Posted on 11/10/2009 11:55:00 AM PST by B-Chan
The passage of sweeping national health care legislation by the U.S. House of Representatives has set the stage for the greatest intrusion of the State into the everyday lives of the American people in the nation's history. Across the Web, the groans and cries of the free-marketers, capitalists, and libertarians have begun to echo in response. Surprisingly, many of these voices condemn the Catholic Church for its "socialist" commitment to feeding the poor, caring for the sick, and doing the other things Jesus Christ commanded of us. "Without the support of you bleeding-heart Catholics," the refrain goes, "this socialist nightmare could never have passed."
An element of truth exists behind this complaint. A pious Catholic's heart does bleed for the sick, the aged, the destitute, the lame, and the suffering; in this, it mimics the Sacred Heart of our Lord Himself, who gave all He had, including His life, for the sake of the suffering.
But is the Catholic Church "socialist"? Impossible. Socialism is a materialist doctrine with a dialectical and teleological basis that is utterly incompatible with the word and example or our Lord. As such, it has been repudiated specifically in the teaching of the Church, most notably in the encyclical Rerum novarum (1891) of Pope Leo XIII, which states
the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal. The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property.1But if the Church is not socialist, neither is it capitalist. Capitalism, like socialism, is both philosophically materialist and ethically libertarian -- and libertarian thought (which is just Liberal thought with a different name) is completely in opposition to the teaching of Jesus Christ. Our Lord is not a free marketer, a capitalist, an entrepreneur, or a salesman. As the ultimate altruist and counter-example of rational sef-interest, He stands at the opposite end of the ideological spectrum from Rand's Nietzschean superman John Galt. Jesus Christ is a King, not a CEO*, and He commands His servant Church to uphold the Natural Law, which proclaims that every human being is a Child of God -- and as such, is deserving of food, medical care, and the other basic hallmarks of human dignity.
The Church is called upon to provide these social services. The State has no just role in pubic life except to keep the peace, protect the borders, establish justice, and preserve the national patrimony. In a Christian social order, the State officially recognizes the Church's special role in the life of the nation, and protects and support the Church in its provision of social services. This was the pattern of social organization throughout Christendom until the advent of the Lutheran heresy, which proclaimed the cult of individual Liberty and its separation of Church and State.
By destroying the proper relationship between Church and State, the "libertarian" movement invited the State to overstep its ordained bounds and intrude into areas of life within which it has no just business. In a post-Reformation representative republic such as our own, which pretends neutrality in matters of faith, the State cannot fulfill the role of Protector of the Church given to it by God; as a result, over time, popular demand forces the State to assume the provision of social services which in a Christian social order would be provided by the Church.
Human beings have the positive and Divine right to daily bread, health care, and other aspects of human dignity. In his Luciferian quest for individual Liberty, however, Western man has destroyed the Divinely-ordained social order under which the Church provided these goods. As a result, the heavy hand of the State will now intrude into every aspect of public life in its futile attempt to build a just society. Ironically, the worship of individual liberty instigated by the "reformers" of the Church and the secular counterparts of the "enlightenment" has destroyed the liberty under God that individuals once enjoyed as organic parts of the Catholic and medieval social order.
Nationalized health care is a fact. Soon, the power of life and death will rest entirely in the hands of the State. And as the smothering blanket of socialism settles slowly across our land, I invite libertarians to quit their whining. In their quest for freedom from the Church, they destroyed the institutions that kept the State in its proper place. Libertarians made this bed; we are now all going to be forced to sleep in it.
*That was L. Ron Hubbard's gig.
The remedy, obviously, it to retain strict and clear separation from the state.
There is an odd mutant offshoot of what calls itself “conservatism” that is defeatist at best and quisling at worst, in that it hopes to enlist the enemies of civilization generally into its domestic partisan causes. See for example Neville, er, Dinesh D’Sousa’s latest scribblings and the disdain with which they were deservedly greeted here.
The same way in which it was paid for in the Middle Ages.
(Really, evading the question is -- I won't say "unlike you" because that would be a lie... I won't say "pathetic" because, while true, it would be rude -- so I'll say it's "unimpressive".)
The desire for “a true free republic where individual freedom is paramount and no man is a king” is not part of the patrimony of faith left for us by the Apostles. Instead, we are told “fear God; honor the King” (1 Pet 2:17).
“The same way in which it was paid for in the Middle Ages.”
Rape, pillage, feudalism, plague, conquest, oppression, etc.?
This must be a joke.
Going on a complete tangent here, but I always wondered what a person in Jesus’ day could do to get a 100% capital gain. I suppose you’d have to invest in livestock or something.
Because there is no such thing as a "conservative" Roman Catholic. Not after they've all lined up behind Ratzinger's "global authority" encyclical.
Double-talking fascism -- global power over everything in the hands of a few, self-appointed despots.
The problem arises from the fact the papacy has no clue as to the mind renewed by the Holy Spirit or the liberty of a Christian conscience.
At least with the issuance of this duplicitous document Roman Catholic apologists can never maintain Rome believes in freedom or democracy or individual initiative. (Not that it ever did; Rome's always been a mobster unto itself.)
Through all this communistic drivel we have to wonder how William Buckley would have reacted to the pope's treacherous edict. Under the guise of helping the poor Rome seeks to enslave the sweaty masses once again, urging that America give up her sovereignty, defense, courts, social policies, immigration laws, borders and legal system to some "global authority."
Rome has become an enemy to America's very survival.
God willing, all mysticism and tyranny will go the way of the guillotine...unless Ratzinger wants to bring that back, too.
Then move to Spain.
“Technological improvements aside, Spain of the sigla de oro was a paradise compared to any modern secular megastate.”
Yeah, that killing and expelling of Jews by the State was so cool.
The Vedas teach that the ideal government is a righteous king - a Rajarshi - which is a combination of the two words Raja - king, and rishi - wise holy man.
A society where dog-like men (no offense to dogs, they are what they are, but people should not resemble them) elect other dog-like men leads us exactly to what we have today.
Of course, kings or other rulers who are dog-like are not better. The problem is really with animalistic immoral people, not exactly the form of government.
With no due respect, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
I am proud to be a conservative Roman Catholic and there are many like me. Feel free to disagree with Catholics all you like but don't presume there aren't any conservative Catholics.
Maybe if the Catholic Church had reformed its abuses there would have been no need for a Protestant "heresy", commonly called "The Reformation".
Also...Is this guy actually suggesting that we as a society should return to a government and church relationship that existed before Martin Luther? UNBELIEVABLE!
The ranks of the Catholic hierarchy and intelligentsia is full to overflowing with idiots like this writer. It is one among many reasons why I started looking for a different church 30 years ago. Wow! Am I ever glad to be out of the hold of this nuttiness!
This reminds one of Max Weber's thesis about the inner connection between capitalism and Calvinism, between the formation of the economic order and the determining religious idea. Marx's notion seems to be almost inverted: it is not the economy that produces religious notions, but the fundamental religious orientation that decides which economic system can develop. The notion that only Protestantism can bring forth a free economy — whereas Catholicism includes no corresponding education to freedom and to the self-discipline necessary to it, favoring authoritarian systems instead — is doubtless even today still very widespread, and much in recent history seems to speak for it.Related threads:
- Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), Market Economy and Ethics, 1985"...Protestants showed ‘a special tendency to develop economic rationalism’; that is, a particular approach to creating wealth that was less focused on the gain of comfort than on the pursuit of profit itself. The particular satisfaction was not in the money extracted to buy things (which had always driven money making in the past), but in wealth creation based on increased productivity and better use of resources."
- Book review: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, by Max Weber
Great perspective.
It's kind of hard to believe that people who claim to be conservative come to FR and advocate the destruction of the Republic and union of church and state.
Feel free to disagree with the polls all you want, but don't presume conservative Catholics make up anything remotely close to a majority of professing Catholics in the world today - and don't assume that your Pope agrees with your politics.
...let me once again share the four-pronged typology that a veteran priest here in Washington, D.C., gave me a few years ago. There are, he said, four kinds of Catholics in this country and, thus, four “Catholic votes” on almost any issue. Any news report that lumps these groups together isn’t worth very much.Related threads:* Ex-Catholics. Solid for the Democrats. Cultural conservatives have no chance.
* Cultural Catholics who may go to church a few times a year. This may be one of those all-important “undecided voters” depending on what’s happening with the economy, foreign policy, etc. Leans to Democrats.
* Sunday-morning American Catholics. This voter is a regular in the pew and may even play some leadership role in the parish. This is the Catholic voter that is really up for grabs, the true swing voter that the candidates are after.
* The “sweats the details” Roman Catholic who goes to confession. Is active in the full sacramental life of the parish and almost always backs the Vatican, when it comes to matters of faith and practice. This is a very small slice of the American Catholic pie.
IIRC, this country was initially settled by people fleeing religious persecution. To their credit they didn't preclude members of churches that had been persecutors from being allowed to come here. Instead they embraced the philosophy of the enlightenment that we could reason together and the truth would be revealed. Of course it requires an educated populace to be able to reason together.
Any one here want to agree with such an outlandish statement?
I know many (not all) Freepers are trying to purge anyone here who doesn't worship Sarah Palin, but it would be news to me if most Freepers agree with the statement that there aren't ANY conservative Catholics. Actually it would be news to a lot of people in my home state of Louisiana.
I put up with enough anti-Catholic bigotry from the likes of Maureen Dowd. If conservatives want to be the angry, white Southern Protestant party, it's going to be a minority party for a long, long time to come.
This may change in the next couple years. The reason being the economy. When our economy was strong it was a magnet attracting large numbers of immigrants from the south (legal & illegal). Now that the economy is in bad shape and bleeding jobs (unemployment 10.2 - 17.8% depending on which stat you use) a large number of these immigrants are going back. As the numbers shrink the % of native born RC's will increase. I think the conservatives in this church are found in this pool.
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.