Only Fools RUSH in Where Angels Fear to Tread: Limbaugh Excoriates Pope Francis Unfairly
I often listen to Rush
Limbaugh on the radio and find him to be an intelligent man and an erudite
conservative journalist. He uses common sense and logic to expose the fallacious
arguments of liberal progressives. UNFORTUNATELY he himself has fallen into a
trap by which he erroneously extrapolates a false premise from the recent papal
document from Pope Francis. Evangelium Gaudii is an Apostolic Exhortation issued on
November 24, 2013. It is not a Papal Encyclical (like Humanae Vitae) nor
is it an Apostolic Letter (like Ordinatio Sacerdotalis) While not an ex
cathedra infallible document, it nevertheless contains ordinary papal
magisterial teaching which demands submission of mind and will by faithful
Catholics.
Rush is uncharacteristically
inaccurate in his quotations. Pope Francis did NOT
criticize unfettered capitalism, he used the
phrase unfettered consumerism. The late and great Father Richard
Joh Neuhaus defined consumerism as: "precisely, the consuming of life by the
things consumed. It is living in a manner that is measured by having rather than
being. As Pope John Paul II makes clear, consumerism is hardly the sin of
the rich. The poor, driven by discontent and envy, may be as consumed by what
they do not have as the rich are consumed by what they do have. The question is
not, certainly not most importantly, a question about economics. It is first and
foremost a cultural and moral problem requiring a cultural and moral
remedy."
Capitalism is an economic and
political ideology whereas consumerism is a personal and individual ideology.
The former is focused on a free market whereas the latter is obsessed with the
acquisition of goods in and of themselves. Blessed JP2 made the distinction
that communism and consumerism are far extremes and both threaten human freedom.
One denies the right to access of necessary goods, the other deifies materialism
and promotes avarice, greed and envy. A free market system, on the other hand,
treats human beings equally, not giving undo advantage to card carrying members
of the communist party while penalizing those who express some political
dissent.
What Pope Francis, Pope
Benedict, Pope John Paul and Pope Leo and others have consistently been saying
and teaching, however, is that the individual PERSON is a moral agent and he or
she must answer to God for what they did or did not do to help their neighbor in
need. The Gospel of Matthew ends by separating the sheep from goats based on
what each individual DID or DID NOT do to feed the hungry, give drink to the
thirsty, shelter the homeless, care for the sick, etc. It is not a judgment of
government policies or agencies but a personal judgment on each one of us. That
being said, besides personal acts of Christian charity, it is logical and
reasonable, prudent and necessary to pool resources and even for the state to
help in cases where the most needy and most urgent cases are helped. Yet, no
Pope ever promoted nor called for a welfare state that perpetually cares for the
poor. The ultimate goal is to enable the poor to rise above poverty and reach a
level of dignity commensurate with their human dignity. Access to necessary
goods is a natural right. That does not mean, however, that the Natural Moral
Law requires the poor to become enslaved to the state by permanently keeping
them dependent. Rush calls Pope Francis a Socialist at best and a Communist at
worst. Does this sound like a commie comment? "Welfare projects, which meet
certain urgent needs, should be considered merely temporary responses."
(#202)
Contrary to what many modern
public school textbooks currently tell our children, capitalism was actually
created during the high Middle Ages and as Michael Novak wrote in 2003,
Catholicism is what created it. While feudalism sustained Christendom from the
fall of the Roman Empire (476 AD) through the so-called Dark Ages, during the
12th to 14th centuries the middle class arose thanks to capitalism which
eventually replaced feudalism. Mediaeval guilds and religious orders, such as
the Cistercians, became contemporary entrepreneurs of their time. "They mastered
rational cost accounting, plowed all profits back into new ventures, and moved
capital around from one venue to another, cutting losses where necessary, and
pursuing new opportunities when feasible. They dominated iron production in
central France and wool production (for export) in England. They were cheerful
and energetic. Being few in number, the Cistercians needed labor-saving devices.
They were a great spur to technological development. Their monasteries 'were the
most economically effective units that had ever existed in Europe, and perhaps
in the world, before that time.'" (Novak)
Thomas Woods "How the
Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" (2005) has an entire chapter (8)
entitled "the Church and Economics" where he, too, proposes that money was not
an artificial product of government (crown or parliament) but a result of a
voluntary process between merchants. Barter became more and more impractical
when dealing with perishable items and dealing with transporting goods over long
distances. Religious orders like the Cistercians devised accounting systems by
which goods could be bought and sold between fellow monks and this was
duplicated by lay merchants who participated in the process. While the secular
states were governed by aristocracies and monarchies and while the Church
herself is hierarchical, it is still Catholic doctrine that all men and women
are created in the image of God and by baptism are considered children of God.
That spiritual equality was translated into an economic equality which
transcended the political. The emerging middle class came from the peasant class
and they did so because their faith taught them they were equal in the eyes of
God and therefore had equal opportunities to improve their material situation.
Those who could not, like the destitute poor, the lame, widowed and orphaned,
relied on the Christian charity of the nobility and the emerging middle class.
It was the Church who literally created the colleges and universities, hospitals
and orphanages and who ran the poor houses, soup kitchens, etc. The secular
state (government) did not create these institutions, religious orders and
dioceses did. Christian charity motivated those who had more to help those who
has less.
When you read Evangelium
Gaudii in its entirety, it continues the papal magisterium found in Rerum
Novarum, Quadragesimo Anno, Mater et Magistra, Gaudium et Spes, Centesimus
Annus and of course, the Catechism of Catholic Church. The very reason any
nation has banking and finance laws is that human beings are not perfect.
Original Sin affects everyone and some people, be they CEO's, CFO's, bankers,
brokers, et al., sometimes make bad choices that produce bad effects and which
cause great harm to many innocent people. I know of no conservative or liberal,
republican, democrat, or libertarian who would advocate the repeal of laws
barring insider trading. We needs laws to maintain some parameters on banks and
stock brokers to protect people from abuse and exploitation. Republicans and
democrats dispute the length, breadth and depth of such legal regulations but
even a free market has some borders which cannot be ignored. Limited government
is still very different from no government. Some, even if minimal, legislation
is needed since not everyone acts prudently or fairly nor for pristine motives.
That being said, it was totally unfair and inaccurate of Mr. Limbaugh to attack
Pope Francis for addressing a letter as head of the Roman Catholic Church to his
more than one billion members. The pontiff was merely reiterating consistent
church teaching that supports a free market but which also reminds the moral
obligation to act responsibly, honestly, and prudently. No one can command
generosity but it is something which should be encouraged and promoted. Welfare
dependency does not help the individual nor the nation. Some welfare is
necessary for those who cannot be helped by private or non-profit charitable
organizations. The goal always, though, is to help move those into economic
independence and become self-sufficient. Laborem Exercens teaches us the
sanctity of human work. The Catechism tells us that the Catholic Church always
believes justice and solidarity are essential and necessary to human freedom.
Justice is distributive, commutative and social.
Unfettered consumerism is not
synonymous with capitalism. A free market system respects human freedom and
autonomy. Consumerism is an abuse and an extreme. Communism wrongly treated
human labor as a means of production for the state. Consumerism wrongly treats
the product of human labor and of the free market as the final source of
happiness and fulfillment. Things are helpful but in and of themselves do not
produce enduring and lasting and true happiness. Material things make life
easier and more comfortable and more convenient. Technology helps cure sickness
and disease and help makes life less a burden. All Pope Francis was warning,
however, is that the possession and acquisition of goods is not salvific nor do
they bring lasting joy. Pleasure is temporary whereas joy can be eternal. The
Pontiff was not forcing any nation or government to abandon capitalism nor was
he advocating socialism let alone communism. He was, however, reminding
Catholics all over the globe that we must buy and sell prudently and using our
conscience. In that light, I see no reason for Mr. Limbaugh to take offense or
issue with Pope Francis. I highly urge Rush to read Fr. Robert Sirico's "Defending the Free
Market" and John Horvath's "Return to Order". Horvath does a splendid job explaining the
notion of frenetic intemperance which is a
cousin of unfettered consumerism and Sirico
precisely shows that freedom requires a free market while greed is no friend of
capitalism, rather it flourishes under socialism.
No comments:
Post a Comment