Skip to comments.Extreme poverty is also a violation of human rights, says Argentinean cardinal (New Pope)
Posted on 03/14/2013 6:19:02 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota
The Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, has called for an ethical response to solve the problem of social debt, saying that, not only do terrorism, repression and murder violate human rights, but also extreme poverty and the unjust economic structures that give rise to great inequalities.
Social debt is immoral, unjust and illegitimate, the cardinal said, emphasizing that this is especially true when it occurs in a nation that has the objective conditions for avoiding or correcting such harm. Unfortunately, he noted, it seems that those same countries opt for exacerbating inequalities even more.
Argentineans have the duty to work to change the structural causes and personal or corporate attitudes that give rise to this situation (of poverty), and through dialogue reach agreements that allow us to transform this painful reality we refer to when we speak about social debt, the prelate said.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
The problem of debt and social justice must be of concern to every sector of society, he added, including leaders in government, politics, finance, business, agriculture, industry, unions, the Church and other social organizations.
Not Liberation Theology; but rather a restructuring to allow more opportunity for the working poor? Hard to tell from what I've been able to find thus far.
He is not a socialist. But many on the Right act as if we should punish the poor and those who are imprisoned rather than work to help them transform themselves.
If we are hard-hearted we cannot build a decent and just society. We must live as God teaches us to live and set an example through good works to every one, particularly those most in need of it. Compassion and love cannot be built by a government; it can only come from people acting out of fear of God, not out of fear of the state.
There is no system that exacerbates extreme inequality of opportunity and thus promotes poverty more severely than a Marxist/socialist system. Such a system has been empirically established to consistently and repeatedly impoverish the vast majority of people under its control and concentrates privilege, wealth, and power in the hands of a central few.
In the United States we have laws that are enforced. They are revolutionary ~ and we think that's how things ought to be. The pope agrees. That doesn't mean we can count on him to endorse free markets.
Best cure for poverty=capitalism
Put it this way, it’s not charity to give away money taken at the point of a gun.
The Pope is in favor of the social market. That is a market that is tempered by ethics and a concern for the welfare of all. The Church is both against communism and laissez-faire capitalism.
Exactly. More wealth was created in the West in the period from the late 1700s through the early 1900s than at any other time or place in human history. And that is when Capitalism, in its “harshest” form, was in full force. Private charity is fine and eveyone should engage in it. But it should never be called “moral” for the government to take money from one person and give it to another person as a transfer payment or other benefit. That is simply a government policy and in many cases a horribly wrong government policy. I don’t know enough about this Pope to know if he supports private charity or is going to start going around saying that government has an obligation to hand out cash and other benefits to the poor. I hope he doesn’t.
The local news was talking about how he was into "social justice" otherwise know as socialism. Not sure were they got their information. If true, already I don't like him.
Its more than charity; its a social obligation to uplift your fellow man. But this originates with individuals ans society and not from the government. Catholic social justice is not the social justice identified with the Left, which thinks the state is the source of justice. The true source of justice is God.
Socialism makes everybody equally poor except those who rule.
I think that as the first Jesuit pope, he's a very interesting choice -- an aspect that seems to be glossed over by most of the MSM. I wouldn't be surprised if he had pretty much everyone "challenged" -- or extremely annoyed, depending on perspective -- before he's finished.
Exponentially more wealth was created in the last 50 years than in all of human history previously.
It is likely much of this wealth is built on a shaky foundation of government and private debt, but that doesn't mean the wealth wasn't created.
Admittedly, the industrial and scientific revolutions of the 18th through 20th centuries laid the foundation for post-WWII growth, but they didn't get much of the benefit.
We have no right to another’s labor, wealth, or property.
And in the 3779 verses in the four gospels, Jesus Christ NEVER comments on the state’s or society’s various methods for running economies or political systems, much less offer a prescription for preference for one over another.
Christ shows himself repeatedly to be sympathetic with the poor and sympathetic with the oppressed, but never does he offer prescriptions to deal with these worldly issues.
If we can extrapolate at all from the four gospels regarding the economic policies and practices of the state, it would be to suggest that Christ might theoretically eschew the state’s oppression of men by it political meddling in the free choices of men. But even this would mischaracterize Christ’s mission.
He came to save souls, not rearrange social structures.
He sounds quite like a re-distributionist. Gotta spread the wealth to pay off that social debt!
You’re the only person I know besides myself to point out the problem of Real Property Record Titles systems in the rest of the world. It was written up about 8 years ago, I think, in connection with the problem of fighting poverty in Egypt, a country where one might get a deed in the form of a bill-of-sale, but.........there’s no place to file it to perfect one’s property claim. However, I’d have thought that with South America and the natural follow-on from Spanish Law there would have been central registries for the recordation of deeds/mortgages, etc. And I’d have thought they’d have the infamous “Notarial” records systems. I know they do in Puerto Rico.
That is a sort of recollection I have from long ago.. can someone corroborate it for me?
Anyway... what could be MORE immoral and unethical than stealing from honest, hard-pressed and hard-working people to subsidize the amoral and irresponsible lives of 4th and 5th generation losers who WILL NOT take responsibility for themselves or their OWN, routinely bad choices???!!
>> But many on the Right act as if we should punish the poor
Which is why the continuous attacks on private property.
The rest of the place is a mishmash of semi-systems, ancient traditions with no standing in law, as well as non enforcement.
Mexico encumbers it all with land tenancy laws that hurt the poor and help the rich ~ that was part of the Revolucion's land reform ~ it kinda' backfired so you end up with more concentration of ownership than before the Revolucion. Part of that, though, is their need to compete in agriculture with the US, else cheap American crops would swamp their country.
I keep my eye on this just in case any real news pops up but ever since the Commies were demonstrated to have no use for the poor either, you don't hear their Socialist brethren hyping any sort of land reform ~ or enforcement of titles.
Should that wealth not be what God wants for mankind? What was that about poverty being a violation of human rights? If capitalist splendor is what God wants for mankind then the Pope has his work cut out for him. He should not be taking the wealth away from those who are blessed, but teaching the poor and oppressed how to earn a better living.
Quite true of the Commies; ask any Russian. For the Leftists, the “poor” are to be used for their nefarious ends. They’re seen as a tool.
What does it really matter whether he is to the left of “Hugo Chavez” or to the right of “Ronald Reagan” on economic issues? The majority of Americans (and it’s been my experience, even a majority of American Catholics), really don’t give a rat’s rump what the Pope says if they bother to listen to him speak at all. That’s not meant to be slam at the man or the Papacy, just a statement of fact.
Those guys believed the poor should be punished and took serious action to punish them. We weren't involved and, again, we're not Royalists.
For a Christian: The Lord is our Provider.
If we submit to the Lord, and work hard, the Lord will bless us.
A wealthy man has been blessed by the Lord. Who are we to judge how he obtained his wealth? If he obtained his wealth through nefarious means, that is between him and the Lord.
We are commanded to work, as unto the Lord; support our families; and share with those in need from compassion. God will also provide for those in need, as they learn to serve Him.
No where does scripture suggest a right to TAKE form the more fortunate, only that we should be generous to those in need.
For a Marxist/Liberation Theology adherent: The State/society has an inferred ‘contract’ to provide for the members/subjects. The rich have too much, and must have obtained it by exploiting the worker. Those who will not share their wealth with the poor are greedy. Their greed justifies taking their wealth by force.
So a Christian works for his wealth, which is provided by God, and shares with the poor out of compassion.
A Marxist depends upon the social contract for his wealth, the State is his provider, and he takes from the ‘rich’ out of envy.
Sorry for needing so many words to explain such a basic concept.
Actually, no apologies necessary, well stated sir or madam.
> My understanding of Christian teachings (as imperfect and incomplete as it is) suggests that Christ was,to a degree at least,a socialist.
Never in 3779 verses of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, does Christ assert that the third party of government should confiscate wealth from party A and give it to party B.
Not only that, but in these 3779 verses, Christ makes ZERO statements concerning how the state and society and community should organize the civic affairs of men with men, in politics or economy or any worldly, civic, manner.
Christ is silent on school boards, city councils, tax rates, neighborhood associations, the Fed, the Laffer Curve, dog catchers, government loans, and all other civic matters and arrangements of men with men.
Christ is interested SOLELY in the salvation of souls.
> He made very clear His expectations regarding charitable endeavors
Yes. Christians are to give. Everything belongs to God. The poor man you see on the street is Christ, and you are measured by how you treat Christ. You are to give up EVERYTHING and follow Christ.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
You forget, there really are some just plain bad people who aren’t going to be “transformed” because all they care about is themselves.
Sounds like something Ronald Reagan would say.
“Shoes of the Fisherman” Anthony Quinn
Use the riches of The Church to care for them.
It doesn’t say don’t worry about the poor. The passage to which you refer is a complex and nuanced moment, when Mary Magdalene annoints the feet of Jesus ( as an indication of his approaching death). Pharisees rebuke the woman, and Jesus, saying that the money for the costly ointment would be better spent on the poor. Jesus answers, the poor we will always have with us, but I am here just a little while.
Yes there is extreme poverty but somehow their leaders live in golden palaces. It is not America’s fault of world proverity as we have shown and told the world what to do and vast, vast amounts of our treasure has been taken from us to prop up those leaders that live in those palaces as opposed to demanding our treasure, if allowed to be taken from us should go directly to the people, not those peoples government.
The big deal here, given the availability of land, was to issue the smallest grant in terms of 1,000 arpents!
The grantee ~ which might have been a government agent at a Villa Real (yup, St. Louis wasn't the only one of those), would subdivide it into 10 arpent sites which were just big enough to feed a horse and family ~ plus, they'd cut roads in there to provide for circulation around the townsite.
One place in Illinois not far from Champaign, going South, was enclosed in a stockade fence all the way around ~ with towers in the corner to fight invaders.
The Spanish may well have provided title to the properties but when they pulled out of the region after the end of Queen Anne's War they took the records ~ whatever they were ~ with them. I suspect many of them still exist.
In some cases I have been able to identify an earlier Spanish resident of one of these grants simply by looking to see who the first fellow was to file for a title under the American government. These guys are ALL hispanic! The French, with a different system, chose to file claim with the US government and wait 25 years for a title. The Spanish went right to the government's land agents to make their claims.
Obviously all the earliest settlers knew about land titles and the power they gave an individual. Even the Oneida were as exacting as the Spanish in their own land grants ~ look up a guy named Allen who was the first settler of Rochester ~ trace his story back to the grants the Oneida gave him. They were far from primitive savages.
From the earliest times American land title systems have protected the poor from the rich, and the rich against each other.
This guy sounds like he might be to the corporatist states what JPII was to the communist states.
Social corporatism (a modern fascism) while pretending to be sensitive to the needs of the poor actually ruins their lives by making them dependent on the state.
In reality, since the fascist state has an elite group running things and an elite leader over them, it is really nothing more than a modern form of serial emperors in an aristocratic empire.
That is: Obama and the liberal hierarchy
The true social justice mission of the church is inextricably tied to the concept of subsidiarity.
Subsidiarity insists that the smallest or most local organization that can address a problem should address a problem.
Therefore, an individual is obligated to help himself, his family, his neighbor. The church is organized throughout the world on a local level to serve the poor, educate children, build hospitals and provide ministry programs for all.
There is very little in terms of helping the poor that required a large federal government. That is Catholic teaching, although the concept is not properly promoted by many in the media and more unfortunately by many in the church.
Right. Even private contributions to the needy (like tsunami victims) finds its way into the wrong hands.
In any case, America and Americans are and have ALWAYS been more than generous.
No other nation on earth has voluntarily given such a bounty of aid to the sick, needy, oppressed, etc. It never ends.
At the same time (and moreso lately), these same people, AND their leadership never miss an opportunity to bash the US.
Some of the countries most exceedingly Anti-American, would not even appear on a MAP if not for the assistance and continuing support of the US... they constantly receive material, political and financial assistance from the US...often times with NO expectation of repayment !!
They don’t need to LOVE us but some basic respect for who we are and what we do for them would be nice.
The economist Hernando de Soto wrote about this. I have his book "The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else" at home.
Thanks for posting. I was about to do the same, to answer Lucian’s question in post 1, but you beat me to it.
“Social justice”, is a requirement of all Catholics (all human beings I’d say) but it is sadly perverted by the leftists in both the US media and the US Church.
Subsidiarity is the true way Catholics (and humans in general) should promote social justice, as rwilson99 explained in post 41.
And I’d dare to say its how the good Cardinal then, now Pope Francis, approaches the problem.
Well we'll see if that's how he interprets it. If you read the material on the ACCB web site on "social justice" it appears interchangeable with the liberal Democrat platform. Maybe that will change. I'm not holding my breath.
The Catjolic church owns over 1/4 of the worlds fine art or so we were (proudly) told on a tour of St. Peters. Yet they have some of the most crushingly poor congregations that send THEM money I suggest the new pope do something about the log in his own eye before lecturing the rest of the world how to care for the poor. I’m not Catholic bashing, but I have often wondered how the Catholic church reconciles it’s great wealth and opulence with the poverty of some of it’s people, particularly when Chridt said “the Som of Man has nowhere to lay His head”. And now the new pope wants to lecture us how to care for the poor?
Great! A world communist pope to go hand in hand with the communist US President!
I thought there was an economist who either won a Nobel Prize, or was nominated for one, who wrote a paper or book on the relationship between property rights and the economic prosperity, or lack thereof, of a country. However, I can’t seem to find the article.
There are criminals whose crimes are so horrible, redemption is not possible for them.
But pastoral ministry includes reaching to lost souls who want to change their ways. Christian teaching after all says, hate the sin but forgive he who sins.
The Church saved my life. I was treated in a Catholic hospital.
So yes, the Church is the world’s largest non-profit education and health care provider.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.