Pope Benedict XVI calls for "the redistribution of wealth"--a blow to Free Market Theology?

[Nate13]

Or simply follow efforts of those on the Right to shape/twist his words to allow or even confirm their political views.

If that includes reading the original source from the Vatican and not cherry picking encyclicals that only say what we like then I’m all for it.

 

[CatholicPraises]

For the Pope to join basically the Obama doctrine on redistribution is insanity and only harms the poor, especially considering Obama’s pro choice beliefs.

 

[Dirt]

If that includes reading the original source from the Vatican and not cherry picking encyclicals that only say what we like then I’m all for it.

Considering that Encyclicals from The Holy Fathers are used as teaching instruments to educate and edify the Faithful, just what exactly would “cherry picking” constitute? The Encyclicals say what the respective Holy Fathers wish for us to know on a given subject that they feel is pertinant to our Faith. Please elaborate on your statement. Thank you.

 

[Dirt]

For the Pope to join basically the Obama doctrine on redistribution is insanity and only harms the poor, especially considering Obama’s pro choice beliefs.

Where in the Document from His Holiness Pope Benedict did you see Him espouse an “Obama Doctrine”?

 

[Nate13]

Considering that Encyclicals from The Holy Fathers are used as teaching instruments to educate and edify the Faithful, just what exactly would “cherry picking” constitute? The Encyclicals say what the respective Holy Fathers wish for us to know on a given subject that they feel is pertinant to our Faith. Please elaborate on your statement. Thank you.

My point is that there are many many encyclicals on social justice. Attempting to divulge the Church’s position based on information found from one particular encyclical is heading for trouble. By “cherry picking” I was referring to only quoting/reading from encyclicals that seem to more closely relate to the position we hold.

 

[Nate13]

Where in the Document from His Holiness Pope Benedict did you see Him espouse an “Obama Doctrine”?

I agree that was an overstatement. I think the only thing I have a problem with is the choice of phrase with “redistribution of wealth”. Like I said before wealth is either taxed, stolen, or given charitably. You can “redistribute wealth” using either of these three means. Other posters have provided quotes from other encyclicals which make it seem apparent the pope is stressing for more charitable giving in particular. Liberals seem to want to take his statement as meaning the pope is all for the idea of taxing the heck out of the rich because they all know when they say “redistribution of wealth” they are referring to taxing the rich. I don’t believe the pope has such a narrow view of “redistribution of wealth” and I think the quotes provided from other posters in this thread for a variety of encyclicals support this belief.

 

[markomalley]

I agree that was an overstatement. I think the only thing I have a problem with is the choice of phrase with “redistribution of wealth”. Like I said before wealth is either taxed, stolen, or given charitably. You can “redistribute wealth” using either of these three means. Other posters have provided quotes from other encyclicals which make it seem apparent the pope is stressing for more charitable giving in particular. Liberals seem to want to take his statement as meaning the pope is all for the idea of taxing the heck out of the rich because they all know when they say “redistribution of wealth” they are referring to taxing the rich. I don’t believe the pope has such a narrow view of “redistribution of wealth” and I think the quotes provided from other posters in this thread for a variety of encyclicals support this belief.

When the Holy Father is talking about redistribution, he is talking about how the subject chooses to distribute the property that was distributed to that subject. Thus re - distribution.

If the context of the discussion has a State as the subject and, for example, energy as an object, he could be referring to how a State shares the energy reserves that have been distributed to it. It all depends upon the context of the specific statement.

In the Holy Father’s message, the concept of redistribution is stated in this specific context:

1. “Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity.”8 We Christians believe that Christ is our true peace: in him, by his Cross, God has reconciled the world to himself and has broken down the walls of division that separated us from one another (cf. Eph 2:14-18); in him, there is but one family, reconciled in love.

Peace, however, is not merely a gift to be received: it is also a task to be undertaken. In order to be true peacemakers, we must educate ourselves in compassion, solidarity, working together, fraternity, in being active within the community and concerned to raise awareness about national and international issues and the importance of seeking adequate mechanisms for the redistribution of wealth, the promotion of growth, cooperation for development and conflict resolution. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God”, as Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:9).
To me, the context appears to be the relations between States. That is the only context that makes sense with each item in this list:

• Redistribution of wealth
• Promotion of growth
• Cooperation for Development
• Conflict Resolution

Now, I suppose some leftist could twist this around to make the Holy Father sound as if he is endorsing the Communist Manifesto…but it would be a stretch that would require selective cherry-picking and out-of-order reassembly of random phrases from within the message (sort of like what the media does all the time).

Furthermore, this redistribution (action) of wealth (object) by nations (subject) does not even necessarily refer to giving away money (although gratuitousness is thoroughly endorsed by the Holy Father…see Caritas in Veritate). It could refer to putting a mechanism in place to generate the capability for poorer countries to earn that wealth through the production of goods and services to be sold to wealthier countries. Then a richer country would distribute wealth to a poorer country in exchange for a product or a service. The wealth would still be redistributed, but it would be an exchange vice a gift. The trick there would be to avoid taking undue advantage of the poorer State (or to allow corrupt leaders within that poorer State the opportunity to sell their countries down the river for their personal aggrandizement)

Unfortunately, leftists always use the term redistribution in its socialist sense, making all of us over-sensitive to the possibilities the word presents.

 

[Elvis_Guy]

My respect for Pope Benedict just keeps growing.

This is a challenging message for many - including many Catholics - but it is consistent with the Gospel.

My respect…went down…if he’s a pinko commie…time to step down…

 

[exnihilo]

Free markets are an ideal which do not really exist. The US and Western Europe might be relatively free compared to some other economies but none are an ideal free market. What indisputably slows the transfer of wealth is government in its laws, rules, and regulations. The many laws of the state prohibit new businesses from forming and thus entrench existing ones. The law is always written by those in power to stop them from losing it. So if wealth needs to be redistributed more government is not the answer.

Having studied economics extensively, I always laugh when Americans on a certain position of the political spectrum keep spouting this nonsense of “free markets”. It is not “free market ideology” that these people are promoting, but instead a “hatred-against-the-poor” mentality.

Never in the history of the world has there been a free-market. This is a fact, and you can look it up if you wish. The United States is not a free-market. Had the United States been a free-market, much of its industry would be lost virtually overnight due to outsourcing to China and India as well as losing economic stability to bank runs (i.e. the bank panics prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve).

No serious economist believes in free-markets. It is now almost universally recognized - with the exception of ideologues - that the Government also has a role to serve in the proper functioning of an economy.

I actually have a degree in economics. You are correct there has never been a truly free market. This is an ideal. Communism is also an ideal. Advocates for it will often say there has never truly been a communist state. They are probably right. But what we do know from the study of history is that private property and voluntary economic transactions is provides the most wealth for the most people.

The claim that no serious economist believes in free markets is unwarranted. I’d be interested to know how you define serious. Keep in mind that schools of economics are mostly controlled by government money. The state owns the largest universities and has a huge role in providing money for education, therefore it is natural to expect economists to be biased in favor of its patron. In the private sector economists who advocate for free markets are not likely to be employed by large corporations seeking to craft the law in ways to benefit them.

Regarding the Federal Reserve I would point out that according to it the banking system would have collapsed despite their existence if not for the huge bailout from taxpayers. So even the Fed admits they cant prevent failure despite all the negative aspects of its existence, such as monetizing government overspending through inflation.

 

[Elvis_Guy]

Another example of our Church over reaching!! As an American Catholic, I would support limiting on the RCC by way of Tax Deduction removals as punishment… Openly Pressuring Socio Economic opinions as subtle dogma on Sovereign Nations. I’m sure I’ll get flack for this…well shocker…I’m used to it…I don’t care!! I CARE for our Church but at times, Rome needs the burned fingers to learn. This is such a case. Peace out!!

 

[ringil]

Another example of our Church over reaching!! As an American Catholic, I would support limiting on the RCC by way of Tax Deduction removals as punishment… Openly Pressuring Socio Economic opinions as subtle dogma on Sovereign Nations. I’m sure I’ll get flack for this…well shocker…I’m used to it…I don’t care!! I CARE for our Church but at times, Rome needs the burned fingers to learn. This is such a case. Peace out!!

So you are an American first and Catholic second?

 

[Dirt]

Another example of our Church over reaching!! As an American Catholic, I would support limiting on the RCC by way of Tax Deduction removals as punishment… Openly Pressuring Socio Economic opinions as subtle dogma on Sovereign Nations. I’m sure I’ll get flack for this…well shocker…I’m used to it…I don’t care!! I CARE for our Church but at times, Rome needs the burned fingers to learn. This is such a case. Peace out!!

Yes you may :slapfight:

I cannot judge you, nor would i. As for me, i am a loyal subject of Christ The King;
a Member of His Body The Church;
giving due respect and obeidience to the Vicar of Christ, The Holy Father.

 

[Dirt]

My point is that there are many many encyclicals on social justice. Attempting to divulge the Church’s position based on information found from one particular encyclical is heading for trouble. By “cherry picking” I was referring to only quoting/reading from encyclicals that seem to more closely relate to the position we hold.

Thank you for clarifying your position. I agree, using a single Encyclical would be insufficient. That is why I try to show several from different Holy Fathers to show a consistancy of opinion on certain issues.
For what it is worth, i do not “cherry pick” certain Encyclicals to prove a point. I merely point readers to what the Holy Fathers have stated on certain subjects and let the reader draw their own conclusions. Many are ignorant that these topics have been addressed by The Holy Fathers and i simply would like to educate Catholics on their heritage and what has been said before.

 

[pnewton]

Or simply follow efforts of those on the Right to shape/twist his words to allow or even confirm their political views.

It is not twisting the words of the Holy Father to point out the twisting that the Washington Post already did.

 

[Elixir]

I would support limiting on the RCC by way of Tax Deduction removals as punishment…

Punishment for what? I don’t follow what you’re trying to get at.

 

[Elvis_Guy]

Punishment for what? I don’t follow what you’re trying to get at.

The Church wants redistribution ? Let the Church start. Let artwork from The Vatican to the Chalices of the Parish church be sold and "redistribution " made… land which the Church owns save that on which a building rests…sold…redistribution …Judgment begins in the House of The Lord! I call it a punishment …for a simple reason…it is to expose absurdity and hypocrisy in the Church…if our Pontiff wishes this let us see busts and tapestries from the Apostolic Palace, part of…his redistribution …fair really

 

[Elvis_Guy]

So you are an American first and Catholic second?

Indeed!!! I am an American Patriot First…Catholic Second…you read me correctly and never have I hidden how…I prioritize loyalty .

 

[pnewton]

Indeed!!! I am an American Patriot First…Catholic Second…you read me correctly and never have I hidden how…I prioritize loyalty .

You need to understand then that this here is a Catholic website. Most here are faithful Catholics, which precludes any form of idolatry. Nothing should come before God. As Catholics, we here believe that the Catholic Church is lead first and foremost by the Holy Spirit and is the Bride of Christ. Anything less is idolatry. For me, I see any opinion arising from deformed priorities can not help but being deformed.

 

[pnewton]

The Church wants redistribution ? Let the Church start. Let artwork from The Vatican to the Chalices of the Parish church be sold and "redistribution " made… land which the Church owns save that on which a building rests…sold…redistribution …Judgment begins in the House of The Lord!

In light of your backward understanding, I do not see how you have any moral authority to judge the Holy Bride of Christ. This forum is not the place for your anticatholic rhetoric. Rather, that sort of stuff is restricted here to the Apologetics forum where the absurdity of the old, tired, “sell the art work” line can be addressed for the faulty reasoning it contains.

 

[BB2]

The claim that no serious economist believes in free markets is unwarranted. I’d be interested to know how you define serious. Keep in mind that schools of economics are mostly controlled by government money. The state owns the largest universities and has a huge role in providing money for education, therefore it is natural to expect economists to be biased in favor of its patron. In the private sector economists who advocate for free markets are not likely to be employed by large corporations seeking to craft the law in ways to benefit them.

By “serious economist”, I mean an economist with good academic credentials whose views are also widely supported by the rest of academia and empirical studies. To purport that economists are being “controlled by government money” is just a conspiracy theory. In the grand scheme of things, the statistics don’t lie; economics is also a science. Virtually all economists agree that free-markets do not work and a government is required to ensure that market failures are adequately addressed. And Catholic social teaching, if we want to go down that route, agrees. Some Catholics are quick to point out that the Catechism derides Communism yet deliberately overlook the simultaneous fact that the Catechism also derides laissez-faire economic policies:

“The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor” (CCC, Pt. III, 2425)

It amounts to economic heresy to argue for a market with no government ensuring that the economy is for the people rather than the people for the economy. Even Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, and all the other “saints” of economics recognized the limits of what a free-market can do.

To reiterate, I actually find it insulting to Pope Benedict XVI that some users here are quick to go out of their way to change what he has said or ignore it completely under the guise of “I want to read what the Pope said himself”. I’m pretty sure had the Pope condemned Communism or financial regulation, these users wouldn’t go out of their way trying to change the Pope’s comments. The Bible speaks of those who have itching ears who only hear what they want to hear, and some users here have aptly demonstrated that. The Pope was never a Republican, however way anyone wants to change that.