Top 5 Lame Excuses Not to Support Extreme-Poverty Alleviation Work

[Tzimisce]

huffingtonpost.com/nick-pearson/extreme-poverty-alleviation-work_b_4855656.html

Pride is a sin you know.

 

[freeRadical]

By selecting the proper political and economic systems that are more congruent with LOVE, and using the mass media, one can drastically change the overall love and caring that exists in society.

What political and economic systems are more congruent with love? It sounds to me like you want a centrally planned economy which is run by “experts” that know what is best for everybody and is going to make everyone do it. When are you gonna to let go of this pipe dream?

When are you going to come to terms with the fact that the Church has condemned Socialism? It’s condemned a community of goods, its condemned state ownership of the means of production, and it condemns the abolition of private property.

Secondly, it sounds like to me you want to indoctrinate and brain wash everybody too.

 

[Robert_Sock]

When are you going to come to terms with the fact that the Church has condemned Socialism? It’s condemned a community of goods, its condemned state ownership of the means of production, and it condemns the abolition of private property.

2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.” Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended
-CCC

Read closely what I have highlighted. Why is the CCC conditional in saying that it’s really ‘totalitarian and atheistic ideologies’ that are being rejected, and not socialism itself. It appears to me that the authors of the CCC wanted to clarify what past popes really mean when they condemned socialism.

 

[markomalley]

2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.” Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended
-CCCRead closely what I have highlighted. Why is the CCC conditional in saying that it’s really ‘totalitarian and atheistic ideologies’ that are being rejected, and not socialism itself. It appears to me that the authors of the CCC wanted to clarify what past popes really mean when they condemned socialism.

It appears to me, Robert, that we have gone there before. It appears to me that I have provided you ample quotes from papal encyclicals already to show that the Church condemns socialism/communism PERIOD. See post #42 - #45 on this thread, as an example of this. And, while we are not, per CAF rules, supposed to cross-link between threads, I will post another short quote from a papal encyclical that I showed you in another thread:

Socialism is fundamentally evil at its core.
“Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”

• Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 120

• 
  Socialism is fundamentally materialist at its core. You cannot get around that, Robert. It is what it is.

Robert, in all candor, having a discussion with you is extremely frustrating, particularly when a claim you make is thoroughly disproven and then you repeat the exact same claim less than 100 posts later in the discussion.

 

[freeRadical]

Read closely what I have highlighted. Why is the CCC conditional in saying that it’s really ‘totalitarian and atheistic ideologies’ that are being rejected, and not socialism itself. It appears to me that the authors of the CCC wanted to clarify what past popes really mean when they condemned socialism.

Robert, you really need to read Rerum Novarum:

4. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man’s envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

1. And in addition to injustice, it is only too evident what an upset and disturbance there would be in all classes, and to how intolerable and hateful a slavery citizens would be subjected. The door would be thrown open to envy, to mutual invective, and to discord; the sources of wealth themselves would run dry, for no one would have any interest in exerting his talents or his industry; and that ideal equality about which they entertain pleasant dreams would be in reality the levelling down of all to a like condition of misery and degradation. Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal. The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property. This being established, we proceed to show where the remedy sought for must be found.

17.** It must be first of all recognized that the condition of things inherent in human affairs must be borne with, for it is impossible to reduce civil society to one dead level. Socialists may in that intent do their utmost, but all striving against nature is in vain. There naturally exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind; people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition. Such unequality is far from being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community. Social and public life can only be maintained by means of various kinds of capacity for business and the playing of many parts; and each man, as a rule, chooses the part which suits his own peculiar domestic condition.**

1. The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvellous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice.

Read what I highlighted

Your views are in conflict with the Church’s views on how society should be ordered.

You should heed these words for Saint Pius X

SAINT PIUS X (1903-1914):
The dream of re-shaping society will bring socialism
“But stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, ‘the reign of love and justice’ … What are they going to produce? … A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.” (Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique “Our Apostolic Mandate”] to the French Bishops, August 25, 1910, condemning the movement Le Sillon)

The highlighted part sounds like you, doesn’t it?

 

[Tigg]

Math doesn’t work with people who are already set in their mindset. Only personal catastrophic disasters that affect their quality of life personally can get through the haze they have created around themselves.

And if you believe the historical aspect, by the time the personal catastrophic disaster hits and the real intent (to harm, not help) is finally realized, a tyrannical, corrupt government will have done its worst.

 

[Tigg]

There is no political or economic system that will ever breed love. It sounds to me like you want to force people to love one another.

Sounds like part of the utopian concept where, erroneously, man believes he can create heaven on earth, and eliminate all poverty and societal ills through his own efforts alone. It is an imaginary world which completely disregards man’s fallen nature and the need for God.

 

[Robert_Sock]

It appears to me, Robert, that we have gone there before. It appears to me that I have provided you ample quotes from papal encyclicals already to show that the Church condemns socialism/communism PERIOD. See post #42 - #45 on this thread, as an example of this. And, while we are not, per CAF rules, supposed to cross-link between threads, I will post another short quote from a papal encyclical that I showed you in another thread:

Socialism is fundamentally evil at its core.
“Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”

• Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 120

• 
  Socialism is fundamentally materialist at its core. You cannot get around that, Robert. It is what it is.

Robert, in all candor, having a discussion with you is extremely frustrating, particularly when a claim you make is thoroughly disproven and then you repeat the exact same claim less than 100 posts later in the discussion.

People may claim that socialism is evil, and provide quotes for why it is so, but that does mean that they are correct and that I agree with them. I’m not convinced that all forms of socialism would be condemned by the Church and Pope Francis. I rely heavily on what the CCC has to say. Talk about presenting facts and having them whitewashed, that’s what happened to my post on the CCC. Again, the CCC clearly states that it’s the totalitarian and atheistic nature of past socialistic systems that are being condemned. Why is this clarification present in the CCC?

I repeat myself due to unfinished business in past posts.

The rejection of socialism by past popes is dependent on the point of history they existed. Within the history of past totalitarian and atheistic nature of socialism, I too would be against it. But times have changed, much of the evil nature of socialism has disappeared, and fresh thoughts about its efficacy need to be considered.

LOVE!

 

[freeRadical]

People may claim that socialism is evil, and provide quotes for why it is so, but that does mean that they are correct and that I agree with them. I’m not convinced that all forms of socialism would be condemned by the Church and Pope Francis. I rely heavily on what the CCC has to say. Talk about presenting facts and having them whitewashed, that’s what happened to my post on the CCC. Again, the CCC clearly states that it’s the totalitarian and atheistic nature of past socialistic systems that are being condemned.

I repeat myself due to unfinished business in past posts.

The rejection of socialism by past popes is dependent on the point of history they existed. Within the history of past totalitarian and atheistic nature of socialism, I too would be against it. But times have changed, much of the evil nature of socialism has disappeared, and fresh thoughts about its efficacy need to be considered.

But the Popes of the past have condemned specific parts of Socialism. They’ve condemned community of goods, state ownership of the means of production, class warfare, and abolition of private property. And they have held up the right to own capital, the right to private property, and the right of the individual to employ his labor as he sees fit. The point the Church really hammers about Socialism is that it degrades the family and removes the authority of the parents over the children.

You really need to read Rerum Novarum.

The evil nature of Socialism has not disappeared, it will always be evil.

 

[Robert_Sock]

But the Popes of the past have condemned specific parts of Socialism. They’ve condemned community of goods, state ownership of the means of production, class warfare, and abolition of private property. And they have held up the right to own capital, the right to private property, and the right of the individual to employ his labor as he sees fit. The point the Church really hammers about Socialism is that it degrades the family and removes the authority of the parents over the children.

You really need to read Rerum Novarum.

The evil nature of Socialism has not disappeared, it will always be evil.

I take your post to heart, and maybe socialism is evil in all its forms, but I still do not see it this way.

In any event, we need to alleviate extreme poverty, and I do not think a capitalistic world will cater to the needs at hand. Socialism seems the better alternative to me since it can more easily create a society that cares about the needy.

 

[markomalley]

People may claim that socialism is evil, and provide quotes for why it is so, but that does mean that they are correct and that I agree with them. I’m not convinced that all forms of socialism would be condemned by the Church and Pope Francis. I rely heavily on what the CCC has to say. Talk about presenting facts and having them whitewashed, that’s what happened to my post on the CCC. Again, the CCC clearly states that it’s the totalitarian and atheistic nature of past socialistic systems that are being condemned. Why is this clarification present in the CCC?

I repeat myself due to unfinished business in past posts.

The rejection of socialism by past popes is dependent on the point of history they existed. Within the history of past totalitarian and atheistic nature of socialism, I too would be against it. But times have changed, much of the evil nature of socialism has disappeared, and fresh thoughts about its efficacy need to be considered.

LOVE!

Robert, where do you think the CCC gets its information from?

 

[freeRadical]

I take your post to heart, and maybe socialism is evil in all its forms, but I still do not see it this way.

In any event, we need to alleviate extreme poverty, and I do not think a capitalistic world will cater to the needs at hand. Socialism seems the better alternative to me since it can more easily create a society that cares about the needy.

But the Church doesn’t agree. It believes the best way to alleviate extreme poverty is the right to private property and free enterprise.

Why do you think Socialism will eliminate extreme poverty? Because it takes from some and gives to other?

Have you read Rerum Novarum? You’ll find that Pope Leo says that that kind of thinking is erroneous and it goes against the natural law that God has set forth for man.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert, where do you think the CCC gets its information from?

I’m not sure where the information comes from when addressing socialism. But I would think it comes from all the information the Church has on a given subject. Any such refinements which the CCC has planted, should be based on an aggregate analysis that includes all the Church’s sources, including the Gospels.

Please answer for me why the CCC added these new refinements in its views on socialism when they could have simply condemned it in all its forms?

LOVE!

 

[freeRadical]

I’m not sure where the information comes from when addressing socialism. But I would think it comes from all the information the Church has on a given subject. Any such refinements which the CCC has planted, should be based on an aggregate analysis that includes all the Church’s sources, including the Gospels.

Please answer for me why the CCC added these new refinements in its views on socialism when they could have simply condemned it in all its forms?

LOVE!

The Popes are the Church are they not? They are the Vicar of Christ are they not? They have condemned Socialism. So who’s right? The Popes or the Catechism? Maybe you are trying to read into the Catechism something that isn’t there. The Popes have been very clear on this and they are responsible for guiding the Church and shepherding the flock, are they not? I think I’ll go with what the Popes say and not your interpretation of the Catechism.

 

[markomalley]

I’m not sure where the information comes from when addressing socialism. But I would think it comes from all the information the Church has on a given subject. Any such refinements which the CCC has planted, should be based on an aggregate analysis that includes all the Church’s sources, including the Gospels.

Please answer for me why the CCC added these new refinements in its views on socialism when they could have simply condemned it in all its forms?

LOVE!

You seen to be the only one in this discussion who claims that it doesn’t condemn socialism.

By the way, the ccc gets its info from the documents that make up the Magisterium. Like the ones we quoted for you. And if you look at the footnotes, you’ll see that particular paragraph references JPII’s Centesimus Annus.

 

[Robert_Sock]

But the Church doesn’t agree. It believes the best way to alleviate extreme poverty is the right to private property and free enterprise.

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut! How can I agree, though, given the great evils I see in capitalism?

Why do you think Socialism will eliminate extreme poverty? Because it takes from some and gives to other?

I believe socialism is just better suited to promote humanitarian values. I foresee a world where deeper meanings of LOVE are planted in society.

Have you read Rerum Novarum? You’ll find that Pope Leo says that that kind of thinking is erroneous and it goes against the natural law that God has set forth for man.

No, I never read the Rerum Novarum.

The natural law that God has set forth is LOVE! The Gospels are centered on LOVE, and God commands LOVE, but I do not see society following it. Yes, the seeds of LOVE can be planted within society, I strongly suspect that there are individuals who already know how to do this. I believe it’s just a matter of time before it’s implemented. Under what political and economic systems this will take place, I honestly do not know for sure.

LOVE!

 

[freeRadical]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut! How can I agree, though, given the great evils I see in capitalism?

Because you are blinded by your own hubris. Your solution to the evils of Capitalism is the evils of Socialism?

I believe socialism is just better suited to promote humanitarian values. I foresee a world where deeper meanings of LOVE are planted in society.

So even though the Church has condemned Socialism, you still think it’s okay? Do you disagree with the Church on this issue?

Did you read the quote from Pope Leo that I posted concerning people who think they can design a society that promotes love and justice?

No, I never read the Rerum Novarum.

The natural law that God has set forth is LOVE! The Gospels are centered on LOVE, and God commands LOVE, but I do not see society following it. Yes, the seeds of LOVE can be planted within society, I strongly suspect that there are individuals who already know how to do this. I believe it’s just a matter of time before it’s implemented. Under what political and economic systems this will take place, I honestly do not know for sure.

LOVE!

You should read Rerum Novarum. You will see that Socialism conflicts with natural law. Yes, the seeds of love can be planted in society. By God and by the Church. Not by a political or economic system. To believe that a government, political system, or economic system can solve all the ills of the world is at best naive, and at worst delusional.

 

[freeRadical]

Robert, is it love to forcibly take from one person and give to another? It is love to violate the God-given right of private property for the good of society? Is it love to take what one person has earned with his God-give labor and give it to one who doesn’t employ his labor?

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert, is it love to forcibly take from one person and give to another? It is love to violate the God-given right of private property for the good of society? Is it love to take what one person has earned with his God-give labor and give it to one who doesn’t employ his labor?

We already forcibly take from one person and give to another through income tax and its use for humanitarian aid. The disparity between the rich and poor needs to be corrected, and can be done with taxes, and God commands us to correct injustices.

I do not think that God ever commanded the right to private property, but commanded justice. All property belongs to God, and we need to do whatever God commands. Unfortunately, people are conflicted in what that command is, but we as Catholics know that the most basic commands deal with LOVE and justice, not property rights.

 

[freeRadical]

We already forcibly take from one person and give to another through income tax and its use for humanitarian aid. The disparity between the rich and poor needs to be corrected, and can be done with taxes, and God commands us to correct injustices.

Is that love? Force is love? God commands us to voluntarily help the poor. How would you correct the disparity between the rich and poor? By forcibly taking from one and giving to another? By taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive? You see to know very little about what the Church teaches on these concepts.

I do not think that God ever commanded the right to private property, but commanded justice. All property belongs to God, and we need to do whatever God commands. Unfortunately, people are conflicted in what that command is, but we as Catholics know that the most basic commands deal with LOVE and justice, not property rights.

Well, again, the Church disagrees with you. You really need to read Rerum Nevoram. The Church absolutely believes in the right of private property, and in that encyclical Pope Leo states that private property rights are God-given and in accordance with natural law. Depriving man of his private property rights violates natural law.

Do you see that quote from Pope Leo I posted about those who think they can design a society that promotes love and justice?