Pope Francis Doesn't Understand Economics: Judge Andrew Napolitano

Pope is a "communist and a Marxist" who has "assaulted matrimony" in a "rejection of his papal role," says leading Catholic libertarian.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Pope Francis Doesn't Understand Economics: Judge Andrew Napolitano

HD Video Download

"The pope is by his own words a Peronist," says Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News' Senior Judicial Analyst. "He is probably also a communist and a Marxist, who does believe the government ought to control and motivate the means of production and means of distribution."

As both a devout Catholic and principled libertarian, Napolitano believes Jesus Christ would reject the pope's view of economics. "The essence of libertarianism is the primacy of the individual over the state and absolute freedom of the individual to make his or her own choices," Napolitano explains. "That's also the teachings of Jesus Christ: 'I have come to set you free.'"

In a conversation with Reason's Editor in Chief, Matt Welch, the Judge discusses his frustrations with Pope Francis on the eve of his first Papal visit to the United States. Napolitano takes issue with the pope's exhortations on economic issues and Catholic tradition when it comes to allowing marriage annulments and permitting priests to forgive abortion. 

"Speeding up annulments…is a rejection of his papal role," says Napolitano. "He has assaulted matrimony. For him to make annulments easier is a backdoor towards permitting divorce."

Produced by Anthony L. Fisher. Camera by Jim Epstein and Fisher.

About 7 minutes.

Music: "Ecce gratum" by MIT Concert Choir

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube Channel to get automatic updates when new videos go live.

Comments

[The Last American Hero]

He's not so much speeding up annulments as standardizing the process. In some areas of the world the process was so cumbersome as to be virtually impossible.

The stuff he says on economics is downright chilling. Especially where he conflates government spending on social programs with charity.

The Cato podcast on this topic this week was pretty interesting.

[gaoxiaen]

There are no divorces in the Philippines, which is overwhelmingly Catholic. The only way out of a bad marriage is annulment and it's very difficult and expensive to get one.

[LarryA]

There I one other alternative. Murder.

[Hidebehindyourcause]

Yeah I live there, so I know this to be true.

Even if a woman gets beaten by husband, and cheated upon she's pretty much shit outta luck if she's poor (which pretty much everyone is).

If you think our government is bad, you should go there.

[Cap'n Krunch]

Hey, we're trying to be that bad as hard as we can. If these freaking freedom lovers would just get out of the majorities way we could easily be that bad in a year or two, but no, these people who love freedom, rights and independence just won't compromise.

[rac3rx]

A standardized process is a great idea. I've been case sponsoring Catholic annulments almost 10 years. I get foreign applicants, especially Nigerians, who are transferred to the Houston area for employment. While they're here, they try to go through the process because it's not possible to obtain an annulment in their home country. Their Churches just won't do them.

There is also a streamlining to the process. In the US, a petition has to pass 2 tribunals in order to be granted. In the Archdiocese of Galveston Houston, it is ours and San Antonio. When I got my annulment almost 10 years ago, going through both tribunals took about a year. As a case sponsor today, the two tribunals are taking over 2 years to process and notify Petitioners of grant or denial. That's pretty unreasonable IMO. A Petitioner either has a case or not.

This is actually one of the few areas where I believe the Pope has it right.

[bassjoe]

I find it odd, to say the least, when people mix their religious and economic views (for example, by appealing to Christ's authority in a matter). Something which both the pope and Napolitano are doing.

[Bill Dalasio]

Not really, if you consider it a matter of political economy. People's political economy is affected by their moral perspective. And some people's moral perspectives are influenced by their religion.

[LarryA]

But there should be a difference between "I believe divorce is morally wrong so I won't get one," and "I believe divorce should be illegal so no one can get one."

Napolitano's "Jesus said divorce is wrong therefore it should be illegal" position is hardly a libertarian one.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

There's a difference though. Nepolitano is referring to rules that people voluntarily subscribe to. In the USA people can walk away from any church at any time.

[Gn8]

Unless those rules are enshrined in secular law, while libertarians would (hopefully) not support that there are religious statists who would gladly use government force to compel others to follow their beliefs.

[Nick H]

That's not his position. He's talking about divorce being recognized within the Catholic Church.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

That what I said. One can walk away from the church and its rules no longer apply.

[C. S. P. Schofield]

The Pope, as one might expect of the head of an fundamentally feudal institution, is a believer in Aristocracies. Oh, he might be shocked to hear it put in those terms, but he firmly believes - as the Church believes - in top-down rule. Catholic societies, as a rule, devolve into masses of "simple faithful" (ie, peasants) ministered to by an elite. They are preferable to open Communist/Socialist states only because the rapacity of their officials is to some extent limited by the Precepts of Christ.

A small extent.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

You sir are spot on !

[Chip Chipperson]

Pope John Paul II was instrumental in the fall of communism, as a close partner of Reagan and Thatcher and an outspoken critic of the Soviet Union. He understood firsthand what the Soviet Union did to Eastern Europe and what communism would do to the rest of the world if given a chance. He was a true believer in natural rights, freedom of conscious, and inherent human dignity and had a distinctly libertarian view of the state, because he knew what the state can (and does) do to undermine that human dignity.

He is living proof that Catholicism can indeed be put to good use when properly applied.

[C. S. P. Schofield]

Ok. I'm sorry to pick nits, but I can't help myself. He cannot be "living proof", because he isn't alive. Maybe he WAS living proof?

[Chip Chipperson]

Well, his memory is still alive 🙂

[OneOut]

I remember those days and good on you for reminding us.

He parternered up with that Lech Welsa guy too didn't he ?

[DenverJ]

Yeah. How many Pollocks does it take to take down an Evil Empire?

[Marshall Gill]

Just two.

[DenverJ]

I'm in Solidarity with that answer.

[Migrant Log Chipper]

Yeah, the lefties I knew were big on Solidarity back in the early 80's. Funny how things change in 30 years.

[retiredfire]

That's because they thought it was a union movement, like the trade-union thugs, here.
Little did they realize it would be the beginning of the tearing down of their beloved Soviet Union.

[Marshall Gill]

Can a man have a higher evidence of awesomeness than to have the KGB try and take you out? Karol J?zef Wojty?a fought the Nazis and then the Communists. Saint John Paul the Great, indeed.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

He was a decent guy who stood against progressives who wanted to kill him. I'll give the church a thumbs up for him. He saw first hand what communism did to Poland and learned a valuable lesson. The present guy grew up under Peron, but learned the wrong lesson.

[LarryA]

Pope John Paul II was instrumental in the fall of communism

But that doesn't counter Schofield's post. I would expect the leader of the Catholic Church to be against any atheistic government. Did Pope John Paul II believe communism was wrong because it was statist, or because it was godless?

[Chip Chipperson]

Read up on him, he was a tremendously interesting guy. His abhorrence for communism had little to do with its atheism. He grew up in Poland and saw firsthand how, first Nazism and then communism used the state to crush the human spirit. He was a believer in natural rights above all, and deeply suspicious of statist remedies. He was uniquely fit for his time.

[Free Society]

The Pope, as one might expect of the head of an fundamentally feudal institution

So he has contractual relationships with allodial and vassal lords? Please go on, share with us your deep knowledge of feudalism.

Oh, he might be shocked to hear it put in those terms, but he firmly believes - as the Church believes - in top-down rule.

Right, because everyone knows that feudalism is all about top down, centralized rule of an organized state. Titty Fucking Christ, read about the subject before you start making comparisons to it, we wouldn't want you to look like you don't know a damned thing about what you're talking about, would we?

[Deli-bro]

As a baptist from the south (not Southern Baptist though) who is living in New England and engaged to a catholic, I find it odd that progressive catholics expect their pope to mirror their social and economic values.

When the pope started to be more welcoming towards gays, many people were expressing joy that one of their beliefs was being validated by the pope.

I suspect people want to be able to hold views without feeling guilty because they need permission to hold certain views.

[Suthenboy]

"...they need permission to hold certain views."

Absolutely true, and true of all religions. I never understood that.

*disclaimer - I was thrown out of catechism when I was 12 by Sister Theresa. The Bitch.

[elfprince13]

"Absolutely true, and true of all religions. I never understood that."
Except, perhaps, baptists - freedom of conscience is kinda our thing.

[Sevo]

And our buddy who can't keep her superstition out of her job is back at it:

"Kim Davis may have invalidated marriage license forms, deputy clerk says"
[...]
"Davis replaced the old marriage license forms with forms that don't carry her name, the name of the county or any reference to a clerk or deputy clerk, said Mason's lawyer, Richard Hughes.
[...]
Hughes said: "Mr. Mason's concern is he does not want to be the party that is issuing invalid marriage licenses and he is trying to follow the court's mandate as well as his superior ordering him to issue only these changed forms. ..."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/19/.....index.html

[Suthenboy]

I will say it again. Individuals have a fundamental right to free association. Agents of the government do not. Legislatures make laws. Bureaucrats are bound to follow those laws.

If any good were to come out of this it would be people seeing that government has no place in marriage. The only thing government should be doing with regards to marriage is enforcing contracts.

[Sevo]

"If any good were to come out of this it would be people seeing that government has no place in marriage."

And religion has no place in government.

[OneOut]

"And religion has no place in government."

Hear Hear ! I always asklmy friends who disagree with that how would they like it if it were the Muslims in government making laws based on their religion ?

But those are usually the same one's I have to tell that a wall on the border keeps us in just as well as it keeps the Meskins out.

They don't get it.

[Suthenboy]

I think Forest Gump had a little saying about that; Stupid is as stupid does.

[LarryA]

Hear Hear ! I always ask my friends who disagree with that how would they like it if it were the Muslims in government making laws based on their religion?

The question is too far from their worldview.

Ask them how they would like a Christian government run by [Christian denomination they aren't a member of]. As in, "My Baptist friend, how would you like Congress to be made up of Episcopalians?" Or vice-versa.

[retiredfire]

If you tell them "that a wall on the border keeps us in just as well as it keeps the Meskins out", then they have every right to consider everything else you tell them as, equally, ridiculous.
Check federal laws on religious accommodation, they say private as well as public employees have the right to have one provided.

[Harold Falcon]

Accommodation, not acquiescence. The person still has to be able to perform the fundamental requirements of the job. You're not required to hire a Muslim woman who won't take off her clothes at a strip club. Grow a brain, dipshit.

[NYC2AZ]

"If any good were to come out of this it would be people seeing that government has no place in marriage."

Cons will see this as a great thing because she is sticking to the progs. Progs will see this as an anomaly, an interloper that will be removed by whatever means the just and almighty State deems appropriate.

[OneOut]

"Bureaucrats are bound to follow those laws."

Oh Yeah ? Try telling Lois Lerner and Hilliary's assistant at State who refuses to testify before Congress without immunity that shit my friend ?

Who in authority thinks it's right to send this woman to jail while Lois Lerner is at home on the couch enjoying her government pension ?

[Suthenboy]

Rather than 'bound' I should have said 'are supposed to'.

You are correct. Progressives despise the rule of law. It limits power and prevents them from doing great things and making progress. That is the heart and soul of progressivism; ruling by decree without restraint or consequence.

They really are the worst kinds of people.

[OneOut]

You should have been dowon here in Paradise yesterday Suttenboy.

A buddy and I met the shrimp boats as they were docking and bought 15 lbs. of 20/22 count (per pound) shrimp for $2 per lb. and then met up with a crabber friend of mine who sold us a dozen and a half of #1 Jimmys ( the largest size) for $25 as he was taking them out of his crab boat. What do rich people eat ?

We came home with a few cold ones under our belt and then met up with the ladies and had a shrimp boil and crab steaming good old time by the pool. The cold beer and rum flowed. We fed a lot of people some fantastic uber fresh seafood for cheap. Being a Louisiana boy I'm sure you know what I mean. If you want to send your brother down one Saturday to load up on some boat fresh seafood let me know and I'll hook him up.

Life, isn't it wonderful in this great, warts and all, country in which we live ?

Go Cowboys !!

[dantheserene]

You sir, know how to have a good time.

[C. S. P. Schofield]

The lady is locally elected. Her State voted against Gay Marriage by a 3 to 1 margin, or so I'm told. Does she owe obedience to the Federal Government, or to the expressed wishes of the peole who elected her.

I'm not saying I think she's right about Gays. In fact, I am firmly convinced that she and the voters of her State have their heads jammed up their backsides. But the chorous of "She's a government employee, she has not right to disobey" and variations makes me tired.

She has as much right to be a civilly disobediant pain in the ass as anyone else.

She also has the right to deal with the consequences.

[Notorious UGCC]

"Legislatures make laws. Bureaucrats are bound to follow those laws."

Not only did the legislature of Kentucky make laws by which public officials can only recognize man/woman marriages, the people of Kentucky directly approved a constitutional amendment applying the same principle.

So you're saying Kim Davis is "bound to follow those laws."

[Suthenboy]

On Topic: This is the biggest 'NO SHIT' yet from Napolitano.

The college of cardinals had their head up their ass electing a goddamn Argentinian commie. One of the best popes ever is followed first by a goddamn nazi, and then by a fucking commie.

[John C. Randolph]

Maybe the cardinals are all commie rat bastard sleeper agents bent on destroying their medieval institution?

-jcr

[Suthenboy]

If they actually are I don't know what they would do differently.

[Sapient Mulch]

ILLUMINATI1II11!!!!!

[Bill Dalasio]

I do have to ask, "the most charismatic head of the Catholic church since Pope John Paul II"? Hasn't there been exactly one between the two?

[Sapient Mulch]

Only once, but there are no existing photos outside the Vatican Archives and a Papal Release is required to view them. All surviving witnesses have been rendered mute in a miracle of divine intervention.

[OneOut]

"permitting priests to forgive abortion. "

This is what I don't get about Catholicism. As a Protestant Christian I don't need another man's permission to be forgiven for my many sins against God. Religon is a man made construct and somewhere some time long ago some man made this shit up where he and his coharts convinced other people that they had to get his permission to be forgiven by God. What utter crap.

There is a deep and wide chasm between believing in religon and believing in God.

[mgd]

Here:

https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/GOTOCON.HTM

What I don't get about Protestants is why they think their magical thinking is superior to Catholic magical thinking.

[OneOut]

So you are a unbeliever ? Meh.

Maybe you believe in science. I believe God created science.

So what ? Maybe science created itself.

Live and let live is my motto.

[OneOut]

Ad for clarity's sake I suppose I'm a Protestant by default.

I attend a non denominational church.

I don't believe in Religon, I believe in God.

[DenverJ]

A statement I hear alot and which means nothing. Do you being to a church? Do you tithe at that church? Does your church have elders who are basically the board of directors?
You, my friend, belong to an organized religion.

[OneOut]

I am not a member of the church I attend. I do give them some money every time I attend because I know they have expenses. My charity is handled otherwise. I do not adhere strickly to any church's or denomination's doctrine.

I believe in God, not in any particular church or doctrine or denomination.

So yes it does mean something. There is a difference in believing that some other men are infallible and are supposed to tell me what to believe. I believe what I believe based on my own reading of the bible. I have read it cover to cover and the New Testament twice and am working on a third. I consider myself, as does my wife, strictly a New Testament Christian

So my friend, you are incorrect.

[DenverJ]

Fair enough. I suspect our definition of religion might differ, but it is way too nice a day to get hung up on semantics.
I think I'm going to go play some pool. Enjoy the rest of your day!

[OneOut]

"but it is way too nice a day to get hung up on semantics."

We definately agree o this.

It's a beautiful day where I'm at ad the heat has eased and there is a slight crispness in the air.

Even Jackland Ace's evident need to insult someone in his every post can spoil a day like today.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

Belonging and Believing are different things.

To believe is to live according to one's beliefs. Belong means "to go along with, properly relate to", according to Etymology Online.

Belief (faith) means "to hold dear, esteem, trust", again according to Etymology Online. In this sense, Belief and Faith have to do with one's values, where Faith refers to trust in one's values.

I agree that belonging to a group or institution that has different beliefs is problematic. This is why I find it hard to belong to a church, myself. My greatest problem with churches, though, is that they are way too literal in their interpretations, but so are Atheists. Literalism and legalism are killing Christianity.

Nonetheless, I agree with OneOut: believing in God is not the same as believing in religion.

[OneOut]

Thaks for putting it better than I did.

I once had an agnostic friend of mine try to tell me I was some kind of new age Christian after we had a long conversation. I said no, I'm a New Testament Christian. Some of my beliefs are outside the norm of mainstream Christianity. Many might be surprised to know that Billy Graham said on TV once that he wasn't exactly sure what happened after death. He said we might be sent to other worlds or dimensions to spread the Word. I believe that so many have been turned away from Christianity because of the actions of some literal hard line Old Testament styled so called Christians.

One of them I know for sure is all our our's friend here at Reason Agile Cyborg. He has spoken here before about the scary upbringing he had and the beating and abuse he suffered growing up at the hands of a sadist using the Bible as an excuse for his behavior. It originally turned him away from God because he thought we are all like that. But then again he has said here that he now realizes that we are not all like that.

[retiredfire]

To be a Christian, you have to believe what some men said - the earliest estimate being some two, or three, generations after Jesus walked the earth - as to him being the messiah and rising from the dead.
You sound more like what Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine were - deists. Believing in God but not that He has revealed Himself to any human, other than through our natural existence.

[Berha123]

i am agree

[C. S. P. Schofield]

Well, their results seem to be, in general, an improvement...

Just as Christianity has produced societies that are, on the whole, preferable to societies that tolerate an abomination like the Caste system.

[John C. Randolph]

Religon is a man made construct

Just like gods.

-jcr

[Sapient Mulch]

Exactly why this is the church for me:

http://unitedchurchofbacon.org/

"Because at least it's real!"

[Hidebehindyourcause]

Tell me about it.

My wife is Catholic, and I'm more or less non-denominational but consider myself on the Protestant side of the things.

I told her that while I respect the Pope as a religious leader, I don't think he's any more special than anyone else. Fortunately for me she's open minded and respects my point of view (although she disagrees).

There's many things about the Catholic church that I don't understand.

That being said, the main thing is that they believe in God and accept the fact that Jesus died for their sins. My wife does. I told her that's the most important thing. She also has faith, does have have a personal relationship with God, and isn't a mindless religious drone like some are in all Christian denominations.

Not trying to get preachy, just wanted to share my view on a couple of minor issues that I have with Catholicism, as a Protestant.

[DJF]

The Pope understands economics, he is the one who controls a country, lives in a palace and has people waiting on him day and night. The Popes economics are doing great.

[Peter Verkooijen]

Rerum Novarum - Mussolini - Peron - Pope Francis

[Hicks]

It always seemed to me that Jesus was the original radical socialist.
All that stuff about rich men having a better chance of "passing through the eye of a needle than entering heaven".

Why is it odd that the leader of His True Church would exhibit a few of those traits?

[OneOut]

Do you know what the " eye of a needle " is that that refers to ?

It's not something our grandmothers used to sew with.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Exactly ! I wish people knew what the fuck they were speaking about when they employ quotes such as the one Hicks did.

[Jackand Ace]

I'm fairly sure he does. Do you?

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Fuck you are stupid.

[DenverJ]

The verse says that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to pass into heaven.
I always thought the error in the translation wasn't the eye of the needle part, but that "camel" should actually have been translated as "camel hair thread or rope".

[Jackand Ace]

So take it that way. The point remains...it's impossible.

[DenverJ]

Not true. How do you think the Aramaic people held things together? The needles were large, like you'd use today when sewing leather. And you know what? The eyes of those needles are large, and made to good that size fiber.
It is difficult not impossible, because the rich man will love his money.
Not that I necessarily believe that, but I'm pretty sure Christ wasn't saying that heaven was closed to rich people.

[Jackand Ace]

It is true. Rope would not pass through the eye of a needle, no matter what meanings you want to use. But have at it. You should know that Luke makes abundantly clear what Christ was trying to impart in the following verse:

27 Jesus replied, "What is IMPOSSIBLE with man is possible with God."

You seem to think it's possible for rope to pass through, which would then mean it would have been a poor example for Jesus to use.

[JPyrate]

Fuck off Cross Fucker.

[OneOut]

".it's impossible."

No it is not.

The eye of a needle is this. In times when city's were surrouded by a wall they most all had a large gate for people and caravans to enter during the day. At night these large gates were closed to prevent unwelcomed intruders. A smaller door was sometimes built by the side of the gate to allow latecomers or travelers to enter after the gate was closed. This is the eye of the needle. It was built small to prevent armed agressors to storm in and was only large enough for one person, or camel, to enter at a time.

The eye of the needle parable was used to illustrate that it is hard for a rich person to enter heaven, but it is not impossible.

Class dismissed.

[Jackand Ace]

Remedial classes mandatory for you. See what Luke says in the next verse. Bible study must not be a strong suit in your church.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

Still, you miss the teaching for your literalism. A strong characteristic of both Christians and Atheists. Scripture is almost completely metaphorical, allegorical, or symbolic. It is meant to speak to the spirit through the subconscious. Reading it literally by way of your rationalism will leave you missing the point every time.

[OneOut]

"Jackand Ace|9.20.15 @ 2:43PM|#

So take it that way. The point remains...it's impossible."

You seem to think you know more about it than Christ does.

Matthew 19:23 And Jesus said to His disciples, "Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 "Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."?

Hard does not mean impossible. Perhaps it is you who needs some remedial Eglish.

[Jackand Ace]

Enjoy your Sunday!

[retiredfire]

Except, of course that what you quote has not been traced back further than about 80 years after Jesus died, so no one at that time knew, exactly, what he might have said.
Quotes from a book, translated from a language centuries past its use, with dubious connections to any, particular, time frame, really don't prove anything.

[DenverJ]

I hadn't heard of that interpretation before. I just read a little about it. I like it. Not that it matters much to me, who am neither rich nor a believer.

[OneOut]

No problem.

And it's nice to talk to someone who doesn't feel the need to insult someone with their every post ala Jackland Ace.

[DenverJ]

Ah well, trolls gonna troll. It's best not to engage directly, unless you're bored 😉
"cooled off" huh. Louisiana? So what, it's down into the 90's?
I kid. Have a great afternoon and evening.

[jester]

I believe that is an ancient urban legend invented by a Scots preacher. I'll have to look around for a reference. As I understood it, Jesus was fond of hyperbole, a literary device. Hence: swat at gnats and swallow camels, motes and beams, etc.
As far as rich men, Jesus did not advocate that the state should impoverish rich people for being rich. He said go and sell your stuff and be charitable to others. Quite a different story.

[DenverJ]

But, was he a True Scots preacher?

[Eric Bana]

This link might be interesting if you haven't seen it: http://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/19-24.htm

The commentaries are old, but it shows the disagreement related to the issue. See the Cambridge explanation for example. I find it curious how people put so much stock into a compilation of ancient writings that are so unclear, inconsistent, and confusing as a whole that the fervent adherents of these writings literally come to thousands of different conclusions about what the heck they think their deity meant.

[Millard Fillmore]

Because there is a difference between thinking that rich people kind of suck, and deciding that because of this we should forcefully take all of their stuff?

[Notorious UGCC]

Thomas Aquinas couldn't have said it better, thank you!

[Frankjasper1]

Perhaps the rich progs and socialists who like his message should start giving up their wealth

[Millard Fillmore]

No, that wouldn't be fair, because all those other mean rich people would get to keep theirs.

[Millard Fillmore]

Something about "property rights" such bullshit, I know

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Whoa there fella, let's not get carried away. The $100 million Hillary somehow earned was.....well earned and she deserves it !!! The $ Romney stole was taken off the backs of the oppressed poor and workers and orphans and deserves to be stolen and given to Hillary !!!!!11!

[Jackand Ace]

Good point.

[msimmons]

Speaking of odd exhibitions by our leaders: Why is it that someone who spends so much time accusing his country of being racist and of income inequality to justify government sponsored social justice (force) always summers in Martha's Vineyard?

What makes you think Jesus was a radical socialist? Biblical text is amgiguous. Is it the populist perception of Jesus as a hippie?

Biblical jurisprudence entails impartial application, not neo-Marxist conceptions of "social justice" enforcing equal outcomes. Nowhere in Scripture are states tasked with leveling wealth. Egalitarianism rarely lifts the "least of these." Instead, it deprives their right to rise beyond their circumstances. Even the poorest in America generally have more than anyone save perhaps the dictator's inner circle where governments enforce equality.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bi.....lse/print/

[Harold Falcon]

Yeah, because Jesus advocated a government using armed force to redistribute income. Get the fuck out of her with that shit.

[Frankjasper1]

The pope said it was selfish for people not having kids. What a clown

[Christophe]

The pope needs Catholics to have more kids. It's the only way to have more Catholics, they don't really proselytize well.

[msimmons]

Progs are willing to embrace his pope-ness cause they think he's bending the church in their direction on same sex marriage, abortion, state sponsored welfare, socialism, etc...Catholic progs in particular. Someone recently asked: Is it a bad thing if the Pope is relaxing church doctrine in response to trends in modern society? Look, I'm not religious and gave up on Catholicism decades ago, but if you claim to be a Catholic, what comes with that is an acceptance of enduring values and burdensome articles of faith. In this sense the Church is supposed to lead its followers not the other way around. I think the judge mostly gets it right reconciling his religious beliefs with libertarianism. The alternative, what we see Pope Chavez doing, is a post-modern/nihilist underming of enduring values that will move the flock closer to an end end point where God is dead. It's a parallel to our public servants/keepers disdain for Constitutionally limited government. Political progressives are as nihilistic as it gets.

[Jackand Ace]

He understands economics as much as Nappy understands Christ's intent.

[Sevo]

Jackand Ace|9.20.15 @ 2:13PM|#
"He understands economics as much as Nappy understands Christ's intent."

And as much as Jack understands logic. Or knowledge.
Lefty ignoramuses really shouldn't throw stones.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Hey Jack, still waiting on you to explain Venezuela !

[Christophe]

Doesn't exist. The whole country is a propaganda piece by the US, designed to keep the proletariat scared and compliant.

[msimmons]

Decent article on post-modernism...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....88122.html

[Bill Dalasio]

Well, my guess is that Francis is doing irreparable long-term damage to the Catholic church in the U.S. In preaching the Gospel According to Salon, he's gained plenty of plaudits from the progressive commentariat. Of course that is unlikely to translate in full pews, as progressives already have their own God - the state. Meanwhile, the traditional faithful are likely to be alienated by a Catholicism that no longer speaks to them and has rendered itself doctrinally incoherent in the name of fashion.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

I believe you're correct.

People will not sit in pews and have their lifestyle vilified for long. Some will try to change, others will just ignore. We still are primarily an open market, capitalist nation and he is insulting deeply cherished ideals. If Francis lives long, he will depopulate American catholic churches of the most successful and hardest working folk, and be left will mostly poor people and white, middle class progressives.

[Choadintheroad]

Nonsense. There is a good reason for the Pope to show such a different change in direction. People were leaving the church in droves due to the kiddy fiddling scandals. The point was making people think all the old guard (e.g. the child molesters) were out.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

You may be right. However, given the Catholic church's ideological history in South America, it's more likely that a wave of Liberationism* has taken over. If this pope lives long, then the friends of liberty have a tough row to hoe in coming decades.

*Liberation theology has little to do with liberty, of course

[mfckr]

It's fair to point out that the Catholic Church as an institution has had a cozy relationship with socialism in the past. The current pope isn't the 1st one to argue favorably for socialism, e.g. http://is.gd/QugllI

[DenverJ]

Not gonna click, just gonna point out Christ's admonition to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render into God that which is God's." Which I read as separating religion from politics.

[mfckr]

Debating over religious interpretation is pointless. The Catholic Church clearly has it own interpretation (pro-socialist), and you're entitled to your own.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

That teaching also separates the spiritual from the material. The gospels are clear that Jesus was concerned primarily with spiritual issues, and material ones only to the extent that they influence the spiritual. When he addressed wealth it was typically about concern for the material--wealth--getting in the way of spiritual concerns.

For e example, the parable of the talents is not about making money by investing, but about the general concept of investing what you have to get what you don't have. A very capitalist notion, I think.

[Hidebehindyourcause]

Greed primarily.

[msimmons]

The wiki entry is a nice collection of picked cherries. I don't believe Jesus was either a capitalist or a socialist, but am appalled by socialists that invoke his name for their cause and more often than not do not believe in Jesus or his teachings to begin with.

Politicians expand power by sowing discontent with our worldly estates relative to others ? what the Bible calls covetousness. Demagogues encourage jealousy to justify looting taxpayers. They violate the eighth and tenth commandments through programs enabling recipients to avoid the fourth commandment's requirement of work (Exodus 20:9).

This misaligns incentives from the underlying goal of economics: efficient allocation of scarce resources. To fund this largesse, Washington employs counter-productive policies that arguably violate Scripture: progressive taxation which distorts incentives (Moses instituted a flat tax); exploding public debt (Proverbs says borrowers are slaves to lenders); and debased currency (the Bible repeatedly condemns false balances).

[msimmons]

Modern manifestations of the social gospel incorporate elements of socialism and an unwarranted adoration of government programs. The Religious Left and likeminded liberals promote compulsory government wealth redistribution as an outpouring of Christian faith, but there is little compassionate in coerced charity. The poor need protection from this well-intentioned foolishness. The Religious Left basks in spiritual themes emitting the veneer of scriptural authority, but voting to spend another's wealth isn't benevolent. Christ came to die on a cross to remit man's sins, not to ease our worldly burdens through secular poverty programs.

In socialism, greed shifts from productivity into consumption. Without property rights or opportunities for profit, men quickly descend into mutually destructive envy. Our base instincts betray us. Output plummets. When we see someone slacking and still taking ? we produce less. When we see others hoarding ? we snatch more too. If nothing can be owned, advantage is only feasible by consuming beyond one's share of public goods.

Without freedom to elevate one's family, production falls forcing government to become oppressive. Socialism renders workers slaves to the state. Finding scriptural support for state administered socialism that involves coercion is puzzling. Biblical teaching does not sanction involuntary socialism by secular governments.

[Kevin Sorbos Manful Locks]

Well it's been 30 years since he's denounced anybody to a military Junta, so that's progress... right?

[Notorious UGCC]

The reactionary clerico-fascists at the *Guardian* don't agree with your accusation:

http://www.theguardian.com/wor.....tina-1970s

[Notorious UGCC]

I would certainly be interested to know where Pope Francis called himself a Peronist.

I admit that the Washington Post called the Pope a Peronist.

Re annulments - tldr version, the Pope greatly broadened the discretion of the bishops to hand out speedy annulments without being second-guessed by higher authority. There are exceptions and clarifications to be made, but basically the Pope made it easier.

That means we have to trust the individual bishops to hold fast to the Catholic teachings on marriage, and not use annulment as a substitute for divorce.

Basically, whether the new rules will be abused depends on the integrity of the bishops. Some bishops will apply the new procedures in a way that respects the institution of marriage. Other bishops will have more discretion to hand out assembly-line annulments.

Thus, the new rules open the door to corruption wider than it already is by removing certain checks against corrupt bishops.

[Notorious UGCC]

Other bishops will *use their discretion* to hand out assembly-line annulments.

[JPyrate]

Fuck this Christian Caesar in the back with a proper Roman Gladius.

[LarryA]

The Catholic Church's political and economic views are validated by the long list of politically stable and economically prosperous Catholic countries.

Oh, wait...

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

This is a good point. The teachings of Catholicism contributed to the so-called Dark Ages. It wasn't until the mutually supporting advent of Protestantism and the Renaissance that conquered Catholicism such that open and free trade of goods and ideas was able to lift the West out of the grinding poverty that until recently was characteristic of the rest of the world.

This pope is wrong. Bernie Sanders is wrong. Barak Obama is wrong. Progressives are wrong. They would take us back to the Dark Ages if we let them.

[Notorious UGCC]

Trying to live up to your handle, I see.

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

Well, I'll concede that Catholicism underwent its own reformation starting sometime after the Protestant reformation. But history is history.

I'm a Protestant and have many disagreements with it. Nonetheless, the history of the Catholic church from the fourth century until the seventeenth is not good. Tell where I'm wrong.

We could start with development of the Canon. How about the destruction of the Gnostics? Mithraism?

[Hyperbolical (wadair)]

Ok, it's late and I'm looking back on the mistakes I've made in my spiritual/ecclesiastical life and feeling a bit charitable. So I'll give you some advise that I know from experience you won't consider until you've hit the proverbial wall.

You can't understand the teachings of Christ until you've separated the institution from your spirituality. Read the scripture, and ignore the theology.

[Notorious UGCC]

Sure, I've had some difficulties in my spiritual life as well.

But it's not because I worship Theology. Catholics worship God.

Theology can tell you when you're going in the wrong direction. It doesn't by itself improve your spiritual life.

I don't think the Mithraists - a religion based in the Roman army - had much to fear from the Church. I think the soldiers simply gave up that particular fad.

Gnosticism was never destroyed - you still see gnostic tendencies from time to time. Plenty of people are Gnostic as they wanna be. But the internal dynamics of the belief system make it difficult to organize in churches. Only the Mandeans managed it, and they believe in marriage and having children, a key difference from many other Gnostics.

[John Galt]

"Economically prosperous Catholic countries"

I think I hear God laughing....

[Faisal Malem Jumat]

There are no divorces in the Philippines, which is overwhelmingly Catholic. The only way out of a bad marriage is annulment and it's very difficult and expensive to get one.
Togel Online Asli4D.net Terpercaya & Number Game 3D Indonesia

[John Galt]

Economics isn't the only thing Pope Francis doesn't understand. He also doesn't understand that he'd be doing the world a far better service sticking around home helping to pry his priests off the backsides of his altar boys, instead of running around doing everything in his power to help his evil socialist pals to enslave mankind.

[BulletGibson]

The Pope doesn't care about people. Proof?

There are officially 11 million illegals in this country from Latin America. Millions more are here legally. These people are literally willing to face death to get out of the countries they come from. The US has taken them in.

There are hundreds of millions more still left in these horrible countries. Living in squalid conditions. But does the Pope speak of their plight, or their leaders guilt in doing what they do? No. Instead he comes here to tell us we should be kinder.

He castigates the righteous and ignores the guilty. Why? Because these are socialist Latino countries and he can't have that.

[John Galt]

The pope obviously has priorities. And priority number one is to tear down all who have lifted themselves up. No surprise there, the creep is a hardcore socialist and creating "equality" by reducing all to the same poverty and ruin is the socialist way. Well, 'all' excluding the evil engineers of socialism themselves, of course. The engineers set aside for themselves lives filled with extravagance and great luxury.

[Eric Bana]

I live in Mexico, and things are pretty great for me and a big portion of the population. There is indeed a very considerable number of people in very impoverished conditions, but there is also a very large middle and upper class.

I just wanted to balance things out since you made Mexico out to be like a squalid wasteland of privation, which it is not.

[John Galt]

BTW, my hat's off to The Judge. I imagine he's Catholic ( someone correct me if I'm mistaken) , yet he hasn't let it blind him to the fact that the present pope-litician is pushing one messed-up political agenda.

[rofilicoj]

Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
This is wha- I do...... ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

[Laird]

Pope Francis spent his entire life in Argentina. He has seen (and lived with) the disastrous results of communism. For him to continue to espouse that failed economic philosophy after all that leads to the inescapable conclusion that this is a deeply stupid man, incapable of learning even when his nose is thrust directly into reality. His opinions on anything (possibly, although not necessarily, excluding Catholic dogma, upon which I am not qualified to comment) are therefore completely worthless.

[granite state destroyer]

Napolitano is a moron, or at least he doesn't understand the faith he pretends to profess. Theologically the point of the Church is to save souls, not to increase standards of living or promote the "primacy of the individual". Devout Christians traditionally supressed their individuality. Markets and government institutions are irrelevant if you really just care about Jesus' message as laid out in the New Testament.

Now if you want to be cynical, and assume that neither Napolitano or the Catholic Chuch really believes in the transcendental message anymore, it still makes no sense for the Catholic Church as an institution to take a libertarian position. The Church as an institution benefits from poverty and rigid social systems. All you have to do is look at what happened to the Church in former strongholds such as Ireland, Spain and Quebec. The richer the people become, the less they give a shit about the Catholic Church.

[connie547]

Start making cash right now... Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I've started this job and I've never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here...
http://www.homejobs90.com

[Mendicant Optimist]

I find Latin plurals more interesting, especially stuff like poplites and flatuses.

[RicardoARG]

Francisco is the number one

[Faisal Malem Jumat]

There are hundreds of millions more still left in these horrible countries. Living in squalid conditions. But does the Pope speak of their plight, or their leaders guilt in doing what they do? No. Instead he comes here to tell us we should be kinder.
6dewa.net Agen Judi Poker Domino99 Capsa Susun AduQ BandarQ Terpercaya Indonesia

[Faisal Malem Jumat]

Nice Information...
Agen Bola Terpercaya Warung757.net

[sikatpejwan.top]

Kapalpoker.com Agen Poker, Domino Dan Capsa Online Indonesia Terpercaya
http://www.syakurtaginting.web.....erpercaya/