Socialism and Christianity

[Abu]

The Catholic tradition is to encourage formation in skills and the virtue of work while helping a society to help themselves. It was the great Catholic Late Scholastics who discovered the principles of free enterprise which shows clearly that it is the ethics of the individual which determines the right or wrong of an action in commerce as St Augustine taught – “wickedness is not inherent in commerce, but that with any occupation it was up to the individual to live righteously.” [John W Baldwin, *The Medieval Theories of the Just Price, The American Philosophical Society, 1959, p 15]

While the Sacred Scriptures condemn greed and wrong use of wealth, commerce or merchants are not condemned. Further proof that the virtues belong to, and are required of, the individual in business.

The fact is that Catholic philosophy and theology, based on reason and faith, enabled the birth of free enterprise. From the great monastic estates in the ninth century, immense increases in agricultural productivity grew from “such significant innovations as the switch to horses, the heavy moldboard plow, and the three-field system” away from subsistence agriculture to specialised crops and products, sold at a profit to initiate a cash economy. “As their incomes continued to mount, this led many monasteries to become banks, lending to the nobility.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 56, 58].

Randall Collins has noted that innovation and specialization in the monastic estates was “a version of the developed characteristics of capitalism itself… the dynamism of the medieval economy was primarily that of the Church.” [Randall Collins, The *Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, 1998, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, p 47].

Fr Anthony G Percy concludes in his chapter Entrepreneurial Work: Scripture and Tradition: “The entrepreneur can (and should) work for the development of the common good. This is a consistent feature of the Fathers of the Church, of St Thomas Aquinas and other Scholastic theologians. Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 81].

You can have anything goes in anything in life, but that is not part of Catholic developed free enterprise, it is instead part of fallen human nature which is why we have laws to control greed, connivance, deceit and cheating, which have no place in any human activity. Individual morality determines how owners, managers and employees treat each other and the customers, which requires the morality taught by Christ’s Church. That’s why laws seek to punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and worse crimes. That’s why we have the Catholic Church to guide us – She who invented charity in the West.

 

[Abu]

Specifically ignoring St Paul and Sacred Scripture leads to the grave error of taking from others to feed those who will not work, for St Paul mandates:
“For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” [2 Thess 3:10].

In the Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens, 1981, #26, Bl John Paul II, pointed out:
‘The teachings of the Apostle of the Gentiles obviously have key importance for the morality and spirituality of human work. They are an important complement to the great though discreet gospel of work that we find in the life and parables of Christ, in what Jesus “did and taught”.’

“SOCIAL INJUSTICE”, where government subsidies reward the good-for-nothings who “refuse” to work and steal from those who do work to do so.

When you love your neighbour you encourage those “refusing to work” to face reality and God’s creation and get out and find work; you help others to produce goods and services, you don’t indulge their destructive whims and fancies.

Eradicating poverty has to be done one step at a time. Right now there is enough food to feed everyone. That has been so for many decades.

Further, between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

The revered Fr James V. Schall, S.J.:
‘Much of world poverty has in fact been reduced or alleviated, as a recent essay in The Economist has shown. Christians often seem not to know that this change has happened or why it happened.’
[tinyurl.com/ldjt6go]](http://tinyurl.com/ldjt6go])

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Unemployment rate of countries

 

[empther]

References made in this thread to the societies in Paul’s time, and to the Benedictine rule, and other such special societies, have no relevance whatsoever to the real world.

In the real world people will not do what they’re told as in a monastery. Nor will they always do their share of the work. So ‘share and share alike’ fails. Ain’t going to work. Here comes the whole story in a nutshell. Are you paying attention? ] **There will always be more poor people, whether their poverty is their own fault or not, than the workers will be willing to support. **

 

[tonyrey]

Specifically ignoring St Paul and Sacred Scripture leads to the grave error of taking from others to feed those who will not work, for St Paul mandates:
“For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” [2 Thess 3:10].

In the Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens, 1981, #26, Bl John Paul II, pointed out:
‘The teachings of the Apostle of the Gentiles obviously have key importance for the morality and spirituality of human work. They are an important complement to the great though discreet gospel of work that we find in the life and parables of Christ, in what Jesus “did and taught”.’

“SOCIAL INJUSTICE”, where government subsidies reward the good-for-nothings who “refuse” to work and steal from those who do work to do so.

When you love your neighbour you encourage those “refusing to work” to face reality and God’s creation and get out and find work; you help others to produce goods and services, you don’t indulge their destructive whims and fancies.

Eradicating poverty has to be done one step at a time. Right now there is enough food to feed everyone. That has been so for many decades.

Further, between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

The revered Fr James V. Schall, S.J.:
‘Much of world poverty has in fact been reduced or alleviated, as a recent essay in The Economist has shown. Christians often seem not to know that this change has happened or why it happened.’
[Towards the end of poverty | The Economist]](Towards the end of poverty | The Economist])

Statistics demonstrate that poverty is rapidly increasing in the UK as the result of economic injustice promoted by the present government.

 

[empther]

tonyrey,

Statistics demonstrate that poverty is rapidly increasing in the UK as the result of economic injustice promoted by the present government.

I’d be interested in hearing what you mean by ‘economic injustice’ by the British government.

I assume that you don’t mean what most people would mean by ‘economic injustice’, that is, the government conniving to make some people poor.
I assume your meaning of ‘economic injustice’ means policies that restrict wealth production by corporations and individuals through excessive taxation, and things like that.

( I’m thinking of a person like Melissa Meyer, the relatively new CEO of YAHOO! She sleeps four hours a day because she works so much, but she gets paid a lot. If the government taxed her income 90%, would she work so hard? I doubt it. And so YAHOO’s productivity would suffer. )

 

[tonyrey]

tonyrey,

I’d be interested in hearing what you mean by ‘economic injustice’ by the British government.

I assume that you don’t mean what most people would mean by ‘economic injustice’, that is, the government conniving to make some people poor.
I assume your meaning of ‘economic injustice’ means policies that restrict wealth production by corporations and individuals through excessive taxation, and things like that.

( I’m thinking of a person like Melissa Meyer, the relatively new CEO of YAHOO! She sleeps four hours a day because she works so much, but she gets paid a lot. If the government taxed her income 90%, would she work so hard? I doubt it. And so YAHOO’s productivity would suffer. )

Just one example is reducing income tax on the rich by 5% and reducing the benefits for the poor so that children have to go to school without breakfast.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

References made in this thread to the societies in Paul’s time, and to the Benedictine rule, and other such special societies, have no relevance whatsoever to the real world.

In the real world people will not do what they’re told as in a monastery. Nor will they always do their share of the work. So ‘share and share alike’ fails. Ain’t going to work. Here comes the whole story in a nutshell. Are you paying attention? ] **There will always be more poor people, whether their poverty is their own fault or not, than the workers will be willing to support. **

How do the workers support the poor? Is it by putting a few coins in a paper cup now and again? Or is it something more organized like putting some money into the governments budget so they can run training courses or fund education for people who are capable of profiting by it? Feed a man for a day with a few coins, feed a man for a lifetime by teaching him a trade.

 

[SuperLuigi]

How do the workers support the poor? Is it by putting a few coins in a paper cup now and again?

In the USA a person can make 18,000 pounds a year from doing that.

Or is it something more organized like putting some money into the governments budget so they can run training courses or fund education for people who are capable of profiting by it? Feed a man for a day with a few coins, feed a man for a lifetime by teaching him a trade.

Some people who are poor and uneducated are that way personal choice.

You would be mistaken if you thought that all of them were just sitting around waiting for the government or some idealist to save them.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Some people who are poor and uneducated are that way personal choice.

You would be mistaken if you thought that all of them were just sitting around waiting for the government or some idealist to save them.

18,000 dollars is not very much. Its ok if you live in a squat and have no expenses. But if you plan to marry and raise a family you need a house, 180,000 dollars, a car for work, 10,000 dollars, medical insurance, 10,000 dollars, education for your children 80,000 dollars. Not to mention other basics like food, power, fuel, and business expenses to supply materials to support all of this.
If a man learns a worthwhile trade he can earn a 1000 dollars a week, or 52,000 dollars a year. And he will be one less beggar bothering you on the street.

 

[Qoeleth]

( I’m thinking of a person like Melissa Meyer, the relatively new CEO of YAHOO! She sleeps four hours a day because she works so much, but she gets paid a lot. If the government taxed her income 90%, would she work so hard? I doubt it. And so YAHOO’s productivity would suffer. )

That would be GOOD if she did not work so hard. She is destroying the life God gave her, for the sake of greed and ambition, probably damaging her family relationships and well being.

The 40-hour working week is being destroyed by people, of their own choice, who are greedy and want to work too many hours. It is a form of self-abuse.

The ‘workaholic rich’ are also victims of the capitalist system…

 

[SuperLuigi]

=Paddy Walker;11476761]18,000 dollars is not very much. Its ok if you live in a squat and have no expenses.

18,000 pounds is about 23,000–25,000 USD.

I’d say that’s pretty good if you only beg for change and bounce around homeless shelters and soup kitchens for free.

Why do you think some people don’t want a job? Because with returns like that, they don’t need one!

But if you plan to marry and raise a family you need a house, 180,000 dollars, a car for work, 10,000 dollars, medical insurance, 10,000 dollars, education for your children 80,000 dollars. Not to mention other basics like food, power, fuel, and business expenses to supply materials to support all of this.

Believe it or not, a person can get by on much less than a 180,000 USD a year and I sure wouldn’t pay 80 grand to send my kids to school.

Besides, a lot of people in the West don’t have very many kids anymore.

The basics are not that expensive.

If a man learns a worthwhile trade he can earn a 1000 dollars a week, or 52,000 dollars a year.

You’re not listening! Some of them DO NOT WANT TO WORK!!!

And he will be one less beggar bothering you on the street.

Actually, I find secular liberals who think they have all the answers more annoying.

I’ve never seen a liberal give a penny to a homeless person or to charity; they always want someone else to solve the problem it seems.

 

[SuperLuigi]

That would be GOOD if she did not work so hard. She is destroying the life God gave her, for the sake of greed and ambition, probably damaging her family relationships and well being.

The 40-hour working week is being destroyed by people, of their own choice, who are greedy and want to work too many hours. It is a form of self-abuse.

The ‘workaholic rich’ are also victims of the capitalist system…

If they are “victims” its because of liberalism in the West. Liberalism demands businesses give more to government and then businesses either

1. Go out of business
2. Raise prices to compensate for higher taxes (thank you Labour Party and Democrats)
3. Lay off people and demand more from those who stay.

 

[tonyrey]

If they are “victims” its because of liberalism in the West. Liberalism demands businesses give more to government and then businesses either

1. Go out of business
2. Raise prices to compensate for higher taxes (thank you Labour Party and Democrats)
3. Lay off people and demand more from those who stay.

Many businesses take advantage of high unemployment by paying their staff unfair wages and reducing their work force even further to maximise their profits. The economic system is completely dominated by competition and the law of the jungle. There is obscene disparity between the rich who are steadily becoming richer and the poor becoming so poor that many have to choose between eating and heating. When the children of employed parents have to go to school without breakfast something is radically wrong with the system.

A million people in the UK are on zero-hour contracts which allow an employer to hire staff without an obligation to provide any minimum working hours. Half of them have had shifts cancelled without receiving notice beforehand and, of course, they never have paid holidays or any other benefits. Wage slavery is still alive and well in the capitalist system under the Conservative government, most of whose ministers happen to be millionaires and in league with big business - like Rupert Murdoch’s empire…

 

[Abu]

powerofk #75
Plus, with unfettered capitalism concentrating a higher and higher percentage of the wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer, it lands more and more people into a situation where they either starve or need a safety net.

While you are on the right track, where is “unfettered capitalism”? Where is a market unrestricted by any law? There is no such thing. There are some people whose god is money, but the tremendous reduction in poverty over the last 200 years is due to the Catholic Late Scholastics discovery and application of economic laws of free enterprise.

It is most unreasonable to blame free enterprise for the poor policies of governments or of individuals, and for inadequate laws that can be improved.

 

[Abu]

Regrets, Post #53 is wrongly posted.

 

[Qoeleth]

While you are on the right track, where is “unfettered capitalism”? Where is a market unrestricted by any law? There is no such thing. There are some people whose god is money, but the tremendous reduction in poverty over the last 200 years is due to the Catholic Late Scholastics discovery and application of economic laws of free enterprise.

Who are these “Late Scholastics” mention? What are their writings on economics?

I have here the Opera Omnia of Lombard, Bonaventure, Aquinas, Scotus, Abelard, even Saurez (and Anselm , who could be considered a proto-Scholastic.) Or are you referring to Ockham (often considered as one of the last representatives of the Scholastic era), who was big on separation of Church and State (like most capitalists)? But even he hardly recommended a market-economy. In fact, I am not aware of any of these talking about economic theory at all.

I am hopefully not totally ignorant of Scholastic theology- but if you refer me to a specific author and specific work, we can see what they say?

 

[Bob123Q]

Quite frankly as I do reasearch I side with a religous center labour theory of value
yet I found a statment in a book which quite well buts me in my place and here it goes

marxian doctren claims that capitilism will cause imperilism and wars and slavery over money and profits. Every one knows that every war had something to do with money so every seems to thinks that marxian ecominic way of looking at things is right for they can see money moving the world yet no one but an economist and historiaan who is educated could truly know if the world wars and even claims about wars in the middle east today where started for other reason or just for profit.

Think about it every thing around us could be some sort of capitilist plot or some secret plot that they capitilist elite only know about (the war in Iraq, big buisness coperations, world war 2, the assination of J F K) and thats just it it all could be. Good thing we are all not that easly lied to about everyhting simply because we know about these things yet do not understand them fully.

Any one can make up a capitlist plot out of now where. it take some one who knows what they are talking about to explain why capitilism can turn social and form pensions and labour unions and hopefully go even futher than that in the futture.

 

[Abu]

Qoeleth #55
Who are these “Late Scholastics” mention? What are their writings on economics?

See post #22.

What is missed is that the free enterprise system was developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics. There is nothing that can compare with its economic laws – it is the economic approach that has revolutionised the standard of living of millions. Individual morality determines how owners or managers or employees treat each other and the customers, which ethic may derive from a policy set by the firm, and requires the morality taught by Christ’s Church. So irrefutably, Christ’s Church accepts and promotes free enterprise, which Her Late Scholastics developed against all other systems, but will not specify economic models or theories as that is not Her mandate.

From Dr Alejandro A Chafuen, Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986:
The Medieval Schoolmen who preferred to be called the “Doctors”, “were the foremost thinkers of their times.” (op. cit. p 21). They employed logic and reasoning for the development of mankind. Chafuen incisively points out: “The Doctors offered utilitarian arguments to show that goods that are privately owned are better used than commonly owned goods. This explanation offers a budding theory of economic development: the division of goods and their ultimate possession by private individuals facilitates increased production.” (op. cit. p 47).

The control of monopolies is part of free enterprise and the Schoolmen criticized both entrepreneurs or workers who engaged in conspiracies to establish a monopoly. (op. cit. p117, 177). The Late Scholastics were observing and explaining the existing cause and effect relationships which had started in the great Catholic monastic estates of the ninth century.

Free enterprise is not “greed driven” it is common good driven for the welfare of the greatest number and dependant on consumer satisfaction and competition, dependant on the laws of cause and effect involving God-given reason, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.

Free enterprise is a set of economic truths or laws developed by the Late Scholastics based on cause and effect. These economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason and will, requiring scientific research and study, but are unlike the laws of physics which do not rely on reason and will for effect. So constants do not apply to economic laws as they do for physics. Economics is predictive and comparative, not absolute as in physics. [Dr Thomas E Woods, *The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 31].

Jesuit thought…“encouraged the rise of a system based on private property…have a long tradition and are rooted in the writings of Aristotle, St Thomas Aquinas and their Scholastic followers. The Late Scholastic Jesuits were outstanding…”

“In Germany the Hispanic Scholastics had a great impact on the writings of Samuel Pufendorf (1632-1694). Through Grotius, Pufendorf and the Physiocrats, many Late Scholastic ideas influenced Anglo-Saxon economic thought, especially the ‘Scottish School’ consisting of Ferguson…Hutchinson…and Smith (c. 1723-1790).”
Note: “Adam Smith included many quotations from Grotius and Pufendorf in his Lectures on Justice.” [Chafuen, op. cit. p 25].

The Catholic stress on individualism was foreign to many cultures, and Jeremy Waldron, in God, Locke and Equality, 2002, affirms that Locke built his thesis on the doctrine concerning morality; “returning to the standpoint of St Thomas and the Scholastics.” (The Catholic Church And the Counter-Faith, Philip Trower, Family Publications, 2006, p 74).

In developing an understanding of the laws of free enterprise, “The Schoolmen determined that wages, profits and rents are not for the government to decide. Since they are beyond the sphere of distributive justice, they should be determined by common estimation in the market.” Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius 1986, p 122].

 

[Qoeleth]

See post #22.

What is missed is that the free enterprise system was developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics. There is nothing that can compare with its economic laws – it is the economic approach that has revolutionised the standard of living of millions. Individual morality determines how owners or managers or employees treat each other and the customers, which ethic may derive from a policy set by the firm, and requires the morality taught by Christ’s Church. So irrefutably, Christ’s Church accepts and promotes free enterprise, which Her Late Scholastics developed against all other systems, but will not specify economic models or theories as that is not Her mandate.

From Dr Alejandro A Chafuen, Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986:
The Medieval Schoolmen who preferred to be called the “Doctors”, “were the foremost thinkers of their times.” (op. cit. p 21). They employed logic and reasoning for the development of mankind. Chafuen incisively points out: “The Doctors offered utilitarian arguments to show that goods that are privately owned are better used than commonly owned goods. This explanation offers a budding theory of economic development: the division of goods and their ultimate possession by private individuals facilitates increased production.” (op. cit. p 47).

The control of monopolies is part of free enterprise and the Schoolmen criticized both entrepreneurs or workers who engaged in conspiracies to establish a monopoly. (op. cit. p117, 177). The Late Scholastics were observing and explaining the existing cause and effect relationships which had started in the great Catholic monastic estates of the ninth century.

Free enterprise is not “greed driven” it is common good driven for the welfare of the greatest number and dependant on consumer satisfaction and competition, dependant on the laws of cause and effect involving God-given reason, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.

Free enterprise is a set of economic truths or laws developed by the Late Scholastics based on cause and effect. These economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason and will, requiring scientific research and study, but are unlike the laws of physics which do not rely on reason and will for effect. So constants do not apply to economic laws as they do for physics. Economics is predictive and comparative, not absolute as in physics. [Dr Thomas E Woods, *The Church And The Market

, Lexington Books, 2005, p 31].

Jesuit thought…“encouraged the rise of a system based on private property…have a long tradition and are rooted in the writings of Aristotle, St Thomas Aquinas and their Scholastic followers. The Late Scholastic Jesuits were outstanding…”

“In Germany the Hispanic Scholastics had a great impact on the writings of Samuel Pufendorf (1632-1694). Through Grotius, Pufendorf and the Physiocrats, many Late Scholastic ideas influenced Anglo-Saxon economic thought, especially the ‘Scottish School’ consisting of Ferguson…Hutchinson…and Smith (c. 1723-1790).”
Note: “Adam Smith included many quotations from Grotius and Pufendorf in his Lectures on Justice.” [Chafuen, op. cit. p 25].

The Catholic stress on individualism was foreign to many cultures, and Jeremy Waldron, in God, Locke and Equality, 2002, affirms that Locke built his thesis on the doctrine concerning morality; “returning to the standpoint of St Thomas and the Scholastics.” (The Catholic Church And the Counter-Faith, Philip Trower, Family Publications, 2006, p 74).

In developing an understanding of the laws of free enterprise, “The Schoolmen determined that wages, profits and rents are not for the government to decide. Since they are beyond the sphere of distributive justice, they should be determined by common estimation in the market.” Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius 1986, p 122].

You don’t actual mention any specific writings of any Scholastics at all.

As for Grotius and Pufendorf, they are certainly not orthodox theologians or philosophers, as far as the Catholic Church is concerned. Maybe some forms of Protestant might approve of their work. Grotius wrote a book alled “The Law of Predation”, in which he basically defends the ‘natural rights’ of acquisition through conquest.

The books you are getting you ideas from are totally dubious, and highly partisan. You should quote the writings of the actual Scholastics.

You should read Pope Francis’ “Evangelii Guadium”, in which he criticizes the effect of capitalism.