The Pope is a Communist!

[Omaha]

Wow, I can’t believe it…Pope Benedict XVI has issued an encyclical letter, Caritas in Veritate, saying that we are in a global economy and that the right to form labor unions and collectively bargain is unjustly under attack! And I thought he was going to be a conservative Pope.

I am going way out on a limb here, because I haven't checked with Colbert Conservatism central and found out the position of the great Conservative Stephen Colbert on this subject. You see, Stephen is a practicing Roman Catholic.

In his Papal Encyclical he chastises governments that limit unionization! He harkens back to Rerum Naoarum [[1891) of Pope Leo XIII.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/L13RERUM.HTM

“Working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition.... the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.�

The current Pope says that the Church backs the right of workers worldwide [[“in the advancement of humanity and universal fraternity�) to unionize. The letter says that a worker's right to join with others to assert their rights is even more important today than over a hundred years ago. He says he doesn’t want to interfere in any way with the “politics of state,� but it seems he wants to use all the moral suasion available to influence the “politics of state.�

This so-called conservative Pope also notes Pope Paul VI’s Populorum Progressio. In which Pope Paul VI noted the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional.

"As St. Ambrose put it: 'You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich.' [[22) These words indicate that the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional."

Mon Dieu, this quote is spitting in the face of so many great rich Americans, not the least of whom was the great Robber Baron, George Pullman.

The Pullman Company rejected any attempt by “citizens’ committees� to arbitrate differences and end the strike of 1894. Since the strike was between the company and its “ex-employees,� there was “nothing to arbitrate.� When asked why he would not submit to arbitration, George Pullman replied to the U.S. Strike Commission that such arbitration would violate a principle: “The principle that a man should have the right to manage his own property.�

I just hope that all true-believing Roman Catholics can see through this Papal "claptrap." I pray that they will join me, as a Social Darwinist, in declaring the maximization of short term profits through the commercialization of everything from health care to automobiles is really the way our Lord wants the world to be run.

This new Papal letter mocks those who are dedicated to the unregulated free market and to the “mere accumulation of wealth.� It's clear to me Pope Benedict XVI should read Adam Smith and learn if we all act selfishly, the invisible hand of God will make everything workout to everyone’s benefit.

I mean if the bishops, priests, deacons, men and women , religious, the lay faithful and all people of good will [[to whom the encyclical letter was addressed) pay attention…short term greed could suffer a painful setback everywhere in the world! Come on DY posters, we can’t let Pope Benedict XVI’s letter go unchallenged. The man is worse than President Obama; he’s a communist!

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/be...ritate_en.html

[rb336]

Damn. the revolution theologists from SA got to him

[ccbatson]

I think we excuse the clergy their socialist sins.

[elganned]

I just hope that all true-believing Roman Catholics can see through this Papal "claptrap."

Ummm...I hate to be the one to break it to you, but if they're true-believing Roman Catholics, they have to side with the Pope. Especially when he's speaking ex cathedra, which I believe an encyclical is by definition.

Sorry. It seems karma just ran over your dogma.

[gibran]

and Jesus was a liberal...wow what a trend...Pope and Jesus communist/socialist rebel rousers...

[Detroitej72]

I'd like to hear what supposed Catholics Hannity and O'Reily have to say about this, they might want to join a more conservative fundamentalist denomination.

P.S. I bet Karl Marx just turned over in his grave!

[oladub]

" Pope Benedict called on Tuesday for a "world political authority" to manage the global economy and for more government regulation of national economies ."
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...5662VM20090707

I thought that was supposed to be the anti-Christ's line. I don't like to mettle in other people's religions but if the Pope wants to have international powers run our economy are we allowed to critique Catholic history? I don't think this Pope knows anything more about economics than Pope Urban VIII knew about science when he goaded Galileo for claiming the Earth went around the sun. Then, there was the ghastly moment when Pope Pius blessed Italian troops en route to Ethiopia to run Ethiopia's economy.

Unequal distribution is one thing, world economic government is another.

[dtowncitylover]

If you knew anything about the Church, you would know that it does not support capitalism [[or socialism) 100% because much of today's capitalism is greed, a sin of course.

[d.mcc]

Or the fact that Jesus taught about giving up ones possessions for those less fortunate so that all could share in the greater wealth of the community...ie...Communism

RUT ROH!

[elganned]

Let’s get some perspective on this idea of “Jesus as Communist/Socialist�.

Again, it’s a matter of “where you end depends on where you start�, i.e., underlying assumptions. The view that Jesus advocated socialism is grounded on the assumption that the world will continue into the future indefinitely, and we need to set up an equitable social order.

But that was not Jesus’ world-view; he expected everything to be over soon: “…this generation will not pass away before you see the Son of Man descending in glory…� [[italics added).

The admonition to “sell all you have and give it to the poor� is not intended to benefit the poor, it’s intended to benefit the giver. “…where your treasure is, there you heart also is� means that while you’re worried about Stuff, you aren’t thinking about God. Earthly possessions are a hindrance to spiritual advancement. When the young man asked, “What must I do?� and Jesus answered, “Go and sell all you have and give it to the poor, and come follow me,� the important phrase is not “give it to the poor� but “come, follow me�. Don’t worry about your Stuff, get right with God.

His message is personal and spiritual, not social. It is “harder for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven� not because there is anything inherently evil about being a rich man but because while you’re worried about your Stuff, you can’t be worrying about your salvation.

I’m certain that asking Jesus if he advocated socialism or communism would have puzzled him greatly. His response very likely would have been, “Why are you thinking about that crap? Who cares? Worry about your soul, not about who gets what Stuff! It won’t matter in a little while, anyway; the Kingdom is at hand—time to refocus!�

So, that’s my take on it. [[From an self-confessed Non-Christian. )

[oladub]

There is a difference between the communal economies of the early Christian communities, as described in Acts, and calling for the Roman government to be Communist. The former is a voluntary activity of sect members. The Hutterites, today, in Canada, and the US, live in communal arrangements. If anyone here yearns for communal living, join the Hutterites or start your similar community. Catholics have monastaries; no sex but a great communal option for Catholics. Think of all the outstanding work done by the Mother Theresa's of the Church. My guess is that it would be easier to begin a communal lifestyle in the US than in Western Europe although Findhorn comes to mind.

Again, the Pope went beyond suggesting sharing with one's neighbors. He advocated " for a "world political authority" to manage the global economy and for more government regulation of national economies ."
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...5662VM20090707
I wonder how such a world political authority will manage Vatican wealth.

[elganned]

I expect that, to the extent that the Vatican invests in world markets, their assets would be regulated like everyone else's.

[oladub]

I was thinking more like the gold and real estate that the Catholic Church has accumulated over the centuries - some of it being tax exempt. Every once in a while a country, like Mexico or Cuba, has confiscated a lot of Church real estate. Maybe that is something the Pope should be encouraging his proposed world political authority to do.

The representives I can vote for to represent me have done a poor enough job. No world political authorities to manage me, or my country, thank you. Sounds like the Pope is trying to get an invite to the next Bilderberger meeting.

[elganned]

Well, the Vatican is a member of the Pentavirate--and probably sits on the Tri-Lateral Commission, too! [[Bunch of damned One-Worlders...).

[mjs]

Great, first he takes a book from Chavez and now he accepts a book from this commie! "Benedict gave Obama with a copy of a Vatican document on bioethics that hardened the church's opposition to using embryos for stem cell research, cloning and in-vitro fertilization. 'Yes, this is what we had talked about,' Obama said, telling the pope he would read it on the flight to Ghana."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_obama_vatican

[elganned]

*Sigh*. A book is just a book.

I read a book on coprophilia once, but that didn't turn me into one.

[gibran]

I heard the Pope gave another President a book once...

See Dick Shoot
See Jane Run

[mjs]

I was being sarcastic. I think one of the main reasons to debate or read is to have your ideas challenged so you can keep adjusting your viewpoint. Bush read thousands of books as long as they agreed with him and look how he stayed the course regardless of how bad it fell apart. Obama reads far less, but far more diverse, and people say he flip-flops and goes back on his campaign promises. Personally, I like a guy thats willing to adapt to miscalculations or situational changes and adjust to other viewpoints.

[vetalalumni]

... one of the main reasons to debate or read is to have your ideas challenged so you can keep adjusting your viewpoint.

100% agreement. New [[to the learner) information is a hallmark of education.

[ccbatson]

Religious conservatives do have a paradox to contend with. The solution? Objectivism [[and a form of atheism...at least).

[mjs]

So you are randian enough to be anti-religious like she was?

[mjs]

That linked article would interest you.

L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican's daily newspaper, gave Obama a positive review after his first 100 days in office.

As a child in Indonesia, Obama's Muslim father enrolled him in Catholic school for a few years.

Polls have shown [[Obama) received a majority of Catholic votes.

His election presented a challenge for the Vatican after eight years of common ground with President George W. Bush in opposing abortion, an issue that drew them together despite Vatican opposition to the war in Iraq.

As Obama has pledged to step up efforts for Middle East peace through a two-state solution, Benedict made a similar appeal during a trip in May to Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories. He issued the Vatican's strongest call yet for a Palestinian state.

[ccbatson]

Long before I knew who Rand was, in my teens, I developed my perception of religion as an ancient manmade system of controlling the masses and allow for a civil society at that time. Since it is the foundation of modern society, there is much in religion to respect and value, but a great deal that is frankly wrong [[the collectivist bits for none thing). I differ from Rand in that she completely dismisses religion as evil, I see it as an ancient philosophy with some strengths and weaknesses. She is completely atheistic, where I look at G-d as a word describing existance as a whole, and therefore, by that definition and by logic it/G-d must exist. Rand herself has repeatedly expressed that the core of metaphysics is that existants [[or existence) exists. By my definition, she would have to agree that G-d exists.

Her arguments against blind faith in religion, collectivism, and mysticism are absolutely and irrefutably correct by rational analysis.

[gibran]

or maybe while religion has been twisted to justify many things; it's real potential is in the application of the principles of good that was at it's foundatioal tenets...

I have no problem with Religion and Science co-existing...for in science there is nothing 100 absolute...and if there is even a .05 chance that faithis right I would rather err in faith than a lack of it...

maybe the old tales of the old books were written with the cognitive ability [[of the time) of their intended audience...can you imagine trying to explain the Big Bang theory to a group of wandering shepherds; or evolution without the proof to a group of mystics ...as long as life has mysteries...people have to fill the blanks in..and if that is with faith ..as long as it is not used to hurt others or themselves what is the ultimate harm..it is then subjective to the person who practices it.

[ccbatson]

You need to give up the irrational belief that there are no absolutes first. If you do not, you have a flawed philosophical foundation that will defeat every belief in the long run.