Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholics and Communists
American Thinker ^ | 12/3/13 | Daren Jonescu

Posted on 12/03/2013 10:13:35 AM PST by armydoc

The Catholic Church's recent history of sympathizing with, and even supporting, Marxist progressivism is clear, sad, and indicative of a deeply irrational and anti-individual streak within the modern Church hierarchy. Catholics who care about the Church, its history, and its future -- and also about humanity, reason and freedom -- must stop making excuses for their current spiritual leadership's collectivist authoritarian impulses.

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


TOPICS: Catholic; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last
Excerpted per copyright requirements. An excellent article. Mr. Jonescu is a gifted writer. Have at it.
1 posted on 12/03/2013 10:13:35 AM PST by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: armydoc

Mr. Jonescu does not seem to have all the necessary information to write an unbiased article on this topic.


2 posted on 12/03/2013 10:40:25 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Ad hominen. Less than worthless remark.


3 posted on 12/03/2013 10:43:19 AM PST by DManA (rs Jus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: armydoc

The liberal bishops love the poor differently from conservatives and libertarians. They literally believe Jesus when he said, “Blessed are ye poor” in Luke 6:20-21.

That’s why they advocate for social programs, regulations, and taxes that are ensured to make more people poor. Poverty is a blessing, and the bishops want more of it.


4 posted on 12/03/2013 10:47:42 AM PST by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic

I wouldn’t ascribe motives to them. It’s just that they don’t know what they are talking about. They are just mouthing worn out platitudes.


5 posted on 12/03/2013 10:49:56 AM PST by DManA (rs Jus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic

That’s a great analysis...

too bad leftists can’t be shamed by their obvious lack of reasoning and ability to see the results of their advocacy.


6 posted on 12/03/2013 10:51:32 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DManA

No, there is factual information missing from that article which gives a wrong impression. Have you not heard that there are dissident priests and lay persons in the Church?


7 posted on 12/03/2013 10:51:40 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
This has been an unpleasant article to write. But here it is. The Catholic Church is no more defensible than any other institution that continues, against all historical evidence, reason, and decency, to embrace and defend -- whether tacitly or openly -- the politics of mass envy, of collectivist authoritarianism, of coercive redistribution of the fruits of men's labor, and of the practical denial of the basic right of self-determination that ought to be at the core of a Catholic teaching that upholds the dignity of every living soul.

Did you read the article? It is spot on.

8 posted on 12/03/2013 10:51:50 AM PST by USS Alaska (If I could...I would.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Last I checked,

thou shalt not steal or covet

are still in there...

And socialism cannot be reconciled with these.


9 posted on 12/03/2013 10:52:11 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
Mr. Jonescu does not seem to have all the necessary information to write an unbiased article on this topic.

I could counter with "you don't have all the necessary information to provide an unbiased rebuttal on this topic", but then I would be doing nothing more than you have- disagreeing with your conclusion by positing ignorance and bias. I have no evidence that you are ignorant or biased. I thought the essay was well-reasoned and supported. Do you have any details you wish to dispute?
10 posted on 12/03/2013 10:53:38 AM PST by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: armydoc; Arthur McGowan
It's fair criticism of a good share of Catholic leaders in today's Church. I think other FR Catholics could agree with much of the points made from reason, rather than the usual vicious spittle from bigots that post every child abuse allegation they can find.

The article does not claim Catholic theology is hopelessly wrong-headed, but rather I see it as challenge to confront Church leadership when they speak in support of what is so clearly wrong in the secular world.

11 posted on 12/03/2013 10:57:50 AM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal

It’s rather a straight line, however, from a works-based theological construct, to socialism,
because works based righteousness so easily morphs into advocacy based righteousness.


12 posted on 12/03/2013 10:59:20 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
Gee, how did Pope Pius XI slip this little gem past?

DIVINI REDEMPTORIS ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON ATHEISTIC COMMUNISM

Also, why didn't Archbishop Fulton Sheen get smacked down, when he stated that Catholicism was Christ and the Cross, while Communism was just the Cross?
13 posted on 12/03/2013 11:00:41 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: armydoc

I’ve been saying this for years on FR. But the puritans disavow evidence.


14 posted on 12/03/2013 11:00:44 AM PST by deadrock (I am someone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Envy, or covetousness, is the only emotion that is expressly forbidden by the Commandments. That's probably because envy can be cultivated or wither by one's own will.

And envy is the organizing principle of socialism.

Socialists wouldn't stand a chance with the argument that the State will take the fruit of your labor and distribute it according to the needs of the State. However, many people are attracted by the argument that the State should take the fruit of another's labor and distribute it to them.

15 posted on 12/03/2013 11:01:49 AM PST by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic

Oh, it’s more devious than having the State take it from another and give it to me,

it’s that I (if I were a liberal) can feel righteous by advocating that the State take from person A and give to “needy” person B.


16 posted on 12/03/2013 11:04:50 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal
It's fair criticism of a good share of Catholic leaders in today's Church. I think other FR Catholics could agree with much of the points made from reason, rather than the usual vicious spittle from bigots that post every child abuse allegation they can find. The article does not claim Catholic theology is hopelessly wrong-headed, but rather I see it as challenge to confront Church leadership when they speak in support of what is so clearly wrong in the secular world.

Agree. I admire the humility of this Pope, and I do think it is genuine. He has shown willingess to be a servant-leader of his people. That spirit, self-sacrifice, is genuinely Christian. That is what Catholic leadership (and all leaders in Christendom) should be extolling. Unfortunately, for some reason he doesn't see the dramatic difference between self-sacrfice/charity and state enforced redistribution. If he did see the difference, and its effects, he certainly wouldn't advocate for it.
17 posted on 12/03/2013 11:07:21 AM PST by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

We can take some comfort that Francis just issued excoriation of capitalism as an apostolic exhortation.

If I understand correctly, encyclicals trump exhortations.


18 posted on 12/03/2013 11:07:38 AM PST by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Well, that, too ... That’s why it is culturally so much easier to be liberal or a leftist. One can feel all self-righteous without having to do anything.


19 posted on 12/03/2013 11:11:21 AM PST by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: armydoc; Mrs. Don-o; don-o; Dr. Sivana; Tax-chick; Campion; narses; NYer; Salvation; shibumi; ...
What a load of crap!

A priest in the North Korean totalitarian state acts as a marionette for the tubby little third generation dictator Kim Il Birdbrain and that becomes the platform for Jonescu's attack on the Roman Catholic Church since Mr. Jonescu apparently regards Adam Smith or maybe even Ayn Rand as the authors of his personal scriptures rather than Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, and Peter, tyo say nothing of the Old Testament.

The late and unlamented Fr. Robert Drinan, S. J., and Fr. Charles Curran and a handful of others were advocates of abortion but, I trust, Mr. Jonescu does not imagine that the fact that they were not silenced and defrocked and excommunicated or even burned at the stake as in those dear dead days of yore (as I would have preferred) does not make the Roman Catholic Church in the United States pro-abortion. Fr. Drinan, after many years of scandal producing behavior as Barney Frank's predecessor in Congress, was ordered by John Paul II to his face to leave Congress (which he did) and Curran was stripped of his status as theologian.

Pope Francis (not my favorite contemporary pope but pope nonetheless) lived his entire adult life in Argentina where the choices in politics seem to be essentially between Peronist fascists such as Juan and Evita OTOH and faux Peronist Marxists and social revolutionaries against human nature like the Kirchners OTO. Understandably, given the choices available, then Father,Bishop, Archbishop, Cardinal Bergoglio, tended toward the imperfect fascist model rather than toward the utterly unacceptable Kirchner model. Try to remember that he is, despite MSM sensationalism to the contrary, a RELIGIOUS leader and not a politician and it shows.

Both of those choices are quite unacceptable to normal American conservatives of a free market persuasion but Marxism and Marxism-Leninism and Maoism and Ho Chi Minhism and Kim Il Birdbrainism are MORE unacceptable and, indeed, totally unacceptable (despite one North Korean priest's idiot imaginings and substitute of "nationalism" vis-a-vis South Korea's often admirable alternative.

That there are child-molesting individual priests (certainly a grave evil) does not make the Roman Catholic Church a church devoted to child molesting any more than the idiot North Korean priest's ravings define Catholicism in North Korea much less anywhere else.

Would more stringent discipline of wayward priests serve the Roman Catholic Church well? No doubt! Catholic leaders and even popes are fallen human beings and probably do a better job at their jobs than would Mr. Jonescu and or anyone sharing his profile as intellectual at large with few real responsibilities in life.

Oh, and conveniently, Mr. Jonescu warns us NOT to rely on soon to be Saint John Paul the Great as a counterexample justifying support of the Roman Catholic Church as an enemy of Marxism just as Ronald Reagan should not be an excuse for supporting the GOP or Margaret Thatcher ought not justify support for the Tory Party in Great Britain.

Mr. Jonescu should be reminded that Saint John Paul, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher are, each in his or her own sphere, the ideal (however imperfect) of what a pope, a president or a prime minister might be. They are the each standards against whom all successors are judged and those successors are likely, in the foreseeable future to fail against such respective standards.

Mr. Jonescu is just another (apparently) fallen away cradle Catholic, favoring his own inner fallacies rather than the accumulated wisdom and teaching magisterium of the Church in which he was privileged to be baptized. That is also the Church which Friedrich von Hayek, Russell Kirk and Frank Meyer entered as death drew near. I believe but am not sure that it was also the Church of Ludwig von Mises.

Mr. Jonescu seems to fancy himself an "American Thinker" by association with that publication but, if the cited article is any evidence, we will wait in vain for him to attain the stature of von Mises, von Hayek or Frank Meyer. If that seems unfair to Mr. Jonescu, that would be because I am applying his own standard to Mr. Jonescu.

20 posted on 12/03/2013 11:12:51 AM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Rack 'em, Danno)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
You evidently missed the part of the article which granted that Catholicism officially rejects Communism, socialism, and Marxism "by name" and therefore has never advocated any of those philosophies "by name."

However, the point was that the same philosophies with the names removed are being advocated by Catholic leaders today.

Also, the article deals with the liberal, post-VII Church, not the old pre-VII Church.

21 posted on 12/03/2013 11:14:19 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (The Left: speaking power to truth since Shevirat HaKelim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk; armydoc
A priest in the North Korean totalitarian state acts as a marionette for the tubby little third generation dictator Kim Il Birdbrain and that becomes the platform for Jonescu's attack

It was my understanding that the priests in question were South Korean. That was at least the implication, and if this is not the case the author should be ashamed of himself.

22 posted on 12/03/2013 11:17:27 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (The Left: speaking power to truth since Shevirat HaKelim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

I like quacking, waddling, winged and web-footed swimming birds with bills,

but I vehemently reject the charge that I like ducks or geese (by name)!


23 posted on 12/03/2013 11:19:08 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
Unfortunately, for some reason he doesn't see the dramatic difference between self-sacrfice/charity and state enforced redistribution.

Exactly. Further, why is it that liberals think that captains of industry are corruptible, but politicians are trustworthy?

24 posted on 12/03/2013 11:21:46 AM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
You evidently missed the part of the article which granted that Catholicism officially rejects Communism, socialism, and Marxism "by name" and therefore has never advocated any of those philosophies "by name."

The whole system has been formally rejected, by name. The article's opening was so wrong, it didn't call for reading the whole thing.

The Pre-VII encyclicals are not abrogated. In fact, they are often cited in later encyclicals.

Individual Bishops, even Bishop's conferences are not "The Church". L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, is not "The Church".

Heads of theology of departments on Universities who identify themselves as Catholic, are not "The Church".
25 posted on 12/03/2013 11:23:24 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
The whole system has been formally rejected, by name. The article's opening was so wrong, it didn't call for reading the whole thing.

That right there's your problem.

The Pre-VII encyclicals are not abrogated. In fact, they are often cited in later encyclicals.

You mean like the Syllabus of Errors is constantly referenced and reinforced? [/sarcasm]

Individual Bishops, even Bishop's conferences are not "The Church". L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, is not "The Church".

Apparently neither is the Pope.

Heads of theology of departments on Universities who identify themselves as Catholic, are not "The Church".

In other words, anything, from any source whatsoever, that embarrasses you is "not 'The Church.'" Gotcha.

We'll all need to check with you from now on I suppose.

26 posted on 12/03/2013 11:29:51 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (The Left: speaking power to truth since Shevirat HaKelim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal
liberals think that captains of industry are corruptible, but politicians are trustworthy

Yeah, I've seen this as well, in personal conversations.
It's not even comprehensible to them that business people could be virtuous and that government, made up of the same pool of people, would be corrupt.
And further, that it's FAR more dangerous to have corrupt people in charge of government and the legal use of deadly force, than it is for a business to be run by a corrupt person.
There's no business in this country that can, without the aid of a corrupt government, use force to make me do what they want me to.

27 posted on 12/03/2013 11:32:12 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Yes, absolutely! Part of what makes me want to pull my hair out in arguments with such people. HOW CAN THEY NOT SEE THIS?! Truly, they suffer from a mental disease.


28 posted on 12/03/2013 11:41:56 AM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DManA

The Pope can do wrong. The most bizarre nonsense can fall from his lips and it’s the fault of translators, the papers, his enemies, “you just don’t understand”..... spin, spin.


29 posted on 12/03/2013 11:48:15 AM PST by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
We'll all need to check with you from now on I suppose.

No. You needn't check with me. You really needn't check with Mr. Jonescu.

The reason the article is not worthy of being read was that it began with the logical fallacy of "begging the question". Once you get your premise wrong, nothing good can follow.
30 posted on 12/03/2013 11:48:32 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: armydoc

Here is something I can add to the discussion:

When Bergoglio Defeated the Liberation Theologians

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350613?eng=y


31 posted on 12/03/2013 11:51:01 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
The reason the article is not worthy of being read was that it began with the logical fallacy of "begging the question". Once you get your premise wrong, nothing good can follow.

It certainly wasn't pleasant to read, but it still dealt with some very real situations.

At any rate, I didn't post the article. I just read it.

32 posted on 12/03/2013 11:58:03 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (The Left: speaking power to truth since Shevirat HaKelim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: armydoc

Good article.

I view most of the bishops and priests of the Catholic Church as the enemy of my Church (the Catholic Church) and the U.S. Constitution.

This Pope has yet to demonstrate that he has anything intelligent to say about political or economic policy. He has proven that he knows something about straw men and clichés.


33 posted on 12/03/2013 11:59:44 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
You've made a very important point, that there's all the difference between heaven and hell, between self-sacrifical charity and state-enforced redistribution.

This is a key truth!

I have not read Pope Francis' 48,000 word Apostolic Exhortation (I wonder if anyone as? I wonder if anyone ever will?--- but that's another screed I'm storing up for later.) I have not seen any quotes, however, in which Pope Francis is calling for state-enforced redistribution of property as the solution to the vexations of poverty. I could have missed something that's out there, of course. Could you supply such a quote, with the accompanying paragraph for context? (If you can, I will thank you and I will use it.)

This little Korean whatchamacallit is the very opposite of an exponent of either papal diplomacy or Catholic doctrine. A defender of North Korea, he calls himself a peace and justice advocate; however if my memory serves me well, there are only two governments in the world with whom the Holy See does not have any level of diplomatic relationship, and those are the governments of North Korea and of Red China, because they are implacably opposed to, antagonistic towards, and incompatible with, the Catholic Church.

Understand that the charism of infallibility does not extend to papal diplomacy (!!) but the fact is, the Reds say the Catholic Church defends the right of private property, and will forever. And the Reds are right. That goes together with the Church's robust understanding of the duties of private property, which make us ---if we neglect the needs of the suffering and destitute --- answerable to God and liable to hellfire.

I deplore the softboiled socialism so often dished out by clerical bureaucracies like the USCCB and so many others. Yeah, it's out there and I hate it. Anathema sit. But I am convinced by the evidence so far --- and you could get confirming testimony from Cristina Fernández de Kirchner --- that Pope Francis is a persistent and aggravating opponent of the Communist camp.

Peace, armydoc!

34 posted on 12/03/2013 12:00:15 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o (There is none holy like the LORD; there is none besides you; there is no rock like our God. - Samuel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; armydoc

Another article that mentions Cristina Kirchner’s dislike of Pope Francis:

http://www.acton.org/pub/commentary/2013/06/05/pope-francis-liberation-theology

Pope Francis is far more spiritual than political in his thinking and many people don’t really understand this. I think he looks at political constructs and sees how sin has manipulated/corrupted them.


35 posted on 12/03/2013 12:07:46 PM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MrB; SumProVita; Revolting cat!; Skepolitic; GOP_Party_Animal; armydoc; BlackElk; ...
Here's one from a cartoon series from the very Conservative and thoroughly Christian Harding College (now University): Make Mine Freedom. This institution, affiliated with the non- denominational church (small "c" intentional) of Christ is notable for its American Studies Institute which teaches the fundamentals upon which this country was founded: the Bible, liberty, individualism and free enterprise.

Also of interest is War We Are In, Part Two Communism vs Capitalism, a lecture by Dr. George S. Benson, former President of Harding. It's a strong defense of a pro-God, pro-American and an unabashed pro-capitalism philosophy. Yes, it's a bit dated, but Dr. Benson's words still are meaningful here in the 21st Century as the world faces the dangers of atheistic liberalism.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a member of a church of Christ congregation here in Texas. I'll add that guns are not only permitted during services but are, in fact, encouraged. Our preacher carries a gun as do most of our members. In that regard, it's much like Baptist-affiliated Liberty University in Lynchburg which also stands for freedom by permitting guns on campus.

To Catholic FReepers: Is there an official stance from the Vatican on guns at Mass or is it up to each Catholic Church?

36 posted on 12/03/2013 12:14:20 PM PST by re_nortex (DP - that's what I like about Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex

Attitude towards guns is a very good proxy for someone’s individual freedom index,

and for a church, another indicator is whether they use any sort of coercion to get people to part with their money.

Each should give what he feels comfortable with, under no coercion but the Holy Spirit.


37 posted on 12/03/2013 12:17:01 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic
We can take some comfort that Francis just issued excoriation of capitalism as an apostolic exhortation.

If I understand correctly, encyclicals trump exhortations.


This is a very complicated area. A lot depends on what authority the Pope is actually asserting, and the circumstances of his statement. (Even in a serious encyclical, a phrase such as "Given the current circumstances ..." means that when the circumstances change, what is to follow may or may not be as relevant.)

Second, excoriating raw capitalism does not imply supporting Marxism. There were economic systems before both Marx and Adam Smith. Even into the 20th Century, men like G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc were Distributists. They were arch-conservatives, and very anti-Marxist. The name alone, and a shallow reading on aspects of it would send some Freepers pointing "Marxist!"

Although Pope Francis shall never be confused with an Austrian economist, at least SOME of the translations have been bad, maybe purposefully bad. When the Spanish for "enterprise, by itself" is rendered "enterprise, inevitably", that is a perversion of the meaning. Fr. Z's posts here are informative.


38 posted on 12/03/2013 12:21:02 PM PST by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
, excoriating raw capitalism

Were has there been raw capitalism anywhere on Earth in the past 150 years? And as for bad translations, the document was posted in English on the Vatican's web site. Presumably the translations were done by Vatican translators.

39 posted on 12/03/2013 12:25:43 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DManA
Presumably the translations were done by Vatican translators.

Yup, and they are as reliable as American bureaucrats on this stuff. The only authoritative one would eiter be the original (which could be in any language) or in most cases the official Latin.

Heck, an EXTREMELY inaccurate translation of the 1970 Mass was performed by ICEL, and it took about FORTY YEARS and serious attention of a liturgically minded Pope (Benedict XVI) to correct a lot of it.

Were has there been raw capitalism anywhere on Earth in the past 150 years

Not much, but there is an intellectual movement pushing for it, both among conservatives and some anarchist types. While some here would oppose anti-trust laws of any kind, they are a response to what happens when one capitalist "wins the game" to such an extent that competition is permanently locked out? This stuff was certainly happening in the U.S. in the late 19th century. One could check out Rerum Novarum for Pope Leo XIII's landmark response to the times.
40 posted on 12/03/2013 12:35:01 PM PST by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

Thank you, Black Elk


41 posted on 12/03/2013 12:39:04 PM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

It’s on the Vatican’s own web site but we shouldn’t trust its accuracy. Check.


42 posted on 12/03/2013 12:39:25 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you, Mrs. Don-o


43 posted on 12/03/2013 12:40:21 PM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

Thank you, Dr. Sivana


44 posted on 12/03/2013 12:41:57 PM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
As I had remarked on another thread, traditional Catholicism has always been skeptical of radical laissez-faire, and has often emphasized communitarianism and social justice over individualism. Max Weber's book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism highlights the cultural differences between Catholic and Protestant societies, and the social and economic differences that result.

The emphasis on communitarian concerns is not a recent perversion of renegade "liberation theologians," (though leftwing liberation theologians certainly exploit the false connection). You see anti-laissez-faire attitudes among some of the most conservative and traditional Catholics as well, who have championed distributism, falangism, corporatism, etc. as alternatives to both Marxist socialism and capitalism. Many libertarians falsely attribute any criticism of laissez-faire to Marxist influence, when in fact some of these ideologies boil down to advocacy of a kind of social order that predated capitalism and republican government.

45 posted on 12/03/2013 12:56:31 PM PST by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex

Since it’s private property, any individual Catholic parish can post notices that firearms are prohibited. I have never seen this, however, not even in the more liberal parishes I’ve been to. The Vatican takes no official stance, although I’m sure they would prefer people come unarmed.


46 posted on 12/03/2013 12:59:13 PM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic
That’s why they advocate for social programs, regulations, and taxes that are ensured to make more people poor. Poverty is a blessing, and the bishops want more of it.

Especially the current pope...I'm waiting to see if he starts passing out his robes to the cold and needy...

47 posted on 12/03/2013 1:12:15 PM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
I have not seen any quotes, however, in which Pope Francis is calling for state-enforced redistribution of property as the solution to the vexations of poverty. I could have missed something that's out there, of course. Could you supply such a quote, with the accompanying paragraph for context?

As the essay suggests, Pope Francis has not openly advocated state enforced redistribution in so many words. It's very difficult, however, not to infer such a sentiment from Evangelii Gaudium:

While the earnings of a minority are grow¬ing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ide¬ologies which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. Con¬sequently, they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control. A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. (56)

Now, what does he mean by "they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control"? Pope Francis certainly is too smart to put up such an obvious strawman to take his phrase "any form of control" literally. I know of no one advocating for capitalism without any governmental "control". Government enforced regulations to counter fraud, provide consumer health and safety protections, and ensure robust and fair competition are universally accepted as proper governmental activities. Additionally, the context of the paragraph is inequality. So, it's difficult not to deduce that the "control" of which he speaks is redistributional in nature. Finally, the problems he sees causing the inequality ("absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation") are factors that exacerbate wealth inequality by making the rich richer, not the poor poorer. So, the only additional type of government "control" which the government could apply which might decrease inequality would be "redistrubutional" type controls, be they overt transfer payments or covert redistribution such as minimum wage laws or price controls. Of course, we know those type of "controls" tend to hurt the poor disproportionately and exacerbate the situation

Understand that the charism of infallibility does not extend to papal diplomacy

Yes, that is understood. However, as V2 taught, every Papal teaching must be respected:

"This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme Magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking" (LG 25)

Peace to you as well, Mrs. D!
48 posted on 12/03/2013 1:17:51 PM PST by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
What I think is funny is that about a year ago American Thinker had an article about Jews almost all still supporting Barry and a bit about the long history of Jews in various Communist and Marxist movements/revolutions and they were very careful to make it clear they weren't talking about all Jews or the current socialist state of Israel.

When it's time for a little anti-Catholic red meat, though, the editors at AT don't seem to see any reason to not use a broad brush nor do the commentors on FR seem to mind joining hands with those who claim Jesus Christ is a fraud and all Christians, not just Catholic Christians, are drooling idiots taken in by the scam of Christianity.

I guess people who have sucked down revisionist history to the point they've never even heard of the violence and murder that Pinkerton's were guilty of while in the employ of poor little non-Capitalists like Dale Carnegie or what Baldwin-Felts was up to in Logan County W Va have also sucked down the current media machine command to go after the Catholic Church every way possible for opposing King Barry and not to let little things like the truth get in their way.

At least while folks who call themselves Conservative and Christian are solidly in the Obama camp when it comes to attacking Catholics and working hand in glove with anti-Christ cultists a good many folks who call themselves Liberal and Whatever who have long been blind enough to support Barry are waking up. With more people awake we may finally end up with folks who do more than complain and encourage infighting in their own ranks pushing back against Barry.

I'm sure the Chicago fascist crowd will finish running through the propaganda they used to spread the Klan in the twenties pretty soon, though, and we will then no doubt be entertained with articles rehashing the various dark conspiracies that were spread so effectively in Europe during the thirties.

At some point, all those conspiracy theories tie the evil Jooooz to the evil Papists and I'll be interested in seeing who thinks slanders and lies about Jews is acceptable religion forum fare the same way slanders and lies about Catholics are.

49 posted on 12/03/2013 2:10:55 PM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
The joke about the old Partisan Review (which actually was Marxist, at least at the beginning) is that their office typewriters had keys with whole words like "alienation" on them.

Seems like the American Thinker's keyboards have a special key that just types out the whole word "Marxism." Really, it's not enough now to wildly accuse people of being socialists? They have to be whole-hog Karl Marxists nowadays?

Religions don't translate or divide directly into secular ideologies. There's alway some remainder that resists such oversimplifications.

So Catholicism or Christianity or Judaism or Hinduism or Buddhism can't be reduced to laissez-faire capitalism in a simplistic fashion. They talk about different things and deal with matters that aren't reducible to economics or politics.

Only an idiot would conclude that that makes them Marxist.

50 posted on 12/03/2013 2:22:20 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 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