Once again I am forced to give some thought to the "Apostolic Exhortation" published recently by Pope Francis as the "Evangelii Gaudium."
There were some comments posted on the Internet, suggesting that with some of his remarks, Francis revealed himself as a "Marxist Communist", that he was leaning far to the Left of the political spectrum.
What else did anybody expect ?
Of course, as an "evangelizing Catholic" he must speak in favour of the poor and downtrodden and must urge society to arrange itself in a manner, as to eliminate poverty.
I cannot criticize him for that.
Let me examine his Evangelium from this perspective:
In para 51 Francis writes:
"The Culture of Prosperity deadens us" -
If the Culture of Prosperity really deadens us, it behooves us to find a different culture. What then is the opposite of Prosperity ?
( I assume that the Pontiff did not refer to the "Prosperity Gospel", but used the word in its dictionary sense:
Prosperity: noun: success, riches, plenty, ease, fortune, boom, luxury, well being...
So, if the Culture of Prosperity deadens us, must we turn away from such deadly culture and embrace the opposite ?
The dictionary tells us that the opposite of prosperity is:
poverty, want, failure, depression, shortage and destitution.
Surely, the Pope could not possibly have such a turn-around in mind for us. So what is he talking about ?
"We are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase !"
What, pray tell, is wrong with having something New to purchase ? Maybe it is something which makes our lives a bit better ? Could it also be that the person who produced this "Something-New-To-Purchase" is very happy that we purchased it, since he now is able to feed his family ?
Had we never had something "New To Purchase," we would find ourselves in front of a log fire, chipping away at the wheel. ( which was one of the first "Something New to Purchase".)
But then, in paragraph 57 Francis gets serious:
"Not to share one's wealth with the poor is to steal from them
and take away their livelyhood."
How do we share our wealth with the Poor ?
Do we throw everything into a pot and divvy it up "from each according to his abilities to each according to his needs" ?....
sounds frighteningly familiar, you say ?
The Exhortation continues:
It is not our own goods we hold, but theirs.
Why is it, that something I obtained with my own honest labour all of a sudden belongs to "Them"?
Why does the Pope fortify the differenciation between "Us" and "Them" ?
Who are "Us" and who are "Them" ?
Is there a dividing line, the parts forever changing, melting into each other at the borders ?
Should we not consider all of "Us" as "Us" and see to it that each of "Us" enjoys varying degrees of prosperity ? Surely that is what every reasonable man, including Francis, would want to see.
If "Us" really stole from "Them" and if the goods we hold really do not belong to "Us" but to "Them", then how do we remedy this misalignment ?
There are many more such statements in this Evangelium, expressing this thinking, so that some people actually have come to the conclusion that the Pope is a "Marxist". An accusation which, during a recent interview, he denied.
If not a Marxist, then what is he ? Maybe he is a left leaning Socialist ?
Christ surely appears to have been a Socialist but do not forget what God is supposed to have said to one of the Prophets: "Enjoy the day according to your means."
Compare, I urge you, the statements of Francis with those of Marx:
"Communism is a higher class of Socialism."
"From each according to his ability to each according to his needs."
"The Theory of Communism can be summed up in one sentence: "Abolish All Private Property."
And then, Marx said something, which makes the Pontiff insist that he is not one of them.:
"The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion"
Hey, Francis, don't get too chummy with Karl.
And now, in my opinion and interpretation, comes a real scorcher, a true barn burner if I ever read one:
In paragraph 192 Francis moves away from the pure Marxist theories and....... would you believe it...?
moves right onto the turf of Ayn Rand, a dyed in the wool Capitalist:
Here he says:
".......... we are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a dignified sustenance for all people, but also their general temporal welfare and prosperity. This means education, access to health care and above all employment, for it is through free, creative labour, that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives. A just wage enables them to have adequate access to all the other goods which are destined for our common use."
Ayn Rand's Philosophy of Objectivism demands a society in which, through free, creative labour, everybody has the opportunity to achieve their reasonable goals. The accent is on "Free and Creative Labour"..
Not through Government hand outs, subsidies, etc.... but through FREE AND CREATIVE LABOUR..
with ample consideration for those who are not able to fend for themselves.
So you accuse me of being a dreamer, since the time of true Capitalism has gone and passed us by ?
Well, if I am a dreamer, so is Pope Francis,
in the most humble opinion of
.
Bertstravels.
No comments:
Post a Comment