Posted on 07/13/2009 3:55:19 PM PDT by NYer
Brian Griffiths, Lord of Fforestfach and vice-chairman of Goldman Sachs International, says Pope Benedict's Caritas in Veritate offers the single best analysis of the current global economic crisis.
The language may be dense, but the message is sufficiently rewarding. The encyclical analyses modern capitalism from an ethical and spiritual perspective as well as a technical one. As a result it makes the Government’s White Paper on financial reforms published two days later look embarrassingly one-dimensional and colourless.
It is highly critical of today’s global economy but always positive. Its major concern is how to promote human development in the context of justice and the common good. Despite heavy competition from some of the world’s finest minds, it is without doubt the most articulate, comprehensive and thoughtful response to the financial crisis that has yet appeared. It should strike a chord with all who wish to see modern capitalism serving broader human ends.
High praise. Griffiths combs through the encyclical, and identifies Benedict's six strategies for balancing capitalism and human dignity. Jason Farago of Newser has helpfully summarized them:
This is an interesting list, but it raises questions. Catholic Social Teaching is a collection of principles, which are then applied by the individual to concrete situations. The pope is certainly free to make his own policy suggestions -- he's a head of state and a brilliant man -- but they don't carry the weight of the principles themselves.
For example, we who live in the First World are required by our faith to recognize our solidarity with those languishing in less developed countries, and work to help them. But increasing foreign aid to those nations may not be the best way to express that solidarity, and might actually do more harm than good (see Dambisa Moyo's work on the question).
Likewise, while we have an absolute moral obligation to treat workers humanely and pay them fair wages, increasing the power of trade unions may not be the best way to do that (and might very well have unintended consequences that are worse than the original problem).
Of course, it's tough to make these points in a Catholic venue without being waved off as a "dissenter from the right." Nevertheless, these are open questions and faithful Catholics are free to debate them, so long as they're genuinely commited to the social doctrine, and not acting out of political partisanship.
The financial leaders have had time to digest B16’s encyclical.
Folks, the high praise was given for liberal stances the Pope has assumed.
This is not a credit to either of these mentioned people.
Ironic that Goldman Sachs is about to report huge profits in the next day or so....
I was thinking similar things.
Related thread (same day news):
Goldman Executives Sold $700m of Stock (Uh Oh!)
I guess it's your prerogative to declaim on all matters under the sun as if with authority, but you don't flatter yourself by doing so.
High-priority bump. Been looking forward to this.
1. Reform of global institutions, including the UN, for “the management of globalization.”
2. More widespread sources of wealth: not just banks but mutual societies, credit unions, and other new forms.
3. Strengthened trade unions to protect workers in the global market.
4. Greater aid to developing nations to combat the “scandal of inequality.”
5. Action on climate change, for economic and religious reasons.
I'll grant only number six, because that is rooted in conservative thought.
We're waiting...
doesn't the air get stagnant in that box?
The Pope just got nod from a global fascist wannabe. As a Catholic, I find this path of unintended consequences quite unsettling. I’m not going to world government with the Pope.
Why can’t the Vatican simultaneously publish a summary of their encycical that the man in the’pew’ can understand.At this point I would say that most Catholics believe that the Pope supports one world government as does Al Gore.
Maybe all, maybe none. Who cares?
The Pope's writings are rooted in The Gospel of Jesus Christ not "conservatism". The Church's teachings on morality long predate mere political movements such as conservatism, liberalism, socialism or communism.
The Gospel does not fit into a nice political box and the Church has at least some issues with all of the major political ideologies, including capitalism.
Read Acts.
"And all they that believed, were together, and had all things common. 45 Their possessions and goods they sold, and divided them to all, according as every one had need.
Acts: 2:44-45
Oh no! Socialism!!
Oh, give me a break. So, you are one of the Catholics that believe everything the Pope does, regardless of talking on Scripture or otherwise, is infallible?
I thought that even the Catholic church said such thoughts were heresy, with the Pope only infallible on godly matters, not the rest.
Get real.
Wow!
CWR Round-Table: Caritas in Veritate (Web exclusive)
Editorial: Pope's New Encyclical Speaks Against, not for One-World Government and New World Order
Caritas in Veritate: language in paragraph 67 [Vanity]
Why does Pope Benedict talk about Humanae vitae in the new encyclical? [Catholic Caucus]
[Caritas in Veritate] Father Fessio: A New Framework for Social Justice [Catholic/Orthodox Caucus]
A Capitalist or Anti-Capitalist Encyclical? [Caritas in Veritate]
Caritas In Veritate (Pope Benedict XVI Encyclical)-Full Text
Pope's New Encyclical Speaks Against New World Order [Catholic Caucus]
On the 3rd Encyclical (Catholic/Orthodox Caucus)
Best Pro-Life Quotes from Pope Benedict XVI's New Encyclical
Encycli-bites for reading “Caritas in veritate”
In new encyclical Pope Benedict slams population control, urges openness to life
The New Encyclical [Cairtas in Veritate -- Love and Truth] {Ecumenical]
AP, Reuters Go Full Tilt in Spinning Latest Writing of Pope
Caritatis [sic] in Veritate: papal encyclical calls for new moral approach to global economy (CWN)
Supreme Knight criticizes use of Pope's encyclical for political agendas
Benedict XVI explains gifts and limitations of free market economy
Benedict XVI Tightens Up the Church's Social Teaching
Excerpts from Pope Benedict XVI New Encyclical "CARITAS IN VERITATE" (CHARITY AND TRUTH)
Love for others requires involvement in politics, pope says
You wrote:
“Oh, give me a break. So, you are one of the Catholics that believe everything the Pope does, regardless of talking on Scripture or otherwise, is infallible?”
Where did marshmallow mention infallibility? Criticize what he said all you like, but why do you have to falsely claim he said something he never said in that post?
What marshmallow said - and he is absoultely right on this - is that the pope’s comments are rooted in the gospel not modern political conservativism. Look at what you posted:
“1. Reform of global institutions, including the UN, for “the management of globalization.”
Is it conservative? No. But is it compatible with the gospel message of charity? Yes.
“2. More widespread sources of wealth: not just banks but mutual societies, credit unions, and other new forms.”
To me that seems incredibly conservative - people doing it for themselves rather than waiting for high interest loans from corporate banks. What’s more conservative than doing it yourself and helping your neighbors?
“3. Strengthened trade unions to protect workers in the global market.”
The Church has been teaching that since the first days of trade unions - that’s well over a century of constant teaching and that means the Church has been very conservative in her teaching by changing nothing. That may not be the conservatism you want, but it is Christian nonetheless.
“4. Greater aid to developing nations to combat the “scandal of inequality.””
Charity. Christian. Period.
“5. Action on climate change, for economic and religious reasons.”
This is the only one I think is more of passing thing just because we know that climate change is natural more than manmade. The principle, however, of having some sort of coordinaed plan for dealing with the possible effects of climate chage makes perfect sense. Again, for the sake of charity is nothing else.
I think what is at work here is this: many of the anti-Catholics here, like yourself, have replaced Christianity in their hearts and minds with another gospel that is as much rooted in political conservativism as it is in Protestantism. Because of that many of you believe traditional Christian beliefs and practices are not Christian at all because they do not fit into a recently developed political conservatism. By the way, that political conservatism is largely a product of this continent. It would be almost entirely unrecognizable to the Protestants of 16th or 17th century Europe. There are mamy good points to it, but I long recognized two things about it:
1) As a fullfeathered thing, it doesn’t neessarily work everywhere and always because it is so American, and
2) I should never confuse it with Christianity itself. Always remember what CS Lewis warned us about in the Screwtape Letters: we shouldn’t pursue a Christianity that is: Christianity and...(add whatever you want here).
Why can’t you see that “charity” must be something given freely from the heart for it to ever, EVER matter to God? A government taking from someone to give to another is not holy and it gives no one “points in Heaven,” nor is it righteous.
You need to read The Pilgrim’s Progess, Vlad, to understand that the only thing helped Christians survive on this continent was not Communism, but individual responsibility for taking care of one’s own plot of land. They first tried Communism, but it allowed everyone to sit on their laurels to let others do the work. When they subdivided their land to the individual families, they had plenty.
You seem to think the environmental thing is not quite serious. However, remember, if your Pope said it, that must mean it is Christian, righteous, good, and right, correct? That is basically how you’ve defended the other items in the list.
Get real.
You wrote:
“Why can’t you see that “charity” must be something given freely from the heart for it to ever, EVER matter to God?”
I don’t see what I’m talking about as in conflict with that. I have no problem giving to (even taxes!) to keep children from starving to death, for instance.
“A government taking from someone to give to another is not holy and it gives no one “points in Heaven,” nor is it righteous.”
Feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and so on is a good act even if done by governments in the name of their people. It would be best if this were done by individuals, but some tasks are so massive that that is almost impossible.
“You need to read The Pilgrim’s Progess, Vlad, to understand that the only thing helped Christians survive on this continent was not Communism, but individual responsibility for taking care of one’s own plot of land.”
No, Actually I don’t need to read Pilgrim’s Progress. 1) What you Protestants did here - and yes, they were all Protestants - that you call communism was doomed to failure and I already know that. But then again, I know the
Jesuit Reductiones were economically successful and offered the natives a far better life than what the Spanish slavers did. The Catholics succeeded where the Protestants failed. I wonder why?
“They first tried Communism, but it allowed everyone to sit on their laurels to let others do the work. When they subdivided their land to the individual families, they had plenty.”
Yes, they did. Then again in the Jesuit Reductiones they had pleny and apparently it was more “communist” then the earliest Protestant colonies.
“You seem to think the environmental thing is not quite serious. However, remember, if your Pope said it, that must mean it is Christian, righteous, good, and right, correct?”
Should not Christians practice good stewardship? Is is good, right and correct to practice good stewardship of the earth?
“That is basically how you’ve defended the other items in the list.”
Again, is it good to practice good stewardship? Yes or no?
“Get real.”
Coming from you that’s hilarious.
Get real and answer this question: Is it good to practice good stewardship? Yes or no?
In the eyes of God, it is only good to practice stewardship if you are an individual, not a country.
I knew it! International Finance is nothing but a Welsh Conspiracy!
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.