Posted on 11/06/2011 7:07:21 PM PST by Morgana
Speaking on a Vatican proposal to restructure world finance, a Cardinal declared, "We should not be afraid to propose ideas even if they might destabilize pre-existing balances of power that prevail over the weakest."
And does this include the position enjoyed by the Vatican as well?
Or is this yet another example of the "don't do as I do, do as I say" mentality that prevails among globalist elites?
Before calling for the redistribution of global wealth, shouldn't an institution calling for such divest itself of its ostentatious finery that, despite having a certain beauty, wasn't necessarily part of the founder's original business plan when operating in the field?
Before lecturing the rest of us how we need a goodly portion of what we have taken away in the name of the downtrodden, how about telling the downtrodden to exercise a little control over themselves by refraining from having so many children that they can't afford?
Isn't that the greater act of selfishness, going through with one's own carnal enjoyment despite knowing the that the life of the resultant progeny will be likely destitution?
Shouldn't one of the world's foremost moral authorities instead be calling for more independent creation of wealth rather than the centralized bureaucratic redistribution of such resources?
The Vatican insists such reforms are required in order to make the world economy more responsive to democracy.
So what is going to protect Vatican assets when the enemies of all forms of Christianity vote to confiscate that institution's vast and historically varied holdings?
(Excerpt) Read more at webcommentary.com ...
What about natural family planning?
There is always that, have nothing against it. However this author is pushing for contraception.
Plus one can still get pregnant by natural family planning.
Related threads:
Age-old ‘distributism’ gains new traction
Mixed Blessing: The Ryan budget and the raging battle within the U.S. Catholic Church [lefty take]
Capitalist Fantasy: Pauper laborer, prince spender
Market Economy and Ethics By Cardinal Ratzinger(Pope Benedict XVI) 1985
What the Popes Really Say About Socialism
Let’s Get This Straight on Papal Infallibility [re Redistribution of Income & Environmental Science]
Church and economy-Excerpts from Cardinal Ratzinger(PopeBenedict XVI) 1984 interview
Pope to issue encyclical on economics
Economic Catholicism
Short-sighted speculation harms economy, endangers peace, Pope writes in World Peace Day message
Disney accused by Catholic cleric of corrupting children's minds
The Pope predicted economic Armageddon back in 1985
Chesterton’s genuine hope for a just society
Catholic Teachings on Capitalism, Marxism and Economics
The Pope Denounces Capitalism and Marxism
Day Five: Pope raps Capitalism, Marxism as 'blind alleys'' in a world without God
US Bishops – Our Clerical Keystone Cops
"Since the origins of modern capitalism around 1780, more than two-thirds of the world’s population has moved out of poverty. In China and India alone, more than 500 million have been raised out of poverty just in the last forty years. In almost every nation the average age of mortality has risen dramatically, causing populations to expand accordingly. Health in almost every dimension has been improved, and literacy has been carried to remote places it never reached before.
Whatever the motives of individuals, the system has improved the plight of the poor as none ever has before. The contemporary left systematically refuses to face these undeniable facts."
-- Robert Novak, from the thread Economic Heresies of the Left (Novak on Caritas in Veritate)
Despite what one might think, economics is not morally or theologically neutral. Every business action supports a certain economic paradigm and in doing so, supports a certain and specific theology. Every businessperson needs to understand that taking a specific economic position gives insight into your view of theology, morality and God. These insights must be addressed because it will affect how you run your business....For a business owner, it could be whether you maximize your profits or how you compensate your employees, issues like that....Economics is certainly not morally or theologically neutral. To take a stance as a Marxist, Keynesian, or an Adam Smith Capitalist reveals insight into your view of man, God and redemption....
....These truths are not the same as capitalism. Yet capitalism is the one economic paradigm that is most congruent with Calvin’s teachings and the Biblical economic “truths” I mentioned....Calvin believed wealth cannot be evil because God chooses to bless some with wealth. But, whether wealthy or poor, Calvin and the Bible exhort us to be content with our economic positions in life and to live a life following his word, not chasing after wealth....People who think of Calvin as equating material prosperity with eternal destiny are misreading him. But if someone is in difficulty, then maybe that is where that person needs to be in this life for the sake of his eternal life. That may be an expression of God’s will.
-- from the thread How theology ties into economics
Did you ask specific questions? - all you said was that you needed help.
This Pope, like John Paul II before him, understands the horror of socialism and fascism, and knows that capitalism is the one system that works for free people. But the Pope also knows that there are areas of the world where people are not free to engage in capitalism, or may not have the resources to take advantage of it. The Church has always worried about the poor. This Commission is just part and parcel of that concern, and they're always having discussions on what might be done about poverty. But any findings that comes of it have no bearing on the teachings of the Church that bind Catholics.
Eschatology deals with things to come, not life after the first death.
Yes, Catholicism firmly believes Christ bequeathed the authority to bind and loose via Peter and that they ultimately and exclusively have such authority today.
Indeed they seek to remain obedient to other commands, such as the Great Commission, but when one fails to place faith alone in Christ alone, the object of their thinking corrupts their ability to work through faith in Him.
Wish I could help, but Francisco has the Crud.
You wrote:
“Whatever credibility you thought you had on the subject evaporated with that idiotic statement.”
Okay, let’s test you: Tell me the exact year the Catholic Church was founded and by whom?
“Anyone with a pedestrian knowledge of religion....any religion....knows The Vatican and other religious institutions have had times when they’ve functioned like a government bureaucracies.....and worse.”
Did you fail High School Logic? Be honest, you never took logic, right? The fact that the Vatican has a bureaucracy does not mean it funstions like other bureaucracies. Your ignorance is showing.
“I’m out of touch? Open a history book.”
I have a PhD in History. My emphasis was Church History. Just keep embarrassing yourself there, chief.
I think you are forgetting much of the Old Testament. Remember how the prophets denounced those who oppressed the poor and powerless?
Economics is a human activity. As such it is open to scrutiny in regard to morality. It’s just that simple.
You wrote:
“One of the reasons “Liberation Theology” is so popular amongst Catholic roots and communist/socialist leaning agendas in Central America, was based upon the Catholic perspective that they have the moral imperative to direct where the wealth should go anyways, by Divine mandate issued through the Church.”
I would love to hear how you explain the love of Protestants for liberation theology. Then there are little diddies lik ethis I would love to hear you explain: http://books.google.com/books/about/John_Calvin.html?id=x5qNNAAACAAJ
QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS - ENCYCLICAL ... ON SOCIALISM
At the very beginning of Our pontificate, as the nature of Our apostolic office demanded, we hastened to point out in an encyclical letter addressed to you, venerable brethren, the deadly plague that is creeping into the very fibres of human society and leading it on to the verge of destruction; at the same time We pointed out also the most effectual remedies by which society might be restored and might escape from the very serious dangers which threaten it. But the evils which We then deplored have so rapidly increased that We are again compelled to address you, as though we heard the voice of the prophet ringing in Our ears: "Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet."(Isa. 58:1) You understand, venerable brethren, that We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning - the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever.
Surely these are they who, as the sacred Scriptures testify, "Defile the flesh, despise dominion and blaspheme majesty."(Jude 8) They leave nothing untouched or whole which by both human and divine laws has been wisely decreed for the health and beauty of life. They refuse obedience to the higher powers, to whom, according to the admonition of the Apostle, every soul ought to be subject, and who derive the right of governing from God; and they proclaim the absolute equality of all men in rights and duties. They debase the natural union of man and woman, which is held sacred even among barbarous peoples; and its bond, by which the family is chiefly held together, they weaken, or even deliver up to lust. Lured, in fine, by the greed of present goods, which is "the root of all evils, which some coveting have erred from the faith,"(1 Tim. 6:10) they assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law; and by a scheme of horrible wickedness, while they seem desirous of caring for the needs and satisfying the desires of all men, they strive to seize and hold in common whatever has been acquired either by title of lawful inheritance, or by labor of brain and hands, or by thrift in one's mode of life. These are the startling theories they utter in their meetings, set forth in their pamphlets, and scatter abroad in a cloud of journals and tracts. Wherefore, the revered majesty and power of kings has won such fierce hatred from their seditious people that disloyal traitors, impatient of all restraint, have more than once within a short period raised their arms in impious attempt against the lives of their own sovereigns. . .
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_28121878_quod-apostolici-muneris_en.html
Ignore the Vatican.
Wow! What brilliance and insight! Thank you, Daffy, for that post!
I have read Pope Benedict’s writings while Cardinal and he is brilliant also, and understands the extreme evil of Communism/leftism.
It is just in the PC world (created by Marxism) we use “kinder and gentler” terms, so not to “offend”. I am copying these quotes and will use them.
It looks as if they are starting a resurgence with Archbishop Dolen. His latest defense of Marriage and family was great! The Church HAS to get control of itself and lead this march against this secularism.
Returning to our Constitution using its philosophy of Natural Law Theory is the only way we can return to sanity (and God!) God is IN OUR Constitution and we are built on Moral Absolutes and not on Barney Frank’s standards of Right and Wrong....That is why zero is trying to destroy the Constitution.
http://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=43548
If you have a PhD in history, with an emphasis on Church History, and stand by what you’ve said, you’re the one who should be embarrassed. Immensely.
“Yes, Catholicism firmly believes Christ bequeathed the authority to bind and loose via Peter and that they ultimately and exclusively have such authority today.”
And the actual quote, is “whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.
I’m not sure how that translates into power over *earthly* affairs.
“Indeed they seek to remain obedient to other commands, such as the Great Commission, but when one fails to place faith alone in Christ alone, the object of their thinking corrupts their ability to work through faith in Him.”
Faith alone appears nowhere in the Bible. The Catholic church believes, as Christ taught, that salvation is by the Grace of God, through faith in Christ. It is not obtained through our own efforts but through God himself.
Then you should answer his question. When was the Catholic church founded?
It has no bearing on the issue.
You called out his credentials and then duck the question?
Not exactly sporting.
The original statement he made concerning The Vatican not functioning in the same way as traditionally viewed bureaucracies is absurd.
Everything from disbursement of resources to a local parish, appointing Cardinals, Popes, deciding what constitutes a miracle, who is a Saint, etc....
It has all the same types of structure, process, politics, intrigue, and cronyism involved. To say otherwise denies the fact certain factions, some undermining, and decisions existed in its history. After pointing that out, he brought his credentials into play. I just observed that made the original statement more ludicrous. Someone like that should know better.
The question posed is irrelevant. Let me see if I can explain. Let's say I was having a debate with someone over the President using the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling on his own. Suppose that person said something directly contradictory to the Amendment language and I called them out on it. If they were to say, "Well.....I'm a PhD in history with an emphasis on Constitutional Studies....by the way, who was the first state to ratify The Constitution?"
Not only would I be right in questioning their credibility, I'd also be correct in saying the question has no relevance to the discussion....especially when I never claimed any expertise. The obvious deflection also makes the other person appear a bit petty. So, if "ducking" a question that is not germane provides someone with some sort of bizarre perceived vindication/satisfaction, I'll remain unconcerned. It doesn't change the original argument.
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.