if Murphy and the Council of Catholic Bishops….and even the Pope, who resides in Socialist Europe, can’t see that this verbiage and doctrine is completely inappropriate….then I completely reject their leadership.

It’s bad enough that the Catholic Church didn’t dynamically reprimand the Catholic Clergy rogue abortion supporters of Pelosi. It’s also bad enough that the Catholic Church has allowed disgraces to humanity like Pfleger to go unchallenged. It’s also bad enough that with the exception of keeping a strong stand against abortion, the Catholics in vast numbers vote Democratic, thus supporting Pro-Abortion policies and a Party who is generally very against Christianity (unless faking it so that it can keep them politically expedient such as Pelosi, Biden, Kerry..and Obama) But to specifically write formal doctrine/policy that promotes or calls for “wealth re-distribution” by the Government…..then it is time to stop donations to the Catholic Church.

By writing this policy letter, the Catholic Church is deciding to be a further tool for the forwarding of the Obama/Dem Socialist agenda. As stated in multiple articles by the left, I.E. Obama and Democratic Party, the left is not even arguing that they are not enacting Socialism on their path to Communism. The Obamacrats now confirm, acknowledge, and speak of their new order openly.

At this point, I will voice my concerns to our local Bishop and Monsignor. I will not denounce my faith, however, I will ABSOLUTELY discontinue my donations to them if they are going to support this policy and philosophy of being a tool to support Government redistribution. Charitable giving is one of the highest forms of good. Charitable giving that becomes a tool for the Government, to enhance Socialism and Communism, is the highest form of BAD.

jstjoan

The Catholic Church has been wrong on illegal immigration for years now, supporting sanctuary cities and the sanctuary movement for a long long time.

Why does it surprise you that the church is becoming more open and official in support of so called “social justice” movement, this latest move is just a logical extension of a wrong position on illegal immigration.

Here is the document–I read it and found much I agree with.
http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/labor_day_2010.pdf

This entire document repudiates both naked individualism and statism, both “greed is good” AND “the government is THE solution.”

Here are some parts I was especially heartened to read:

“While it is not the role of the Church to propose a concrete economic blueprint for the future, the words of Pope Benedict should remind us that a key, perhaps the key, to overcoming the current economic situation is to unleash the creative forces of men and women.”

“Jobs are the result of initiatives creating markets that offer new opportunities in response to new challenges.”

“The role of the market is clearly the major force for the development of a sound economy. The state has played and continues to play an important, perhaps increasingly important, role in the economy and in the regulation of markets. At times, the market and the state seem to be the only two factors…

“Perhaps the most undervalued and overlooked sector in this framework is that of civil society. Could a reawakening and new development of the roles of intermediary institutions, including voluntary associations and unions, be a force to call the market to a greater understanding of the centrality of the worker? Could they be a means to restrain, mediate, or hold accountable both the state and the marketplace? Could their voices help create greater economic and social justice, a more mutually respectful and collaborative stance by all the actors toward the economy, work, and wealth creation around the world?”

The thrust of the document is that the state and the individual have been overemphasized, to the exclusion of the civil society–VOLUNTARY associations.

On a related note–I’m working my way through Gilder–Wealth and Poverty. Fantastic stuff.

that the point is “greater economic and social justice”? That (social justice) is what I’m saying is contrary to founding principles.

The thrust of the document is in the title: “Social Contract” for Today’s “New Things”. It’s based on the 1891 document, the first contract which “provided moral, and even spiritual, guidance for many of the great social reforms of the last century, including advances in public health, the banking system, public education, living wages, unions, and income security through the creation of Social Security; and the “New Thing” added to it now by Pope Benedict is the globalization of our economy.

The very last sentence reads: “A new social contract, which begins by honoring work and workers, must be forged that ultimately focuses on the common good of the entire human family.”

How is this not promoting collectivism?

Re immigrant assimilation and Catholics, I lived in a largely Spanish speaking immigrant community in Fla. for most of the past several years. Many there had left their country of origin 10, 20 or more years ago. Most had no desire to speak or learn English or assimilate into American ways. America is just a place where they can recreate the culture they came from. I showed my neighbor pictures of my family, of my father as a soldier in World War II and how he fought to defend American freedom. Not interested. Culturally, many yell instead of speaking in conversational tones, play loud music 14 hours straight, and tell the police they are entitled to be loud because they are Latin. The police in Florida don’t disagree. The result is a ‘weak’ neighborhood, criminals see people don’t respect their neighbors, leave garbage out with bugs flying around for days on end, etc. If you want a normal life you have to move away. This is the reality of the compassion of social justice.

Full disclosure: I am a Roman Catholic and have been for 65 years. I have not seen the statement of the USCCB. I am NOT a fan of the USCCB.

There are many good bishops but unfortunately, it often seems as if the USCCB has been taken over by Alinsky activists who are often eager to interpret the words of the Holy Father and of Jesus Christ Himself in their own political view.

Context is everything with an encyclical. Context is everything in any document. If you look at just a few phrases of the Declaration of Independence, it wouldn’t give you the whole picture.

The Holy Father has spoken on many issues, and I highly recommend that you read the Encyclical in question. It is CARITAS IN VERITATE and can be found at:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html

Then, you may want to go to websites such as:

http://www.jimmyakin.org/2009/07/early-tentative-thoughts-on-the-new-encyclical.html

http://catholicexchange.com/2009/09/11/121661/

does beg the question – if you’re not attacking the Church, what in hell are you doing?

If you take Benedict XVI out of context, his statements can mean anything you, or indeed, anything the USCCB, wants it to mean. If you want to know what the Catholic Church actually means by its teaching on social justice, read the The Catechism of the Catholic Church – available in almost every written language on the planet and in your local chainstore bookseller.

The only forms of government to which the Church objects are those which limit or indeed destroy the God-given liberties and rights of men.

Benedict XVI, like his immediate predecessor, both lived in countries dominated by totalitarian regimes, and are and were absolutely against the idea of a collectivist government. In fact, Benedict lived under both socialism and communism, seeing them both as inferior and unjust forms of government – especially when compared to a republican government.

As to the “influence” of the Church in your own life as being justification for smearing Her, I would suggest that since you have never actually identified yourself as a Catholic, and obviously see the Church as a cultural or familial habit, that you rest easily, you have no need to denounce an allegiance you do not possess. Nancy Pelosi too, so she claims, is a lifelong Catholic.

obviously missed the very first sentence of my post that you re-read it where I said I was a Catholic.

And since you missed that, why don;t you go ahead and read the actual Labor Day statement in which the USCCB clearly calls for the same kind of social justice that the progressives in this country are calling for,

First off, a political web site should not be the outlet for theological discussion.

Second, a solid 25% or more of the GOP vote comes from Catholics, roughly the same percentage as that of the Democrats, so positing the religion at odds with conservative thought runs against the mission of this web site.

Third, the Catholic Church is not so much conservative or liberal as it is orthodox in its beliefs. To even attempt to place it on the political spectrum as one or the other is to miss the point of what it is about.

Fourth, to the extent one is looking at whether it takes conservative or liberal positions, I would submit that the vast supermajority of practicing Catholics I know are social conservatives and tend vote as such. My pastor regularly criticizes liberal politicians, including Obama, Pelosi, the Clintons, and others. Other priests I have heard talk about the need for all people to respect the just immigration laws of the land. A good friend of mine from college, himself now a priest, dedicated some of his time to helping people learn to speak English. The Pro-Life movement has known no greater ally in America than the Catholic Church. Every Pro-Life Supreme Court Justice for a long time has been Catholic, or converted to Catholicism on the Court. All the conservative Justices have been Catholics.

As far as Pope Benedict’s writings go, few have been such powerfully conservative voices in our lifetimes. His writings have emphasized powerful conservative principles such as subsidiarity, the belief that the lowest level of government capable of governing should do so – a principle which not only dovetails well with the conservative push for states’ rights and limited government, but more importantly, mirrors the rationale behind it. Not to mention his strong stances to protect the unborn, speaking out against embryonic stem cell research, cloning, infanticide, abortion, pornography, etc.

Finally, the Church’s call for social justices and helping the poor must be put in its proper context. The Church teaches people should give selflessly and tend their neighbor. This does not mean it is government’s role to do so. Unfortunately, this distinction is lost on many, including both many Catholics and many others of other faith backgrounds as well.

It is not unreasonable nor to be unexpected that people will argue over the best ways to discharge this basic Christian duty. At the end of the day though the Church is certainly not a force for liberalism or government forced wealth redistribution. It has stood against Nazism, Communism, and Pope Benedict himself has forcefully denounced socialism. What the Church is about is Her Sacraments and spiritual stewardship of her flock.

In the eyes of Jesus, the homeless panhandler did NOT have a good chance of getting in to heaven.
Paraphrasing his words, since I dont know the exact quote, Jesus said;
“Blessed are those who have toiled, for they have found the right life”.
Jesus wanted people to be productive. At that time in history, most common folk worked in agriculture and trade in livestock for the purpose of producing food. Those things at that time were considered by followers of Jesus to be “participating in creation” an activity God would smile upon !
I dont know where the Catholic church gets their philosophy of govt as the main proliferator of charity. Seems to me they they would have a better arguement that it should be the people and private business as the main proliferators of charity. After all, govt as a whole is just a worldly establishment, vs people actually have the chance to go to heaven. You see what I mean ?

From the beginning, Jesus had to work through flawed agents – because we all are flawed and fall short. The Church as well, though embued with the Spirit, also will fall short because it is comprised of flawed individuals. For that reason, we are urged to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

Which leads to this variant on the famous Anne Landers question to anyone who would leave a relationship: can you better serve Christ (and contending for the Faith) by staying within the Church or going elsewhere?

I would argue here that you are rushing to judgment – in particular

1) erroneously utilizing this one statement of a set of American bishops as evidence that the entire Catholic Church, Pope on downwards, has fallen in apostacy. Several, especially A_Texan and grandma, have presented contrary evidence of sufficient persuasion that you owe it to yourself and God to fully examine the whole teaching of the Church on this matter rather than acting precipitously based on your interpretation of what you think the Church is saying.

2) And even if you see some error in the Church’s teachings on social justice, you still need to examine the Church’s teachings on the whole range of social and spiritual issues – included sanctity and protection of life, sexual ethics, family, relationship to God, forgiveness of sin, etc. – before passing judgment on whether the Church has fallen into irremediable apostasy.

3) You also need to at least be open in your heart to receiving correction from church teaching, rather than starting from the position of maintaining your rightness on these matters. Note I said “open in your heart” – I’m talking about attitude, not intellectual abdication.

I would hope you would avoid the same error that so many Catholics with liberal views have done, which is to abandon the church because it doesn’t conform to their preconceived standards (frequently around sex issues or the role of women in the church) rather having a teachable spirit.

In brief, rebels (those liberals who have chosen the path of subversion rather than abandoning the Church) have gained a strong foothold in the administrative structures of the Church, but the battle is not over by any means. But panic is a sure way of turning ultimate victory into immediate defeat. After all, Christ’s promise stands that the power of hell will not prevail against the Church built on the Rock.