Saints' Discussion Forums

Here I will start with posting some excerpts from Rerum Novarum..

From the beginning we'll see a condemnation of Socialism, but through that condemnation, we'll discover the positve angle of what men must not be deprived by government of!  :D

"In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: for the ancient workingmen's guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition."

"To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man's envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community."

"It is surely undeniable that, when a man engages in remunerative labor, the impelling reason and motive of his work is to obtain property, and thereafter to hold it as his very own. If one man hires out to another his strength or skill, he does so for the purpose of receiving in return what is necessary for the satisfaction of his needs; he therefore expressly intends to acquire a right full and real, not only to the remuneration, but also to the disposal of such remuneration, just as he pleases. Thus, if he lives sparingly, saves money, and, for greater security, invests his savings in land, the land, in such case, is only his wages under another form; and, consequently, a working man's little estate thus purchased should be as completely at his full disposal as are the wages he receives for his labor. But it is precisely in such power of disposal that ownership obtains, whether the property consist of land or chattels. Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life."

"What is of far greater moment, however, is the fact that the remedy they propose is manifestly against justice. For, every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own. This is one of the chief points of distinction between man and the animal creation, for the brute has no power of self direction, but is governed by two main instincts, which keep his powers on the alert, impel him to develop them in a fitting manner, and stimulate and determine him to action without any power of choice. One of these instincts is self preservation, the other the propagation of the species. Both can attain their purpose by means of things which lie within range; beyond their verge the brute creation cannot go, for they are moved to action by their senses only, and in the special direction which these suggest. But with man it is wholly different. He possesses, on the one hand, the full perfection of the animal being, and hence enjoys at least as much as the rest of the animal kind, the fruition of things material. But animal nature, however perfect, is far from representing the human being in its completeness, and is in truth but humanity's humble handmaid, made to serve and to obey. It is the mind, or reason, which is the predominant element in us who are human creatures; it is this which renders a human being human, and distinguishes him essentially from the brute. And on this very account - that man alone among the animal creation is endowed with reason - it must be within his right to possess things not merely for temporary and momentary use, as other living things do, but to have and to hold them in stable and permanent possession; he must have not only things that perish in the use, but those also which, though they have been reduced into use, continue for further use in after time.  "

"This becomes still more clearly evident if man's nature be considered a little more deeply. For man, fathoming by his faculty of reason matters without number, linking the future with the present, and being master of his own acts, guides his ways under the eternal law and the power of God, whose providence governs all things. Wherefore, it is in his power to exercise his choice not only as to matters that regard his present welfare, but also about those which he deems may be for his advantage in time yet to come. Hence, man not only should possess the fruits of the earth, but also the very soil, inasmuch as from the produce of the earth he has to lay by provision for the future. Man's needs do not die out, but forever recur; although satisfied today, they demand fresh supplies for tomorrow. Nature accordingly must have given to man a source that is stable and remaining always with him, from which he might look to draw continual supplies. And this stable condition of things he finds solely in the earth and its fruits. There is no need to bring in the State. Man precedes the State, and possesses, prior to the formation of any State, the right of providing for the substance of his body. "

"The fact that God has given the earth for the use and enjoyment of the whole human race can in no way be a bar to the owning of private property. For God has granted the earth to mankind in general, not in the sense that all without distinction can deal with it as they like, but rather that no part of it was assigned to any one in particular, and that the limits of private possession have been left to be fixed by man's own industry, and by the laws of individual races. Moreover, the earth, even though apportioned among private owners, ceases not thereby to minister to the needs of all, inasmuch as there is not one who does not sustain life from what the land produces. Those who do not possess the soil contribute their labor; hence, it may truly be said that all human subsistence is derived either from labor on one's own land, or from some toil, some calling, which is paid for either in the produce of the land itself, or in that which is exchanged for what the land brings forth. "

I'm going to pause here, because I believe in Deuteronomy, or close by, will be some of the laws for the people of God on how to distribute the largess of the land, how to care for the widow and the stranger, forgive debts and so forth. I'd like to find those and quote those for further context if someone else doesn't get to them first.  :D

That sure makes so much sense..
Do politicians ever read this stuff???

No?  :D  :cherubim:

 :happyroll:

Oh but actually, some of this is incorporated in the Conservative movement in the U.S. and so I suppose in other countries -- so some actually have read it, I don't want to tar and feather -all- of them.

Our traditions, our family, our property, all in danger and needing defense!

 :madgunfighter::)

I particularly like the quote:

"distort the functions of the State"

In other words, it is Catholic teaching that the State is not meant to confiscate, tax, and redistribute wealth from one group to another, that is not its function, and it is immoral if it takes this task upon itself.

That sounds like a great deal of freedom right there to me!  :D

So strong and convincing are these arguments that it seems amazing that some should now be setting up anew certain obsolete opinions in opposition to what is here laid down. They assert that it is right for private persons to have the use of the soil and its various fruits, but that it is unjust for any one to possess outright either the land on which he has built or the estate which he has brought under cultivation. But those who deny these rights do not perceive that they are defrauding man of what his own labor has produced. For the soil which is tilled and cultivated with toil and skill utterly changes its condition; it was wild before, now it is fruitful; was barren, but now brings forth in abundance. That which has thus altered and improved the land becomes so truly part of itself as to be in great measure indistinguishable and inseparable from it. Is it just that the fruit of a man's own sweat and labor should be possessed and enjoyed by any one else? As effects follow their cause, so is it just and right that the results of labor should belong to those who have bestowed their labor.


With reason, then, the common opinion of mankind, little affected by the few dissentients who have contended for the opposite view, has found in the careful study of nature, and in the laws of nature, the foundations of the division of property, and the practice of all ages has consecrated the principle of private ownership, as being pre-eminently in conformity with human nature, and as conducing in the most unmistakable manner to the peace and tranquillity of human existence. The same principle is confirmed and enforced by the civil laws-laws which, so long as they are just, derive from the law of nature their binding force. The authority of the divine law adds its sanction, forbidding us in severest terms even to covet that which is another's: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife; nor his house, nor his field, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is his."(2)

12. The rights here spoken of, belonging to each individual man, are seen in much stronger light when considered in relation to man's social and domestic obligations. In choosing a state of life, it is indisputable that all are at full liberty to follow the counsel of Jesus Christ as to observing virginity, or to bind themselves by the marriage tie. No human law can abolish the natural and original right of marriage, nor in any way limit the chief and principal purpose of marriage ordained by God's authority from the beginning: "Increase and multiply."(3) Hence we have the family, the "society" of a man's house - a society very small, one must admit, but none the less a true society, and one older than any State. Consequently, it has rights and duties peculiar to itself which are quite independent of the State. 

"The quite independent of the State." is a huge statement to me. The family, rights and duties, quite independent of the state, older than the State, and so..

But to back up a bit.. 'forbidding us even to covet'

Envy, covetousness, class warfare, this is the methodology of the Communist, Socialist, and Left of society today. They pit the rich against the poor, and the media promotes this warfare, which is gradually producing a society where property rights disappear, and liberty is taken away, and people become uninterested in laboring because what they labor for is taken away, and when they do not labor, they are given what they need. . An imbalance which is both fundamentally unjust and doomed to eventually collapse.

If anyone is rich, such a person must be evil because that person has more than others, and the Left places a moral impetus behind confiscating that person's wealth, casts aspersions on how it was gained, and points to the suffering as justification for that confiscation.

But -- the ends do not justify the means. And the consequences of this means are not good either, ultimately.

It is also the opposite of freedom, freedom is self reliance --- slavery is reliance on another, and so, those who fall into this system fall into the trap of being provided for by the government, rather than for themselves, or through their families -- in other words, it also aims at the destruction of the family, this method as well as individual responsibility.

Did you ever watch the documentary by AAron Russo called "From Freedom to Fascism"
In the American Constitution there is no requirement for the laborer to pay tax. In fact it actually states that tax can only be taken on profit which would mean corporate tax only should be paid to the government.
The laborer doesn't make any profit. He exchanges a fair days work for a fair days pay and so has merely done a swap by exchanging labor for money without gaining interest. . It's a marvelous bit of journalism on his part and worth watching on google video.

No, I've never seen it. But you're making me look up stuff about it!

One has to wonder what kind of countries we would have now if people were allowed to keep the fruits of their work, to work freely without taxes, restrictions, and confusing paperwork, establish businesses whenever they wished, and have the value of their money remain unadulterated.

 :D

Well, reading about it was interested but it doesn't look like something watchable, as usual, unfortunately.  :D

the "society" of a man's house - a society very small, one must admit, but none the less a true society

I'd also like to start a thread about the rights of a man's family eventually.  :D I wonder if I'll be able to find enough material?

One of the things I learned about reading about AAron Russo was that he was also talking about the Federal Reserve system. And I believe similar systems are in place everywhere throughout the world.
 
And the issue of the Federal Reserve printing money, which I must say, has always been something I have been concerned about.

Perhaps someone can explain it to me, but the idea of the government or a quasi-governmental entity being able to basically print as much money as it wants, whenever it wants..

Well. It stinks. It devalues, yes, all the money every private citizen has immediately and so places total control of everyone's possessions in the hands of that entity -- and whoever controls the money, controls everything.

When money is tied to something material, and represents this -- then only a certain amount of it can be created. And your property retains the value of that material, no matter what. When it is based on the ephemeral -- whoever determines its value determines how rich or poor you are, at will.

Perhaps there's some other way to explain this, but that is how it appears to me, as an uneducated in the matter, non-economist. :) Not to go too off topic. Which is why if anyone can explain it to me in a better way.. ?  :D

I don't see another way of explaining it.. You've explained it perfectly

It makes me want to go to an economics class and try to hear the explanations!

I was reading a book by an Irish priest explaining St. Thomas Aquinas on the matter and saying that money was invented to serve as a stable measure of exchange. "For St. Thomas, it is the duty of the State to see that money or exchange-medium is a stable measure of value."

St. Thomas Aquinas: "It is true, that it is the same with money as with other things, namely that one does not always get what one wants for it, because it is not always endowed with the same purchasing power, that is it, is not always of the same value. But, nevertheless, matters should be so arranged that it should be steadier in value than other things. . . As a measure used for estimating the value of other things, money must keep the same value, since the value of all things must be expressed in terms of money. Thus exchanges can readily take place, and as a consequence, communications between men are facilitated."

I happened on this priest writing on the subject so perfectly after it was brought up, just what I needed to learn a bit more.

But I am thinking.. what is required to keep money as stable as possible as a value? So that, in fact, earlier Socialism was mentioned, it seems to me that controlling money's value without keeping it stable is Socialist, because then again, the property has been in effect confiscated by the government.

Stability of currency or lack of stability dictates how wealthy or poor we are at any given time and this is totally out of the control of the ordinary person.
The very system on which the western economy is based IE: taking interest on loans, has always been condemned by the prophets in the old testament. This system can never maintain stability as there will always be more money owed than there is in circulation so obviously the printing of more money to counter this can only devalue that which is already in circulation. I think It is something the Lord is not pleased with.

Yes I am beginning to realize this! Thank you Martin! And thank you Irish priests! I had little clue except a vague concern about usury and the Fed because I did not understand it.. but reading St. Thomas express clear Catholic principles in contrast to what we are undergoing is helping!  :D

 :bighanky: :toocrying:

I've been meaning to continue with this topic, and here we go again, with a little diversion..

From Pope Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum we go to Pope Pius XI's Divini Redemptoris, his encyclical 'On Atheistic Communism'. Some excerpts. . .

In the face of such a threat, the Catholic Church could not and does not remain silent.

Ever since the days when groups of "intellectuals" were formed in an arrogant attempt to free civilization from the bonds of morality and religion, Our Predecessors overtly and explicitly drew the attention of the world to the consequences of the dechristianization of human society.

With reference to Communism, Our Venerable Predecessor, Pius IX, of holy memory, as early as 1846 pronounced a solemn condemnation, which he confirmed in the words of the Syllabus directed against "that infamous doctrine of so-called Communism which is absolutely contrary to the natural law itself, and if once adopted would utterly destroy the rights, property and possessions of all men, and even society itself."

Later on, another of Our predecessors, the immortal Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, defined Communism as "the fatal plague which insinuates itself into the very marrow of human society only to bring about its ruin."

With clear intuition he pointed out that the atheistic movements existing among the masses of the Machine Age had their origin in that school of philosophy which for centuries had sought to divorce science from the life of the Faith and of the Church.

The Communism of today, more emphatically than similar movements in the past, conceals in itself a false messianic idea. A pseudo-ideal of justice, of equality and fraternity in labor impregnates all its doctrine and activity with a deceptive mysticism, which communicates a zealous and contagious enthusiasm to the multitudes entrapped by delusive promises.

Communism, moreover, strips man of his liberty, robs human personality of all its dignity, and removes all the moral restraints that check the eruptions of blind impulse. There is no recognition of any right of the individual in his relations to the collectivity; no natural right is accorded to human personality, which is a mere cog-wheel in the Communist system. In man's relations with other individuals, besides, Communists hold the principle of absolute equality, rejecting all hierarchy and divinely-constituted authority, including the authority of parents. What men call authority and subordination is derived from the community as its first and only font. Nor is the individual granted any property rights over material goods or the means of production, for inasmuch as these are the source of further wealth, their possession would give one man power over another. Precisely on this score, all forms of private property must be eradicated, for they are at the origin of all economic enslavement .

Refusing to human life any sacred or spiritual character, such a doctrine logically makes of marriage and the family a purely artificial and civil institution, the outcome of a specific economic system. There exists no matrimonial bond of a juridico-moral nature that is not subject to the whim of the individual or of the collectivity. Naturally, therefore, the notion of an indissoluble marriage-tie is repudiated. Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust instead into public life and collective production under the same conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right.

What would be the condition of a human society based on such materialistic tenets? It would be a collectivity with no other hierarchy than that of the economic system. It would have only one mission: the production of material things by means of collective labor, so that the goods of this world might be enjoyed in a paradise where each would "give according to his powers" and would "receive according to his needs."

In a word. the Communists claim to inaugurate a new era and a new civilization which is the result of blind evolutionary forces culminating in a humanity without God.

It subverts the social order, because it means the destruction of its foundations; because it ignores the true origin and purpose of the State; because it denies the rights, dignity and liberty of human personality.

How is it possible that such a system, long since rejected scientifically and now proved erroneous by experience, how is it, We ask, that such a system could spread so rapidly in all parts of the world? The explanation lies in the fact that too few have been able to grasp the nature of Communism. The majority instead succumb to its deception, skillfully concealed by the most extravagant promises. By pretending to desire only the betterment of the condition of the working classes, by urging the removal of the very real abuses chargeable to the liberalistic economic order, and by demanding a more equitable distribution of this world's goods (objectives entirely and undoubtedly legitimate), the Communist takes advantage of the present world-wide economic crisis to draw into the sphere of his influence even those sections of the populace which on principle reject all forms of materialism and terrorism. And as every error contains its element of truth, the partial truths to which We have referred are astutely presented according to the needs of time and place, to conceal, when convenient, the repulsive crudity and inhumanity of Communistic principles and tactics. Thus the Communist ideal wins over many of the better minded members of the community. These in turn become the apostles of the movement among the younger intelligentsia who are still too immature to recognize the intrinsic errors of the system. The preachers of Communism are also proficient in exploiting racial antagonisms and political divisions and oppositions. They take advantage of the lack of orientation characteristic of modern agnostic science in order to burrow into the universities, where they bolster up the principles of their doctrine with pseudo-scientific arguments.

There is another explanation for the rapid diffusion of the Communistic ideas now seeping into every nation, great and small, advanced and backward, so that no corner of the earth is free from them. This explanation is to be found in a propaganda so truly diabolical that the world has perhaps never witnessed its like before. It is directed from one common center. It is shrewdly adapted to the varying conditions of diverse peoples. It has at its disposal great financial resources, gigantic organizations, international congresses, and countless trained workers. It makes use of pamphlets and reviews, of cinema, theater and radio, of schools and even universities. Little by little it penetrates into all classes of the people and even reaches the better-minded groups of the community, with the result that few are aware of the poison which increasingly pervades their minds and hearts.

A third powerful factor in the diffusion of Communism is the conspiracy of silence on the part of a large section of the non-Catholic press of the world. We say conspiracy, because it is impossible otherwise to explain how a press usually so eager to exploit even the little daily incidents of life has been able to remain silent for so long about the horrors perpetrated in Russia, in Mexico and even in a great part of Spain; and that it should have relatively so little to say concerning a world organization as vast as Russian Communism. This silence is due in part to shortsighted political policy, and is favored by various occult forces which for a long time have been working for the overthrow of the Christian Social Order.

. . .

This was published in 1937. . .

I'd like to say as with many condemnations of error in the Church, we can look to the contrast provided by it to see what the Church loves and supports -- what God loves and supports.

The joining of science with the life of Faith and the Church. . . the rights of individuals in relation to government.. human personality not be quashed. . . inequality and hierarchy, divinely constituted authority, the authority of parents -- all these as the work of God, with a purpose for its difference, superiority or inferiority, a reason for its different existence. . . that God is the true and fundamental source of authority and submission (and so these are good). . . that there is an especial link of women to the family and the home. . . that her emancipation from a life of family and home is not a principle, but rather her respected place there and treatment respecting her womanhood a principle. .. That it is not desirable that the government raise a family's children instead while both parents are forced into generic work. . . that parents raise their children in Godly education and make the key decisions rather than the state. . .

That honest journalism is called for rather than the subversive conspiracies to promote and propagandize certain positions in favor of Communism, etc. . . that the people be educated and fully aware of the effects of anti-Catholic propaganda in society so they can properly resist it and help others to recognize its force, and counter it with the truths of the Faith regarding government. . . that higher education be fully Catholic and resistant and aware of all propaganda. . . . and resistant to the use of government and corporate funds to inculcate this propaganda. . . and especially concerned with educating the youth in the principles to resist this. ..

And that the conspiracy of silence on the part of a large section of the non-Catholic press of the world be recognized for its evil sources.. and also today, in regards to sadly a good deal of the 'Catholic' press where the struggle against Communism's principles have been neglected, or worse, the principles of Communism have succeeded in being inculcated and are being promoted..

So.. The positive values of true Catholic government and the principles behind it need all the more to be understood clearly, studied, and promoted.  :D

It seems to me, that conversion of a majority need to be made to Christianity and the Catholic Church before this can take place - and not only in the US, as our economy is world-wide, but all over the world. Therefore, prayer and fasting are the way to 'get this demon out'. :crucifix:  :+: :+: