Posted on 08/30/2010 3:24:57 AM PDT by markomalley
Thank you for posting. The article is interesting in that it (nearly) simultaneously follows two lines of thought. Very difficult to achieve, but the author does it well. It points out the fallacy of injecting 20th/21st century “social justice” ideas into the gospel, and the message that Christ’s justice is available to all.
Quite a good article.
I agree. The social justice (aka, share the wealth) mantra permeates SOME Catholic churches, not all. Our Priest is very conservative.
But in Phoenix, the Priest stood up calling for open borders and it was our duty to provide health care, jobs, etc. for anyone that comes into the USA. I got up and walked out. Never had done that EVER in the middle of a sermon.
I’m starting to see more fellow Catholics understand that social justice is NOT following God’s teachings. I remember there being something (no coffee yet, so please be kind) about God giving us the poor to keep us humble. If we all have the same wealth, who will keep us humble?
The vast majority of the catholic heirarchy in the USA either does not understand the difference between charity and legalized theft or doesn’t want to understand the difference between the two. They, along with their liberal democrats allies, have idea that if we just take enough form those who have and give it to those who doen’t we will achieve some utopian dream. What they don’t get is that for the most part those who have got what they have by hard work, and those who don’t have lack these things because of their life choices and lack of toiling.
I thought it was very good economics, explaining that Priests and such just don’t understand a world where goods are scarce and prices are used to ration them, because there are no limits on prayers and such, and no rationing mechanism is necessary for them.
Actually, there is nothing wrong with actual social justice.
However, social justice as it has been taught is, as you say, not following either the teaching of Christ or the teaching authority of the Magesterium of the Church.
What too many in the Church have taught for the past 60 years or so is half the doctrine...which makes it no doctrine at all. They (mis-)teach the principles of the common good and solidarity yet leave out subsidiarity and participation. Consequently, rather than teaching the authentic social doctrine as taught by the Holy Fathers since the days of Pio Nono, they end up teaching socialism.
Authentic social justice is achieved when those who have plenty voluntarily share with those who have need and when those who receive the benefits of that giving receive it with gratitude. The ersatz social (in)justice happens when governments act as Robin Hoods, taking from those who may or may not have plenty and turn it over to those who may or may not have need. Those who have their goods stripped of them feel as if they are victims of larceny; those who receive those goods feel entitled and feel entitled to ever more. Neither receive any type of spiritual good from this and, in fact, my belief is that those who are the recipients actually are damaged in the process.
The late Bishop Fulton J. Sheen in his book ‘Life Of Christ’ very clearly describes how Christ explicitly says that his Gospel is specifically NOT one focused on and of ‘social justice’. The book is wonderfully written. Bishop Sheen is wonderfully clear and explicit in his presentation of the message and mission of Christ.
“The social justice (aka, share the wealth) mantra permeates SOME Catholic churches, not all.”
The authentic teaching of the Church regarding social issues is good, but most Catholics are unaware of it. The new compendium would be a good place to start.
And yet if you go to the American Conference of Catholic Bishops' web site and look under "social justice" (the word "justice" being truly Orwellian in this misuse) you will see with the exception of abortion, something that pretty much matches the National Democratic party's platform. The current crop of catholic "leadership" has pretty much diametrically opposite views from your description of Sheen's position.
The key word is "voluntarily" This makes it charity. By lobbying the government to redistribute the wealth, the current crop of Catholic bishops has endorsed theft, not charity.
I agree. This process turns what otherwise might be decent people into misers who hate their neighbors, and it dehumanizes the recipients. How many times have we seen posts in which someone claims that it's just to treat the poor as if they were house pets, simply because "they're taking my money"?
You may not have seen the gun at your head, or the handcuffs on your wrists as you handed in your income tax forms and wrote out that check, but they were there if needed.
Did Jesus ever say "use guns to raise funds for the poor"?
Did Jesus perhaps have "handcuff and jail cell" sessions? Anyone catch that ~ I've gone through the Bible many times and must have missed it.
Exactly right. As P.J. O'Rourke said, "Would you kill your mother to pave I-95?" Because that's what it comes down to.
Occupied GA's tagline is right on. It's not a poor person - or sick person, immigrant, or Catholic bishop - on your doorstep with a gun, as a rule: it's our very own government.
I would also add that not enough distinction is made between how individual catholics make decision within an economic system catholics wish to establish.
For example if I describe myself as a “Capitalist”; it could have two disparate meanings.
1. It could mean that I make all my personal decisions entirely based on the greatest personal economic gain for myself. This can clearly be contradictory to church teachings.
2. It could also mean that I advocate for a free market system where my property rights are protected and I am free to make economic decisions based on any factors I choose. This in general is clearly consistent with church teaching, especially since history has shown that free markets produce the most wealth for the most people with the least poverty.
The marxist-liberal-democrats often exploit this ambiguity to claim that because of “social justice” capitalism is immoral.
The funniest part about it is that the system of governance they advocate is the only system of governance that has been explicitly condemned by the Church. (i.e., socialism)
A Catholic sensibility at the micro-level works wonderfully. In other words, a business owner caring about his employees and thier families and arranging pay, work and benefits accordingly. At the macro level, with government transfer payments, government “charity” is not charity, it is redistribution with jail as the consequence if you want to keep your own money rather than have the politicians distribute it to their favored groups and friends.
Good, thought-provoking article.
But you should have made it a caucus thread.
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.