Socialism

[Neil_Anthony]

I know the Church is very much in favor of labor unions, but what about other aspects of socialism? Are we required to vote for people who will spend more to help the poor, even if that means raising taxes, reducing private property rights, and bigger government?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I know the Church is very much in favor of labor unions, but what about other aspects of socialism? Are we required to vote for people who will spend more to help the poor, even if that means raising taxes, reducing private property rights, and bigger government?

Labor unions are not an aspect of socialism. To make such a claim is to demonstrate a fundamental ignorance relative to what socialism IS.

 

[bilop]

I know the Church is very much in favor of labor unions, but what about other aspects of socialism? Are we required to vote for people who will spend more to help the poor, even if that means raising taxes, reducing private property rights, and bigger government?

No. The Church is completely against socialism. The level of taxes and spending are prudential judgements that the Church makes no pronouncements on. The obligation to help the poor is a personal responsibility not a societal one.

God Bless

 

[ChiRho]

No. The Church is completely against socialism. The level of taxes and spending are prudential judgements that the Church makes no pronouncements on. The obligation to help the poor is a personal responsibility not a societal one.

God Bless

Amen. The responsibility is personal and undeniable.

 

[vern_humphrey]

And while the Church upholds the right of labor to form unions, that does not mean the Church supports forced membership, where one must join a union and pay dues in order to get and keep a job.

 

[SoCalRC]

The obligation to help the poor is a personal responsibility not a societal one.

No, it is both. We see this in Holy Scripture. For example, in Matthew 25:31-46, we are told that the Son of Man will gather all Nations and judge them. The 6 criteria are considered so important that they are listed 4 times each.

When asked about a path of personal salvation, Jesus gave virtually the same answer in Luke 10:25-37. 5 of the same criteria are mentioned directly, and the 6th is alluded to indirectly (you have to understand the full societal context of the story).

The concept is also taught by the Magisterium. There are many good examples, particularly in Papal Encyclicals, but even a simple set of notes on Catholics in secular public life covers it. For example:

The Church recognizes that while democracy is the best expression of the direct participation of citizens in political choices, it succeeds only to the extent that it is based on a correct understanding of the human person.[17] Catholic involvement in political life cannot compromise on this principle, for otherwise the witness of the Christian faith in the world, as well as the unity and interior coherence of the faithful, would be non-existent. The democratic structures on which the modern state is based would be quite fragile were its foundation not the centrality of the human person. It is respect for the person that makes democratic participation possible. As the Second Vatican Council teaches, the protection of «the rights of the person is, indeed, a necessary condition for citizens, individually and collectively, to play an active part in public life and administration».[18]

When people read the document:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

They sometimes translate this to mean some single aspect they agree with, like abortion. But the footnotes take us to “Gaudium et spes” from the Second Vatican Council. Using that definition, care for society’s weakest members must be “foundation” for the society to be morally viable in the eyes of the Church, rather it is a democracy or not.

Later in the same document, on the subject of limiting the moral harm of secular laws, it is noted:

In this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility towards the common good. Nor can a Catholic think of delegating his Christian responsibility to others; rather, the Gospel of Jesus Christ gives him this task, so that the truth about man and the world might be proclaimed and put into action.

So, both individuals and societies must answer to God.

 

[vern_humphrey]

So, both individuals and societies must answer to God.

Take away the individuals, and what is left of society to be judged?

Socialism is doing great deeds with someone else’s money. Usually while damning and blackguarding the man who’s paying the freight.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Socialism is doing great deeds with someone else’s money. Usually while damning and blackguarding the man who’s paying the freight.

That’s the part I’ve never been able to figure out. It’s doing good with SOMEONE ELSE’S money. Normally that would violate the commandment against stealing. However people usually say that the government is allowed to redistribute money, so that isn’t stealing.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

That’s the part I’ve never been able to figure out. It’s doing good with SOMEONE ELSE’S money. Normally that would violate the commandment against stealing. However people usually say that the government is allowed to redistribute money, so that isn’t stealing.

It’s about the idea of the social contract. By continuing to live in a society, you are agreeing to abide by that society’s rules and laws, including the payment of the upkeep of that society.

For example, I walk into a 7-Eleven. If I were to walk into that store with a dollar in my pocket, it’s my money. If I open a candy bar and start chowing down before paying for it, that dollar now belongs to 7-Eleven even though it’s still in my pocket.

By using to goods and services and stability that a society creates, a person becomes indebted to that society through taxation or service or both.

 

[Orionthehunter]

No, it is both. We see this in Holy Scripture. For example, in Matthew 25:31-46, we are told that the Son of Man will gather all Nations and judge them. The 6 criteria are considered so important that they are listed 4 times each.

When asked about a path of personal salvation, Jesus gave virtually the same answer in Luke 10:25-37. 5 of the same criteria are mentioned directly, and the 6th is alluded to indirectly (you have to understand the full societal context of the story).

The concept is also taught by the Magisterium. There are many good examples, particularly in Papal Encyclicals, but even a simple set of notes on Catholics in secular public life covers it. For example:

When people read the document:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

They sometimes translate this to mean some single aspect they agree with, like abortion. But the footnotes take us to “Gaudium et spes” from the Second Vatican Council. Using that definition, care for society’s weakest members must be “foundation” for the society to be morally viable in the eyes of the Church, rather it is a democracy or not.

Later in the same document, on the subject of limiting the moral harm of secular laws, it is noted:

So, both individuals and societies must answer to God.

The means by which justice is achieved is a prudential judgment of the faithful. To interpret that justice on any matter must be achieved by government intervention is not Church Teachings. Even with regard to those items that there appears to be no practical solution but via government mandate (i.e. collective defense or criminal judtice), the Church doesn’t deliniate that it must be a government solution.

Sin and salvation is personal and not collective. If I live in Utopia and I know not Christ, it won’t make a bit of difference to my salvation. Conversely, if I live in the most heinous of societies but I follow Christ, the fact I live in the most unjust of societies won’t threaten my salvation on bit.

 

[ChiRho]

However people usually say that the government is allowed to redistribute money, so that isn’t stealing.

by what authority? The government should protect life, liberty and property, not take away from it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

That’s the part I’ve never been able to figure out. It’s doing good with SOMEONE ELSE’S money. Normally that would violate the commandment against stealing. However people usually say that the government is allowed to redistribute money, so that isn’t stealing.

Apparently, to be truly holy, you have to do it with someone else’s money.

It’s like the Minimum Wage – those who press hardest for it don’t have any employees. And I can’t understand why – since as they will tell you, they’re much smarter, holier and more moral than people who actually do create jobs and employ people.

 

[SoCalRC]

Sin and salvation is personal and not collective. If I live in Utopia and I know not Christ, it won’t make a bit of difference to my salvation. Conversely, if I live in the most heinous of societies but I follow Christ, the fact I live in the most unjust of societies won’t threaten my salvation on bit.

Protestants embrace Solus Christus and Sola fide, Catholics do not. Following Christ includes meritorious works for us. In fact, we believe in a treasury of meritorious works.

When it comes to earthly tasks, there is truly strength in numbers. Societies can perform, collectively, things which are beyond the scope of any single human being. If we only look to God when we are at our weakest, never when we are at our strongest we are putting other concerns ahead of our duty to God.

 

[StevenFrancis]

As an American Catholic, I have truly found myself with only one candidate to vote for, when applying all aspects of my new found Catholocism. This candidate is in the bottom 1/3 of the his/her political party for recognition, funding, etc., and frankly, with our rediculous, embarrassing, and apparently unchangeable, polarizing two party political system has literally no discernable chance of receiving the nomination of his/her own party, let alone winning the National Election. The State I’m living in has only one caucus this time around, and it is not this candidates’ party. I can not participate in voting to help this person win the nomination. So…to make a long story, medium length…There is truly no one who I can vote for based on the set of standards I adopted as a Catholic. I am unflinching in my beliefs and faith. I have looked at voting guides. The principles in those guides say that life issues are primary, and out of those, abortion is the first concern, even over just war, because of the sheer magnitude of number of lives involved. The last President this country elected who DID have the correct values on abortion, was also a criminal in virtually every other sense of the word, and in favor of un-just war, free trade vs. fair trade, corporate theft, bribery, fraud, death penalty to a ludicrous degree, dishonesty. He takes every opportunity possible to disenfranchise, scare, bully, hide, and yes…even kill the poor through neglect. There is not one single iota of one thread of the social justice teaching of Jesus Christ in the entire administration he built. Nor very much, frankly in the administrations that preceeded his, going all the way back to, what, FDR? Maybe?

There is too much pressure put on us by our own Church to vote correctly, because frankly, the United States can not make the corrections it needs to make, by voting for ANYbody offered up to us this time around. With the one notable exception, that I brought up in this post, even the Catholics running have no interest in doing much of anything regarding abortion. We may very well be facing a general election between two abortion supporters. I understand then, we can start moving down the Catholic cause list, and look for the choice incorporating the largest degree of favoritism towards our big ticket items, then failing that, the candidate sharing our view on the most of the little items.

I am very frustrated, and am praying for guidance. I have faith that the Holy Spirit will guide me in the end to do what is most appropriate. I guess I’m just annoyed the most, that I won’t be given a chance in my goofy State to give the one and only full slate Catolic values candidate my vote, becuase there is no primary or caucus for him/her, and he/she will not be a choice in the General Election.

The way I am inclined so far, through listening in prayer is to write the person in for President, then just vote on my local issues as I normally would. But then, in a way, I lose my vote as an American. Sad state of affairs.

Just so everyone knows…in spite of this issue that is haunting me a little, I am a happy and grateful American. At least I have the right to complain here, and I CAN cast a small protest vote by writing someone in. Can’t do that in very many places from what I understand. But since my VERY strong conversion by Christ Jesus, I am first and foremost a Catholic Christian. THEN an American. Ceasar does not come before God. And I will adjust to all this. This is just my first Presidential race as a Catholic, and it’s a big wake up call, as has been most everything else, as I go deeper and deeper into my faith.

Also…in spite of all the above, believe it or not I am in great peace with my God, my family, my neighbor, and my country. I was just getting something off my chest.

How are other deeply convicted Catholics approaching this Presidential race? Have they all been like this, from a Catholic standpoint? Is it just that I can only now see this stuff? It must have really been rough all these years for any other folks of my generation who were Catholic faithful their whole lives.

My hat if off to you.

Praise be to Lord Jesus Christ,

Peace be with all…

Steven

 

[SoCalRC]

Socialism is doing great deeds with someone else’s money. Usually while damning and blackguarding the man who’s paying the freight.

You mean they way we are slashing taxes on the wealthy then putting the costs of two expensive wars on our unborn descendants via massive deficits and borrowing?

Or do you mean the way that businesses use venture capitol?

We band together into societies specifically for collective protection and common good. Societies that fail to address collective need inevitably fall. We have a knee jerk reaction to the word “Socialist” here in the west (having learned at a young age to hate and fear China and the Soviet Union - odd that one is gone and the other now serves as our collective banker) But we actually have a fair number of socialized structures, most benefit business and were originally formed to bail out large scale financial failures.

 

[SoCalRC]

The way I am inclined so far, through listening in prayer is to write the person in for President, then just vote on my local issues as I normally would. But then, in a way, I lose my vote as an American. Sad state of affairs.

I don’t find it sad at all. I chased the elussive benefits of ‘pragmatic’ voting for a long time. Now I vote my faith, 100%, and I do use write ins (which is a huge pain in my district).

I don’t lose my vote, I fully use it. To me, it is the ones that hold their noses and try to be ‘practical’ that are losing their vote, willingly giving up their full voice, all to the illusion that their vote only has meaning in a narrow framework contstructed by others.

Sure the odds look bad, but when have they ever really been good for a Christian? Rome looked untouchable, now the word is synomomous with Catholicism. Follow God and good will follow. If it were easy or obvious, it would be a true act of faith.

Peace

 

[rlg94086]

CCC:

[1882](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1882.htm’) Certain societies, such as the family and the state, correspond more directly to the nature of man; they are necessary to him. To promote the participation of the greatest number in the life of a society, the creation of*** voluntary associations*** and institutions must be encouraged "on both national and international levels, which relate to economic and social goals, to cultural and recreational activities, to sport, to various professions, and to political affairs."5 This “socialization” also expresses the natural tendency for human beings to associate with one another for the sake of attaining objectives that exceed individual capacities. It develops the qualities of the person, especially the sense of initiative and responsibility, and helps guarantee his rights.6

[1883](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1883.htm’) Socialization also presents dangers. ***Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “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 co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”***7

[1884](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1884.htm’) God has not willed to reserve to himself all exercise of power. He entrusts to every creature the functions it is capable of performing, according to the capacities of its own nature. This mode of governance ought to be followed in social life. The way God acts in governing the world, which bears witness to such great regard for human freedom, should inspire the wisdom of those who govern human communities. They should behave as ministers of divine providence.
1885 The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.

(Bolding mine)

I am opposed to Socialism on the federal level and believe only in very limited Socialism on the state and local levels. That is in line with the teaching of subsidiarity.

It is clear to me that our charitable role in society should be focused primarily on “voluntary associations”, which is why I support private charitable organizations. This is more fitting with the Church’s teaching IMO.

 

[rlg94086]

(Bolding mine)

I am opposed to Socialism on the federal level and believe only in very limited Socialism on the state and local levels. That is in line with the teaching of subsidiarity.

It is clear to me that our charitable role in society should be focused primarily on “voluntary associations”, which is why I support private charitable organizations. This is more fitting with the Church’s teaching IMO.

Oh…I forgot this one…

CCC:

1894 In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, neither the state nor any larger society should substitute itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and intermediary bodies.

 

[StevenFrancis]

As an American Catholic, I have truly found myself with only one candidate to vote for, when applying all aspects of my new found Catholocism. This candidate is in the bottom 1/3 of the his/her political party for recognition, funding, etc., and frankly, with our rediculous, embarrassing, and apparently unchangeable, polarizing two party political system has literally no discernable chance of receiving the nomination of his/her own party, let alone winning the National Election. The State I’m living in has only one caucus this time around, and it is not this candidates’ party. I can not participate in voting to help this person win the nomination. So…to make a long story, medium length…There is truly no one who I can vote for based on the set of standards I adopted as a Catholic. I am unflinching in my beliefs and faith. I have looked at voting guides. The principles in those guides say that life issues are primary, and out of those, abortion is the first concern, even over just war, because of the sheer magnitude of number of lives involved. The last President this country elected who DID have the correct values on abortion, was also a criminal in virtually every other sense of the word, and in favor of un-just war, free trade vs. fair trade, corporate theft, bribery, fraud, death penalty to a ludicrous degree, dishonesty. He takes every opportunity possible to disenfranchise, scare, bully, hide, and yes…even kill the poor through neglect. There is not one single iota of one thread of the social justice teaching of Jesus Christ in the entire administration he built. Nor very much, frankly in the administrations that preceeded his, going all the way back to, what, FDR? Maybe?

There is too much pressure put on us by our own Church to vote correctly, because frankly, the United States can not make the corrections it needs to make, by voting for ANYbody offered up to us this time around. With the one notable exception, that I brought up in this post, even the Catholics running have no interest in doing much of anything regarding abortion. We may very well be facing a general election between two abortion supporters. I understand then, we can start moving down the Catholic cause list, and look for the choice incorporating the largest degree of favoritism towards our big ticket items, then failing that, the candidate sharing our view on the most of the little items.

I am very frustrated, and am praying for guidance. I have faith that the Holy Spirit will guide me in the end to do what is most appropriate. I guess I’m just annoyed the most, that I won’t be given a chance in my goofy State to give the one and only full slate Catolic values candidate my vote, becuase there is no primary or caucus for him/her, and he/she will not be a choice in the General Election.

The way I am inclined so far, through listening in prayer is to write the person in for President, then just vote on my local issues as I normally would. But then, in a way, I lose my vote as an American. Sad state of affairs.

Just so everyone knows…in spite of this issue that is haunting me a little, I am a happy and grateful American. At least I have the right to complain here, and I CAN cast a small protest vote by writing someone in. Can’t do that in very many places from what I understand. But since my VERY strong conversion by Christ Jesus, I am first and foremost a Catholic Christian. THEN an American. Ceasar does not come before God. And I will adjust to all this. This is just my first Presidential race as a Catholic, and it’s a big wake up call, as has been most everything else, as I go deeper and deeper into my faith.

Also…in spite of all the above, believe it or not I am in great peace with my God, my family, my neighbor, and my country. I was just getting something off my chest.

How are other deeply convicted Catholics approaching this Presidential race? Have they all been like this, from a Catholic standpoint? Is it just that I can only now see this stuff? It must have really been rough all these years for any other folks of my generation who were Catholic faithful their whole lives.

My hat if off to you.

Praise be to Lord Jesus Christ,

Peace be with all…

Steven

I just noticed that my post isn’t really on-topic. I just wanted to appologize to the OP. I don’t know how to move it, or make it a new post. I wasn’t trying to hijack your thread. I just wasn’t paying enough attention and was responding to something else I read earlier.

Sorry,

Peace to you all

 

[StevenFrancis]

I don’t find it sad at all. I chased the elussive benefits of ‘pragmatic’ voting for a long time. Now I vote my faith, 100%, and I do use write ins (which is a huge pain in my district).

I don’t lose my vote, I fully use it. To me, it is the ones that hold their noses and try to be ‘practical’ that are losing their vote, willingly giving up their full voice, all to the illusion that their vote only has meaning in a narrow framework contstructed by others.

Sure the odds look bad, but when have they ever really been good for a Christian? Rome looked untouchable, now the word is synomomous with Catholicism. Follow God and good will follow. If it were easy or obvious, it would be a true act of faith.

Peace

This makes very good sense. Thank you very much,

Peace,

Steven