again.
Now I really will quit. Got to go anyway. Be of good cheer!
Several months ago, Bp Johnston sent out invitations to a dinner to various people in the diocese. I’m sure he knew who had money, though he did invite some people of ordinary means like me.
The dinner was nice, if a bit spare, and he spoke, and it was all pretty nice. In the entranceway was a table with all sorts of really fancy desserts on it. At a point, he announced that he was going to auction them off. The very first one, a very nice cake, but still just a cake, went for $5,000.00. The successful bidder proceeded to cut it up and pass the pieces around to people at his table and another one. Various items went for thousands or for a couple of hundred. The bidding almost seemed staged to allow some to buy at less staggering prices. Probably the truly rich (and boy there were some) backed off so all could buy, but stayed in just enough to put serious money in the coffer. All successful bidders passed their loot around, including the plate of cookies that went for something between $100 and $200. It was all for support of the unwed mothers’ home in Springfield, and people were glad to do it. The laughing and the comaraderie were infectious. Oh yes, Catholic Charities did charge for the dinner, but it was a nice dinner, and who wouldn’t pay for it even if it was a bowl of chili?
Practical things. Practical. No mention of “social justice” in the whole event. No condemnation of “the rich”, no shaming anybody, no high-flown language, no political anything. Were we being had in a way? I mean, $5000 for a cake? Sure we were all being had. But if you’re willing to be “had” are you really being “had”?
I enjoyed it, and hope I get invited again.
Now I really will quit. Got to go anyway. Be of good cheer!
F
freeRadical
Guest
A lot of people misuse the word Socialism. I run into it all the time. With that in mind, the Church has specifically condemned Socialism, that is, they have condemned the ownership of the means of production by the State.
The church has always supported private property rights, free enterprise, and economic freedom as the best way to lift the poor out of poverty. People seem to forget that.
I’m not against helping the poor, I just don’t think that governmental welfare programs and wealth redistribution are the best ways to help the poor. Yet when I say this, I am immediately slandered as hating the poor.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
I agree that people need to say what they mean by socialism. I heard a radio commentator say that the Democratic Party is a socialist party and refer to Mayor deBlasio of New York as Comrade deBlasio.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
It is a mistake to assume that anyone who says things like that is a leftist.
C
CaptFun
Guest
:tiphat: Don’t quit. Remember. Without a rant, Ulysses would just have been General G.
Or President G.
In G’s Tomb.
Thanks for GRANT-ing us your insights. Too many to comment upon now, except to say … go confidently … since your heart’s right and you appear headed in the right direction.
I don’t always do it. But I think tithing is good. Whether I give it right to the Church or (instead of my rather wealthy parish) to whatever child of God in my perview needs aid.
Sometimes tithing time in lieu of money can work too.
T
Thomas_White
Guest
An encyclical is a papal teaching Catholics are called upon to uphold. Make no mistake, the pope’s encyclical made the issue of climate change and mankind’s care of God’s Creation both a theological issue and a moral imperative.
- Status