Pope John XXIII forbade Catholics to support Communism

[MPat]

So: It is wrong to vote for either a socialist or a capitalist? Who is there left to vote for?

“Socialist” is someone who likes Socialism. Yes, Catholics are not supposed to vote for them.

“Capitalist” is someone who owns means of production, a businessman. They can be of any ideology. By itself, there doesn’t seem anything wrong about voting for a businessman.

If you want to find the “pro-capitalist” ideology that is not acceptable for Catholics, there’s, for example, Anarcho-Capitalism.

As you might suspect, there’s lot of “space” between Socialism and Anarcho-Capitalism. There are many acceptable flavours of Christian Democracy, Conservatism, even Reaction.

 

[Brendan_64]

Socialist” is someone who likes Socialism. Yes, Catholics are not supposed to vote for them.

The trouble is that the term ‘Socialism’ can mean many different things to different people. I’ve come across people from the USA who view universal healthcare free at the point of delivery as socialist. Whereas here in the UK all major political parties are in favour of that. The same could be said for social security benefits.

The fact is that all governments who tax the public take people’s wealth and redistribute it. Socialism is a word that gets bandied about a lot, but there seems to be no clear meaning to what it actually is.

 

[jtavington]

Right. Numerous popes have spoken out in favor of social democracy. And a lot of people who call themselves socialists would be better termed social democrats (or New Deal Democrats) but are being deliberately provacative.

 

[abucs]

Just an interesting question :

What are people’s different views on where socialism stops and communism begins?

Loss of multiparty democracy?
Nationalisation of the majority of the economy?
Abolition of private property?

 

[MPat]

The trouble is that the term ‘Socialism’ can mean many different things to different people.

No, the problem is that the term “Socialism” simply has more than one meaning: the system and the ideology.

Numerous popes have spoken out in favor of social democracy.

If you think so, then list at least some. Preferably, citing the specific parts of their encyclicals or something.

And a lot of people who call themselves socialists would be better termed social democrats (or New Deal Democrats) but are being deliberately provacative.

Socialism has many types. One of them is Social Democracy. That is not being denied by actual Social Democrats, calling the organisation linking many of their parties “Socialist international”.

Socialism is a word that gets bandied about a lot, but there seems to be no clear meaning to what it actually is.

It not that hard to tell. Go to the Socialist International (Declaration of principles - Socialist International - “Declaration of principles”, 1989) and they will tell you that they really-really-really like equality (“Justice means the end of all discrimination against individuals, and the equality of rights and opportunities. It demands compensation for physical, mental and social inequalities,”, “Basic economic, social and cultural equality is essential for individual diversity and social progress.”, “Equality and personal freedom are indivisible.” etc.). And that’s the defining feature of them.

The Church, on the other hand, is careful to condemn only unjust inequality, unjust discrimination.

 

[deMontfort]

Just an interesting question :

What are people’s different views on where socialism stops and communism begins?

Loss of multiparty democracy?
Nationalisation of the majority of the economy?
Abolition of private property?

It’s a distinction without a difference. Communists and Socialists want the same thing: A government run economy where the wealth (or lack thereof) is distributed equally. The distinction is that someone calling themselves a “Communist” wants to achieve it immediately through violent revolution while someone calling themselves a “Socialist” wants to achieve it gradually through the ballot box.

What the Socialist can’t comprehend is that the means used to achieve what he wants was never an issue: The issue was always with what he wanted to achieve.

 

[Le_Bonvivant]

I am a member of the dutch socialist party. I have no interest in the relationship between the church and the communists in times long ago. I’m a member because we re the party that does the most to help the poor, handicapped, elderly, refugees and all vulnerable groups in our society

 

[abucs]

I am a member of the dutch socialist party. I have no interest in the relationship between the church and the communists in times long ago. I’m a member because we re the party that does the most to help the poor, handicapped, elderly, refugees and all vulnerable groups in our society

Can I ask if your focus on helping the vulnerable groups is based on allocating tax dollars or is it more a creation of community which helps itself?

I think one of the great enduring strengths of the church in helping the vulnerable is that it created communities with a common ethic of helping themselves through the development of hospitals, morals, education, economics etc.

My impression is that socialists tend to do ‘their religion’ through the state by the allocation of tax dollars and I wonder if this is more divisive in the long run than the community approach.

Sorry if I am way off base there with my impressions or characterisations. Of course if the Dutch socialists are the people most helping the disadvantaged then who could argue with you being part of that and I applaud your commitment and wish you well.

 

[MPat]

I have no interest in the relationship between the church and the communists in times long ago.

You say that as if that was a good thing. But not being interested in truth is a bad thing.

I am a member of the dutch socialist party.

You mean the one described in Socialist Party (Netherlands) - Wikipedia - the one formerly known as “Communist Party of the Netherlands/Marxist–Leninist”?

I’m a member because we re the party that does the most to help the poor, handicapped, elderly, refugees and all vulnerable groups in our society

Something tells me causality goes the other way here: you’re a member, and thus you think well about this party. That would also explain lack of interest in the relevant teaching of the Church.

 

[Le_Bonvivant]

Of course simply allocating tax euros is part of it. However, we pay half our paycheck to the government in the Netherlands whoever is in office, be it right or left wingers, we’re used to this. So it’s not really about raising the taxes even more for this, it’s about distributing more of the government budget to these things instead of things we consider less important.

Apart from that we’re also trying to get volunteers in action, raise awareness and remind people that we have to take care of everyone in our country, also the people who cannot keep up with the pace and cunningness you need to survive these days.

You are absolutely right that the way the church handled these things in the past, with genuine love and care in the past, was even better. But I have to be realistic, the church does not create communities here anymore and we as a church in the Netherlands (or anywhere else in the world) cannot run hospitals anymore. There simply arent enough believers anymore. So I’ll go for the second best thing here.

 

[Le_Bonvivant]

I don’t think it’s relevant. Every sane person knows communism in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe was awful and the church was right to reject it. It however has nothing to do with socialist parties in 2018.

 

[MPat]

I don’t think it’s relevant. Every sane person knows communism in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe was awful and the church was right to reject it. It however has nothing to do with socialist parties in 2018.

Oh, of course there is one great difference between you and CPSU and the like. They had power and you do not.

And that’s a great difference. Just look:

Of course simply allocating tax euros is part of it. However, we pay half our paycheck to the government in the Netherlands whoever is in office, be it right or left wingers, we’re used to this. So it’s not really about raising the taxes even more for this, it’s about distributing more of the government budget to these things instead of things we consider less important.

It is easy to have unrealistic plans when you have no power.

But what if you’d get power, make a budget you like - and it proves to achieve less than you imagined? (And it will. Building a Paradise on Earth without God is costly.)

Do you imagine you will look for the guilty party in the mirror?

After all, as so many Socialists with power found out, it is so easy to look for guilty party elsewhere - for “evil capitalists”, “counter-revolutionaries”, “saboteurs” etc.

And after that you will get an obviously evil regime, just like they did.

You are absolutely right that the way the church handled these things in the past, with genuine love and care in the past, was even better. But I have to be realistic, the church does not create communities here anymore and we as a church in the Netherlands (or anywhere else in the world) cannot run hospitals anymore. There simply arent enough believers anymore. So I’ll go for the second best thing here.

And do you work to make the number of believers higher?

Not to mention that, contrary to your claims, the Church does have some hospitals (see, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Hospitals_affiliated_with_the_Roman_Catholic_Church). It would have more, if health care was not being handled by governments to such a great extent.

But, of course, if you want Equality and do not value Subsidiarity that much, it is so easy to ignore such inconvenient facts!

Apart from that we’re also trying to get volunteers in action, raise awareness and remind people that we have to take care of everyone in our country, also the people who cannot keep up with the pace and cunningness you need to survive these days.

So, in other words, you are not lifting a finger to help the poor.

But you are doing a lot to help yourself get the power, while telling everyone (including yourself), that you’ll use it to help the poor.

But ultimately, you won’t really help the poor all that much, while causing a lot of harm to just about everyone.

All that is not much of a secret for the Church, which has condemned all forms of Socialism (yes, including moderate Socialism).

 

[Le_Bonvivant]

So you re not gonna join us are you?

 

[abucs]

So you re not gonna join us are you?

One further question from the above is on Subsidiarity.

Again my impression is that socialists tend to favour strong and powerful central governments which have a strong (name removed by moderator)ut to court systems and policing and human rights bodies etc.

Is there a role (or a potential role) for Subsidiarity with the Dutch socialists?

That is that there could be some recognition that control of things like, culture, law, policing, human rights is best left up to (or strongly include) responsibly devolved groups like local government, churches, community groups, NGO’s that can contribute through their own cultural ethos that exist (and develop) from the ground up rather than from the top down?

It is not just a question for socialists of course as the central government seems to be a favourite for all political parties and of course it has strong merits. But since you are a socialist and my impression is that socialists have centralising tendencies I thought I would ask your opinions.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

refugees

So you’re helping import Muslims? How’s that help the faith?

 

[FiveLinden]

So you’re helping import Muslims?

Please don’t use verbs we use for objects and animals to describe human beings, especially those in need.

 

[Le_Bonvivant]

Its basically the way it works in the Netherlands, the government itself doesnt do that much, but it supports initiatives of people or groups of people by backing them with money or permits to carry out their ideas. In the past many of these organisations did come from churches but these days not much anymore. There still are some christian initiatives but Holland is mainly protestant so they re not backed by our church. We do not want a government that controls people, we want to support initiatives that we think will help our country. Apart from that, the Unions, and making sure workers are not exploited and employers follow the law are important for us too

 

[DymphnaOfWashington]

So you’re helping import Muslims? How’s that help the faith?

CCC 841

 

[SuperLuigi]

I am a member of the dutch socialist party. I have no interest in the relationship between the church and the communists in times long ago. I’m a member because we re the party that does the most to help the poor, handicapped, elderly, refugees and all vulnerable groups in our society

Yes, there’s nothing quite like using the force of the state to take the fruits of others and claim credit.

 

[MonteRCMS]

Pope Saint John Paul II wrote a whole entire Encyclical which is an important read:

Centesimus Annus

Role in the fall of Communism

Russian President Vladimir Putin meeting John Paul II in June 2000
Main article: Holy See–Soviet Union relations
John Paul II has been credited with being instrumental in bringing down Communism in Central and Eastern Europe,[72][85][90][107][108][167] by being the spiritual inspiration behind its downfall and catalyst for “a peaceful revolution” in Poland. Lech Wałęsa, the founder of Solidarity and the first post-Communist President of Poland, credited John Paul II with giving Poles the courage to demand change.[72] According to Wałęsa, “Before his pontificate, the world was divided into blocs. Nobody knew how to get rid of Communism. In Warsaw, in 1979, he simply said: ‘Do not be afraid’, and later prayed: ‘Let your Spirit descend and change the image of the land … this land’.”[167] It has also been widely alleged that the Vatican Bank covertly funded Solidarity.[168][169]

US President George W. Bush presenting the Presidential Medal of Freedom to John Paul II in June 2004
US President Ronald Reagan’s correspondence with the pope reveals “a continuous scurrying to shore up Vatican support for U.S. policies. Perhaps most surprisingly, the papers show that, as late as 1984, the pope did not believe the Communist Polish government could be changed.”[170]

The British historian Timothy Garton Ash, who describes himself as an “agnostic liberal”, said shortly after John Paul II’s death:

No one can prove conclusively that he was a primary cause of the end of communism. However, the major figures on all sides—not just Lech Wałęsa, the Polish Solidarity leader, but also Solidarity’s arch-opponent, General Wojciech Jaruzelski; not just the former American president George Bush Senior but also the former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev—now agree that he was. I would argue the historical case in three steps: without the Polish Pope, no Solidarity revolution in Poland in 1980; without Solidarity, no dramatic change in Soviet policy towards eastern Europe under Gorbachev; without that change, no velvet revolutions in 1989.[171]

Graffiti showing Pope John Paul II with quote “Do not be afraid” in Rijeka, Croatia
In December 1989, John Paul II met with the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev at the Vatican and each expressed his respect and admiration for the other. Gorbachev once said “The collapse of the Iron Curtain would have been impossible without John Paul II.”[85][107] On John Paul II’s death, Mikhail Gorbachev said: “Pope John Paul II’s devotion to his followers is a remarkable example to all of us.”[108][167]

On 4 June 2004 US President George W. Bush presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the United States’ highest civilian honour, to John Paul II during a ceremony at the Apostolic Palace. The president read the citation that accompanied the medal, which recognised “this son of Poland” whose “principled stand for peace and freedom has inspired millions and helped to topple communism and tyranny”.[172]