Pope Francis Takes On Capitalism And Inequality

[Stone holm]

I'm sure this pope would be just as critical of socialism as he is of capitalism.  Catholic social teaching tends not to care for either.

 

Doesn't it depend on the type of socialism.  Obviously, he would oppose any Marxist form or radical full nationalization of everything, but doubt he would be much opposed to the pinker versions common in Europe.

[pmccombs1]

Doesn't it depend on the type of socialism.  Obviously, he would oppose any Marxist form or radical full nationalization of everything, but doubt he would be much opposed to the pinker versions common in Europe.

 

Oh, if I had to guess, I'd say that Phillip Blond's Red Toryism would sit well with this pope. The Christian Democrats are another group that draws on Catholic Social Teaching. 

 

While these groups might have a few things in common with socialists, they contrast as well.

 

Areas where catholic economics coincide with socialism include notions of social justice, solidarity, community focus, and welfare. These are general themes in Mormon ideas of economy as well.

 

Areas where catholic economics coincide with capitalism include the endorsement of private property and of markets. 

 

The area where catholic economics really stand out, as I see it, is in what they call the principle of subsidiarity. The Catholics have a completely different idea of what the underlying assumptions and questions surrounding economy are. For the socialist and capitalist alike, the question is one of prosperity and security. They may differ on how to achieve those ends, but they both agree that they are the only things that matter to economics.

 

Among other things, subsidiarity puts production and consumption as close as possible to each other. Catholics like Pope Francis seem to think that economics are everything to do with household and vocation, and that these things are destroyed under economies that take people away from their homes and families. That is where the injustice begins, and it intensifies as we turn increasingly to abstract wealth and boundless means.

[Stone holm]

Oh, if I had to guess, I'd say that Phillip Blond's Red Toryism would sit well with this pope. The Christian Democrats are another group that draws on Catholic Social Teaching. 

 

While these groups might have a few things in common with socialists, they contrast as well.

 

Areas where catholic economics coincide with socialism include notions of social justice, solidarity, community focus, and welfare. These are general themes in Mormon ideas of economy as well.

 

Areas where catholic economics coincide with capitalism include the endorsement of private property and of markets. 

 

The area where catholic economics really stand out, as I see it, is in what they call the principle of subsidiarity. The Catholics have a completely different idea of what the underlying assumptions and questions surrounding economy are. For the socialist and capitalist alike, the question is one of prosperity and security. They may differ on how to achieve those ends, but they both agree that they are the only things that matter to economics.

 

Among other things, subsidiarity puts production and consumption as close as possible to each other. Catholics like Pope Francis seem to think that economics are everything to do with household and vocation, and that these things are destroyed under economies that take people away from their homes and families. That is where the injustice begins, and it intensifies as we turn increasingly to abstract wealth and boundless means.

 

Sounds very close to 19th Century Mormon economics, which lingered on through a lot of the 20th Century in a reduced form with such things as "home production" which you don't hear much about anymore.

[teddyaware]

If we are to become the disciples of Christ we must forsake our riches for the kingdom of heaven. It is the only way that we can build Zion. Satan doesnt want equality, he doesnt even want charity on any level, even if it is a governmental law. His system only works with class distinction, greed, robbery, lies, etc. Its all about being uncharitable, prideful and greedy.

This is interesting. The equality of the followers of Christ, under God, is one of the bases of the United Order. Under said order private citizens, who are members of the Lord's Restored Church, voluntarily, and without any compulsory means whatsoever, consecrate all they possess to the Lord for the upbuilding of His Kingdom. And as you said, this is the only way the Zion of God will ever be built. But before this can happen, each individual within the United Order must fully repent of their sins, truly love God, purify their desires, have a sincere desire to do the will of God and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

In light of the above highly exalted principles, one must be aware there is a constant danger to all when the adversary, almost without fail, attempts to utilize secular governments in order to apply a distorted and contrived version of the law of consecration, not to actually help anybody, but to destroy freedom and consolidated power in the hands of the wicked and ultimately himself.

It was in the war in heaven that the adversary first used a twisted but ideologically tempting version of the United Order in order so as to appeal to a misplaced sense of mercy and justice amongst the pre-existent children of God. Again, not to actually help anyone (though at first he may have believed this was so) but as appealing bate to tempt and then enslave the spirits who would follow him into perdition.

This is one of reasons why the Saviour, in the Doctrine and Covenants, said whatsoever system of earthly government that espouses and codifies governing principles that are more or less than those found in the Constitution of the United States will come of evil. Attempts to cram some of the principles of United Order down the throats of those who are spiritually unprepared will always result in fiscal and moral disaster; and it must never be forgotten that Zion societies can only be successfully built by the righteous. The place to start when building a truly just society is to teach and preach the Gospel of Christ.

Edited November 26, 2013 by teddyaware

[Rob Osborn]

This is interesting. The equality of the followers of Christ, under God, is one of the bases of the United Order. Under said order private citizens, who are members of the Lord's Restored Church, voluntarily, and without any compulsory means whatsoever, consecrate all they possess to the Lord for the upbuilding of His Kingdom. And as you said, this is the only way the Zion of God will ever be built. But before this can happen, each individual within the United Order must fully repent of their sins, truly love God, purify their desires, have a sincere desire to do the will of God and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

In light of the above highly exalted principles, one must be aware there is a constant danger to all when the adversary, almost without fail, attempts to utilize secular governments in order to apply a distorted and contrived version of the law of consecration, not to actually help anybody, but to destroy freedom and consolidated power in the hands of the wicked and ultimately himself.

It was in the war in heaven that the adversary first used a twisted but ideologically tempting version of the United Order in order so as to appeal to a misplaced sense of mercy and justice amongst the pre-existent children of God. Again, not to actually help anyone (though at first he may have believed this was so) but as appealing bate to tempt and then enslave the spirits who would follow him into perdition.

This is one of reasons why the Saviour, in the Doctrine and Covenants, said whatsoever system of earthly government that espouses and codifies governing principles that are more or less than those found in the Constitution of the United States will come of evil. Attempts to cram some of the principles of United Order down the throats of those who are spiritually unprepared will always result in fiscal and moral disaster; and it must never be forgotten that Zion societies can only be successfully built by the righteous. The place to start when building a truly just society is to teach and preach the Gospel of Christ.

Whereas I agree in principle with much of what you say I am led in the belief that we should get away from the idea of Satan wanting a government like you speak of. Remember this- Satan does nothing good for society and does no charitable deed. The war in heaven was fought over the simple principle of morality- what is right and what is wrong. It doesn't benefit Satan to build, guide or persuade government in the principles of Zion. The various "social" systems of our and other governments are not the works of Satan. Satan isnt about lawfully relieving the less equal in society. Its all about social class, greed and whatever "natural" means required (always sinful behavior) to achieve that goal. Take welfare for example- Its a social system in our country we have set up for the purpose of helping the less equal in society- to bring them up to where mainstream is. the principles guiding it are indeed the same principles we use in the church in the church welfare system. this is not the devils counterfeit system. Speaking of counterfeits, the counterfeit to Zion is actually a destruction of such according to Satans ways. Satan would rather there were no welfare system in place and that because of his order of social class. There must be bottom feeders in his system willing to forsake God in the times of need, even cursing him, so that wickedness cn be upheld.

Satan's ultimate government is ctually quite similar if not the very same as prison gangs. He has a system of plots in place with wicked men running them in a pyramid scheme of ever increasing power of captivation that he uses for control. Wickedness is bought with a price- trade some level of freedom for instead a protection guarentee all bound in the secret combinations of sin.

[sweetpotatoh]

Yes, money is used as means of exchange, but we can exchange things with each other without any need for any money.  Or either one of us could just give something to the other without expecting or asking for any kind of exchange.  Why wait until "money" comes into play?  Why should any of us regulate our gifts to each other because of some perceived need for the use of some "money"?  Think of a world where people just gave things to other people, simply because of charity?  But the selfish man says what would I get out of it?  Why should I just give my things away?  Do you also require money when giving things to your own family?  I know we need to be prudent with how we go about sharing our resources, but we don't need to require any money when we're living the principle of charity.  I'm limited only because I now have limited resources to share with other people.

What do you make? How do you make it? Where do you get the raw materials to produce your product? How do you let me know you have something to give me? How do I know, you want what I have? What if some one wants to exchange with you but they live a thousand miles away?

The problem is scarcity. Natural resources are scarce, like you mentioned, and for society to function there has to be a reason for the owner to convert the resources to product. That reason is money.

Charity is awesome and I love your fierce attitude towards it. In the interest of self preservation and fulfilling my obligations to my family and church I have to have a way to get product. The way I have chosen is a job. The money that I earn allows me to be charitable, to a certain extent, without making my family suffer and support them. If my debt obligations were less I could be more charitable, unfortunately they don't take "charity" as payment.

[Avatar4321]

Whereas I agree in principle with much of what you say I am led in the belief that we should get away from the idea of Satan wanting a government like you speak of. Remember this- Satan does nothing good for society and does no charitable deed. The war in heaven was fought over the simple principle of morality- what is right and what is wrong. It doesn't benefit Satan to build, guide or persuade government in the principles of Zion. The various "social" systems of our and other governments are not the works of Satan. Satan isnt about lawfully relieving the less equal in society. Its all about social class, greed and whatever "natural" means required (always sinful behavior) to achieve that goal. Take welfare for example- Its a social system in our country we have set up for the purpose of helping the less equal in society- to bring them up to where mainstream is. the principles guiding it are indeed the same principles we use in the church in the church welfare system. this is not the devils counterfeit system. Speaking of counterfeits, the counterfeit to Zion is actually a destruction of such according to Satans ways. Satan would rather there were no welfare system in place and that because of his order of social class. There must be bottom feeders in his system willing to forsake God in the times of need, even cursing him, so that wickedness cn be upheld.

Satan's ultimate government is ctually quite similar if not the very same as prison gangs. He has a system of plots in place with wicked men running them in a pyramid scheme of ever increasing power of captivation that he uses for control. Wickedness is bought with a price- trade some level of freedom for instead a protection guarentee all bound in the secret combinations of sin.

 

Satan creates imitations of the Celestial Order that pretends to help the poor and needy while really making them subservient to violent men.

[Helen47]

The Roman philosopher Senaca wrote a book on anger. He noticed how angry the rich always were if they did not get their way quickly.Some rich get rich on the addictions of others (gambling, sex). Some provide food which is attractive in the pics but not good in reality (Mac and Kentucky Fried) Ever since tehy have opened in India, India people are starting to get obese.

[Rob Osborn]

Satan creates imitations of the Celestial Order that pretends to help the poor and needy while really making them subservient to violent men.

Highly doubtful, please explain your case.

[Stone holm]

Satan creates imitations of the Celestial Order that pretends to help the poor and needy while really making them subservient to violent men.

I hear this argument a lot. It is not, however, an argument , but rather mere name calling. Governments are instituted of God for the benefit of man. Of these , until Christ comes the best of these is a democratic system which protects the civil liberties of the individual. Who are we then to say that when a free people adopt a system which is aimed at providing for individual dignity and care of the poor, weak, and elderly, and to educate the young and provide jobs for all who wish to work, that this is of Satan. No, I think that is something hat comes too quickly to the lips of too many of us.

[Tiki]

I hear this argument a lot. It is not, however, an argument , but rather mere name calling. Governments are instituted of God for the benefit of man. Of these , until Christ comes the best of these is a democratic system which protects the civil liberties of the individual. Who are we then to say that when a free people adopt a system which is aimed at providing for individual dignity and care of the poor, weak, and elderly, and to educate the young and provide jobs for all who wish to work, that this is of Satan. No, I think that is something hat comes too quickly to the lips of too many of us.

Then take it up with Pres. Marion G. Romney:

President Marion G. Romney warned about the continuing imitations of the adversary: “In this modern world plagued with counterfeits for the Lord’s plan, we must not be misled into supposing that we can discharge our obligations to the poor and the needy by shifting the responsibility to some governmental or other public agency. Only by voluntarily giving out of an abundant love for our neighbors can we develop that charity characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ [Moroni 7:47.]” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1972, p. 115; or Ensign, Jan. 1973, p. 98.)

And Pres. J. Rueben Clark:

President J. Reuben Clark Jr. said: “The United Order has not been generally understood. … [it] was not a communal system. … The United Order and communism are not synonymous. Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the United Order. There is no mistake about this and those who go about telling us otherwise either do not know or have failed to understand or are wilfully misrepresenting.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1943, p. 11.)

http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichments/enrichment-l-the-law-of-consecration-and-stewardship?lang=eng

Imitations = counterfeits. These two Apostles of The Lord, were "name-calling," weren't they?

Edited November 27, 2013 by Tiki

[Rob Osborn]

Then take it up with Pres. Marion G. Romney:

President Marion G. Romney warned about the continuing imitations of the adversary: “In this modern world plagued with counterfeits for the Lord’s plan, we must not be misled into supposing that we can discharge our obligations to the poor and the needy by shifting the responsibility to some governmental or other public agency. Only by voluntarily giving out of an abundant love for our neighbors can we develop that charity characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ [Moroni 7:47.]” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1972, p. 115; or Ensign, Jan. 1973, p. 98.)

And Pres. J. Rueben Clark:

President J. Reuben Clark Jr. said: “The United Order has not been generally understood. … [it] was not a communal system. … The United Order and communism are not synonymous. Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the United Order. There is no mistake about this and those who go about telling us otherwise either do not know or have failed to understand or are wilfully misrepresenting.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1943, p. 11.)

http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichments/enrichment-l-the-law-of-consecration-and-stewardship?lang=eng

Imitations = counterfeits. These two Apostles of The Lord, were "name-calling," weren't they?

I disagree with theirs and others who hold this view. The work of the adversary is in wicked evil works. This is basically saying that government having anything to do with helping the poor = evil. Nothing further from the truth. Satan does not work this way, he seeks to help no one who is poor- he despises the poor

[mtomm]

Re-read President Romney. To me he didn't say that the programs were evil, he says that if we think we've taken care of our obligation because there are government programs to help the poor then we are wrong in assuming that.  We still have an obligation to learn charity by giving directly of our abundant love.   Do not be lulled into a trap thinking that if we pay our taxes then our charity work is done.

Every government program is counterfeit to the Lord's perfect way.  We just do the best we can with what we've got at the moment. 

 

I don't how in the world Pres. Clark can say that the United Order was not communal. I will give him credit though, it is not generally understood.  I've seen it debated here with every person putting their own spin on it and some super-spin to make it look less "united."  

[cinepro]

This is an interesting pope. What he says about capitalism, etc., is what you'd expect from someone who's spent a lot of time working in the slums of Rio (I think that's where it was, anyway). LDS thinking, a while back, was not much different. The following, I am told, is an "Apostolic Circular", signed by Brigham Young, the rest of the first presidency and Twelve, date 1875:

 

THE EXPERIENCE OF MANKIND has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Under such a system, carefully maintained there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest for money or property loaned, continued in force.

 

It must be true, because why would the richest man in the territory lie about something like that?

[cinepro]

Edited November 27, 2013 by cinepro

[Stone holm]

Then take it up with Pres. Marion G. Romney:

President Marion G. Romney warned about the continuing imitations of the adversary: “In this modern world plagued with counterfeits for the Lord’s plan, we must not be misled into supposing that we can discharge our obligations to the poor and the needy by shifting the responsibility to some governmental or other public agency. Only by voluntarily giving out of an abundant love for our neighbors can we develop that charity characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ [Moroni 7:47.]” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1972, p. 115; or Ensign, Jan. 1973, p. 98.)

And Pres. J. Rueben Clark:

President J. Reuben Clark Jr. said: “The United Order has not been generally understood. … [it] was not a communal system. … The United Order and communism are not synonymous. Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the United Order. There is no mistake about this and those who go about telling us otherwise either do not know or have failed to understand or are wilfully misrepresenting.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1943, p. 11.)http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichments/enrichment-l-the-law-of-consecration-and-stewardship?lang=eng

Imitations = counterfeits. These two Apostles of The Lord, were "name-calling," weren't they?

Marion G Romney was not saying what you think, I would agree with the Stalinist Communism that Pres Clark was speaking of. Which was not a democratic government which protected individual civil liberty. However, the Satan card gets over played when it comes to government programs and is used simply as a way to shut down discussion. It is an over clever way of keeping people from exercising their combined wills to make life a little better for each other. Because it is a way of shutting down discussion, it may not be, but it shares some of the earmarks of a Satanic device itself.

[volgadon]

I'd love for 3DOP to pitch in, but it is my understanding that even the more conservative popes vocally condemned social inequality of the sort Francis decried. In other words, while I say good for him, I think that popular wisdom and media portrayal misses a good deal of the context.

[Rob Osborn]

They are basically referring to the government welfare system as the plan of Satan. its unwarranted based off a false premise. Here is more from the article from Romney-

“I suggest we consider what has happened to our agency with respect to … government welfare services. …

“The difference between having the means with which to administer welfare assistance taken from us and voluntarily contributing it out of our love of God and fellowman is the difference between freedom and slavery. …"

At no point has the government taken the "means" from us to voluntarily give assistance to the poor. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is not Satans desire nor plan to institute a tax system that alleviates the poor and needy in society. I found this from the Church of Satan's website in the which I find more closely defines where Satan stands in regards to government welfare-

" Satanists see the social structure of humanity as being stratified, thus each person reaches a level commensurate with the development (or lack thereof) of their natural talents. The principle of the survival of the strong is advocated on all levels of society, from allowing an individual to stand or fall, to even letting those nations that cannot handle themselves take the consequences of this inability. Any assistance on all levels will be on a “quid pro quo” basis. There would be a concommitant reduction in the world’s population as the weak are allowed to experience the consequences of social Darwinism. Thus has nature always acted to cleanse and strengthen her children. This is harsh, but that is the way of the world. We embrace reality and do not try to transform it into some utopia that is contrary to the very fabric of existence. Practical application of this doctrine would see the complete cessation of the welfare system, an end to no-strings attached foreign aid and new programs to award and encourage gifted individuals in all fields to pursue personal excellence. A meritocracy will replace the practice of such injustices as affirmative action and other programs designed to punish the able and reward the undeserving...

[Stone holm]

They are basically referring to the government welfare system as the plan of Satan. its unwarranted based off a false premise. Here is more from the article from Romney-“I suggest we consider what has happened to our agency with respect to … government welfare services. …“The difference between having the means with which to administer welfare assistance taken from us and voluntarily contributing it out of our love of God and fellowman is the difference between freedom and slavery. …"At no point has the government taken the "means" from us to voluntarily give assistance to the poor. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is not Satans desire nor plan to institute a tax system that alleviates the poor and needy in society. I found this from the Church of Satan's website in the which I find more closely defines where Satan stands in regards to government welfare-" Satanists see the social structure of humanity as being stratified, thus each person reaches a level commensurate with the development (or lack thereof) of their natural talents. The principle of the survival of the strong is advocated on all levels of society, from allowing an individual to stand or fall, to even letting those nations that cannot handle themselves take the consequences of this inability. Any assistance on all levels will be on a “quid pro quo” basis. There would be a concommitant reduction in the world’s population as the weak are allowed to experience the consequences of social Darwinism. Thus has nature always acted to cleanse and strengthen her children. This is harsh, but that is the way of the world. We embrace reality and do not try to transform it into some utopia that is contrary to the very fabric of existence. Practical application of this doctrine would see the complete cessation of the welfare system, an end to no-strings attached foreign aid and new programs to award and encourage gifted individuals in all fields to pursue personal excellence. A meritocracy will replace the practice of such injustices as affirmative action and other programs designed to punish the able and reward the undeserving...

Wow that sounds an awful lot like Ayn Rand and Nietsche.

[thesometimesaint]

Wow that sounds an awful lot like Ayn Rand and Nietsche.

 

Ayn Rand was a sociopathic misanthrope.

[rodheadlee]

So in America as it is we should either develop some other system or ship the wicked people off to some other country.

They will get shipped off in due time to the telestial world or the outer darkness.

[Tacenda]

http://thisweekinmormons.com/2013/11/wealth-inequality-latter-day-saint-issue-watch-video/

 

This is an interesting article by a LDS.  Not sure how to take it. 

[halconero]

It seems like the big beef some Latter-day Saints have with the distribution of wealth or social welfare programs is the notion that our agency is being violated by the collection and distribution of personal wealth by government.

What happens when such collection, and distribution is supported by the public, even those with substantial wealth? Is it a loss of agency when the populace chooses government as the means whereby the welfare (well being) of all is accomplished?

Such is largely the case in Canada with it's healthcare system. By and by most Canadians support it's role and power in society. Cries that our agency has been violated would fall on death ears. We chose this democratically, we support the idea, and while we recognize the problems we would not solve them by doing away with public healthcare.

Once the question of agency is answered then the real issue is the means or organization such distribution is accomplished, or the question of whether or not government should be responsible.

Edited November 27, 2013 by halconero

[Rob Osborn]

http://thisweekinmormons.com/2013/11/wealth-inequality-latter-day-saint-issue-watch-video/

 

This is an interesting article by a LDS.  Not sure how to take it.

That is very interesting and i am sure in other countries it is an even worse disparity. Its truly sad.

[Rob Osborn]

It seems like the big beef some Latter-day Saints have with the distribution of wealth or social welfare programs is the notion that our agency is being violated by the collection and distribution of personal wealth by government.

What happens when such collection, and distribution is supported by the public, even those with substantial wealth? Is it a loss of agency when the populace chooses government as the means whereby the welfare (well being) of all is accomplished?

Such is largely the case in Canada with it's healthcare system. By anmesd by most Canadians support it's role and power in society. Cries that our agency has been violated would fall on death ears. We chose this democratically, we support the idea, and while we recognize the problems we would not solve them by doing away with public healthcare.

Once the question of agency is answered then the real issue is the means or organization such distribution is accomplished, or the question of whether or not government should be responsible.

I have noted that in large part, socialized systems in government is seen as a loss of agency, but only for LDS members, other Americans do not see that connection for the most part.

Agency is tied in with "sin" being the factor of whether one has such or not. When you apply this to any paradigm it becomes rather apparent that the welfare system does not cause people to sin or bring the whole population into spiritual bondage. The sriptures speak of spiritual bondage as that loss of agency. So basically, there is a pretty bad disconnect with how agency is viewed in our doctrine when instead we equate the loss of agency with government welfare.