Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis's Economics: Yes, He Has A Leftist View Of Free Markets
Forbes ^ | 05/25/2013 | Jerry Boyer

Posted on 05/26/2013 7:28:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

When Cardinal Bergoglio was first chosen as Pope, my immediate reaction was that, although he would probably not tamper with the Church’s views on sexual issues, he would likely move it to the left in terms of economic rhetoric. I based that to some small degree on his choice of name: Saint Francis is something of a favorite of progressives in the Church due to his vow of poverty and his love of animals. But even more important to me was the intellectual milieu out of which he came: Argentine populism, and his own public statements as a cardinal in support of those themes.

I was, of course, attacked by the Catholic left who were quick to denounce me for ignorance, (don’t I know that Francis Xavier was one of founders of the Pope’s Jesuit order), and arrogance (how dare you question the Pope’s Biblical exposition), inaccuracy (how could I, not a Spanish speaker, comment on the Cardinal’s economic homilies given in Spanish) and simple a lack of good will.

But I think subsequent events have borne out my initial impressions. The Pope has clearly identified Saint Francis as his inspiration, for example. Furthermore, I asked my friend Alejandro Chafuen, who is a native Argentinian, a theologian and an economist, to confirm my reading of the Pope’s homily about Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus is indeed referred to as a usurer and associated with foreign banking interests in the Cardinal’s homily, and used as a device to attack foreign bankers who insisted on having their loans repaid by Argentina, despite widespread public support for debt repudiation. But the actual gospel text declares Zacchaeus to be a tax collector, not a loan shark.

So the Gospel reading itself undermines any attempt to scapegoat market processes.

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: altereddate; economics; leftist; popefrancis; repost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

1 posted on 05/26/2013 7:28:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In before some of our Catholic FRiends try to justify the new Pope’s obviously leftwing economic statements. At this point it has become abundantly clear that Pope Francis is an economic populist leftist - which is pretty typical of South American Jesuits.


2 posted on 05/26/2013 7:32:54 AM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...


3 posted on 05/26/2013 7:37:24 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

The author says Zacchaeus was a tax collector and not a loan shark.

I’d really like to know what his understanding of this passage in Luke 19:8 tells us about what Zacchaeus did before he repented:

” And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.”


4 posted on 05/26/2013 7:45:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969; fwdude
In before some of our Catholic FRiends try to justify the new Pope’s obviously leftwing economic statements. At this point it has become abundantly clear that Pope Francis is an economic populist leftist - which is pretty typical of South American Jesuits.

Too late. I posted the same article on Friday, and they came out to justify his position. Even got a complaint about which paragraphs I excerpted and which I left out.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

...they'll say it's not a duck. Rule One: The Pope is never in error, regardless of subject matter. Rule Two: If the Pope is found to be in error, see Rule One and kill the witnesses.

5 posted on 05/26/2013 7:48:41 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

RE: Rule One: The Pope is never in error, regardless of subject matter.

I am not Roman Catholic but...

That’s NOT what ex-cathedra means. Let’s not create straw men here


6 posted on 05/26/2013 7:50:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
It is all a matter of degree. Everybody would help their neighbor in a crisis. Not everybody would agree to provide a middle class living to people too lazy to get off the couch.

It is just as immoral to strip the earnings of a hard working family to redistribute to freeloaders as it is to deny a helping hand in time of need.

Christian leaders seem to lean to the left on charitable issues but it is understood that it must be within limits. Unlimited charity is not good for either the giver or the receiver.

7 posted on 05/26/2013 7:54:12 AM PDT by oldbrowser (We have a rogue government in Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
>>>I’d really like to know what his understanding of this passage in Luke 19:8 tells us about what Zacchaeus did before he repented:

The answer to that lies in the way the tax-collection system worked. He wasn't a loan shark. Plain and simple.

If you will read some history on this subject you will discover that the tax collectors of the day would sometimes require more than what was necessary...and would demand a tax that was somewhat higher than was necessary. IOW: Say you owed 15%...they would tell you that you owed 20% and keep the extra 5% for themselves.

That is how they made their money...by OVER taxing. This of course is contrary to the law of Moses....which is why the Jews really hated Jews who did it.

LOANS had nothing to do with the system...it was a system built on fraud...which is why Zacchaeus said what he did. He had basically robbed people.

Kinda what the government does today.

8 posted on 05/26/2013 7:54:19 AM PDT by NELSON111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I am not Roman Catholic but...That’s NOT what ex-cathedra means. Let’s not create straw men here

I never mentioned their belief in "ex cathedra".

9 posted on 05/26/2013 7:55:27 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; Alex Murphy

That’s not what Alex Murphy meant, either. Any critcism or note of possibly less than conservative statements by the Pope or even the Vatican, from a Protestant, is met with vociferous denial and copious lengthy replies, it just rains down.

The odd thing is, these same posters decry Vatican II, question all manner of liturgical issues, darkly infer that “the smoke of Satan” is in the Church and some even freaked out when Pope Francis didn’t genuflect early on and called *him* Satan.

They’re the rad-trads, verging upon sedevacantist in my outsider’s opinion, it’s a very conflicted view of things on their part, almost Sybill-like from one post to the next, one day to the next. Outside criticism is immediately pounced upon and a multipronged attempt to discredit is immediately mounted, internally inconsistent though it usually may be.

This is the source of all the tremendously lengthy denominational tracts, sermons, somewhat childish daily make-and-do lists, wear purple, run around the courthouse square shaking maracas, put your Barbie on the credenza, your left foot in, your left foot out, and other minutiae that clog FR on a nightly basis. I’ve taken to terming it holy-scroller time and I usually sign off along about then in annoyance.

If it’s intended to be evangelization or proselytizing it’s very clumsy and patently off-putting. We’ve always had Catholic FReepers but these guys are a different breed, often intentionally disagreeable, and unnecessarily so.


10 posted on 05/26/2013 8:15:17 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ping for reference


11 posted on 05/26/2013 8:15:55 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
To preface, I don't see everything the way Catholics do - for that matter, very few others even. That said, Pope Francis appears to me to be a very humble servant of God. And until you hear him advocating taking from one and giving it to another, I'd not put much credence in statements of the unenlightened, calling him a leftist (i.e., socialist/communist).

Just sayin'...

12 posted on 05/26/2013 8:18:11 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: A.A. Cunningham

Case in point.


14 posted on 05/26/2013 8:26:20 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He probably read the Bible. Yikes!


15 posted on 05/26/2013 8:28:35 AM PDT by District13 (I miss my country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The official teaching of the Church is that it doesn’t favor one economic system over another. Also, popes have criticized the marxism masquerading as Catholicism known as “liberation theology.”


16 posted on 05/26/2013 8:37:42 AM PDT by I want the USA back (Pi$$ed off yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Pope Francis supports tyranny and the suppression of human liberty by leftist tyrants. He thus supports those who would enslave humanity, and thereby surrenders his claim to any moral authority whatsoever.

God. Damn. Him.


17 posted on 05/26/2013 8:39:31 AM PDT by Maceman (Just say "NO" to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So this is how these pro-abort celebrities keep getting communion.


18 posted on 05/26/2013 8:40:55 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

This is dumb, doesn’t the Pope know that Jesus invented capitalism?? Its in the Bible.


19 posted on 05/26/2013 8:44:20 AM PDT by escapefromboston (manny ortez: mvp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

” Pope Francis appears to me to be a very humble servant of God.”

I’ve got no dog in this fight except that my wife is Catholic, but this whole humility, “servant-of-God” thing doesn’t square well when one has worked their way up the hierarchy of one of the most powerful, wealthy, often venal, organizations in the history of hard-ball Machiavellian politics, then puts down Capitalism in favor of the sort of feel-good propaganda that the Marxists always rely on.


20 posted on 05/26/2013 9:00:05 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux
I haven't seen anything where Pope Francis is putting down Capitalism. He has been voicing concerns about factual problems with manipulation of the commodity and currency markets, and the taking advantage people by those in power.

Part of what he has been saying, is straight out of the New Testament. Sorry for massively quoting the following, but it helps to explain much:

1 Timothy Chp. 6: (NIV) These are the things you are to teach and insist on. 3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4 they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5 and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

6 But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7 For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. 8 But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. 9 Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Final Charge to Timothy

11 But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness. 12 Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses. 13 In the sight of God, who gives life to everything, and of Christ Jesus, who while testifying before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, I charge you 14 to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which God will bring about in his own time—God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.

17 Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. 18 Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. 19 In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.

20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21 which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith.

Grace be with you all.

21 posted on 05/26/2013 9:21:18 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

He’ll do a bang-up job of filling the shoes of the Fisherman, if bang-up means dragging the Roman Catholic Church further into the secular ditch.

This will make a lot of cafeteria Catholics happy, but like his predecessors he’ll owe his Maker a lot of explaining before the level is pulled.


22 posted on 05/26/2013 9:29:54 AM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

level=lever


23 posted on 05/26/2013 9:31:44 AM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“It doesn’t have a human purpose, but that’s because it has 7 billion human purposes. If you want an economy with a face and a human purpose, then the Egypt of the Exodus era is your place and the Pharaoh of the exodus is your man.”

Again proving a Roman Catholic Pope is not “infallible” and his “word” should be digested, not simply accepted as “Gospel” truth; an all too human opinion, and not a God-inspired one.

If you cannot keep a legal context true to the law, or, in this case, a scriptual context true to the scripture, you cannot formulate an opinion that is a true reflection of them.


24 posted on 05/26/2013 9:37:58 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

...the leftist view is to DESTROY free markets...


25 posted on 05/26/2013 9:46:39 AM PDT by Tzimisce (The American Revolution began when the British attempted to disarm the Colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

My prediction is that Francis will promote “social justice” as a voluntary thing. Not something that should be enforced by government. He has already laid the groundwork for such a point of view by telling us to wake up as Christians.

The trend in economic thinking of the various popes has moved rightward, toward freedom, especially the thinking of John Paul II.

I eagerly await the first encyclical on this subject from Francis.


26 posted on 05/26/2013 9:58:39 AM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Did you ignore context, beginning with Luke 19:2

“Now behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus who was a chief tax collector, and he was rich.”

or, as Luke continues at 19:8

“Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.”

which is NO admission that he had defrauded anyone, in fact, it suggests he is a man who is capable of correcting his errors, if he has made them

and the rest of Luke 19, which opened with Zacchaeus?

it’s no homily against trading well.

the meeting with Zacchaeus is about those who sincerely desire a sight of Christ, like Zaccheus, will break through opposition, and take pains to see him. Christ invited himself to Zaccheus’ house. Wherever Christ comes he opens the heart, and inclines it to receive him. He that has a mind to know Christ, shall be known of him.

Zacchaeus was hated and despised in Palestine because his job was as tax collector - he took from the people on orders of Herod and the Romans to fill their royal coffers, while the people, so many people in Palestine, went hungry FOR LACK OF WORK.

Meanwhile, the taxes deprived everyone of what they could have given in alms for the poor to the temple - charity being traditionally the role of the churches - and those in charge of the temple were themselves living lavishly as well.

Tax collecting, like Zacchaeus job, was part of the corruption of the elite, much like it is today.


27 posted on 05/26/2013 10:08:35 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Did you ignore context, beginning with Luke 19:2

“Now behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus who was a chief tax collector, and he was rich.”

or, as Luke continues at 19:8

“Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.”

which is NO admission that he had defrauded anyone, in fact, it suggests he is a man who is capable of correcting his errors, if he has made them

and the rest of Luke 19, which opened with Zacchaeus?

it’s no homily against trading well.

the meeting with Zacchaeus is about those who sincerely desire a sight of Christ, like Zaccheus, will break through opposition, and take pains to see him. Christ invited himself to Zaccheus’ house. Wherever Christ comes he opens the heart, and inclines it to receive him. He that has a mind to know Christ, shall be known of him.

Zacchaeus was hated and despised in Palestine because his job was as tax collector - he took from the people on orders of Herod and the Romans to fill their royal coffers, while the people, so many people in Palestine, went hungry FOR LACK OF WORK. At tax collecting itself providing ample opportunity for corruption - not from being a lender with interest - by taking more than just the tax that was required [like Socialists, Liberals and Progressives do), padding their own pocket [or in the modern case, their own political and business special interests] with the difference [with non-essential programs just to get more people beholden to them].

Meanwhile, the taxes deprived everyone of what they could have given in alms for the poor to the temple - charity being traditionally the role of the churches - and those in charge of the temple were themselves living lavishly as well.

Tax collecting, like Zacchaeus job, was part of the corruption of the elite, much like it is today.


28 posted on 05/26/2013 10:14:31 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Errant

“I’d not put much credence in statements of the unenlightened, calling him a leftist”

The writer seemed to be more “enlightened” about the context of Zacchaeus in Luke 19 than did the Roman Catholic Pope. In fact, the Roman Catholic Pope seems to have felt free to totally mischaracterize Zaccgaues to make his point. If your use of scripture is not true to the context in scripture then your argument is not true to the scripture either - regardless of well intentioned (or not) arguments.


29 posted on 05/26/2013 10:20:58 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

The official teaching of the Church is that it doesn’t favor one economic system over another. Also, popes have criticized the marxism masquerading as Catholicism known as “liberation theology.”

__________________________

Correct! And Pope Francis has been one of the STRONGEST opponents of liberation theology in all of Latin America.


30 posted on 05/26/2013 10:24:20 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

“Also, popes have criticized the marxism masquerading as Catholicism known as “liberation theology.”

The Roman Catholic Pope’s left-leaning economic views are a separate issue from the core arguments of “liberation theology”, regardless of some economic views of liberation theologists which also are leftist. One can be of the left, in economics, and still not ascribe to liberation theology.


31 posted on 05/26/2013 10:26:27 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
In fact, the Roman Catholic Pope seems to have felt free to totally mischaracterize Zaccgaues to make his point.

Luke19:8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Please enlighten us on exactly where the good Pope mischaracterized Zacchaeus.

32 posted on 05/26/2013 10:34:01 AM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Makes sense. The Catholic Church is a socialist model, with those at the top of the food chain living like kings - in fact, the cardinals are known as “Princes” of the Church - and their wealth based on taxes of a sort from those below. Every once in a while, the princes get together and democratically elect one of their own to run the show.

Sounds like the current state of the US.


33 posted on 05/26/2013 11:12:29 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
What is so leftwing about "Love one another as I have loved you."??

Obviously Mr. Jerry Boyer isn't familiar with the Bible. Perhaps a little more study, Mr. Boyer, would help you with you analysis.

John 13:34-35

New International Version (NIV)

34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”


Mark 12:30-31

New International Version (NIV)

30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’

[a] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] There is no commandment greater than these.”


34 posted on 05/26/2013 12:08:19 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
This has been an inherent problem within Catholicism for over a thousand years. It thinks of itself as a political or worldly power. {It is the same problem that we encounter with Islam.) When there is no division between the “two kingdoms,” the Gospel always suffers. If Rome would limit itself to preaching the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins and administering the true sacraments of Christ, it wouldn’t be entangling itself in politics. The Crusades is a prime example of what happens when the Church gets itself embroiled in worldly pursuits. The last institution that should be telling governments how to manage their economies is the Church of Rome.
35 posted on 05/26/2013 12:09:29 PM PDT by Nemoque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

**when one has worked their way up the hierarchy of one of the most powerful, wealthy, often venal, organizations in the history of hard-ball Machiavellian politics,**

A Pope does not “work his way up the hierarchy**

The choosing of the Pope is done through the College of Cardinals at the Conclave — they are led by the Holy Spirit.

Are you saying that the Holy Spirit is wrong here? That’s a sin! An unforgiveable one, to boot!!


36 posted on 05/26/2013 12:13:49 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Point is Zaccheus was a gov’t bureaucrat a la IRS not a market guy. if he defrauded anyone it was in the name of the state.


37 posted on 05/26/2013 12:23:29 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Errant

Zacchaeus was not a money lender, he was a tax collector;

his living did not come from “usery”, like loan sharking

he was part of the Roman/Herodian system of taxing the people


38 posted on 05/26/2013 1:01:29 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; dagogo redux

The Holy Spirit is never wrong, but humans often are, and even those who make a specialty of claiming the imprimatur of the Holy Spirit. The Pharisees could not contemplate the possibility they were wrong. After all, they sat in the seat of Moses, and Moses had a hot line direct to God. So what could possibly go wrong? Other than becoming so deeply committed to their own sense connectedness to God they totally blew it when Jesus worked wonders among them to show, by the Holy Spirit, He was the Son of God. They mistook him for a devil, not because they had any real evidence of malicious motive, but solely because he dared question their pedigree of divinity.

And that act right there is the only place in Scripture where the unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is exampled for us in concrete form. They showed they would rather deny the witness of the Holy Spirit acting in power before their very eyes, than surrender their pretense to divine authority. Based on that example, it is much safer spiritually to question the divinity of a human hierarchy, like Jesus did, than to defend said hierarchy by attacking the spirituality of honest critics, like the Pharisees did.


39 posted on 05/26/2013 1:34:41 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

We can all sin against the Holy Spirit!

Do you deny the Mass?

Do you deny the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

Do you bless yourself with Holy Water every time you step through the narthex of your church? Or is the Holy Water absent?

Do you deny that Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ, true God and true man?


40 posted on 05/26/2013 1:40:35 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I am a Baptist. I do not answer to the Pope or Catholic doctrine. If you wish to woo me, you must do so from Scripture, and I will gladly entertain such dialogue, and even some of the brighter lights of your own denomination would approve. But if you can only come at me with the mindless cudgel of your pet dogmas, I have better ways to spend my time.

I do know this. Every cultic operation with which I have either had contact or who has tampered with the lives of my loved one has used exactly this same argument. To question organization X, which claims divine authority for all it does, is to question the Holy Spirit, which you better not do or you can’t be forgiven. It doesn’t matter who X is or what X teaches. The pattern is always the same. Use fear and guilt to suppress criticism, even to the point of extinguishing honest private thought.

I’m past all that. But for some, fear of committing the unpardonable sin can become a full clinical neurosis/psychosis. It is extremely dangerous and irresponsible at a spiritual level to use it casually as a cheap device to lock out legitimate criticism of mortal, fallible, human authority.

But it is a free country, and I have no power to stop you from doing so. I advise against it for your own benefit, not just those unfortunates who might be unduly affected by it. It’s just friendly advise. Makes no difference to me whether to take it or not. It’s up to you.


41 posted on 05/26/2013 2:02:13 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
Zacchaeus was not a money lender, he was a tax collector;

Maybe in the simplest of terms. More accurately, we should consider where his wealth come from - loaning sharking, extortion, theft perhaps. The point is, the love of money consumed him, and he likely cared little what he had to do to acquire it.

More importantly, Zacchaeus realized his sins, repented before others, then asked and received forgiveness.

Mr. Bowyer, our Forbes "Contributor", like many, seem to have a difficult time separating wheat from tares, so to speak. His God and savior appears to be accumulation of wealth, and he seems to resent teaching that God expects us to help those less fortunate - as mentioned many times in scripture.

Jesus told his disciples, "I tell all of you with certainty, it will be hard for a rich person to get into the kingdom from heaven.

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

I would even go so far as to say, until we know more about Pope Francis, Mr. Bowyer is bearing false witness; but likely true ignorance.

42 posted on 05/26/2013 2:15:19 PM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Errant
true through
43 posted on 05/26/2013 2:19:49 PM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; narses; All
LOL. Forbes didn't let the facts get in the way of this little hit piece.

So much for Forbes as a reliable source for anything that requires historical context regarding the time of Christ.

Herod did the same thing the Romans did, they told those in charge of a city or province what the total they expected was and left it to the locals to come up with that amount of money or in kind tribute any way they liked. In Jerusalem, just like in Rome and almost all other provinces and cities, it was wealthy folks who bought the right to collect taxes by paying that lump sum up front then recovering their money and a profit however they liked. If someone failed to pay the tax collector, he told his superiors who were independent entrepreneurs and who had the legal authority to have their ownb armed men. If that wasn't sufficient, the person holding the right to collect taxes could petition the Roman authorities for military help or whatever the Romans thought was appropriate. Fairly often the Romans sent someone to investigate reports of unfair taxation practices and ended up taking the authority to collect taxes away from someone who was going too far and handing it over to someone else. There were also cities where the leading citizens and businessmen pooled their resources, paid the lump sum to get the right to control taxation, then put a minimum sales tax on things in their city to make it an attractive place to do business. Rome didn't care one way or another as long at they got the lump sum up front from the party who would be responsible for actually hiring tax collectors and collecting taxes. Sometimes Rome started the bidding for the collection rights at about 95% of what it thought was the right amount of taxation for an area and anyone could bid on the rights. In the more prosperous areas, several families were traditionally taking turns at having the right to collect taxes with there being no chance that anyone other than the old Roman families ever replacing them. Herod probably favored a few families or groups he wanted to win over.

Rome dictated a lump sum it wanted from a given area and it was up to the individual entrepreneurs or group of entrepreneurs how they got that money, produce, or labor, along with a profit. Zacchaeus is an extremely poor choice of examples for someone to use as a representative of a Marxist or Socialist state, or any sort of government at all in fact. Given the fact that Herod followed the Roman model and sold the right to collect taxes to individual capitalists. Zacchaeus was a shining example of Capitalism or Crony Capitalism in action, not Marxism or Socialism. He had to deliver a portion of the total the people with the right to collect taxes had paid and how much more than that he put in his own pocket was up to him.

Through the Eye of A Needle by Peter Brown (Princeton University Press, 2012) begins with a description of the minimalist system Rome used though out the Empire and other works attribute the military weakness of the later Eastern Empire to the fact that local businessmen often refused to collect taxes for the Emperor and therefore the Empire went without those revenues. When Constantinople fell, in fact, a group of the wealthy folks who survived were executed by the Muslim victor because they had refused to aid the Empire by collecting taxes for them and therefore were totally untrustworthy in the eyes of their new master.

Empire of Honour : The Art of Government in the Roman World by J. Lendon (Oxford University Press, 1997) discusses this same point regarding tax collection being a field where individual entrepreneurs often began to build their personal fortunes in greater detail. It also makes it clear just how minimalist the central government was prior to the fall of the Western portion of the Empire and how it remained hobbled in many ways by the fact it was dependent on capitalist approaches to government function right up until the fall of Constantinople.

A number of the lecture series available on-line from various universities also make this point about the :inefficient Roman tax system" in both their descriptions of the Roman Empire and in their descriptions of what various Kings were trying to reinstate in the Medieval period when they handled taxation much the same way. Their their nobles were told what they had to deliver and how they came up with that amount was left up to them.

Reading through comments about this very poorly researched article isn't glaringly obvious that the same folks who each interpret Scripture to suit their Self enjoy having history rewritten to suit their Self as well. Obviously, it never occurred to anyone to check whether the author of the article knew anything about the system of tax collection during the time in question because like the author, they didn't want facts to get in the way of yelling slanders at the Pope and Catholics. Sticking to the facts and the truth wouldn't make the point the author wanted to have as his truth, so he made up a new truth to support his version of Scripture and lots since that "truth" sells, it's the new "truth" for the Self Alone volk.

That's the way Self Alone works across the board. It infects everything, not just the interpretation of Scripture. Whatever twisting and revising of reality it takes to sell a personal interpretation of Scripture that suits your own, Most High and Holy Self, do the twisting and revising then move on to the next slander, half-truth, or lie fast as you can exactly like Martin Luther said to.

44 posted on 05/26/2013 2:41:45 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why do there have to be these cults of personality. That seems to obscure the Father’s will quite a lot. Fine if this pope chooses to live frugally and if he loves animals. Skip the customary opulence and bless every dog and cat in Rome. But to build a whole lefty cult around him?


45 posted on 05/26/2013 3:18:55 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

This sort of question begging railing of Roman Catholics at Evangelicals/Protestants, and sometimes vice versa, probably isn’t going to go away any time soon.


46 posted on 05/26/2013 3:21:08 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (How long before all this "fairness" kills everybody, even the poor it was supposed to help???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“Are you saying that the Holy Spirit is wrong here? That’s a sin! An unforgiveable one, to boot!!”

LOL! I’m not Christian - already damned in your eyes, I suppose.

Like I said, no dog in this fight, but my wife is Catholic and I try to follow the historical trajectory of this stuff for that reason (and the historical trajectory leaves a great deal of questionable goings-on to comment about, quite frankly).

I suppose outside objectivity has no place in such discussions - just as is obviously the case with Islam - so I’ll just offer my apologies, await my eternal damnation as you have specified, and let those of you who know better squabble it out among yourselves.


47 posted on 05/26/2013 3:50:06 PM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux
LOL! I’m not Christian - already damned in your eyes, I suppose.

Maybe you just need A Rood Awakening. Particularly, The Jonah Code or The Great Secret of Solomon's Temple

If any regard, continue the pursuit of truth, and like Zacchaeus, maybe the Messiah will find you.

:)

48 posted on 05/26/2013 4:14:35 PM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

RE: I never mentioned their belief in “ex cathedra”.

I was referring to this statement: “The Pope is never in error, regardless of subject matter.”

Papal infallibility (or speaking ex cathedra) does NOT mean the Pope is never in error regardless of subject matter.

Inerrancy as it refers to the Pope states that by virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error “when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church”.

A personal opinion by a Pope about economics does not apply and therefore is not necessarily infallible.


49 posted on 05/26/2013 6:52:03 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Correct. Some people get the words “infallible” and “impeccable.”


50 posted on 05/26/2013 7:02:00 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson