This could be a very interesting Sunday in several Roman Catholic parishes, especially those around the District of Columbia. I can hear the priests now: "Good to see you, Senator. Welcome Representative. . . Have you seen the Pope’s new encyclical, Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth)?"
It’s a remarkable document, not because it breaks a lot of new ground, but because it speaks about economic systems and social justice at a time of great upheaval. For those who think the pope is concerned only about abortion, it will be a real eye-opener. John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter notes
Release of the 30,000-word Caritas in Veritate was delayed in order to give the pope time to reflect on the economic crisis that erupted in mid-2007. On the eve of a G8 summit in Italy this week devoted to pondering a new architecture for the global economy, Benedict says the church does not have "technical solutions to offer," but nonetheless issues a slew of specific recommendations:
- Resisting a “downsizing” of social security systems;
- Support for labor unions and the rights of workers in a global economy marked by mobility of labor;
- Combating hunger “by investing in rural infrastructures, irrigation systems, transport, organization of markets, and in the development and dissemination of agricultural technology”;
- Enshrining access to steady employment for all as a core economic objective;
- Protecting the earth’s “state of ecological health”
- Seeing “openness to life,” meaning resistance to measures such as
abortion and birth control, as not only morally obligatory but a
key to long-term economic development;- Ensuring that the targets of international aid programs are involved in their design and implementation, and trimming the bureaucracy sometimes associated with those programs;
- Lowering domestic energy consumption in developed nations, investing in renewable forms of energy, and adopting new more sustainable lifestyles;
- Curbing an “excessive zeal for protecting knowledge” among affluent nations, “through an unduly rigid assertion of the right to intellectual property, especially in the field of health care”;
- Opening up global markets to the products of developing nations, especially in agriculture;
- Commitment among developed nations to devote a larger share of their gross domestic product to development aid;
- Greater investment in education;
- More generous immigration policies, recognizing the economic contributions of migrants, both to their host countries and to their countries of origin by sending money home;
- Support for micro-finance, consumer cooperatives, and socially responsible forms of business;
- Reform of the United Nations and international institutions of economics and finance, in order to promote “a true world political authority … with real teeth,” though one informed by the principle of subsidiarity – meaning respect for the liberty of individuals, families, and civil society;
- Opposition to abuses of biotechnology such as a new eugenics.
I wonder how the Catholic members of Congress will react to this? Will Sam Brownback get behind EFCA? Will Susan Collins throw her centrist voice into supporting real health care reform? Will Jean Schmidt become a passionate advocate for environmental regulations to protect the earth’s "ecological health"? Will Democrats like Claire McCaskill and Mary Landrieu answer their religious critics from the evangelical right with the words out of their own faith tradition?
Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, also summarizes the document well, and puts the encyclical in the context of the American political voices:
Although Benedict’s emphasis in the encyclical is on the theological foundations of Catholic social teaching, amid the dense prose there are indications, as shown above, that he is to the left of almost every politician in America. What politician would casually refer to "redistribution of wealth" or talk of international governing bodies to regulate the economy? Who would call for increasing the percentage of GDP devoted to foreign aid? Who would call for the adoption of "new life-styles ‘in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments’"?
I anxiously await John Boehner’s next speech on the House floor.



43 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Would that other denominations were point on publicly.
Wow. Not at all what I would have expected from this pope. Thanks Peterr.
Except for bullet 6, it’s an agenda that can be supported by progressive believers and non-believers worldwide.
What is the thought behind the assertion that lack of birth control leads to long time economic development? Does he mean that more people lead to more GDP? If so, there are many many counterexamples.
Missed that whilst scanning the list. Interested to know how that is a key to long-term economic development. /snarkless
OK, sun has burned off the fog, so I’m off to outdoor stuff. BBL.
The poor unfortunately gets little attention to their plight. It’s good to see the Pope take this stand.
His “moral obligation” to oppose birth control eviscerates the rest of his agenda.
And wasn’t he against the war in Iraq?
And remember…*crickets*
You owe me a cuppa coffee, but as I’m coffeed out, I settle for an iced tea for lunch. *g*
You’re on!
What is it with these sexless males and their paranoia with latex?
They just can’t let go of the male-authoritarion thingy. They have to make their plug even when it is highly inappropriate.
I’m not a fan of Benedict, but from what I’ve heard about this encyclical, I’m glad he put his weight behind this issue.
Don’t get your hopes up with our congress though, I suspect for most of them their religion is just for show and to give them cover to do what they want to do anyway. Like most of modern American Christianity, I’m sure they’ll have no trouble ignoring the parts of their faith they don’t like.
I’ve just spent a week, though, listening to a different stream of Christian thought with people like Shane Claiborne, Greg Boyd, Jim Wallis, Mark Van Steenwyk, etc. It gives me hope.
Pretty much sounds like Obama’s campaign language.
Oh No! The Socialistic Anti-Christ is meddling in American politics!
Top-heavy NGOs, UN, and government agencies deliver fewer goods, services, and knowledge to the field than less top-heavy ones.
The NGO, UN, and government bureaucracies often create programs that are inappropriate for the field and are resistant to feedback from field workers and local communities.
That’s what the sixth bullet point is talking about.
Will any American politician be denied communion for not supporting this?
Heh.
The Pope’s got a lifetime appointment, so what’s he campaigning for. Governor of Alaska?
The hypocritical bastards of the catholic corporation are once again saying “do what we say don’t do what we are doing”. The
organized pedophelia societycatholic church have gold splashed all over their churches while at the same time as they steal more from the poor. The present CEO is a racist, fascist, nazi, bigot…. obviously well suited to lead the “right to lifers” that support the death penalty. Nothing good to say about those bastards.Since Western Governments are struggling with a lack of $$$ in this recession/depression, perhaps Joseph Ratzinger can put his money where his mouth is and liquidate half of the Church’s assets to jump start his recommendations.
Wow! I never excepted something like the from thid pope!
Solarenergie
Seeing “openness to life,” meaning resistance to measures such as abortion and birth control, as not only morally obligatory but a key to long-term economic development
This was the 6th bullet point earlier. For some reason it’s now been removed.
Hey, Petro! Kept missing you yesterday.
Hiya Loo Hoo, had some guests over so kept ducking in and out but missed another Late Nite Snarkfest to watch some soppy movie with Kate Winslett … men are such horrid creatures ! *g*
Other denominations *are* publicly on record about a lot of these things, but rarely does (for example) the Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA) or the Presiding Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (my denomination) make it to the front pages of the national media.
Why did that happen? Is the FBI redacting the Pope’s correspondence as well?
Hehehe. I guess we’re not supposed to notice. ;)
I like to be an optimist, but after 1900 years of Powermongers for Jesus, I’ll reserve judgement on the Pope’s “True Charity” until I read it, all due respects to John Allen. Anything in the fine print about tithing, or having the Church serve as the broker for transfer of funds from rich to poor?
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
While bashing of the Catholic Church is widespread for various reasons, some excellent some poor, when it comes to the big picture and the churches words, not its deeds, the modern church’s thought has consistently adhered to moral and ethical principals which are consistent with those held by people who think in terms of human rights.
When it steps down from the heights of thought however it often gets into trouble. From the footsie it played with the fascists to the way it abandoned the ‘liberation theology’ of 80’s Central America, in practice the church is usually unable to separate itself from alignment with the right.
Raised and educated a Catholic but long not a member I can state without reservation that my liberal ethical and moral principals were founded on the churches. In ways I cannot explain on one level since the likes of Pat Buchanan came out of the same era and developed polar opposite views and feelings.
While todays Protestant Christians pay homage, often purely lip service, to the Ten Commandments, Catholics are usually educated to a more complex view of sin contained in the list of Deadly or Cardinal sins.
lust
gluttony
greed
sloth
wrath
envy
pride
Hardly the last word Wiki is a place to start
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins
The nasty little secret in all this is that the current world population is greatly in excess of the planet’s carrying capacity. That carrying capacity is a function of the sheer number of people, our technological level, and the rate at which we are using up the planet’s resources. World population under current trends will be 7 billion by 2015 and 9 billion by 2050. Even with today’s population we are blowing through the world’s resources, most notably its oil and water. Our technology is still largely carbon fueled and is impacting the planet’s environment in an increasingly significant way.
So if you look at Benedict’s points there is an essential contradiction in them. They are not just about social justice. There is both math and science which underlie them and the pope has not done his math.
Also, don’t forget the Seven Deadly Sins of Gilligan’s Island!
http://www.gilligansisle.com/sins.html
Precisely.
I’m glad you made that point. We’d have to do a lot of digging every day to see what every one is saying about all the hot issues. I suppose there are those who keep a list of places which cover topics of their interests, but most just turn on the tubes, open the paper or their favorite blog and take what they get.
In regard to the Seven Deadly Sins if you study them, from a Catholic perspective, Rush is among the mightiest sinners of all.
Damn! Benedict channeling Leo XIII and some of John XXIII. The best thing from a pope since Vatican II.
Here’s Benedict’s discussion of that:
Shorter Benedict: Once your vision of “openness to life” starts to shrink (abortion, death penalty, euthanasia, etc.), then you start to move down inward-looking paths that ultimately move a society away from long-term economic development.
I’m not sure how much I agree with it, but that’s his proposition.
Once your vision of “openness to life” starts to shrink (abortion, death penalty, euthanasia, etc.), then you start to move down inward-looking paths that ultimately move a society away from long-term economic development.
Every Sperm is Sacred!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47P59ha9k9s
The bottom line is if you search through the New Testament, Jesus mostly talks about the poor and doesn’t even mention homosexuality or abortion.
Some Christians are finally waking up to that.
Change doesn’t happen overnight, but we’re starting to see a subtle shift in thinking that hopefully will shape the next generation.
Benedict has taken an interesting turn on “the right to life” issue. Early in the Encyclical, he explicitly defines the denial of health care to the poor as being equivalent to abortion and birth control.
I wonder how our Catholic lawmakers will take that?
Although it is slightly tangental to the topic, the myth that Catholics are opposed to family planning and limitations on family size is one that needs to be put to rest. The Church’s true position is that it opposes artificial means of birth control and the destruction of human life once begun (this includes abolition of the death penalty for all practical purposes as well as opposition to abortion). Catholic marriage preparation classes (required of all Catholics intending to be married in the church) spend a great deal of time explaining the signs of ovulation in the fertility cycle in order to be able to avoid intercourse at that time. While it requires more body awareness and some resistance to natural urges and is admittedly not foolproof, it does have the advantage of avoiding the negative side effects of artificial means.
The Church’s true position is that it opposes artificial means of birth control and the destruction of human life once begun (this includes abolition of the death penalty for all practical purposes as well as opposition to abortion).
As a recovering Catholic, I suppose that whole “Life” thing began sometime after the Inquistion, the burning of “heretics” and “witches,” the stoning of gays, Rome’s coddling of Nazis, etc., ad nauseam.
This is very, very interesting and ties into a debate that’s happening in the non-aligned countries (largely focused on Africa) on the ideological differences between what is sometimes referred to as the Washington Consensus versus the Beijing Consensus (both misnomers since they have little to do with either city, but rather the debate is between on two rival schools of thought: prevailing “freedom”/free market-based/private-property strategies for promoting development in poor countries advocated by the IMF/World Bank/IFC and by US politicos versus Joshua Cooper Ramos’ balanced/self-sufficiency-oriented/welfare-guided approach associated with development models used to some success in countries like Taiwan, Botswana, Sri Lanka and China).
To put another way – its a debate between an argument that one has to use state-controlled or guided entities to reform institutions and bring people out of poverty through welfare-improvements measures before imposition of Western-style free market reforms (Ramos) and emphasis on democratization or whether one should do overnight market reforms then use trickle-down economics to improve welfare (the approach typically advocated by the US).
This debate is a hot item right now in developing country intellectual cricles in Africa and Southeast Asia, but aside from a few articles out of Cambridge, Oxford and Imperial College in the UK, largely out of the western media. The Pope appears to have taken note of this debate and come out on the side of the Ramos model.
Sotomayor is the sixth catholic on the supreme court.
Newt Gingrich is a slimy little weasel but he just turned catholic.
Now when Roe vs Wade is negated by the Pope’s orders there will be singing and dancing and cheering by all of the clueless.
But when the major religions and the clueless finally catch on that the laws are decided by the Pope and a Supreme Court that has already proved they regard the constitution as a piece of paper to be ignored at will,
it isn’t going to be just the snake handlers and holy rollers who go ballistic.
You going to see Mormons and Baptists and Seventh Day Adventist make a recap of the reformation look like a joke.
If I were catholic, I would move to Paraguay and change my name to Bush or Cheney.