The more I read this article the less I understand it, and the more prominent its factual errors become.
First, while the Pontif wrote "...we must recognize our grave duty to hand the earth on to future generations in such a condition that they too can worthily inhabit it and continue to cultivate it (50).", it is a general statement to which no one really objects. However, under the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, the Pope's ideas and words in regard to specific policies are subordinate. In other words, the faithful are free to pursue specific policies which they believe will fulfill the general statement. In good conscience, I believe that global warming caused by human activity is at best a misinterpretation of the natural variation in the earth's climate and at worst a myth. Further, I believe that the current policies improperly subordinate human needs to an earthly god called the environment.

Those views also apply to Obama's moratorium on drilling. It does not embody a careful weighing of current human needs and the costs, environmental and otherwise, but rather is political grandstanding designed to further his own societal standing.

Finally, I find it striking that those professing faith in God, dont have faith that he created an earth which has proven well adapted for human life and, more importantly, has proven able to recover and thrive despite "damage" inflicted by human activity.

The environmental effects of the BP oil spill will be quickly ameliorated by nature just like all the previous oil spills.

The author is correct that Catholic social teaching requires a balance between private rights and the common good. This balancing act can be found in other faiths and worldviews as well. I think 99% of people would agree that neither is ever absolute. The question is where to draw the line, and this column provides little guidance. The author, in this situation, comes down in favor of the “common good” over “private rights,” which is fine, but he provides no argument about why this is the correct decision in this case. According to the author, the judge weighed the costs and “punitive” nature of the moratorium against the public good and found the case for the public good wanting. It’s a case of risk versus reward in which the author makes no case that the risk outweighs the reward.

He also writes that “While we have considerable freedom about our personal political choices in the application of principles, Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth…” This could have used some clarification. Why just Catholics in America? What Catholic teaching is he citing to support this statement? How much redistribution are they bound to support? Any and all redistribution? If not, it’s another argument about line drawing on which the author provides no guidance. Instead, he says the tea partiers are flat out wrong just because they want to draw the line somewhere other than where he wants to draw it. Again, no argument to back up his statement.

"K A F i R" (A NOne iShmaeli/Esaui iSlami?)

"K A F i R"

"Kafir" "Kafir"

W H A T -- AN -- U G L Y -- W O R D(s)! Racist!

"S A T A N i C -- V E R S U S" Yes? Or NO?

Worse Than The "N" Word That Was made NO Longer Usable in U.S.A Community (Ummah)et al.(Obscene like).

The (un) Holy Quran/Koran Needs To Get a Fixing, NOt only the Hadiths; 'aHaaBi-Bi's (Love's)! aye?

====
...
..
……………………
...................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./
...................... . . . . . . . / . . . . . . /
...................... . . ./ . . . / . . . / . . / . . . . . . . . . /
...................... . . / . . . . . . . / . . . . . / . . . . . . /
...................... , ---------------------- . . . ... . ,.-,
.................... / . . . . . . ` --- . . . . . . \ . __ . / . |
.................. [ . by . K . A . F . i . R ... _|_ . . . |
.................... \ . . . . . . , --- . . . . . . / . . . . .\ . |
...................... `----------------------- . . .. ....`.-`
………………………………..............................
………………
…………
………
....................... ,--------------------,
................... ,' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'|
................ ,' . K . a . a . b . a . '# | . . .Good Bye
............ ,' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '# # | . . . . Idols
.......... :---------------------- '# # # |
.......... | # # # # # # # # # | # # # |
.......... | # # # # # # # # # | # # # |
.......... | #ALLAH-aKBAR#| # # # |
.......... | # [ البيت المعمو ر‎] # |[ الكعبة‎].|
.......... | # # # # # # # # # | # # # |
.......... | # # # # # # # # # | # # # |
.......... | # # # # # # # # # | # # # |
.......... |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_| \_\_\_\
.
..
...
Credits To "jj" http://onwapo.com

==

Stevens-Arroyo wrote: You don't have to be a Catholic to place the common good over private rights...
___________________________________________

That's true. One only needs to attain the maturity development of a teenager. Those who fail to develop beyond the solipsism of youth are called sociopaths.
Corporations (now innervated with humanity by our SCOTUS) are pathological. Their interests are entirely inward-looking. Their purpose, as defined by law, is to maximize shareholder profit.

F I F A - W O R L D - C U P - 2 0 1 0:
.
.GOoooooAaaaaaaLL !!! U. S. A.!
.
..Goodbye Germany! AveeDaZane! Sun.06.27.10
.
...
............ _ , ... .. ... , _
......... .'@.. / ~~~ \ ..@'.
....... / /.~~~\____/~~~\ \
...... |@\___/USA\___/@|
...... |@/......\USA/......\@|
....... \ \___/ ~~~ \___/ /.
..........'.@..\____/..@.'
............. ` ". " ."." ." `
.................... |..|
.................... |..|
.................. / )..|___
.................. \...|..|..|..|
.................... \.........|
...................... \......./
..
.
.......................
. GOooooooooooAaaaaaaaaaaaLLL !!! U. S. A.!
.
Credits to "jj" @ http://onwapo.com

Hermano Arroyo

(“Pope Benedict XVI has elevated environmental concern to a prime objective of Catholic theology. The pontiff wrote: "we must recognize our grave duty to hand the earth on to future generations in such a condition that they too can worthily inhabit it and continue to cultivate it ."
“Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth, even if it goes contrary to ranting from groups like the Tea Party or Wall Street.”)

I disagree with those opinions, don’t drink “Tea”, and my “Street” is a dirt road.

As the Church looks to close the gap between rich and poor nations/peoples the question is…How? To achieve “social justice” just how far is the Pope prepared to reach? Does Christianity provide clear boundaries to a pontiff’s reach or is the “Off Limits” warning lost in the gray area?

It is clear that the Church/Popes newest instrument to implement a redistribution of wealth is “Global Warmings, Cap and Trade”

Now that capitalism has effectively annihilated communisms threat to Christianity and the free world, Cap and Trade can now be safely deployed to in effect castrate the capitalism model so as to … spread out the wealth.

There is a distinct difference between secular social activism and Christian charity.
The Cap and Trade (Take from one - Give to another) approach is secular in nature, not spiritual. This government style, one size fits all solution, should not become Christianity’s default setting as it engages poverty.

For the Church to ally itself with secular powers in such a questionable cause as “Global Warming” is dangerous.

Did the early Church unite with the Roman Empire to levy taxes on its congregants, to create a better world?
They (the saints/early church) did gather up to give of their resources to those in need and we continue on in that spirit of giving to this day.
The key word is (give): They gave freely as each was inclined to, of their own free will.

That spirit of giving manifested itself in the recent Haitian tragedy when multitudes united in giving; it was a voluntary offering, a love of neighbor, which brought people of good will together.

Now Juxtapose Haiti’s legitimate needs to a Global Warming-Cap and Trade crisis. A crisis deemed critically dangerous by a questionable consensus science, which has handed it off to politicians, who plan to implement secular ideologies that will “Save the World” at capitalisms expense. Our participation (that is our wages/salaries) is mandatory; there is nothing spiritual about it.

You counsel us to “Choose metanoia over paranoia when it comes to the environment.”

Paranoia should have no place in Christianity…Paranoia sneaks in the Church’s back door when its leaders align themselves with a secular agenda, that generates fear based upon sciences half truths.

If that is true metanoia…no thanks.

Perhaps our good host should inform himself of Catholic teaching before deigning to speak on behalf of a church he obviously does not comprehend. The Catholic Church does not embrace "wealth redistribution."

Posted by: Jazzmajora

*******************************************

I take it that what is meant is "wealth redistribution" through voluntary donations and charities.

Perhaps our good host should inform himself of Catholic teaching before deigning to speak on behalf of a church he obviously does not comprehend. The Catholic Church does not embrace "wealth redistribution."

Catholic teaching on Socialism:

”…Socialism…cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.” QUADRAGESIMO ANNO, 117, Encyclical of Pope Pius XI Reconstruction of the Social Order, May 15, 1931

“…no Catholic [can] subscribe even to moderate Socialism.”MATER ET MAGISTRA, 34, Pope John XXIII On Christianity and Social Progress, May 15, 1961

“Socialists…debase the natural union of man and woman…the [family] bond they…deliver up to lust. Lured…by the greed of present goods…they assail the right of property. While they seem desirous of caring for the needs and satisfying the desires of all men, they strive to seize and hold in common whatever has been acquired either by title, by labor, or by thrift.” QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS, 1, Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII On Socialism, December 28, 1878

Problem here in the states is that we think of either capitalism or communism as being the only answers. Might be time we looked into Distributism that truly supports private property, responsibly, truly free markets and the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.

Posted by: crabstu

******************************************

Something liike the Swedish or British model? Those countries' tax rates are quite high to support social programmes.
From individuals or corporations, raising taxes is not quite like by them.

Corporations argued that high taxes reduced their capital for investment and reinvestment in R&D, opening and developing new markets, upgrade of processes, modernisation of manufacturing. Just to keep them competitive.

I find the author's use of Catholic teaching in reference to a the oil spill as complete as I do when Sean Hannity tries to do the same. If you are truly interested in what the Church teaches in context, and I'm not saying that the author is completely wrong, then I would suggest actually reading the encyclicals and you might even enjoy the following website.

http://distributism.blogspot.com/

Problem here in the states is that we think of either capitalism or communism as being the only answers. Might be time we looked into Distributism that truly supports private property, responsibly, truly free markets and the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.

If cutting the pie into more equal slices takes precedence over baking the pies, everyone is poorer. That and the fact that those tasked with the cutting always seem to cut themselves a larger portion is the folly of communism.

NewsBusters: WaPo’s Stevens-Arroyo Calls for Catholics to 'Embrace a Redistribution of Wealth'
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sarah-knoploh/2010/06/25/wapo-s-stevens-arroyo-calls-catholics-embrace-redistribution-wealth

HIlarious, the author states he will not offer proof text for his argument because of the proof text "even Satan can quote the Bible". Irony thy name is liberal.

The truth is, the guy can't argue his point in scripture because it's NOT THERE.

This is a communistic/Marxist outlook on life that place the Corporation in the place of Satan and The Government in the place of GOD.

Most Christians realize that ALL institutions of men are corrupt because they are run by men - even the church is open to corruption. That is why we have the Bible.

We merely need to look at the 10 Commandments to show that wealth re-distributio is NOT God's Plan.
- Thou Shalt NOT Steal. How can you steal something if no one owns anything.

All giving in the Bible is VOLUNTARY (I cor 9:11).

All forced contributions WILL NOT be recognized in Heaven as will doing anything because it makes you look good.

It's all about the heart.

There are plenty of good corporations, that employ millions of people, and do good for the world.

Unfortunately, media is produced by and large by liberals who will show us the bad corporations and convince us all are bad. They than slander Conservatives non-stop in the media in order to show an unbalanced view while covering over the weaknesses and failings of the liberals.

Thow shall not covet thy neighbor's goods. How does that work in todays econmics? On the subject of wealth and redistribution, what is the RCC part? Have you ever call a place that the American bishops meet and stay at of what is the lowest rate for a room? Hey, that is redistribution of the wealth even though the average person could not afford the price. When the basket is past, they do not like the sound of coins.

"Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth..."

- Stevens-Arroyo

"The catholic church, however, is bound only to embrace an accumulation of wealth."

- PSOLUS

******************************************

Which, exactly of the above, represents an aspect Catholicnomics?

F I F A - W O R L D - C U P - 2 0 1 0:
.
. Avidazane Germany, YA VOLE! Sun.May.27.10
..
...
.......... .. _ , ........ , _
......... .'@.. /~~~\ ..@'.
........ / /~~~\.___/~~~\ \
...... |@\___/USA\___/@|
...... |@/......\USA/......\@|
........ \ \___/ ~~~\___/ /
..........'.@...\___/...@.'
............. ` ". " ."." ." `
.................... |..|
.................... |..|
.................. / )..|___
.................. \...|..|..|..|
.................... \.........|
...................... \......./
...
..
.
....................... GOoooooAaaaaaaLL !!! U. S. A.!
. GOooooooooooAaaaaaaaaaaaLLL !!! U. S. A.!
....................... GOoooooAaaaaaaLL !!! U. S. A.!
. GOooooooooooAaaaaaaaaaaaLLL !!! U. S. A.!
.
. Credits to "jj" @ http://onwapo.com
.

"Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth..."

The catholic church, however, is bound only to embrace an accumulation of wealth.

And, it is a very effective at doing just that.

Frankly I find this guy's choice of words insulting.

the legitimate expression of legitimate concerns about the direction our government has taken is not "ranting" simply because these concerns are in opposition to the liberal agenda.

If the catholic church really does believe in the redistribution of wealth, that is that I must surrender my hard earned money to someone else for disposal, then I will find a new church. And a new collection basket.

Perhaps the author can point to a selection in the scripture where we are admonished to live in poverty. that's the net result of the liberal agenda. Wealth is redistributed such that the political elite are wealthy and everyone else is poor.

Has this guy learned nothing from the debacle that was eastern Europe under communism?