Pope John XXIII Described Importance of Fathers and Mothers and Condemned Socialism, False Teachings, and Indifference to Truth

[livingwordunity]

Pope John XXIII (soon to be Saint Pope John XXIII on Sept. 30, 2013)

Pope John XXIII - On Unity Within the Family

“We have called nations, their rulers, and all classes of society to harmonious unity. Now we sincerely urge families to achieve and strengthen this unity within themselves. For unless peace, unity, and concord are present in domestic society, how can they exist in civil society? This harmonious unity which should exist within the family circle rises from the holiness and indissolubility of Christian marriage. It is the basis of much of the order, progress, and prosperity of civil society. Within the family, the father stands in God’s place. He must lead and guide the rest by his authority and the example of his good life. The mother, on the other hand, should form her children firmly and graciously by the mildness of her manner and by her virtue.” - Ad Petri Cathedram

Pope John XXIII - On the Sacredness of Human Life

“Human life is sacred—all men must recognize that fact. From its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God. Those who violate His laws not only offend the divine majesty and degrade themselves and humanity, they also sap the vitality of the political community of which they are members.” - Mater et Magistra

On Socialism

“Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority.” - Mater et Magistra

On False Teachings

“There is never any need, therefore, to turn to proponents of doctrines condemned by the Church; for they only draw men on with false promises and when they obtain control of the state, try boldly and unscrupulously to deprive men of their supreme spiritual goods—the Christian commandments, Christian hope, and Christian faith. Those who adhere to the doctrines these men propose, minimize or eliminate all that our present age and our modern civilization hold dearest: true liberty and the authentic dignity of the human person. Thus they attempt to destroy the bases of Christianity and civilization.” - Ad Petri Cathedram

On Indifference to Truth

"Some men, indeed do not attack the truth willfully, but work in heedless disregard of it. They act as though God had given us intellects for some purpose other than the pursuit and attainment of truth. This mistaken sort of action leads directly to that absurd proposition: one religion is just as good as another, for there is no distinction here between truth and falsehood. ‘This attitude,’ to quote Pope Leo again, ‘is directed to the destruction of all religions, but particularly the Catholic faith, which cannot be placed on a level with other religions without serious injustice, since it alone is true.’ Moreover, to contend that there is nothing to choose between contradictories and among contraries can lead only to this fatal conclusion: a reluctance to accept any religion either in theory or practice.

How can God, who is truth, approve or tolerate the indifference, neglect, and sloth of those who attach no importance to matters on which our eternal salvation depends; who attach no importance to pursuit and attainment of necessary truths, or to the offering of that proper worship which is owed to God alone? " - Ad Petri Cathedram, 17-18

 

[L_Marshall]

**
On False Teachings**

“There is never any need, therefore, to turn to proponents of doctrines condemned by the Church; for they only draw men on with false promises and when they obtain control of the state, try boldly and unscrupulously to deprive men of their supreme spiritual goods—the Christian commandments, Christian hope, and Christian faith. Those who adhere to the doctrines these men propose, minimize or eliminate all that our present age and our modern civilization hold dearest: true liberty and the authentic dignity of the human person. Thus they attempt to destroy the bases of Christianity and civilization.” - Ad Petri Cathedram

And yet so many people think he’d be on board with contraception and woman’s ordination…

 

[livingwordunity]

And yet so many people think he’d be on board with contraception and woman’s ordination…

Another thing about Pope John XXIII is that he frequently quoted from and wrote favorably about Pope Leo XIII who I’m sure the liberals of today don’t like. I recommend that every Catholic on here who sees this thread copy these quotes and save them in a document on their computer for use whenever a heterodox Catholic tries to claim that this Pope is one of them.

 

[L_Marshall]

I recommend that every Catholic on here who sees this thread copy these quotes and save them in a document on their computer for use whenever a heterodox Catholic tries to claim that this Pope is one of them.

I second that!

 

[3DOCTORS]

I second that!

I third it!

 

[Gliggle]

**

On Socialism**

“Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority.” - Mater et Magistra

I am really confused by this quote, as I come from a moderately socialist country, Australia. I do see how extreme socialism can impose severe limitations on liberty (If you become fully the states responsibility, it follows the state has full authority over you and every aspect of your life). However moderate socialism doesn’t seem problematic to me, when a state bears responsibility for some aspects of its citizens lives (in my case, say healthcare, social welfare) I don’t see anything being lost because a state always bears some responsibility for its citizens by its very nature. I am just confused though because if the claim is that socialism is problematic because takes no account of anything other than material well-being — I do not understand how this is different from capitalism at all, which seems to me to give material well being the crown.

I also don’t understand the bit about [even moderate socialism] “proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production.” Can someone explain this to me? I actually don’t understand this statement.

Thanks!

 

[livingwordunity]

I am really confused by this quote, as I come from a moderately socialist country, Australia.

Isn’t Australia becoming unfriendly toward Christians who don’t agree with things like abortion and so-called “same-sex marriage”? I thought I heard this from somewhere. Do you know if this is correct?

 

[Gliggle]

Australians have had a very steady level of unfriendliness towards many traditional Christian values ever since I can remember as a thirty five year old. Australia is probably about to get less socialist after the next election, its always wobbling one way or another, this is not an issue to be oversimplified with “People dislike traditional Christian values in your country - therefore the presence of socialism is the cause”. If it was as simple as that I would only have to look at the USA to see an example of a country historically with minimal socialism that has been openly loathing of traditional Christian values long before any strong ideals of socialism crept into their government (I am assuming you are including the US under the umbrella of socialism due to the policies introduced by the current administration?)

But none of this answers my question. It just seems so wild to me, looking back on the last century, to say that moderate socialism is too focused on material wellbeing, when the greatest legacy of pure capitalism seems to be consumerism. You just can’t get any more focused on the material than that can you?

 

[BRZ]

Gliggle, I would say though that it is that unfriendliness towards Christian morals and values that leads to socialism however. Also, as the US becomes more and more unfriendly towards Christian morals and values it seems to be heading more towards socialism. As more and more people being to become dependent on what socialism brings to the table, socialism will increase. Europe is another example. Europe has been targeted by the Catholic Church because of how far it has fallen in Christian morality and ethics and Europe has a whole lot of Socialism.

This doesn’t mean that I think Capitalism is great either. What is the answer? Well, I don’t know, I guess we can look to the Bible for that. There is an example where God sort of did set up a government for his people, the old Israel, before they had kings (God eventually did give them kings but he was not happy that they wanted that when he had already given them a good government with judges and such)

 

[Gliggle]

I was thinking about this discussion after I posted and I thought about how hard it is to quantify attitudes towards Christian values in a society. Its easy for me to say Americans have been historically unfriendly to Christian values even during its non socialist years, however can I prove that? I don’t even live in America, most of my impressions come through the mass media. So I thought that a good way to quantify it would be abortion rates. I found data for the year 2008, and actually the results surprise me.

In 2008 in Australia approx. 80,000 abortions were performed for a population of 21.3 million. In 2008 in the USA approx. 1,210,000 abortions were performed for a population of 304 million.

By these numbers Australians legally murdered 0.4 % of its populations that year, while the USA legally murdered… 0.4%.

By this measure, Australians and Americans were equally unfriendly to traditional Christian values in the year 2008.

Sources
abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/
studentsprotectinglife.org/resources/facts/statistics
prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2008/2008wpds.aspx

In the year 2008 I was on the dole, because I was unemployed. If I had wanted to terminate a pregnancy at that time, the government would have paid for it. If I had gotten very sick, the government would also have paid for my healthcare. I don’t think these things would have necessarily happened in the USA at this time? So I think its fair to say Australia was much more socialist than the US in 2008, had been so for quite a long time, and yet had relatively similar levels of hostility towards traditional Christian values.

Either way when I read the link I was pleased to see that he is also equally critical of Capitalism (see quote below). Certainly, it seems to me that moderate socialism is still a lesser evil than extreme capitalism. Certainly he makes it clear he thinks different times require different commentary.

Other Problems of the Day

1. Pius XI was not unaware of the fact that in the forty years that had supervened since the publication of the Leonine encyclical the historical scene had altered considerably. It was clear, for example, that unregulated competition had succumbed to its own inherent tendencies to the point of practically destroying itself. It had given rise to a great accumulation of wealth, and, in the process, concentrated a despotic economic power in the hands of a few "who for the most part are not the owners, but only the trustees and directors of invested funds, which they administer at their own good pleasure.’’ (l4)
2. Hence, as the Pope remarked so discerningly, "economic domination has taken the place of the open market. Unbridled ambition for domination has succeeded the desire for gain; the whole economic regime has become hard, cruel and relentless in frightful measure.’’ (15) As a consequence, even the public authority was becoming the tool of plutocracy, which was thus gaining a stranglehold on the entire world.

 

[JimG]

Thanks for posting these quotes. They provide much food for thought. I was particularly struck by this:

“For unless peace, unity, and concord are present in domestic society, how can they exist in civil society? This harmonious unity which should exist within the family circle rises from the holiness and indissolubility of Christian marriage. It is the basis of much of the order, progress, and prosperity of civil society.”

Marriage is indeed fundamental, and it has been under attack ever since the acceptance of contraception, a doctrine on which Catholics and Protestants were once wholly united.

 

[Genesis315]

Another thing about Pope John XXIII is that he frequently quoted from and wrote favorably about Pope Leo XIII who I’m sure the liberals of today don’t like. I recommend that every Catholic on here who sees this thread copy these quotes and save them in a document on their computer for use whenever a heterodox Catholic tries to claim that this Pope is one of them.

Yeah, Bl. John XXIII is even more misrepresented than the Council he convened.

It’s interesting you mention Leo XIII as he was maligned in similar ways as John XXIII has been. He too was accused by some of surrending the Church to Liberalism and the spirit of the French Revotlution. Progressives and Modernists longingly expressed their hope for a “Leo XIV” during the “repressive” pontificate of that meanie St. Pius X, much like progressives have longed for a “John XXIV” during the pontificates of Bl. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

 

[Abu]

Gliggle #6
I am just confused though because if the claim is that socialism is problematic because takes no account of anything other than material well-being — I do not understand how this is different from capitalism at all, which seems to me to give material well being the crown.
I also don’t understand the bit about [even moderate socialism] “proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production.” Can someone explain this to me? I actually don’t understand this statement.
BRZ #9
This doesn’t mean that I think Capitalism is great either.

To understand the huge difference between socialism and free enterprise we have to know what the Church teaches about both, how they developed, to understand that free enterprise has seldom been allowed to exist for long anywhere without State interference and manipulation – as against sensible State regulation – and to understand the frailties of human nature.

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

U.S. governments and the Federal Reserve have severely distorted free enterprise from the 1930’s.

Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120: “If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

“And so, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Sons, having surveyed the present economic system, We have found it laboring under the gravest of evils. We have also summoned Communism and Socialism again to judgment and have found all their forms, even the most modified, to wander far from the precepts of the Gospel” (#128).

“In recent years the range of such intervention has vastly expanded, to the point of creating a new type of State, the so-called “Welfare State”. This has happened in some countries in order to respond better to many needs and demands, by remedying forms of poverty and deprivation unworthy of the human person. However, excesses and abuses, especially in recent years, have provoked very harsh criticisms of the Welfare State, dubbed the “Social Assistance State”. Malfunctions and defects in the Social Assistance State are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the State. Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.” (Centesimus Annus, 48, Bl John Paul II, 1991).

Now see the affirmation of free enterprise – Bl John Paul II teaches in Centesimus Annus, 1991:
CA 42. ‘Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of , capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?
‘The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.
‘CA 43. The Church has no models to present;’

Pope Benedict XVI felt it necessary to teach that “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36)

As the eminent and revered Fr James Schall, S.J., points out this is how poverty in the world is alleviated:
“Since the Church wants poverty confronted, since She wants this confrontation to be done justly and with the interest and cooperation of the workers and the poor, She has had to acknowledge, as did the socialist systems themselves, that there are certain ways that must be employed if mankind is to meet its economic problems. These ways can be known and imitated, but they must include a juridical system, profit, enterprise, knowledge, exchange, a market, voluntary organisations, a relatively independent economy, private property, and respect for work and excellence.” (Fr James V Schall, S.J., in *Does Catholicism Still Exist?, *Alba House 1994, p 184-185).

 

[Abu]

Correction to post #13:
Now see the affirmation of free enterprise – Bl John Paul II teaches in Centesimus Annus, 1991:
42. Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society?

 

[Gliggle]

Hi Abu,

Thanks for your reply. I found the quote below useful for understanding this point of view.

Pope Benedict XVI felt it necessary to teach that “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36)

 

[sw85]

And yet so many people think he’d be on board with contraception and woman’s ordination…

I remember hearing recently some hypothesis that Pope Francis was canonizing JPII to please “conservatives” and John XXIII to please “liberals.” This is bizarre to me, since John XXIII clearly was closer to Pius XII than he was to Paul VI. The attribution is entirely due to the fact that he called Vatican II and everyone thinks Vatican II was a “liberalizing” Council, an assumption that almost no one critically questions.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I remember hearing recently some hypothesis that Pope Francis was canonizing JPII to please “conservatives” and John XXIII to please “liberals.” This is bizarre to me, since John XXIII clearly was closer to Pius XII than he was to Paul VI. The attribution is entirely due to the fact that he called Vatican II and everyone thinks Vatican II was a “liberalizing” Council, an assumption that almost no one critically questions.

Your post is completely correct.

 

[Abu]

The great Ecumenical Council Vatican II is succinctly described by the great Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, as Cardinal Ratzinger, as the required fidelity to Vatican II is: “to defend the true tradition of the Church today is to defend the Council…And this today of the Church is the documents of Vatican II, without reservations that amputate them and without arbitrariness that distorts them.” (The Ratzinger Report, Ignatius Press, 1985, p 31).

“It must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points…” (The Ratzinger Report, p 28).

Readers should know that:
The crisis in Christ’s Church is due to the modernist errors abroad before Vatican II, whose promoters tried to take over the Council, referred to in Christ Denied, TAN, 1982, by Fr Paul Wickens.