Venerable Pope Pius XII on capitalism

[Vouthon]

Are people familiar with this quotation:

“…And what of a regime in which capitalism is dominant? Does it offer a prospect of real welfare for woman? We have no need here to describe the economic and social consequences of this system. You know its characteristic signs and you yourselves labor under the burden it imposes: the excessive crowding of the population into the cities; the ever-growing and all-invading power of big business; the difficult and precarious condition of other industries, especially the crafts and even more especially agriculture; the disquieting spread of unemployment…”

***- Venerable Pius XII (QUESTA GRANDE VOSTRA ADUNATA), 1945 ***

Some Catholics, on websites such as fisheaters and even here on CAF have expressed concern about Pope Francis’ words on capitalism. Yet they are nothing new! The only thing that is new is the fact that the media has publicized it more widely, whereas previous popes were sometimes ignored.

Pius XII issued an even more robust critique, p(name removed by moderator)ointing not “unregulated capitalism” or “unfettered law of the market place” but capitalism pure and simple.

Thoughts?

 

[TRH1292]

Amen. Several popes have repeatedly made statements to this effect.

 

[OraLabora]

It’s been posited that the most successful example of communism in action is a cloistered religious community…

The notion of detachment from material things is not new in Catholicism. St. Benedict legislated it for his monks 1500 years ago. How the conservative elements in the US could have missed this about the Church is beyond me.

 

[Vouthon]

To the two above posters

Pope John Paul II wrote in 1987, in his encyclical letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis: “The tension between East and West is an opposition… between two concepts of the development of individuals and peoples, both concepts being imperfect and in need of radical correction… This is one of the reasons why the Church’s social doctrine adopts a critical attitude towards both liberal capitalism and Marxist collectivism.”

It would be a false dichotomy to think that criticism and opposition to one system presupposes support of another. I think that ‘Libertarian’ Catholics did this with papal condemnations of Soviet Communism. They assumed, wrongly, that opposition to this totalitarian system implied support for their system. They got a rude awakening after the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe, when the church’s focus latched onto the remaining enemy lol

 

[Vouthon]

Something else illuminating from Blessed John Paul II:

“…Catholic social doctrine is not a surrogate for capitalism. In fact, although decisively condemning “socialism,” the church, since Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, has always distanced itself from capitalistic ideology, holding it responsible for grave social injustices (cf. Rerum Novarum, 2). In Quadragesimo Anno Pius XI, for his part, used clear and strong words to stigmatize the international imperialism of money (Quadragesimo Anno, 109). This line is also confirmed in the more recent magisterium, and I myself, after the historical failure of communism, did not hesitate to raise serious doubts on the validity of capitalism, if by this expression one means not simply the “market economy” but “a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality” (Centesimus Annus, 42)…”

***- Blessed Pope John Paul II (“What Social Teaching Is and Is Not,” in Origins, Vol. 23, No. 15), September 1993 ***

And His predecessor Pius XI:

"…with the diffusion of modern industry throughout the whole world, the “capitalist” economic regime has spread everywhere to such a degree, particularly since the publication of Leo XIII’s Encyclical, that it has invaded and pervaded the economic and social life of even those outside its orbit and is unquestionably impressing on it its advantages, disadvantages and vices, and, in a sense, is giving it its own shape and form.

1. Accordingly, when directing Our special attention to the changes which the capitalist economic system has undergone since Leo’s time, We have in mind the good not only of those who dwell in regions given over to “capital” and industry, but of all mankind.

1. In the first place, it is obvious that not only is wealth concentrated in our times but an immense power and despotic economic dictatorship is consolidated in the hands of a few, who often are not owners but only the trustees and managing directors of invested funds which they administer according to their own arbitrary will and pleasure.

1. This dictatorship is being most forcibly exercised by those who, since they hold the money and completely control it, control credit also and rule the lending of money. Hence they regulate the flow, so to speak, of the life-blood whereby the entire economic system lives, and have so firmly in their grasp the soul, as it were, of economic life that no one can breathe against their will.

1. This concentration of power and might, the characteristic mark, as it were, of contemporary economic life, is the fruit that the unlimited freedom of struggle among competitors has of its own nature produced, and which lets only the strongest survive; and this is often the same as saying, those who fight the most violently, those who give least heed to their conscience.

1. This accumulation of might and of power generates in turn three kinds of conflict. First, there is the struggle for economic supremacy itself; then there is the bitter fight to gain supremacy over the State in order to use in economic struggles its resources and authority; finally there is conflict between States themselves, not only because countries employ their power and shape their policies to promote every economic advantage of their citizens, but also because they seek to decide political controversies that arise among nations through the use of their economic supremacy and strength.

1. The ultimate consequences of the individualist spirit in economic life are those which you yourselves, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Children, see and deplore: Free competition has destroyed itself; economic dictatorship has supplanted the free market; unbridled ambition for power has likewise succeeded greed for gain; all economic life has become tragically hard, inexorable, and cruel. To these are to be added the grave evils that have resulted from an intermingling and shameful confusion of the functions and duties of public authority with those of the economic sphere - such as, one of the worst, the virtual degradation of the majesty of the State, which although it ought to sit on high like a queen and supreme arbitress, free from all partiality and intent upon the one common good and justice, is become a slave, surrendered and delivered to the passions and greed of men. And as to international relations, two different streams have issued from the one fountain-head: On the one hand, economic nationalism or even economic imperialism; on the other, a no less deadly and accursed internationalism of finance or international imperialism whose country is where profit is…"

***- Pope Pius XI (Quadragesimo Anno), 1931 ***

 

[TRH1292]

To the two above posters

Pope John Paul II wrote in 1987, in his encyclical letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis: “The tension between East and West is an opposition… between two concepts of the development of individuals and peoples, both concepts being imperfect and in need of radical correction… This is one of the reasons why the Church’s social doctrine adopts a critical attitude towards both liberal capitalism and Marxist collectivism.”

It would be a false dichotomy to think that criticism and opposition to one system presupposes support of another. I think that ‘Libertarian’ Catholics did this with papal condemnations of Soviet Communism. They assumed, wrongly, that opposition to this totalitarian system implied support for their system. They got a rude awakening after the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe, when the church’s focus latched onto the remaining enemy lol

Yes. Part of the problem over here in america is, peoples minds and religion and everything else in this society is completely orientated around “Republican V.S. Democrat”. People even rearrange there own religion views to fit that dichotomy. America’s overarching and aggressive political system and way of life really has a poisoning effect on almost everything. If you advocate a different viewpoint or try to adopt viewpoints from both, people either blow a gasket or fail to comprehend what you are saying no matter how hard you try and explain it.

 

[Vouthon]

One more strong passage from that encyclical by Pope Pius XI:

“…Just as the unity of human society cannot be founded on an opposition of classes,** so also the right ordering of economic life cannot be left to a free competition of forces. For from this source, as from a poisoned spring, have originated and spread all the errors of individualist economic teaching**. Destroying through forgetfulness or ignorance the social and moral character of economic life, it held that economic life must be considered and treated as altogether free from and independent of public authority, because in the market, i.e., in the free struggle of competitors, it would have a principle of self direction which governs it much more perfectly than would the intervention of any created intellect. But free competition, while justified and certainly useful provided it is kept within certain limits, clearly cannot direct economic life - a truth which the outcome of the application in practice of the tenets of this evil individualistic spirit has more than sufficiently demonstrated. Therefore, it is most necessary that economic life be again subjected to and governed by a true and effective directing principle. This function is one that the economic dictatorship which has recently displaced free competition can still less perform, since it is a headstrong power and a violent energy that, to benefit people, needs to be strongly curbed and wisely ruled. But it cannot curb and rule itself. Loftier and nobler principles - social justice and social charity - must, therefore, be sought whereby this dictatorship may be governed firmly and fully. Hence, the institutions themselves of peoples and, particularly those of all social life, ought to be penetrated with this justice, and it is most necessary that it be truly effective, that is, establish a juridical and social order which will, as it were, give form and shape to all economic life. Social charity, moreover, ought to be as the soul of this order, an order which public authority ought to be ever ready effectively to protect and defend. It will be able to do this the more easily as it rids itself of those burdens which, as We have stated above, are not properly its own…”

***- Pope Pius XI (Quadragesimo Anno), 1931 ***

A commentary on this notes:

“…Pius XI wanted structural changes as well as moral ones…it is clear that the type of society Pius was calling for would involve a major change in any country where capitalism was currently in operation…It is a repudiation of the central principle of capitalism - its ideological foundation. At the heart of capitalist thinking is the belief that market forces should be the determining factor in the economic order…Pius was rejecting capitalism not just in its present form, but in its essential nature…”

- Option for the Poor and for the Earth: Catholic Social Teaching

 

[Vouthon]

Yes. Part of the problem over here in america is, peoples minds and religion and everything else in this society is completely orientated around “Republican V.S. Democrat”. People even rearrange there own religion views to fit that dichotomy. America’s overarching and aggressive political system and way of life really has a poisoning effect on almost everything. If you advocate a different viewpoint or try to adopt viewpoints from both, people either blow a gasket or fail to comprehend what you are saying no matter how hard you try and explain it.

 

[Veridical16]

Yes. Part of the problem over here in america is, peoples minds and religion and everything else in this society is completely orientated around “Republican V.S. Democrat”. People even rearrange there own religion views to fit that dichotomy. America’s overarching and aggressive political system and way of life really has a poisoning effect on almost everything. If you advocate a different viewpoint or try to adopt viewpoints from both, people either blow a gasket or fail to comprehend what you are saying no matter how hard you try and explain it.

thumbsup

On many threads, one can witness the heresy of Americanism rearing its head, where love for a lesser thing, supersedes sacrificing one’s political personal opinion and rejecting the ‘enthusiasm’ for a political preference or presumptions for the sake of humbly reflecting that it may be wrong. Instead they’d rather disrespect the office of the Pope as we saw by that recently fired CBN/ Fox News commentator who was supposed to be a video game commentator.

These dangers, viz., the confounding of license with liberty, the passion for discussing and pouring contempt upon any possible subject, the assumed right to hold whatever opinions one pleases upon any subject and to set them forth in print to the world, have so wrapped minds in darkness that there is now a greater need of the Church’s teaching office than ever before, lest people become unmindful both of conscience and of duty.

Pope Leo XIII, TBN

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/L13TESTE.HTM

No matter one’s preference for an economic paradigm, it should not be upheld with unwarranted esteem on the level of something grand, as some sort of complement to a Christianized “free society” on the level of Christendom if it in it of itself promotes something counter to the Social Reign of Christ.

There is no neutrality when it comes to city of Man. But we’ are told that in the case of Capitalism* there is* – so leave it alone it shall not be criticized. The problem with “Capitalism” is a semantics issue, wrapped in a blind allegiance to it as sacrosanct field, that only “economists” should discuss.
Pope John Paul II addressed its problems in regard to its ‘name’ as the other poster quoted.

The problem since the 19th century was the presented assumption that economics was now a"science" rather than a field rooted in A MORAL PHILOSOPHY… All one has to do is look into the historical context of who became favored in certain economic conditions, and who has the money/power to promote certain assumptions that many still swallow today. ]

Catholics should be vigilant and detached, I don’t see the need to even care if Capitalism was attacked by the Pope. It is Mammon in the end, and is of little consequence to one’s spiritual salvation, so even if one day the Pope really “blasted” capitalism and condemned it outright – which is not what he did. No Catholic should really care, since complicated economic systems due to the free will men of men has nothing to do with what we the Church Militant should be concerned about first and foremost.

Matthew 6:26

Matthew 6:33

And also if the most convincing argument is * "it has lifted countless out of poverty " *
What good is that assumption? If the spirit is IMPOVERISHED?

And the argument that the poor American , relative to the poor non-American proves Capitalistic fruits alone indicates its goodness??

Again Americanism,

To practice virtue there is absolute need of the assistance of the Holy Spirit, yet we find those who are fond of novelty giving an** unwarranted importance to the natural virtues**, as though they better responded to the customs and necessities of the times and that having these as his outfit man becomes more ready to act and more strenous in action. It is not easy to understand how persons possessed of Christian wisdom can either prefer natural to supernatural virtues or attribute to them a greater efficacy and fruifulness. Can it be that nature conjoined with grace is weaker than when left to herself?

Pope Leo XIII

 

[Veridical16]

The argument that America’s impoverished is a rich man to a poorer nation, is no different than the Marxist who wants the best conditions in its “natural life” as an end. A Catholic should not be boasting about a contented Natural Life on Earth.

What good is it, for a poor person to have television and two cars if his family is broken , while at the same time they are ripe to be manipulated by political forces – they are told to be focused on materialism, class envy, while a rampant sewage of the Western Culture replaces his household through cultural novelties?? Where he is living in a Mortal Sin for the rest of his life?

And if the American is relatively better off, it is not a coincidence that certain smaller nations are victims of Capitalist /Corporatism itself, where they are the ones left starving? They are the ones persecuted in the cheap labor connected to the global markets?? The ‘relative comparison’ to prove its triumphs may in fact be connected to its ills.

Moreover the argument for ultimately ends up lauding Materialism, Individualism, and Avarice as ends. Forgetting that Materialism and Gluttony is more a hindrance in a nation’s purpose , than a goal because it is a society that does not promote a culture that invites Christ.
Also is it not true that poorer Countries (who are not wealthy) who are not satiated by materialism, are not necessarily unhappy, and may not necessarily have lost their faith.

I do not understand how a Catholic would be contented with shallow justifications for our mixed Economy and the Cultural American Capitalistic West of the last thirty years.

So given that Pope Francis had something to say about “Capitalism” in these months is not really a weakness in his office, as opposed to other mishaps publicly.
This is also why, I am not convinced by the Capitalistic West’s thesis.
Tom Woods is one who believes Economic principles trump Catholic principles…and that the Popes have no say on economic matters.

Novak another ardent defender of the Austrian school

To try to run an economy by the highest Christian principles is certain to destroy both the economy and the reputation of Christianity - Michael Novak.

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants.

Pope Pius X Notre Charge Apostolique

No political or economic system is worth defending, unless he desires it to be sanctified by Christ…in cooperating with a higher good, no matter how big or small the nation is.

 

[severus68]

Are people familiar with this quotation:

Some Catholics, on websites such as fisheaters and even here on CAF have expressed concern about Pope Francis’ words on capitalism. Yet they are nothing new! The only thing that is new is the fact that the media has publicized it more widely, whereas previous popes were sometimes ignored.

Pius XII issued an even more robust critique, p(name removed by moderator)ointing not “unregulated capitalism” or “unfettered law of the market place” but capitalism pure and simple.

Thoughts?

Both just following Christ and preaching the Gospel.

 

[George_Stegmeir]

I am surprised that no one on this thread has pointed out that what the various Popes were talking about is the unrestrained Capitalism that exists mainly in Europe, South America, and Asia. None of them had much knowledge or experience with the American (US) form of regulated Capitalism, which has existed for most of the 20th Century, and paid for the costs of two World Wars, and saved the West from Soviet Communism.
Those of you with a Socialist bent will not agree with me, but to quote the late UK Prime Minister, Lady Thacher: “The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of someone elses money.”
And never forget that unrestrained Capitalism in the 19th Century, followed by Socialism in the years following WW II all but destroyed the U.K.

 

[digitalpapist]

I am surprised that no one on this thread has pointed out that what the various Popes were talking about is the unrestrained Capitalism that exists mainly in Europe, South America, and Asia. None of them had much knowledge or experience with the American (US) form of regulated Capitalism, which has existed for most of the 20th Century, and paid for the costs of two World Wars, and saved the West from Soviet Communism.
Those of you with a Socialist bent will not agree with me, but to quote the late UK Prime Minister, Lady Thacher: “The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of someone elses money.”
And never forget that unrestrained Capitalism in the 19th Century, followed by Socialism in the years following WW II all but destroyed the U.K.

European Capitalism has always been far more regulated than American Capitalism during the course of the 20th Century.

Pope Pius XII was very aware of American society; he was actually quite fond of it.
Benedict XVI was the same in this regard.

Please don’t imply that the Popes are ignorant of these things in order to protect worldly morality.

 

[TRH1292]

I am surprised that no one on this thread has pointed out that what the various Popes were talking about is the unrestrained Capitalism that exists mainly in Europe, South America, and Asia. None of them had much knowledge or experience with the American (US) form of regulated Capitalism, which has existed for most of the 20th Century, and paid for the costs of two World Wars, and saved the West from Soviet Communism.
Those of you with a Socialist bent will not agree with me, but to quote the late UK Prime Minister, Lady Thacher: “The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of someone elses money.”
And never forget that unrestrained Capitalism in the 19th Century, followed by Socialism in the years following WW II all but destroyed the U.K.

What are you talking about? Pius XII had a great knowledge of America. It’s insulting for you to defend a economic view clearly not in any way in line with Church teaching by appealing to the ignorance and stupidity of popes. (I assume you believe you are much less ignorant and much smarter than them.) Nobody here mentioned supporting socialism and the blind dogmatism between Capitalism and Socialism reflects the exact attitude I just got done posting about.

The way you will jump through illogical hoops to avoid the obvious implication of what all these popes have clearly said matches anything I have ever seen Pro-Choice people do. I wonder that if Jesus himself came here and said the same things as his vicar’s if you would not have some explanation ready as to why he doesn’t know what he is talking about.

 

[TRH1292]

I am surprised that no one on this thread has pointed out that what the various Popes were talking about is the unrestrained Capitalism that exists mainly in Europe, South America, and Asia. None of them had much knowledge or experience with the American (US) form of regulated Capitalism, which has existed for most of the 20th Century, and paid for the costs of two World Wars, and saved the West from Soviet Communism.
Those of you with a Socialist bent will not agree with me, but to quote the late UK Prime Minister, Lady Thacher: “The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of someone elses money.”
And never forget that unrestrained Capitalism in the 19th Century, followed by Socialism in the years following WW II all but destroyed the U.K.

By the way, Pope John Paul II did much more to save the West from Soviet Communism that Capitalism did.

 

[Vouthon]

Veridical16, two amazingly informative posts, thank you!!

 

[Vouthon]

Two more key quotations:

“…From this point of view the position of ‘rigid’ capitalism continues to remain unacceptable, namely the position that defends the exclusive right to private ownership of the means of production as an untouchable ‘dogma’ of economic life. The principle of respect for work demands that this right should undergo a constructive revision both in theory and in practice…”

- Blessed Pope John Paul II, On Human Work (1981) 14.

“…In Quadragesimo Anno Pope Pius XI referred to the liberal theory of uncontrolled competition as a ‘poisoned spring’ from which have originated all the errors of individualism. The French hierarchy, commenting upon the same pope’s letter on communism, stated: 'By condemning the actions of communist parties, the Church does not support the capitalist regime. It is most necessary that it be realized that in the very essence of capitalism that is to say, in the absolute value that it gives to property without reference to the common good or to the dignity of labor there is a materialism rejected by Christian teaching…”

- U.S. Bishops, Pastoral Letter (1980) 62.

 

[Veridical16]

Veridical16, two amazingly informative posts, thank you!!

thanks,

the quotes from the pontiffs have been helpful thoroughly by the posters on this thread…

Pope Francis recent critiques may help to clarify Catholic Social teaching that has been obstructed a little from the political faction sponsored publications who both want Catholic votes.

I know in my life, I wasn’t always familiar with the criticisms the pontiffs highlighted!