N/A Gone Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/daily_reading/the_socialist_gospel.html What say you...
Socrates Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 [quote name='Revprodeji' date='08 October 2009 - 10:35 PM' timestamp='1255055752' post='1981392'] http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/daily_reading/the_socialist_gospel.html What say you... [/quote] [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19310515_quadragesimo-anno_en.html"]QUADRAGESIMO ANNO ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SOCIAL ORDER TO OUR VENERABLE BRETHREN, THE PATRIARCHS, PRIMATES, ARCHBISHOPS, BISHOPS, AND OTHER ORDINARIES IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE, AND LIKEWISE TO ALL THE FAITHFUL OF THE CATHOLIC WORLD.[/url] "No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true socialist."
N/A Gone Posted October 9, 2009 Author Posted October 9, 2009 Not to cause too much trouble, but what kind of practical authority does this document have for today's understanding of Socialism? In 1931 we really did not have the same understanding of socialism as we do today. Not that I am advocating socialism, just curious.
XIX Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 Socialism is a form of government. Christianity is not a form of government. Game.
Winchester Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 Socialism [i]takes[/i], Christianity requires that one [i]give[/i].
Aloysius Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 the document still applies to the modern definition of socialism; however, the social encyclicals of popes like John Paul II have tended towards approving a sort of hybrid between socialism and capitalism... with socialist policies and capitalist policies being checks and balances to each other in order to safeguard the rights that Catholic Social Justice says needs to be guarded... that is one possible route to take in terms of Catholic Social Justice. I myself prefer a third way around socialism and capitalism known as distributism, which would hold up Quadressimo Anno and Rerum Novarum as its rallying cries, and has been described as "economic thomism" by some... an anti-Capitalist anti-Socialist third way which prefers that ownership of property be widely distributed, not centralized in big businesses nor in governments. it would favor small government and also small business, "the problem with capitalism is not too many capitalists, but too few" would be what Chesterton, one of the founders of the movement, would say. those are two ways to go, believe in a mix of socialist policies and capitalist policies or some third way that's both anti-Capitalist and anti-Socialist. true socialism cannot be embraced by a Catholic. likewise, however, pure unadulterated capitalism has never been embraced by the social teachings of the Church and has always been opposed; of course, it depends on how you define "Capitalism" and some might argue it's okay to be a Catholic and a Capitalist, but when you press them on the issue you usually find that they'll be Catholic first and Capitalist second and will answer in ways that a true pure capitalist would not answer. Rush Limbaugh was recently on Jay Leno talking about Capitalism and mentioned that Capitalism ignores "need" completely in terms of how much one should earn... to which I responded in the thread about it "that's why Capitalism is antithetical to Catholicism"... but one needn't follow Rush's definition of Capitalism I suppose; but one of the social doctrines of the Church would be that people need to have available to them the ability to make as much as they need for their families. how that's accomplished is a matter of debate, but it's an issue that we demand, and those who simply "trust the market" blindly do not demand that, they simply say each person should make as much as they deserve or merit, not necessarily as much as they need. that's just one way Capitalism is antithetical to Catholicism... Christianity, of course, is not socialism and nor has it ever been. from the beginning there have been voluntary 'communists' (for lack of a better word) in the Church, that's where the monastic tradition comes from. Christianity has always held that some, but not all, are called to a life in which they give up private property; but they give up private property the way they give up spouses, they give it up as something which is good in itself, a pure and good sacrifice. the socialists would have us believe that private property is something bad, and the Catholic Church is vehemently opposed to the idea that private property is bad.
Winchester Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='09 October 2009 - 03:39 PM' timestamp='1255117167' post='1981860'] property is theft. [/quote] [img]http://207.199.174.56/img/qzWJBPEnIZ_shut_up_hippie.jpg[/img]
Didymus Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 (edited) As I see it, after reading and trying to grasp the social encyclicals, the central problem with socialism is that it eliminates the private ownership of productive property, and that it degrades the dignity of the human individual through a centralization of government, which renders Democracy next to useless in assisting the most neglected among us. I also favor distributism. I'm actually writing my senior thesis this semester on Catholic Social Teaching and Distributism. btw, it seems to do little good to merely announce to the faithful the quote that one cannot be both a Catholic and a Socialist. [b][i]Why?[/i][/b] Unless we understand [i][b]why[/b][/i] we cannot be both Socialist and Catholic, then we might be swept up by the latest political fashion that might pose itself as the ideal anti-Socialism, as if it would be the Catholic's answer to Socialism Edited October 11, 2009 by Didymus
Didymus Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 [quote name='XIX' date='08 October 2009 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1255059284' post='1981439'] Socialism is a form of government. Christianity is not a form of government. Game. [/quote] the idea isn't that they're the same [i]type[/i] of system, but that rather Socialism would be the govt form of Christianity, or that Christianity is the "spiritual" representation of Socialism. socialists, unfortunately, have tried to make Christianity in their own image, and thats when Liberation Theology was born (in its most modern form)
Winchester Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Maybe the Chestertonian could explain Distributism.
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 [quote name='Winchester' date='11 October 2009 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1255295195' post='1983234'] Maybe the Chestertonian could explain Distributism. [/quote]
N/A Gone Posted October 12, 2009 Author Posted October 12, 2009 Aloy... I am very confused about what you said about socialism. You are willing to say that "capitalism" can have different definitions but you don't grant that privilege to "socialism." Socialism isn't against private property in the sense of your car, Jon's house, etc. What socialism is against is the private ownership of the means of production. In other words, it wants labor-owned and labor-managed factories, so that what is produced, how much of it is produced, why it is produced, and what is done with production is not up to an elite minority but up to the people who are actually doing the work. That's what socialism means when it talks about "private property."
Winchester Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Revprodeji' date='11 October 2009 - 08:32 PM' timestamp='1255307544' post='1983384'] Aloy... I am very confused about what you said about socialism. You are willing to say that "capitalism" can have different definitions but you don't grant that privilege to "socialism." Socialism isn't against private property in the sense of your car, Jon's house, etc. What socialism is against is the private ownership of the means of production. In other words, it wants labor-owned and labor-managed factories, so that what is produced, how much of it is produced, why it is produced, and what is done with production is not up to an elite minority but up to the people who are actually doing the work. That's what socialism means when it talks about "private property." [/quote] Unless labor is government, it's privately owned. And I believe the lack of support of socialism is qualified by its atheism. Edited October 12, 2009 by Winchester
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now