Pope Francis drives a wedge between Catholic Church, GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cider said:
Yes, instead if we believe certain posters here it’s a branch of the Democrat party.
Click to expand...
:confused: Can you identify a post or two to which you’re referring? I’m not doubting they exist but I don’t see them on my own. If anything, I think it’s wise to note what others have already pointed out: the Church isn’t fully aligned with any political party – thank God!
 
kenmiller said:
Stop what ? You are making a premise that does not exist. The planet warms and cools all with her own mind called good old mother nature
Click to expand...
God created all that is. “Good old mother nature” is only one aspect of His omnipotence.
 
Really, and one that has done amazing, unforeseen things since the beginning of time. what does that have to do with the topic? God lets nature take its course. Do your really think He sits at some monitor and directs each minute change in the world?
 
Ridgerunner said:
I do agree with this. I have read, at least, that when the economy is creating wealth, people are more generous to charitable causes. The reverse is also true. While it’s certainly possible for some companies to invest in, say, the Dominican Republic and while doing so undoubtedly creates employment there, the products still have to go somewhere where people can afford to buy them and are not afraid to do so. Maybe people in El Salvador all wear Bass Weejuns, but I doubt it. And they’re not really expensive shoes as shoes go, but not cheap either.
Click to expand...
I imagine there is some truth in that. I know a fair number of people who work in development and the one thing they will tell you is that people aren’t big on sacrificial giving. If you want a really big gift, you need to focus on the person selling a business or cashing in some stock options.

One of the problems that I see in our post-Christian society is that we have a lot of generous givers that have given big gifts that have had little net impact. I occasionally teach at a university that has seen its endowment at least quadruple over the past 20 years. Now, has the quality of education improved much at that school over the twenty years? Not really. It was a good school then and it is still a good school now. However, it has fancier buildings, faculty and staff are paid much better, they have nicer working conditions, etc. That money given to education in a poor country could have brought thousands out of poverty.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I recall reading that if every asset in the U.S., including stocks, bonds, bank accounts, homes, automobiles, furniture, land, machinery and everything else were sold for its present fair market value and distributed evenly over the world population, it would amount to about $1,000 per person. It would soon be gone, of course, and no second distribution. Obviously, too, once the sale started, prices for everything would collapse. But set that aside for the moment.

So, no matter how wealthy anyone thinks Americans are, and no matter how indignant they are about it, there really isn’t all that much to spread around. It really isn’t possible for America to make a significant difference in the financial condition of the rest of the world. So, in truth, those of the more extreme “social justice” persuasion who somehow think massive redistribution will solve much of anything are barking up an empty tree. It’s a romantic, ideological position, not a practical one. It’s a belief that somehow men can, by their own efforts, (force in particular) return to Eden notwithstanding that an angel with a sword of fire (as scripture assures us) guards the gate.

What is possible, however, is for individuals to make decisions based on Church teachings (which are pretty nonspecific) and conscience concerning the ultimate destinations of their resources. In considering that, one must consider those most proximate to him/her first, and according to their stations in life. We do not, for example, deprive our children of a decent education in order to send the cost of it to Haiti. It would be a drop in the bucket in Haiti, and might consign those whose lives we can affect most to a very negative future. But we do not need to send our child to college in a new Corvette when a ten year old Chevy would serve the purpose. If we can then give the difference to charity, we have done what we ought to do, keeping in mind that we need to ensure that our spouse is provided for in his/her old age.

For many of us, charity can’t extend beyond immediate family, and shouldn’t. For many of us, it can extend to neighbor, community, church, charities, as means and other demands of life allow. That can, and for some will, include those in foreign lands.

And I don’t think there is any exact formula for it.
Click to expand...
Great post. You nailed it.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I recall reading that if every asset in the U.S., including stocks, bonds, bank accounts, homes, automobiles, furniture, land, machinery and everything else were sold for its present fair market value and distributed evenly over the world population, it would amount to about $1,000 per person. It would soon be gone, of course, and no second distribution. Obviously, too, once the sale started, prices for everything would collapse. But set that aside for the moment.
Click to expand...
That can’t be rright. The stock market alone in the US is more than $ 6 trilllion, which would make about $ 1,000 for each person in the world. I wouldn’'t be surprised if you’re off by a factor of five for everything together, stocks, bonds, bank accounts, homes, automobiles, furniture, land, machinery and other assets.

Just sayin’.

Also, no second distribution? Think about all the economic activity that you’d get going. Money is not static.
 
Al_Moritz said:
Also, no second distribution? Think about all the economic activity that you’d get going. Money is not static.
Click to expand...
Sales of all property would kill any economy that depends on credit and collateral to fuel it. In this case money would contract and the Fed and other central banks would be powerless to do anything about it.
 
See, here’s the thing. Pope Francis has just reiterated the teachings of the Church. He’s said nothing new - not if you really read the words he’s quoted to have said. Man-made global warming (even if people disagree with it) is a distinctive possibility. Can we ever know for sure how much of the problem is natural and how much (if any) is man-made?

No. But… reducing carbon emissions is in the best interest of the health and safety of the neighboring area, anyway, and the best interest of the long-term economy. Things that emit carbon (especially coal and gasoline) also emit large amounts of particularite matter and ozone which make the air toxic to breathe. More breathing of toxic air means more people coming down with asthma and missing more time in school and work - which means lots of money lost in the economy.

But I diverge. Pope Francis has pretty much always tried to simply reiterate Catholic social teaching. Unfortunately, much of Catholic social teaching (once one gets past the non-negotiables) talks about subsidiary with the poor, aiding the immigrant (regardless of status), forgiveness of those who have wronged you, etc. And therein lies the problem. “Conservatives” are great with the Church when the focus is only on the non-negotiables, but when the focus is expanded, it makes many “Conservatives” uncomfortable. The opposite is true with “Liberals”. “Liberals” love expanded issue focus, because the non-negotiables make them uncomfortable. We have to face it. Catholic teaching is neither “Conservative” nor “Liberal” nor “Moderate” - it’s about following Jesus, loving God (as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), and loving one’s neighbor as oneself - with the ultimate goal of being welcomed into Heaven with a line of people you’ve brought with you along the way.
 
shelby_sun said:
Really, and one that has done amazing, unforeseen things since the beginning of time. what does that have to do with the topic? God lets nature take its course. Do your really think He sits at some monitor and directs each minute change in the world?
Click to expand...
In as much as every breath we take is through His grace, then yes - but without “monitors” (that comment is uncalled for!) Our inadequate minds cannot comprehend the power of God, who created us.
 
Emily2014 said:
In as much as every breath we take is through His grace, then yes - but without “monitors” (that comment is uncalled for!) Our inadequate minds cannot comprehend the power of God, who created us.
Click to expand...
And with every breath we exhale we put CO2 into the atmosphere . Is that a sin?
 
ProVobis said:
Yeh, someone needs to talk to those people over at MSNBC.
Click to expand...
The number of Americans who actually watch MSNBC, Fox, CNN, etc. is ridiculously small. I’m starting to guess that those who do often frequent these forums. But rest assured, most Americans aren’t clued in to any of that nonsense – from liberals or conservatives.
 
powerofk said:
See, here’s the thing. Pope Francis has just reiterated the teachings of the Church. He’s said nothing new - not if you really read the words he’s quoted to have said. Man-made global warming (even if people disagree with it) is a distinctive possibility. Can we ever know for sure how much of the problem is natural and how much (if any) is man-made?

No. But… reducing carbon emissions is in the best interest of the health and safety of the neighboring area, anyway, and the best interest of the long-term economy. Things that emit carbon (especially coal and gasoline) also emit large amounts of particularite matter and ozone which make the air toxic to breathe. More breathing of toxic air means more people coming down with asthma and missing more time in school and work - which means lots of money lost in the economy.

But I diverge. Pope Francis has pretty much always tried to simply reiterate Catholic social teaching. Unfortunately, much of Catholic social teaching (once one gets past the non-negotiables) talks about subsidiary with the poor, aiding the immigrant (regardless of status), forgiveness of those who have wronged you, etc. And therein lies the problem. “Conservatives” are great with the Church when the focus is only on the non-negotiables, but when the focus is expanded, it makes many “Conservatives” uncomfortable. The opposite is true with “Liberals”. “Liberals” love expanded issue focus, because the non-negotiables make them uncomfortable. We have to face it. Catholic teaching is neither “Conservative” nor “Liberal” nor “Moderate” - it’s about following Jesus, loving God (as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), and loving one’s neighbor as oneself - with the ultimate goal of being welcomed into Heaven with a line of people you’ve brought with you along the way.
Click to expand...
Well said. Happy New Year! Three cheers for the non-negotiables and Catholic social teaching (properly expounded and understood)!

:tiphat:
 
When it comes to the environment, it is not as if the battle lines are drawn between the Hosts of Heavens and their saints all dressed in green, and greedy bald capitalist bankers driving widows and orphans and indigeneous tribes from their homes and their rainforests.
When it comes to CO2, there are going to be trade-offs. Every nickel that the real cost of energy is driven up to make hydrocarbons uneconomical is another mouthful of rice that a subsistence family is not going to be able to put in their mouths.
But whatever the real consequences of pumping so much CO2 into the air is, after all the political dross is scraped away enough to see what is going on, it is common sense that that cannot be good for the environment either.
And there will be real costs to a rapidly changing environment, especially for the substituent family again.
the simple fact is that moral leaders can pontificate all that they want, but there is no apparent panacea that good and moral people can grab onto, except to point to everybody else as the problem.
Electric cars, you say?
Except that the major generator of electricity is often coal, which is a hydrocarbon.
Oops.
Electric wind turbines?
Wonderful, everyone ought to have one in their back yard, unless you are a bird caught in the turbines.
Hydrogen cells were all the rage in this part of the country twenty years ago, but that idea has fizzled. We have been into reduce, reuse, recycle for generations now, but CO2 levels still rise.
Forests are great carbon sinks, but the fact that the American states are actually returning more land to forest than is being taken away does not solve the denuding of the Amazon, and the economic need of Brazil and other countries on the edge that drives such practices.
That is not to say that there is nothing to be done, and in fact many good things are being done.
The question is does the huge bureaucratic central planning on international and national levels that is a solution being associated with the pope belong in the ‘solution’ column, or does the bungling and boondoogles and bureaucratic red tape that are invariably a part of these kinds of solutions actually belong in the ‘making things worse’ column?

If the answer that a morally motivated person comes up with , according to his own conscience, is that the central planning solution is counter-productive, then he would in fact be acting immorally to throw his lot in with the pope’s solution, just because he is a Catholic and understands the pope to be a servant of God.
Of course, what the pope is actually saying may well not be what the left wing media is reporting him to say, but we can only go by the reports.
 
Oh no, it’s almost like a religion founded by the Divine Logos Incarnate in the Roman-occupied Levant 2,000 years ago that now has its politically sovereign HQ located in the Italian Penninsula and holds that governments of this world are all flawed temporary placeholders for a coming Kingdom but still should be followed and respected so long as you pay to God what is His and to the worldly governments what is theirs DOESN’T believe in strictly abiding by the ideologies of the American Conservative Right!

Whodathunkit? :rolleyes:🤷
 
The good books tells us:
Romans 8:28 * And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.*
Click to expand...
.
I do think this is a blessing in disguise, so some can reflect on global warming, income distribution, and in turn, others may look at their support of evils such as abortion and same-sex marriage.
 
Who’da Thunk it, doubt were about to see anti-life politicians become role models for the Catholic populace, it’s time for everyone to buckle down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top