T
TheLittleLady
Guest
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...peace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
Notice, the title says “Doctrine” not “opinions”.
Notice, the title says “Doctrine” not “opinions”.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
StudentMI
Guest
Thank you for the link but I already have that, and it doesn’t really answer my question. The article blackforest posted is really good.
Last edited:
E
Ender
Guest
The church gives us objectives and guidelines. What she does not do is give us directions on how to achieve those objectives. The layman is responsible for devising specific policies to reach those goals within the guidelines of what may and may not be done.For example, the Compendium speaks of the necessity of providing the populace with a stable currency. So to use two vastly different scenarios, does that mean advocacy of modern monetary theory is sinful, or is advocating for a currency experiment ala Silvio Gessel forbidden by the Church?
It is confusing when this or that bishop gives his opinion on how a particular social problem should be solved, but very few social problems are also moral issues, and his opinion is generally no more significant than anyone else’s. We are not only free to decide these problems for ourselves, we are obligated to do so.
E
Ender
Guest
Yes, exactly. Proposals are made with the stated objectives of achieving those goals, but you have to decide whether you feel the proposal will actually work. In rejecting a proposal you are not rejecting the goal, but simply saying “This plan won’t work.” The church sets the goals, but she does not have a position on any specific proposal.So it’s more like a goal to strive towards, not necessarily following proposals that sound similar?
T
TK421
Guest
Not necessarily. Since the means to achieve the ends can possibly be evil, sometimes the Church speaks on proposals as well, either coming from the Pope or from local bishops, or both.The church sets the goals, but she does not have a position on any specific proposal.
Last edited:
S
StudentMI
Guest
I’m currently reading An Economics of Justice and Charity: Catholic Social Teaching, Its Development and Contemporary Relevance by Thomas Storck who wrote the article in the OP. So far I’d highly recommend it.
blackforest
Well-known member
Just so we’re clear, councils of bishops are Magisterial in their teachings. This is clarified in my link. The tenets of Catholic Social Teaching are therefore official and integral to our faith.
The bishops lay out the values, principles, and goals; how we go about upholding them is a matter of prudential judgment.
Educated Catholics can disagree, for example, on how “to put the the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.” (Some may argue for charity, some may argue for social programs, most argue for any combination of both). They cannot, however, choose to reject the notion of putting the poor and vulnerable first; that priority is indisputable.
I think that may be what your post is essentially saying, yes?
The bishops lay out the values, principles, and goals; how we go about upholding them is a matter of prudential judgment.
Educated Catholics can disagree, for example, on how “to put the the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.” (Some may argue for charity, some may argue for social programs, most argue for any combination of both). They cannot, however, choose to reject the notion of putting the poor and vulnerable first; that priority is indisputable.
I think that may be what your post is essentially saying, yes?
Last edited:
S
StudentMI
Guest
Yes, exactly! Thank you.I think that may be what your post is essentially saying, yes?
E
Ender
Guest
True, which is why in the previous post I mentioned that as well as the goals she also says we must work “within the guidelines of what may and may not be done.” This concern is most relevant to those (few) political issues which are also moral issues, like abortion. There the church does indeed have a clear position on certain proposals. On most issues (e.g. immigration) she does not.Not necessarily. Since the means to achieve the ends can possibly be evil, sometimes the Church speaks on proposals as well, either coming from the Pope or from local bishops, or both.
C
Crocus
Guest
Interesting the title references both justice, and charity. Presumably it defines these as two separate objects? As such one can evaluate economic systems and judge whether they are achieving the goal of justice, as mandated by the encyclicals, or even whether they are substituting minimal acts of charity (in most cases best accomplished by individuals) in place of true justice.I’m currently reading An Economics of Justice and Charity: Catholic Social Teaching, Its Development and Contemporary Relevance by Thomas Storck who wrote the article in the OP. So far I’d highly recommend it.
Last edited:
S
StudentMI
Guest
It’s more an overview of what the encyclicals say and I haven’t gotten to what I presume will be a synthesis of it all at the end. What I’ve gathered from this and other books though is that economics must be human centred, not just a value free theory, which I can totally agree with. Economics must serve man. I admit my opinions on how to reach that goal may be odd to many, but they do strive to serve the poor and vulnerable.
C
Crocus
Guest
It is important that a high priority be placed on that as a simple goal, that can be tested by the apparent outcome.Economics must serve man. I admit my opinions on how to reach that goal may be odd to many, but they do strive to serve the poor and vulnerable.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.