Vatican Calls for Global Authority on Economy

[Not_Sure_1]

The only thing that should unite men is the Church. No central bank should unite us, especially one that promotes usury like most of the central banks in our nations, owned by Rothschild.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

How BLESSED you are not to have lived through a World War. You know there are worse things than a financial crisis. 50 million people died last time, most were civilians. Don’t bring Revelations into this.

Fear not those who can kill the body, but fear him that can destroy the body and the soul.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Fr. Federico Lombardi, the press spokesman for the Vatican, was noticeably circumspect in his comments on the document and its weight. As indeed he ought to have been. The document doesn’t speak for the Pope, it doesn’t speak for “the Vatican,” and it doesn’t speak for the Catholic Church.

The author of the document, Cardinal Peter Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, told the press when he presented it that the document was intended to “make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations of the upcoming G-20 meeting.”

“This brief document from the lower echelons of the Roman Curia no more aligns “the Vatican,” the Pope, or the Catholic Church with Occupy Wall Street than does the Nicene Creed. Those who suggest it does are either grossly ill-informed or tendentious to a point of irresponsibility.” ~George Weigel

nationalreview.com/corner/281140/pope-chaplain-ows-rubbish-george-weigel

Thanks for this clarification. I feel much better about this.

 

[PatrickSebast]

The posts in which people are fretting over how they will hand-wave this away to their protestant and conservative friends are very worrying to me. There does come a time when you have to accept that part of being Catholic is expressing that there is a significant difference between what the Church calls us to believe and what Evangelical Christian America thinks we should believe. Finding common ground is good and helps build positive relations, but we shouldn’t be sacrificing our identity as Catholics. The Church simply is not going to fall in line with the political or economic beliefs of United States conservatives in all cases.

It shouldn’t be scary to think that someone might question you about a non-authoritative teaching, and if you are really concerned about people forming fears of some Anti-Christ lead one world government with the Catholic Church as a whore of Babylon then it isn’t like anything you said prior to the release of this statement was going to help you out anyway. I will never understand why so many people have such a hard time separating themselves partially from a group. Even if you go to something like a tea-party rally and support their cause that doesn’t mean you have to get along or agree with everyone there. Reality is not a two party system.

Outside of that, honestly the statement about a financial authority being needed doesn’t even bother me. The World Economy is already a reality and financial markets are growing exponentially more entwined every day as communication and transportation capabilities of humans continue to grow and in the end there are going to be supranational institutions, in fact some corporations already are in essences supranational and they do use their status to dodge things like regulations and taxes all the time. In fact it is well known that many companies we purchase our daily goods from use unsafe child labor because there is simply no one willing to regulate it. The idea that financial corporations won’t or even don’t currently take advantages of loopholes provided by jumping between nations is silly.

While there may be a better way to regulate things than a supranational institution it certainly isn’t some illogical out of left-field concept. It isn’t like the people who thought this up were trying to decide how they could think of the most liberal-socialist-communist-leftist-democrat-atheist system possible. They were simply a group of people trying to propose a potential solution to a perceived problem. The way I see it you can either rant and rave about various conspiracies and doomsday prophecies or you can intelligently discuss its pros and cons in hopes of moving towards a real solution for economic disparity.

 

[JReducation]

You know what would work? If the Catholic Church would do what she is suppose to do. Preach the Gospel, cry out about the sins of the world. Bring Christ to the rest of the world. Stop trying to be everything to all men. Just be the Church that was founded by Jesus Christ.

They’re not protected on matters of economics, but neither is our soul protected when we are acerbic toward the Pontiff.

Fr. Federico Lombardi, the press spokesman for the Vatican, was noticeably circumspect in his comments on the document and its weight. As indeed he ought to have been. The document doesn’t speak for the Pope, it doesn’t speak for “the Vatican,” and it doesn’t speak for the Catholic Church.

The author of the document, Cardinal Peter Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, told the press when he presented it that the document was intended to “make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations of the upcoming G-20 meeting.”

Fr. Lombardi works for the Holy See, not Vatican City, two differnt governemnts. He’s going to be very circumspect. It’s not his fault that people don’t even know that Vatican City has its own government, for which Fr. Lombardi does not speak.

Cardinal Turkson has as much right to put something on the table on behalf of Vatican City as does Hilary Clinton on behalf of the USA. It simply means that we must give both a respectful consideration and then put forth our own suggestions.

This is not so difficult. No one is asking anyone to give this an assent of faith. What is being done here is a proposal is being put on the table. As I said before, the hope of the Church is that 2 billion Catholics woiuld come up with something that works.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Julianna]

The posts in which people are fretting over how they will hand-wave this away to their protestant and conservative friends are very worrying to me. There does come a time when you have to accept that part of being Catholic is expressing that there is a significant difference between what the Church calls us to believe and what Evangelical Christian America thinks we should believe. Finding common ground is good and helps build positive relations, but we shouldn’t be sacrificing our identity as Catholics. **The Church simply is not going to fall in line with the political or economic beliefs of United States conservatives in all cases.**It shouldn’t be scary to think that someone might question you about a non-authoritative teaching, and if you are really concerned about people forming fears of some Anti-Christ lead one world government with the Catholic Church as a whore of Babylon then it isn’t like anything you said prior to the release of this statement was going to help you out anyway. I will never understand why so many people have such a hard time separating themselves partially from a group. ** Even if you go to something like a tea-party rally and support their cause that doesn’t mean you have to get along or agree with everyone there. ** Reality is not a two party system.

Outside of that, honestly the statement about a financial authority being needed doesn’t even bother me. The World Economy is already a reality and financial markets are growing exponentially more entwined every day as communication and transportation capabilities of humans continue to grow and in the end there are going to be supranational institutions, in fact some corporations already are in essences supranational and they do use their status to dodge things like regulations and taxes all the time. In fact it is well known that many companies we purchase our daily goods from use unsafe child labor because there is simply no one willing to regulate it. The idea that financial corporations won’t or even don’t currently take advantages of loopholes provided by jumping between nations is silly.

While there may be a better way to regulate things than a supranational institution it certainly isn’t some illogical out of left-field concept. ** It isn’t like the people who thought this up were trying to decide how they could think of the most liberal-socialist-communist-leftist-democrat-atheist system possible. ** They were simply a group of people trying to propose a potential solution to a perceived problem. **The way I see it you can either rant and rave about various conspiracies and doomsday prophecies or you can intelligently discuss its pros and cons in hopes of moving towards a real solution for economic disparity./**QUOTE]

Really? Say it ain’t so.

Thank you. No matter which way you look at a pancake, it has two sides.

 

[BartBurk]

Anti-Catholics are going to have such a good time with this.

Just to see what they were saying about this I listened to Irwin Baxter’s End Times ministry show on our local Christian radio station. He trumpeted how this was proof that we were in the last days and the Babylonian Church (the Catholic Church) was setting up to promote a one world government which would cause the U.S. to lose its sovereignty. Gives them all kinds of unnecessary fuel.

 

[BartBurk]

Thanks for this clarification. I feel much better about this.

I want the Pope to say it, not George Weigel.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

I want the Pope to say it, not George Weigel.

Doubt that would happen, TBH. Would be great if it did.

 

[Julianna]

Just to see what they were saying about this I listened to Irwin Baxter’s End Times ministry show on our local Christian radio station. He trumpeted how this was proof that we were in the last days and the Babylonian Church (the Catholic Church) was setting up to promote a one world government which would cause the U.S. to lose its sovereignty. Gives them all kinds of unnecessary fuel.

Why do you even care what evangelicals say?Their path to heaven is different than the Catholics, not better, not worse, different. The goal is the same.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Why do you even care what evangelicals say?Their path to heaven is different than the Catholics, not better, not worse, different. The goal is the same.

1. Because it fuels already present anti-Catholicism
2. With all due respect, their path to heaven is infinitely more problematic, precisely because they do not have the True Church.

 

[Julia_Mae]

catholicvote.org/index.php

Here’s how Cardinal Turkson, President of the Congregation for Justice and Peace, and Bishop Toso, the secretary, explained how the document should be received and read

…It is in this spirit of discernment that the Holy See, with the note of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, wishes to make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations of the G-20 meeting”.

Bishop Toso explained that the aim of the note is “suggest possible paths to follow, in line with the most recent social Magisterium, for the implementation of financial and monetary policies…”

The Church does not wish to enter into the technical issues behind the current economic crisis, but remains within the ambit of her religious and ethical functions…

 

[Julianna]

1. Because it fuels already present anti-Catholicism
2. With all due respect, their path to heaven is infinitely more problematic, precisely because they do not have the True Church.

When I grew up in New England, just about everyone was Catholic. There were a few Protestant kids in the neighborhood…and we all got along.

When I moved to the “south”, a whole different ballgame. I was in Baptist/Holiness Evangelical territory, and yes, I felt in the minority. Did they or were they ever able to shake my faith, NEVER. Did I believe any of the horror stories about Catholics that they percieved as true? NEVER.

Whatever, “their” path is, “they” believe it to be true based on the word (interpretation) of the Bible. I disagree with the whole “whore of Babylon”, but I don’t hate them for saying it.

Their scare tactics and those from the right-minded Catholics don’t phaze me in the least.

Surely you are stronger than mere words from a faith doctrine that walks another path. Can you keep on your path? I don’t see the problem here at all.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

When I grew up in New England, just about everyone was Catholic. There were a few Protestant kids in the neighborhood…and we all got along.

When I moved to the “south”, a whole different ballgame. I was in Baptist/Holiness Evangelical territory, and yes, I felt in the minority. Did they or were they ever able to shake my faith, NEVER. Did I believe any of the horror stories about Catholics that they percieved as true? NEVER.

Whatever, “their” path is, “they” believe it to be true based on the word (interpretation) of the Bible. I disagree with the whole “whore of Babylon”, but I don’t hate them for saying it.

Their scare tactics and those from the right-minded Catholics don’t phaze me in the least.

Surely you are stronger than mere words from a faith doctrine that walks another path. Can you keep on your path? I don’t see the problem here at all.

Me personally? I couldn’t care less what the good pastor has to say.

But when I look on it from the viewpoint of the entire Church, it bothers me a great deal. Catholicism has become the only group* where discrimination and racism (or better “religionism” ) is perfectly OK. And I’m tired of it, quite frankly.

• it can be argued that there is an additional group: white males. Can’t really argue against that perception, TBH

 

[Chipper]

I want the Pope to say it, not George Weigel.

We are getting some rather strange responses to our questions:
So far:

1. Don’t quote the bible.
2. Don’t discuss the theological implications, but only discuss the pros and cons of a Central Financial authority.
3. Don’t worry about the evangelicals, they are going to heaven anyways.
4. Your concerns are only about your money.
5. Some are admonishing us when we question this matter eventhough we are allowed to question it???

Frankly, these type responses make me even more concerned about this matter.

 

[ManOnFire]

You people crack me up. When the church teaches something that challenges your preconceived notions on how best to run the economy, you assume the world is comming to end. Here’s some advice: turn glen beck and fox news off and read some of the encyclicals on social teaching of the church, you might learn something.

This wasn’t an encyclical.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

This wasn’t an encyclical.

ka-ching

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

nationalreview.com/corner/281140/pope-chaplain-ows-rubbish-george-weigel

As for the document itself, no morally alert person objects to bringing discussions of global finance within the ambit of moral reasoning; that is an entirely worthy intention. Catholics (and others) are entirely free to disagree — as many already have, and vociferously — with the specific suggestions of the Justice and Peace document. Father Reese and other advocates of the Catholic Revolution That Never Was will likely try to brand those critics “dissidents,” which is more “rubbish, rubbish, rubbish.” That the specific recommendations of the document reflect what will seem to many an uncritical internationalism of a distinctly Euro-secular provenance is an interesting matter that will doubtless be discussed, vigorously, within the Catholic family for some time to come. So will the tension between more recent Catholic discussions of transnational and international political authority and the core Catholic social-ethical principle of subsidiarity, with its settled opposition to political and economic megastructures and concentrations of power.

 

[Julianna]

We are getting some rather strange responses to our questions:
So far:

1. Don’t quote the bible.
2. Don’t discuss the theological implications, but only discuss the pros and cons of a Central Financial authority.
3. Don’t worry about the evangelicals, they are going to heaven anyways.
4. Your concerns are only about your money.
5. Some are admonishing us when we question this matter eventhough we are allowed to question it???

Frankly, these type responses make me even more concerned about this matter.

1. Bible is subject to human interpretation…
2. What else is there, you are in agreement with what comes out of the Vatican, (whoever writes it) or your not. Kind of like the shoe is on the other foot when you encounter Catholics who step just left of center, “It’s either all or nothing”
3. Evangelicals should be your least concern. Getting the “correct” information on this document should be paramount. Well, in case you find yourself speaking with an evangelical about it. Which I doubt, since you are happy in your own fishbowl (which has the same water in it as the evangelicals who by the way, think Catholics won’t go to heaven either)
4. Nah, this one doesn’t pass muster…(my money is in the credit union, not a big bank, learned that a long time ago)
5. Yes, you are correct. That shouldn’t be. You “should” question it. And remember that when an “opinion” or somesort comes out of the Vatican that you “do” agree with and some of those slightly left of center (who are Catholics) believe they should question it. Call it, Karma

 

[ringil]

Pope Benedict Calls For “Central World Bank” … Only He Didn’t. Here’s Why.

You may have seen this story which was headlined earlier today on the Drudge Report:

*The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a “global public authority” and a “central world bank” to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises.

A major document from the Vatican’s Justice and Peace department should be music to the ears of the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrators and similar movements around the world who have protested against the economic downturn.

The 18-page document, “Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority,” was at times very specific, calling, for example, for taxation measures on financial transactions. [CNBC](http://www.cnbc.com/id/45013499)*]

In a scenario which will surely strike some as deja vu, the liberal jesuit Fr. Tom Reese previewed the contents of the document last week, in much the same way that the liberal jesuit Fr. Charles Curran “previewed” Humanae Vitae for the mainstream media before the document was actually released (the pope overruled Fr. Curran’s claims that the Church would endorse contraception — but the media had already made up its mind and few bothered to actually read what the pope had to say).

Here’s Fr. Reese on MSNBC “explaining” the news:

youtube.com/watch?v=9F2g15JSbzs&feature=player_embedded

Notice that Fr. Reese does NOT correct the news anchor that this document comes from a vatican congregation — not the pope! Fr. Reese seems perfectly happy to help the mainstream media fundamentally misunderstand the authority of teaching this document enjoys. He claims that the pope has “more in common with the people at occupy wallstreet” than the tea party, even though he has to immediately walk back that claim when it is pointed out to him how violent (and anti-Catholic!) the Occupy Rome demonstrations were (as I blogged about last week). I think it’s no surprise that Fr. Reese spends so much time talking about the 60′s — that’s still his cultural frame of reference.

Rather than get into the nitty-gritty of the 18-page document (which I may do at a later point), let me focus on the most important point: framing. Here’s how Cardinal Turkson, President of the Congregation for Justice and Peace, and Bishop Toso, the secretary, explained how the document should be received and read (underlining mine):

• …It is in this spirit of discernment that the Holy See, with the note of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, wishes to make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations* of the G-20 meeting”.

Bishop Toso explained that the aim of the note is “suggest possible paths to follow, in line with the most recent social Magisterium, for the implementation of financial and monetary policies…”

The Church *does not wish to enter into the technical issues* behind the current economic crisis, but remains within the ambit of her religious and ethical functions…

I have nothing to immediately add to that, because the very authors of the document make clear how it should be evaluated: namely, as a “contribution” (as opposed to a mandate), as a “possible path” (as opposed to a moral proscription), in line with the Magisterium’s social teaching (as opposed to introducing a new teaching), without getting into the technical issues (because the Church is an expert in humanity, not economics) while fully staying within the Church’s religious and ethical functions.

With those extremely important guidelines in mind, we can more fruitfully read the text.

That said, I am absolutely sure the medie cycle for the coming days and weeks will totally miss all these key points and distill this document down to misleading statements such as “Pope Benedict Endorses Central World Bank.” But as I explain above, he didn’t.

Fr. Reese and his liberal Catholic friends would be better served acting as messengers of the Church’s teaching as opposed to creators of it.

catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=21986

Do you think maybe Michael Voris will be discussing this latest word from the Vatican?