Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Giving the Pontiff His Due
On the same flight back to Rome from Latin America on which he admitted he knows next to nothing about economics, Pope Francis also acknowledged criticism he has received here in the United States, and promised to read up on it. From an article in Crux:
If he means this — if he was genuinely unaware of the critique to which his views on markets and global warming have been subjected in places such as this very website, and if he takes the arguments seriously — then the pope will have displayed an example of intellectual humility we can all admire.
Might Ricochet actually receive a reading in the Vatican? We do believe in miracles, do we not?
Published in Economics, Religion & Philosophy
Paging Fr. Sirico! Fr. Sirico to the Vatican — STAT!
Ricochet is a fine daily read on a wide range of topics. Pope Francis needs a primer on economics from a Catholic conscience. There’s no one better suited than Fr. Sirico of the Acton Institute. He would also make an excellent podcast guest. Ahem.
The pope’s default rhetorical content with respect to economics and politics is a window on why Latin America consistently fails to achieve widespread prosperity and stability. Not to get all lefty-academic-deconstructionist here but its hard to get something right if you are trapped in terms/language that invariably lead you to bad intellectual endpoints.
We don’t need to recast Jesus as a spiritual entrepreneur with a high utility for conferring benefits on the lowest socio-economic quintile or otherwise do some dumb right side counter-caricature of Liberation theology.
We do need to make people understand that the best way to maximize human dignity is with freedom. The best way to solve problems is by maximizing the resources available to and favorable cognitive climate for human creativity.
The most annoying part of the encyclical for me was the attempt to counter Malthusian anti-population fascists with an ethos of conservation. Pope Francis bought their bogus zero sum premises and then served very weak tea in response. Thirty years ago Julian Simon (The Ultimate Resource) defeated those same guys with a bet about how the economic future really plays out. The fullness of human nature, free, productive, affirming ought to be the ideal instead of going for the obedient, low-consumption, change-resisting, cheerful peasant motif.
The only positive thing I can say about this Pope is that my wonderful Mrs. Look Away has quit trying to convert me to the Catholic Church.
I’ll drink to that.
I said this on Peter’s last post on the very same subject. I might as well repeat it here:
I’m sure Pope Francis is doesn’t understand economics. It may be that he doesn’t really care. The means may not in his view justify the ends.
Yikes. So I guess Marxism is such the default now in the Catholic Church that he’s never encountered a non-Marxist point of view?
Scary…
He’s bought into Peronism, and it makes me sad. Where’s the encyclical about the persecution of Christians, the normalization of sexual sadism, the empty, joyless reality show culture, the worship of celebrities? Anyone can chirp about global warming. A Catholic prelate is supposed to get past the obvious and the popular.
My argument to the Holy Father would be this:
God’s gift of free will is so important that He endures terrible horrors and deprivations in our world rather than force all to be good. If God will not abridge free will to end starvation and injustice, how can we do otherwise?
Willful good is more beautiful than automatic good. So that human beings may be more than mere animals, we must be free.
The Holy Spirit’s gift of charity can only be shared voluntarily. If I am forced to help my neighbor, then my soul does not benefit from that act. Redistributive programs offer no beauty or love, only a shallow and impersonal materialism which deprives souls of charitable opportunity.
Blue Yeti, I agree. Can we find Fr. Sirico?
I’m stealing that, Aaron. I don’t know when I’m going to use it … but being prepared is a good thing!
He didn’t study such criticisms beforehand? Seems ill-advised.
There is something to this, I suspect. But, in reaction, the man is embracing the rhetoric of Latin American populism — which has produced a result even worse . . . in Cuba, in Venezuela, in Ecuador, and in Argentina. Moreover, if this is the driving force behind the Pope’s analysis, his professed desire that poverty be ended is fraudulent. For, if commercial society has its downside, it has a very considerable upside as well. The Caudillo politics of Latin American has impoverished populations. Bourgeois society has lifted an enormous number of people from poverty and it has given them the means with which to order their own lives.
Paul Rahe just tosses off stuff like this…and leaves me positively slack-jawed in admiration.
Yes, but Latin American populism may be the only economic language his tongue has on hand. He’s stated he’s against the socialists/Marxists. He’s stated he’s against capitalism. The question is what is he for. I’ve speculated on a previous post somewhere here he’s for Distributism. Maybe he’s not even for that. Maybe his understanding of economics is so limited than he doesn’t know what he’s for. Perhaps all he understands is that scripture tells him money is an idol, and that it’s harder to get to salvation for the rich than passing through the needle’s eye, and so all forms of economics (Marxists and capitalism) is essentially making a deal with satan. The results in both systems have led to a falling from faith.
Oh I personally agree with Paul. I’m trying to get into the Holy Father’s line of thinking.
Not understanding economics, at least macroeconomics, is forgivable. After all, no one understands it, including economists. Not understanding history is less forgivable. The economic decline, poverty, and misery that always follow in the wake of socialist policies is plainly there for anyone to see. In the former Soviet Union, in Cuba, in Venezuela, and in now mostly abandoned policies of China and India, among others. The results are obvious. Even if the Pope does not understand Hayek, even if he does not understand why socialist policies fail, he should at least notice that they do fail.
I will cut the Pope some slack in one regard. In South America where the Pope was raised, “capitalism” often means crony capitalism. I have notice that there are really ony two forms of government in South American countries. (1) socialist governments where El Presidente “nationalizes” assets and shares them with his cronies; and (2) “capitalist” governments, where El Presidente’s is selected by cronies who already control the assets, and who pay off El Presidente’s government. Given that background, no wonder the Pope thinks all economies stink.
Peter, Have you ever interviewed Fr. Sirico for Uncommon Knowledge? He has a great left-to-right conversion story in addition to the story of his vocational call. He’s an engaging speaker all around. And maybe you could use Acton Institute’s Poverty Cure for a jumping off point to talk about Pope Francis. Just a thought.
Larry, you’re assuming he has read histories similar to those we have read. Considering how much erroneous history I was taught in American public schools, the misrepresentations are probably worse in overtly socialist and fascist South American nations.
Paul makes an excellent point that free markets can empower free will by increasing opportunities. But I would add two caveats.
First, non-legal aspects of culture can restrict that moral freedom. Even if our laws don’t mandate the firing of “bigoted” employees, it is becoming more difficult to hold a job in America while voicing traditional views even outside the work setting.
Second, as parents teach their teenage children, greater freedom requires greater responsibility. Though it might be immoral to paternalistically deny the uneducated and other persons the same freedoms we enjoy, it is also reckless to expect all persons to be capable of equal freedom. Greater freedom requires not only greater discernment and self-discipline among the capable, but also greater care of those who prove less capable.
It’s also worth cautioning against the anti-Christian trap of total self-determination. God creates us with inherent natures, relationships, roles, and the inescapable duty to pursue His love. The false promise of total self-rule is why errors like transsexuality are now celebrated.
Let me substantiate that proposition further. On more than one occasion now, Pope Francis has stated that money is “devil’s dung.” That would apply to just about any economic system. I’m not sure he cares about the economic system. I think he’s criticizing a money centered life. Which would not be far afield from St. Francis of Assisi, his personal patron saint.
Its far, far worse than you imagine.
1 Timothy 6:10 (RSVCE)
His criticisms have extended specifically to capitalism, so I don’t believe this is correct.
Money is tool which makes all of our lives substantially better.
Key words have been bolded.
Agreed.
Money is a tool, a means to an end. The end is human flourishing, to make our lives substantially better — all lives, everyone, including the poor and the vulnerable.
We need to constantly evaluate our political and economic systems against that standard: do they provide opportunities for the poor to escape from poverty? Do they harm the environment, which in turns harms anyone who breathes polluted air or drinks contaminated water? Do they respect human dignity, or do they exploit the vulnerable?
Then we need to adjust our systems whenever they fall short of these standards. Love of money, maximizing profit or GDP, cannot be our sole criteria, we must look at the bigger picture.
The end is the 4 Last Things: Death, Judgement, Hell, Heaven
The end of human life, yes, absolutely.
My statement was specifically about the end of money. Is money a means to salvation? I suppose it could be, though the Gospels suggest it (or at least the love of it) is more often a means toward damnation.
Somebody quote Francisco D’Anconia. Maybe Francis will see it.
The criticisms are pointed at capitalism, but then Marxism has failed. It’s no longer a viable option. There’s nothing more to say about it.
Right, “love of money” is the root of evil but look at western culture and you’ll find by and large the average person focuses his life on money than on God, even those that are somewhat religious. And not by a small margin. So actions speak louder than words. Also, I could pull 50 quotes from the New Testament that criticizes wealth and money. Here’s one:
That is why I think the Holy Father has been so vocal on the issue. He is trying to preach the anti prosperity Gospel.
I agree with you, Manny, that rich westerners should worry about the state of their souls. I worry about it a lot.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the Holy Father’s emphasis. He seems to be against capitalism because he’s “for the poor.” Well, the poor would seem to be in less danger spiritually, so he must be concerned for their material well-being. In which case, his message becomes utterly incoherent. Nothing has done more for the poor materially than capitalism, as you know.
This is what reveals Francis as a zero-sum socialist. It be may subconscious, but he seems to believe the poor are poor because the rich are rich. It’s nonsense.
You might be right, though he has come out against socialism and Marxism. If you go back to one of my previous comments, I just think he’s ignrant on economics, the only language he has on his tongue is South American populism, and he’s trying, perhaps awkwardly, trying to make people realize that we all focus our lives on money in the modern world and that comes with costs. I don’t think he makes a disciplined argument. I think he jumbles things all over. I’m just trying to understand him and finding there just isn’t any coherence.
I’m a free market guy, and I worry about the state of my soul too!