Never say never. A social system that may be condemned by the Church at one point in history, may be condoned at another point.
Brilliant!
I get what you are saying but wealth is an economic benefit. I don’t think we should reduce the Pope to a simple redistribution of money type philosophy but there are ways that the Pope would like to see the economic benefits of the wealth be given to the poor in society. How that is to be done is a question that must be asked. From the statement it appears that the government plays part of a role in that. I agree with that philosophy and I believe the Church does to. I believe it says in extreme cases someone may procure what they need from the excess of others. (I have to search for the quote, I’ll post it when I find it)I don’t think you can say that the Pope is vague. What you are being confused by is the News Media always re-writing what the Pope says to make it look like he is voting for Obama. It’s not what the the Pope says, it’s always what the News Media wants to cram down our throats.
The rest of this post is not directed at you, but rather what I see as the problem with these type of headlines that constantly get thrown at us.
The key phrase here is the headlines stating “Legitimate Redistribution of Wealth”. THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID. This is what he said “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State”.
Has anyone actually paid attention to the discombobulated abuse of the change of the word “benefit” to the word “wealth”??? Benefit and wealth are not synonyms.
Suppose the head line read* “Pope demands legitimate redistribution of economic benefits”. - *Do you think anyone would pay attention to this news story? I doubt it.
Definition of Benefit: 1. a kindly, charitable act. 2. anything contributing to an improvement in condition. 3. payments made by an insurance company, public agency etc…
Where in this definition does anyone get “wealth” ?? It’s beyond me how they can get away with changing the words to suit their needs and everyone reads it and accepts it.???
Is there such a thing as “illegetimate distribution of benefits by the state”?? Clearly there is. Our benefits system is clouded with corruption and thieves. So ya, the Pope is right in calling them out for not doing more concerning the “Legitimate distribution”.
this was also suggested by Thomas in ST. II-II 66 A.7
Millions, I hardly think so. You really feel like all those non Catholics are going to change their think on birth control, annulments, premarital sex, etc when so many Catholic don’t follow the teachings. What they like about Pope Francis is his compassion for others and his acceptance of other, but they are not going to follow the important teachings. Their will be a few like under any Pope.
Can you point to any subject that the Church has ever condemned and later reversed itself?
To change its teachings on morals and the like, I doubt that the Church would change; but when it comes to economic issues, timing is everything.
The Church does not condone any one particular system of economics over another. You are mistaken if you think the day is going to come when the pontiff declares that an economic system is to be implemented and adhered to under pain of sin. Communism and socialism, your apparent favorite, have been condemned by the Church as political systems. This is never going to change regardless of the “timing.” As has been pointed out more times than necessary, Pope Francis is saying what the Church has always said, that those in legitimate authority have a duty to tend to all, especially the least in society. He is speaking from a moral perspective, not a political one. He is not saying that any system should be implemented to take from the haves to give to the have nots.
As we all now here at CAF, disciplines of the Church can be changed. This is a far cry from saying that the Church has changed its position on the condemnation of socialism and communism. But if it makes you feel good to think that the pope is saying what you think he should be saying, then go for it.
Where did I ever imply anything that comes close to this??? I believe the world may someday become socialistic and that the Church will not object.
Rubbish. Liberal Capitalism is based upon the acquisition of individual profit at the expense of others. It has never in itself liberated any poor person from their situation, rather moderating influences upon it and modifications of the system (such as social welfare legislation, free and universal public education etc,) have enhanced the lives and prospects of the poor.
Yes. I am reminded of St John Paul II discussion re: “authentic feminism/femininity”.I don’t think you can say that the Pope is vague. What you are being confused by is the News Media always re-writing what the Pope says to make it look like he is voting for Obama. It’s not what the the Pope says, it’s always what the News Media wants to cram down our throats.
The rest of this post is not directed at you, but rather what I see as the problem with these type of headlines that constantly get thrown at us.
The key phrase here is the headlines stating “Legitimate Redistribution of Wealth”. THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID. This is what he said “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State”.
Has anyone actually paid attention to the discombobulated abuse of the change of the word “benefit” to the word “wealth”??? Benefit and wealth are not synonyms.
Suppose the head line read* “Pope demands legitimate redistribution of economic benefits”. - *Do you think anyone would pay attention to this news story? I doubt it.
Definition of Benefit: 1. a kindly, charitable act. 2. anything contributing to an improvement in condition. 3. payments made by an insurance company, public agency etc…
Where in this definition does anyone get “wealth” ?? It’s beyond me how they can get away with changing the words to suit their needs and everyone reads it and accepts it.???
Is there such a thing as “illegetimate distribution of benefits by the state”?? Clearly there is. Our benefits system is clouded with corruption and thieves. So ya, the Pope is right in calling them out for not doing more concerning the “Legitimate distribution”.
Wrong. Capitalism has done more to give people modern conveniences and a higher standard of life than any other system that has been tried. It didn’t happen overnight. And it hasn’t always been practiced by morally scrupulous people. But the things today which we take for granted - infrastructure, Automobiles, appliances, homes with central heating, modern comforts, etc. are the product of the free-market. Of course your point that profit only comes at the expense of others is completely false - and betrays a lack of understanding of economics. People don’t make profits at the expense of others. In a free-market economy with minimal regulation, the pie is not finite, but growing. The rising tide lifts all boats, etc.
Obviously you are basing your opinion of the free market on one era - the unrestrained capitalism of the 19th century England. What an unfair caricature. Your reasoning is similar to someone who said that in the 19th century doctors were basically quacks so therefore all modern medicine is quackery.
The Church has condemned socialism. When has it condemned capitalism? (it hasn’t).
That is a great idea. (my bold italics).
Your response seems very political and one-sided. Obviously the pope has not shaken up how you see the world if you are basically resorting to the same old name-calling and stereotypes as before. (neo-cons, libertarians, etc). How exactly has how you see the world changed?
Well said.
Why is it that regardless of the debate, those that have nothing constructive to say, resort to throwing out birth control, annulments, and other pious and judgmental comments. This pope is shaking things up, bringing compassion back into the church, opening the doors wider to our church.
What took place was evil “social Darwinism”. The free exchange of goods and services needs a moral component, but it does NOT need the heavy hand of government bureaucrats, whose main objective is to enrich and empower themselves by skimming wealth that they themselves have not created. Rob
