As most long-time readers of this blog know, I have broached problems with various actions and words that have issued forth from either the Vatican or from Pope Francis himself. I have found them to be at odds with revealed truth to varying degrees. Other Catholic bloggers have chosen to remain silent on these matters; until now I have not objected to their silence regarding foibles from the Vatican. However, I am more and more finding such silence to be indefensible.
The tipping point occurred Friday, with the Pope's bizarre statement that there should be "legitimate redistribution of economic benefit by the state". I will be blunt. In shilling for socialism, he is advocating that the entire world adopt a philosophy of economic chaos that has visited upon millions of people abject misery and even death.
My fellow Catholic bloggers, in the face of this statement that is beyond reckless, you can no longer afford to maintain facades of polite silence and undue deference. Your silence may well be interpreted as tacit approval of this serious error; do you want any resulting spiritual fallout laid to your charge? Your silence in this matter might be construed as an obligation to accept every utterance from the pope as though it had the weight of infallible dogma. Do you really want this "redistribution" nonsense to be ascribed as having the same weight as the teaching on the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament? Realize what a disaster that would be since the previous pontiffs (during the past 130 years) have not spared any breath in denouncing socialism as the spiritual and moral evil that it is. Sensing the inherent evil of socialism, good Catholics may feel constrained to leave the Church - if we don't raise our voices to make plain that socialism is abhorrent to God and His Church and that the Pope is dead wrong on this most crucial matter.
There are a few others who are speaking out, and for these fellow bloggers I am most grateful. One of them is A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics. He put up a post a few days ago as he himself tried to understand why so many are playing "the three monkeys". Read what he has to say, particularly of ultramontanism. Related to that, he links to another article from the Blaze that also deserves consideration. This author mentions the cults of personality that have arisen around all the recent popes, including Francis. These cults seem comprised of people who do want to be good Catholics but who have lacked (often through no fault of their own) proper education in the most basic of Catholic truth. He points out that in the Church's 2000-year history, some of the popes have been very unsavory characters, and that we should not be surprised to find that any pontiff is not an angel in disguise.
Fellow bloggers/writers, no good will come from stifling the truth any longer. Please end your silence now.
Monday, May 12, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
so now the blogosphere is supposed to replace the magisterium. I don't think so. Who's in the Catholic Cafeteria now?
ReplyDeleteConsolamini, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume that you are innocently unaware of the different levels of papal pronouncements. Not everything that issues from the Vatican or even the pope constitutes magisterial teachings. Magazine interviews and verbal welcomes (such as to this UN delegation) have no magisterial weight - certainly not any that comes close to the encyclicals of the previous popes in which socialism is roundly denounced time and again.
DeleteTo my blogging colleagues - once again you see the reason why we must speak - to alleviate the confusion displayed by Consolamini here.
Quit being polite to those who keep the current mischief of religious ecumenism, collegiality, religious liberty going. So now when the Magisterium is way off the mark,we are suppose to just sit then and accept all the nonsense that goes with them. Hogwash, Baloney, and do all you can NOT to defend your catholic faith. Please "Step Asside."
DeleteIts time and time past to ignore those who hide behind the foibles of the magisterium. Please "Step Asside" all you who omit the fact that you have a Catholic Faith. "Silence" and "Fence Sitting" have a common ring to them.
DeleteThomas, I think we can educate the ignorant in a respectful manner. Blustering and bombast will accomplish little. We owe all a modicum of respect simply because all are created in God's image and likeness. That said, nothing will be accomplished by polite silence - and fence sitting, for that matter.
DeleteAMEN!. Preach, it!
ReplyDeleteThank you. For all the confused and desperate Catholics out there, thank you.
ReplyDeleteGood for you. It's time to take the red pill.
ReplyDeletehttp://blog.steveskojec.com/2014/05/03/take-the-red-pill/
It's rash judgment or even calumny to claim that Pope Francis is advocating socialism. Did you actually read WHAT he said? Did you think to compare it to what other popes have said? Please read this to understand more: http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/3129/pope_francis_said_what_about_the_redistribution_of_wealth_and_money.aspx
ReplyDeleteI read the entire unedited address. Did you? Friend, there's no other way to spin "legitimate redistribution of economic benefit by the state". That is socialism, like it or lump it.
DeleteWas JPII socialist when he wrote, "Also to be mentioned here, as a sign of respect for life - despite all the temptations to destroy it by abortion and euthanasia - is a concomitant concern for peace, together with an awareness that peace is indivisible. It is either for all or for none. It demands an ever greater degree of rigorous respect for justice and consequently a fair distribution of the results of true development."
DeleteOr Pope Benedict when he wrote, "Economic life undoubtedly requires contracts, in order to regulate relations of exchange between goods of equivalent value. But it also needs just laws and forms of redistribution governed by politics, and what is more, it needs works redolent of the spirit of gift."
If the post-Vatican II popes are too modernist for you, maybe Pius XI will be more convincing: "Free competition, kept within definite and due limits, and still more economic dictatorship, must be effectively brought under public authority in these matters which pertain to the latter's function. The public institutions themselves, of peoples, moreover, ought to make all human society conform to the needs of the common good; that is, to the norm of social justice."
Pope Francis's teaching is in line with tradition. Perhaps your problem is with the teachings of the Church, moreso than with this pope?
Since when is the State the all-wise, all-knowing competent agent of redistribution? It's one thing for the state to ensure a "level playing field for all"; it's quite another for the state to confiscate from one citizen the fruits of his labors and arbitrarily give it to another individual.
DeleteOkay, so where does Francis say confiscating and arbitrarily redistributing is okay? Or is that simply how you choose to interpret his statement? I would argue that it would fall under the "illegitimate redistribution" category.
DeleteThe Social Magisterium has always insisted upon a legitimate redistribution. Have you ever read the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church? Caritas in Veritate? If you're going to publicly condemn the Vicar of Christ, at least do not do so from ignorance.
ReplyDeleteI saw the word "redistribution" a few times in Caritas in Veritate. I also saw the words surrounding those words - shall we say "cautionary"? By the way - who would decide what constitutes "legitimate distribution" as opposed to "illegitimate distribution"?
DeleteAll I see here are references to the writings of the popes since the second Vatican council. Perhaps something could be learned by reading what the competent authorities, not just popes, have said prior. We have rather a long history of work on these kinds of subjects and they all must be taken into account before we have a full understanding.
DeleteAll truth is God's truth. All untruth is…not of God… We simply have to stop being dishonest out of an ideological type "loyalty" to the Pope. Catholic loyalty is something deeper, more honest, more loving, and more truthful than ideological spin. There is simply no honest way that anybody can claim that this Pope is a good communicator (assuming that he is trying to communicate the fullness of faith). That should be obvious to him as well: suggesting that he needs to take a new approach, or say less.
ReplyDeleteGood article!
Your article is pure balderdash. Read the counter:
ReplyDeletehttp://skellmeyer.blogspot.com/2014/05/pope-francis-and-ephphatha-moment.html
Tell me, did the Pope give a blanket endorsement to redistribution?
Doesn't look like it - he said "legitimate redistribution."
What constitutes "legitimate"?
He didn't say. But he DOES tell us to interpret his words in the light of his predecessors' words, that is, in the light of the Magisterium of the Church. Which you and your paranoid brethren manifestly refuse to do.
Your article is just SSPX nonsense.
WHO defines what is "legitimate"? His predecessors all condemned socialism. If you wish to dismiss this as "SSPX nonsense" and "balderdash", you are most free to bury your head in the dirt.
DeleteMr. Kellmeyer,
DeleteSurely you jest? As Restore says, who defines what constitutes "legitimate"? You? Me? Barack Obama? A Congress with alleged Catholics who frequently support abortion? Some agency from the United Nations?
I have been, myself, more than a little uncomfortable with Pope Francis from the get-go, precisely because he seems too determined to "connect" with people, thoroughly over-riding and even ignoring the typical "connection" means that're readily available. He hasn't seemed willing to admit that he can't talk to everyone in person, but seems quite willing to risk thumbing his nose at people who mostly want to see law and order rule the Church, not chaos.
Unfortunately, Pope Francis has been, apparently since before his election as pope, highly prone to make remarks or intend policies that don't quite embrace open socialism, but come close enough that most people--here in the US and Western Europe in particular--struggle to separate Papa Bergoglio's ideas from actual socialism or from Church teaching.
We have encyclicals and other communication means for a reason. I wish he'd make better use of them.
... And I wish he'd be much more clear that redistribution of wealth DOES pose as much risk to society when exacted by the State as does any other form of wealth management.
Great article.
DeleteGiven some of the response from obviously very confused people in this combox (Steve Kellmeyer, Daniel O'Connor, Militia Immaculate) paired with the clashing voices coming from Rome (Is +Burke or +Kasper correct?) The confusion from these folks Is waranted (of course Kellmeyer's calumnous attack of the good prists of SSPX).
The confusion Is about the Church being a NGO, focusing on social justice or the body of Christ focused on the salvation of souls.
The latter being the point for the thousands of years, the former being the focus of the church of nice newchurch since the 1970s
Confused people: Just what was Communism that it now sounds so good for the Church to invest into today? This is crazy talk, confused talk, these apologist for the pope are perfectly obedient to nonsense and confusion.
DeleteMe, silent? HAH! I've said all I care to on this subject, and while using my real name: "You're infallible. Don't blow it."
ReplyDeleteOn point (!) Restore DC...you are 100% right. The flying monkeys will come out in droves now to attack you....be ready and stand strong.
ReplyDeleteYour fish eating Obama LOGO says it all. You faith is defined by your politics...
ReplyDeleteThe problem for the past 50 or so years is that The Church has let the government take what has been the Church's duties. The Church serves Christ while helping the poor, sick and uneducated. The government may have the money but it does not have Christ. Jesus said "you will always have the poor". So eliminating poverty is biblically impossible. When the Church gets into bed with the Government to help the poor, the Church comes out bad. The Church will aid groups that support abortion when they mix with the government. The church leaders say we can help more people by working with government agencies but you can't serve Christ. The mutual gifts when serving Christ are more than just economic. The giver and the receiver both receive a gift of grace from God. The giver receives the greatest gift. The government and the Church's goals are not the same. Without Christ compassion becomes abortion.
ReplyDeleteHe said "legitimate redistribution of economic benefit by the state." What exactly is "economic benefit?" Does it necessarily entail wealth?
ReplyDeleteThe Pope has harped on inequality as the root of social evil before this. There is both equality of opportunity and equality of result. The free market is premised on the former, while socialism is premised on the latter. Isn't it possible that the "economic benefits" refer to equality of opportunity? Nowhere is wealth explicitly mentioned. Stop subordinating your faith to your politics.
I would love to think we're talking of "equality of opportunity" but the context of the entire address suggests the other.
DeleteAs far as "subordinating my faith to my politics" let's touch on that a bit. First, I strongly suspect you're the Robert Burkett who is to be found at that Jesuitical disgrace known as Georgetown University. You have quite a resume as evidenced by http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Bob-Burkett/5243412. Your various positions include: Chair of the Democratic National Committee Trustees, Finance Chair for Kerry for President, board member for People for the American Way. And YOU have the unmitigated gall to accuse ME of subordinating faith to politics? But why should that surprise me? Hypocrisy and arrogance are hallmarks of progressives who occupy positions of responsibility. Your last statement is quite laughable.
DOWN.GOES.BURKETT.!
DeleteBy "economic chaos" you can't mean the Scandinavian countries that boast the highest standard of living on the planet and have managed to preserve financial stability in the face of Europe's economic woes. They also have the least disparity between the richest and poorest than anywhere else in the world as well as very low crime rates. Perhaps you meant the USA which has a rapidly disappearing middle class, the highest disparity between richest and poorest of any industrialized country, one of the highest crime rates and an abysmal record on education.
ReplyDeleteIs your view of economics shaped by the Church and her magesterium or by the Republican Party and Adam Smith? What the Church has labeled as "Socialism", and consequently condemned, is the type of radical collectivism we once saw in the old USSR and Eastern Bloc, not every form of wealth redistribution. Americans throw the term "socialism" around far too easily. Latin Americans and Europeans do not think in such constricted and stereotyped terms with respect to economic realities (they certainly do in other ways).
Gee, Unknown! Why did you let the Democrats off the hook? Given the spectacular mess that now exists here, don't they deserve at least a "dishonorable mention" from you? Your omission is highly suspect.
DeleteBoth of your parties are in the pocket of big business. The Republicans are just more honest about their allegiance. What a former editor of Harper's Magazine once said of Obama is representative of the Democratic party as a whole: The president is a corporate shill who talks like a preacher, a technocrat who passes himself off as an idealist, a friend of Wall Street disguised as a progressive. At least the old left in our countries (I'm Canadian) wanted to limit, or destroy altogether, what Pius XI described as "the international imperialism of money". The problem of course was what they might replace it with. The present day left in North America focuses on looney issues like multiple "gender identities", gay "marriage", absolutely "correct" speach and the "right" to kill babies, while leaving the corporate and banking elite alone. They couldn't be more useless and are exemplary of what someone once described as "the left in the service of the right".
DeleteMe, I always liked the idea of distributism, if it could be proven to be viable. It would, of course, require a Christian consensus (at least with respect to morality) and so is hardly on the horizon in this part of the world
As long as the Pontiff doesn't speak from the See of Peter he's entirely within his rights to say whatever crosses his mind. The Lord knows that his predecessors would, as for example JP II speaking out against the war to liberate Kuwait as an "unjust war". If non Catholics feel we're all bound to follow in lockstep behind every utterance from the Vatican then we need to educate our brothers and sisters. Wouldn't that fall under the spiritual works of mercy, i.e. instructing the ignorant?
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely agreed. He's entitled to his personal opinion as much as anyone else's. The question is do all understand the various levels of papal pronouncements.
Delete"legitimate redistribution of economic benefit by the state" is what happens anytime taxpayer money is spent. When the government uses money gained by taxation to fix a bridge or pay for something, that is redistribution. All taxation is redistribution, so the fact that the pope used this phrase means very little. Giving the benefit of the doubt, it should be understood in context of other statement's from the Church's Magisterium, for example:
ReplyDelete" "It is the noble prerogative and function of the State to control, aid and direct the private and individual activities of national life that they converge harmoniously towards the common good. That good can neither be defined according to arbitrary ideas nor can it accept for its standard primarily the material prosperity of society, but rather it should be defined according to the harmonious development and the natural perfection of man. It is for this perfection that society is designed by the Creator as a means." Pius XII, Summi Pontificatus, 59
Spoken like obedient servants: But to who? Your globalization of the world by hook or by crook is showing, not a considerate evaluation of what this pope is manifesting independent of where he is. Why does everything the pope says have to be qualified, cleared and redefined by these confused apologist. It simply amazing how difficult it has become to speak the truth with this pope. Worst of all is this slanderous elephant in the room that says, "You can't criticize the pope." This is balderdash!
ReplyDeletelike I said Diane...lots and LOTS of flying monkeys.
ReplyDeleteI suggest all of you read Pope Benedict's last encyclical, "Caritas in Veritae," which advocated the formation of an international authority "with teeth" (quote from encyclical) that would monitor all nation's spending and direct it toward peace, environmentalism and "the common good." Of course, the encyclical doesn't say how such a potentially powerful body could be held accountable, nor how the Vatican would participate. But this is the economic direction toward which the Vatican is pointing. The Catholic Church has never fully embraced the individual economic rights and protections reflected in captalism. It has *always* preferred a centralized, corporatist approach to economics. If Marxism weren't avowedly and antagonistically atheist, the Church probably would have preferred it, if not embraced it, outright. If you don't believe that, then ask yourselves why so many "intellectual" Catholics embrace Distributism, which is just as excessively academic as Marxism.
ReplyDeleteBTW, for the record, I don't support either "Caritas in Veritae" or Pope Francis' remarks. Such pseudo-intellectual nonsense made it impossible for me to remain a Catholic and be intellectually honest.
One more think, Susan. If you want "lots and LOTS of flying monkeys," do some research on the Vatican's interest in extra-terrestrials. I kid you not.
It seems like the Catholic Church is concentrating more and more on things that don't constitute its fundamental pastoral mission.