I don’t think the Pope suggests the the reformed UN regulate domestic taxation. It might regulate economic activity that is transnational in scope, but not the internal affairs of countries.
Let me add a general observation. The US politics are shaped by the economic realities in the US, which is still a very prosperous country. Our unemployed have a living standard most of the world would consider a windfall. So, American conservatism correctly views most taxation, especially for social programs, as waste or, worse, theft. When an American conservative reads about redistribution of wealth, he thinks of the government taking from an honest productive man to give to a couch potato who won’t work and is not in danger of starving to death.
However, if you take a larger view, you would see people literally starving, or armed thugs engaged in genocide. That is serious poverty. The Catholic teaching always was that rules of market exchange do not apply in extreme poverty. That is, of course, what the gospel teaches. Consider for example, the story of Dives (the name itself is ascribed to the rich man by tradition) and Lazarus (Luke 16). There, Dives is condemned for lack of compassion; no suggestion is made that Dives obtained his wealth dishonestly. The market made Dives rich and Lazarus poor, yet dives owed Lazarus food. This is a situation we are not accustomed to in America, but as we contemplate the global economy, we should reflect on that need for “gratuitousness” or “distributive justice” as the Pope calls it.
For the Pope to be suggesting non-Christian entities should help encourage this is patently wrong. Individual people giving monies from their heart is what God wants.
I'm surprised that the Pope doesn't appear to understand that.
As I reflect further on your words, I realize they form the rationale for Socialism.
I do not see, in re-reading the Lazarus account, I do not see ANYTHING that justifies “extreme poverty” as being “special” and “needing” of recompense. The part of Lazarus and the rich man was merely the setup to show that people from extremely different walks can either choose to follow God or not. One of the two was righteous, the other was not. One followed the Scripture, the other, apparently, did not.
It had NOTHING to do with one being poor and the other, rich, being sinful by apparently not helping the other. However, we do know our hearts will be judged.
Choosing to give can be righteous in the right context if done on behalf of God, but it isn’t under any other circumstance. For all others, giving is empty before God if you haven’t accepted Christ.
As far as the Pope saying we must be mandated to give to people in other countries because we “have more,” he apparently doesn’t understand Christ, nor the Bible.