Pope demands 'legitimate redistribution' of wealth

[Isca]

I’m struggling with some of the comments here about the Pope being liberal in his views, as if that’s a bad thing. I would worry if he wasn’t, quite honestly, certainly in regard to socio-economic policies.

As a British socialist, I’m delighted to read the Pope’s words, which make perfect sense to me just as they are quoted. It’s about time that we made real efforts to support those who for whatever reason are unable to support themselves, and that will inevitably require redistribution of wealth, through a re-focus of Government expenditure priorities - and that will involve those who make huge profits paying more taxes, or at least not using means to avoid paying what they legitimately should pay. Social welfare benefits help individuals, but they are not the answer (and they are insufficient, in most cases and often miss the people most in need).

There are so many local projects in the UK aimed at helping the homeless and hungry, some of them are secular and some of them are supported by churches (my own parish provides sandwiches, soup and drinks for anyone who turns up at the parish house requesting food, a volunteer project that runs every day, funded by those who attend the church). All these projects are worthy, but it’s not the answer to the wider problem - people need good educational opportunities, training, decent housing, good healthcare, secure employment and hope, which brings self-respect. Immediate aid projects need to be co-ordinated in a more coherent way, too. All of that costs money.

We need an upstream approach, to stop people falling in the water in the first place. Fishing them out at the bottom doesn’t really help anyone long-term.

 

[Veridical16]

The last will be first and the first will be last. Wealth is vanity and our world is enslaved to it - and to the detriment of other people.

American conservatives are too influenced by John Locke and Adam Smith in my opinion. Too much Locke and Smith; not enough Aquinas and Pope Leo XIII.

Enlightenment/Anglo Protestant Principles need to be jettisoned.

 

[shelby_sun]

He was speaking in Spanish, and there are English and Italian translations. Why do you think it needs to be in Latin?

The Holy See does chip in, in the sense of giving charitable aid around the world. The Catholic Church is the biggest charitable organisaiton in the world.

Yes. Harvard has a bigger budget than the Vatican. Why don’t we sell the Louvre or the Smithsonian? Sigh.

Harvard does not exist to help others only to educate others. Yes I the Church is the biggest charitable organization, so those people or organizations who give a great deal, but still earn of have so much great wealth, are they not giving enough, and who decides.

As far as America goes their is something called separation of church and state, and as an American I really don’t want the country to follow one religions wants over another. Of course, as a Catholic I would like it very much, but only if they listen to the Pope,which is unlikely.

 

[shelby_sun]

Selling the art wouldn’t do anything for the poor. All it would do is make the rich richer.

The Catholic Church does more for the poor than any other institution. All that wealth and art don’t belong to anyone, it’s for the churches, for God’s glory. Selling that would accomplish nothing except deprive people, yes even poor people, of beautiful sacred places to worship. I fail to see how that’s better.

I was told by many Jesuit priest we would not have a Jesuit has Pope in my lifetime or my children’s, yet here we are. The power that be in the Church can do more than you think.
Those things are gift to the Church, so they Church owns them, and it is in the realm of possibilities for them to sell them; of course, they won’t, but why?

Why should anyone care if the Church has those things or not. My point was, as a Jesuit, the Pope is probably not comfortable with what I sin the Vatican when there are so many poor and dying. Growing up with the Jesuit, live in very modest single dorm size rooms with the bare minimum of things. Everything they are given as gift is suppose to be share with all in their Jesuit living community.

So why should the Church keep its wealth and other governments, organizations, people redistribute their?

 

[Thorns]

If one can’t call Jesus a liberal or a conservative or even attribute any political motivation to him, then we shouldn’t place the Holy Father into being part of this or that camp.

Truth is truth, and transcends any notion of man-made ideologies. We can’t pigeonhole the Pope.

If someone perceives the Pope to be conservative or liberal and at odds with where they are politically – in respect to his legitimacy as teacher, it is probably the onlooker who needs to reevaluate where he or she has convicted themselves to certain ideologies that he should not be adhering so tightly in the first place.

Pope Francis was correct in reproaching Catholics who have been reducing the Faith to an Ideology.

en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/10/17/pope_francis_at_mass_calls_for_greater_openness_/in2-738150

The Pope isnt Jesus though.

 

[Sheeniac]

I would think if he is speaking so strongly on this issue he would be thinking that the Vatican should chip in, maybe selling some of its art. Not that it will actually happen.

IIRC much of the art is owned by the people of Italy and is held in trust by the Vatican.

Of course, instead we could rent out the Sistine Chapel for private corporate events if you think that would generate more revenue.

 

[shelby_sun]

IIRC much of the art is owned by the people of Italy and is held in trust by the Vatican.

Of course, instead we could rent out the Sistine Chapel for private corporate events if you think that would generate more revenue.

So maybe the Italian government should redistribute to the poor.

I am sure the Sistine chapel rents out for wedding to certain people like all Churches.

 

[Seamus_L]

Every time Pope Francis speaks, a considerable number of people disagree, often to great extremes, regarding what exactly he said. Not trying to sound like a heretic, but that’s reality and I don’t recall anything like this previously during my lifetime.

 

[shelby_sun]

Every time Pope Francis speaks, a considerable number of people disagree, often to great extremes, regarding what exactly he said. Not trying to sound like a heretic, but that’s reality and I don’t recall anything like this previously during my lifetime.

I am sure the Pope is fully aware of this, and greatly expects.

 

[Veridical16]

The Pope isnt Jesus though.

He follows him. As all Catholics are to do.

So how can any Catholic really call themselves a Catholic with modifiers.

 

[shelby_sun]

He follows him. As all Catholics are to do.

So how can any Catholic really call themselves a Catholic with modifiers.

There are more than you might know that do it all the time.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I see no mention of precisely *how *“legitimate redistribution” can or should be achieved. Yes, he says that “government should. . . .” But exactly *how *“should they” correct injustices? The words of Pope Francis in the article (and the supporting link that Dans0622) are quite vague, are they not? This is what people would like to know, I think, and why there is much confusion and debate on both sides.



Being that the Pope is addressing the U.N. in particular, is there no better opportunity to at least open the door to discussion on the actions of the IMF and the World Bank?

Truth be told, I can’t expect the Church leaders to go up against the powerful banking cartels of the world. And in a way, I feel the ambiguity of Pope Francis’ words to be a positive aspect, because it asks people to practice justice for others while leaving them the freedom to decide how best to correct legitimate economic inequalities according to the commerce laws and productivity levels of their respective societies.

The downside to this vagueness however, is that his words can ring empty because they really don’t get to - as what you referred - the “heart of the matter”. (Not to mention, they leave people to make assumptions while claiming Church authority on the issue.) And I do think that the manipulation of money, and the permission granted to a select few to create money “out of nothing” is (among other policies) a main contributor toward so many of the economic problems we see today.

I tend to go with this. Thanks.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Every time Pope Francis speaks, a considerable number of people disagree, often to great extremes, regarding what exactly he said. Not trying to sound like a heretic, but that’s reality and I don’t recall anything like this previously during my lifetime.

True.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I don’t know how many conservative Popes we’ve had during my life. Can’t we have just one liberal Pope? Just one?

Uhhhhh…absolutely not. :tsktsk:

 

[Vouthon]

He follows him. As all Catholics are to do.

So how can any Catholic really call themselves a Catholic with modifiers.

Indeed, according to the teaching of the church we should never have a modifying term before our faith:

"…We desire that this practice, lately come into use, of using distinctive names by which Catholics are marked off from other Catholics, should cease; such names must be avoided, not only as ‘profane novelties of words’ that are neither true nor just, but also because they lead to great disturbance and confuse the Catholic body… There is no need to qualify by fresh epithets the profession of faith; let it be enough for a man to say, “Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname…”

***- Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum (1914) ***

 

[Veridical16]

I would think if he is speaking so strongly on this issue he would be thinking that the Vatican should chip in, maybe selling some of its art. Not that it will actually happen.

Judas said the same thing

biblehub.com/mark/14-6.htm

The Sistine Chapel argument is usually proposed by someone who thinks all we have in this life is the material.
You can feed the stomach for a day with that money. Yet what good is life if we just fed our bellies and never pondered the spiritual with invaluable art works? God hasn’t left man. He deserves his tribute. To ask to sell off treasures to be locked up in private, is a sign of jealousy and covetousness. No different than Judas.

Anyone thinking the Pope is speaking in general terms, and NOT speaking with that which is consistent with Papal Teaching, as posted by others on this thread,
is someone who thinks the Right to Property at the expense of the common good is good.

To ask the Vatican to sell its art implies all valuable art should be sold off, all public holdings of historical artifacts and governments should sell off all possessions. No Smithsonian, No Nation’s Museums should hold art if everything can be reduced to utilitarian use for one’s stomach.
It’s a ridiculous fallacious argument that deflects from the true point of emphasis, glaring disparity of wealth that does effect the common good.

Jesus said the Poor you will always have with you.

The Pope is pointing out, the poor hasn’t left us. The issue is Economic disparity, which takes away from the working class and middle class.

I think the poor could be helped more, not by those owning billions , but many, many people and families having their wages to live, and having that surplus value to do what they must to care for the poor in their abilities too, which they will have more ability to do so, if the concentration of wealth is among the many.

IT is too simplistic to say, "Hey you’re a billionaire, you do everything! " “hey Church, you own a lot,sell everything!” rather it is the goal to have many people own property and have enough of that surplus value, the concentration of wealth among more people than rich individuals, so that they can be freer to help their neighbor better, than an individual minding a corporation who has not the time, what the many can do for the poor on a more INTIMATE level.

To say, “we need to throw more money at the poor” is to miss the mark. It’s NOT THE MONEY.
**It’s our ATTENTION **to the poor. The wealth is secondary.

This is why "Sell all your possessions, your art! " is a short-sighted demand. NO,
the point of the Popes is to point out that concentration of wealth and profit among the few, at the expense of wage earners and lower classes, middle classes, cripples societies OVERALL ability of helping their poor.

If a father and mother have to work two jobs just to meet their necessities, to provide for their kids? And a student has to work countless hours to pay off their loans? These people who can do more than the impersonal rich man throwing his money at a cause for a tax write off, get cut off from the time they could have to more effectively give their charity.

Currently THE TIME put in to serve that Economic system, is IMPEDING a lot of people’s ability to remember to** care for their impoverished neighbor **and provide their surplus charity, that they WOULD have, if the concentration of wealth gap, was less wide.

Charity is a lot more than just throwing money at something, which a billionaire can do.
If more people are closer to give its** attention *to the poor with what little they have? Then we wouldn’t get this mentality of False Redistribution, “let the billionaire give his money” “i have none in comparison to him” *

This also applies to the STATE, and the problems with welfare state, “oh the government can do everything”
If the working class, middle class were to get what they EARN in JUSTICE , through whatever legitimate means. It doesn’t mean that they NOW have the ability to do as the unjust rich man does with their material, whatever they want ignoring their obligations to the less fortunate.

To whom much is given,much is expected.

This is why Catholicism will be at odds with anyone who looks for an ideology that cater to the MATERIALISTIC. Which is found in both Marxism and Capitalism.

 

[MJE]

Kathyrn Jean Lopez @ National Review:

So, of course, the first Associated Press story that hits the wires makes no mention of anything Pope Francis had to say about the “culture of death” but runs the headline “Pope urges ‘legitimate redistribution’ of wealth by the state to poor in spirit of generosity.”

During a week that included a U.N. committee suggesting the Holy See is guilty of torture – a veiled attempt to stifle the voice of the premier enemy of a secularism with an increasingly intolerant, authoritarian streak, even in the United States — the story this morning is one of a rebuke of secularism and stubborn ideological selfishness.

nationalreview.com/corner/377617/totally-missing-pope-francis-story-yet-again-kathryn-jean-lopez

 

[shelby_sun]

Uhhhhh…absolutely not. :tsktsk:

Sorry but we now have one, at least one who is more liberal than are other Popes in the past.

 

[GratefulDad]

The time has past that the Vatican and local diocese should spend time giving high-level and nebulous advice to politicians and governments.

The 2000’s politicians and governments world wide are by far the most corrupt and fallen people alive. The Catholic Church has the answers and the smartest people to execute just businesses, education system, small governments, societies, etc.

If the Church has some strategy to save civilization today they need to come forward boldly and stop being limp wristed effeminate clergy afraid of what someone in the media will say about them hurting their feeeeeelings.

They need to preach the full and complete Truth that the greedy, the fornicators, the murders will be in hell for all eternity with no chance of ever escaping. Those humans who send themselves to hell will be there with the conscience, resurrected bodies and souls for ever and ever.

Our Lord’s Ocean of Mercy is for everyone but you have to ask for it humbly and sincerely.

 

[Vouthon]

Sorry but we now have one, at least one who is more liberal than are other Popes in the past.

Shelby, my grandfather told me that when his aunt lived through the Second Vatican Council she said to him, “We are all becoming Protestants!”

Pope Paul VI was accused of teaching “souped up Marxism”.

Nothing changes. Pope Francis is no more “liberal” than John XXIII or Paul VI. Relative to each era, popes have always been accused of being too “liberal” or too “conservative”. The Truth hurts and people respond accordingly.

There is no such thing as a liberal or a conservative pope. This is nonsensical media talk.