Responses to Caritas in Veritate
June 30, 2009
In honor of Michael Novak‘s demagoguery of the yet to be published encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI, I invite the readers to offer their own commentary on the yet to be published encyclical. Feel free to include quotes from the encyclical, at least quotes you think should be there.
Advertisement
15 Comments
Comments are closed.
Novak is doing a pre-emptive strike, defensively.
Predicting the ‘leftist’ response to the Encyclical is a bizarre pre-emptive move. What makes it likely that there will be any response? This is an effort to replay the battle over Centesimus Annus, in which the right wing may feel they were upstaged by a leftist take on the encyclical (rather than by the leftist notes in the encyclical itself).
Sorry, but he’s a liar. It’s one thing to extol the virties of capitalism in the modern world, it’s another to tell lies. And when he says the global financial crisis was caused by government policies — lending to the poor and minorities, and subdidizing the GSEs– he is lying.
It seems to me that there are two fundamental errors in Novak’s analysis of the Church’s social teaching vis-a-vis contemporary economic structures (leaving aside his assertion that loans from Fannie and Freddie were the cause of the economic collapse–which is, frankly, embarrassing to see him make–and his unprovable claim that the desire for “creativity” rather than greed motivates the capitalist):
1. Novak consistently conflates capitalism with what JPII calls a “free economy.” One can be a proponent of a free economy without being a capitalist, and vice versa. Indeed, corporate capitalism as it is *practiced* in America is actually hostile to the kind of free economy supported by the JPII. This type of economy, and the legitimately human freedom it is intended to support, is much closer to distributism than capitalism, and includes as part of its basic framework the opportunity for workers to own the means of production.
2. Novak refuses to consider the question of the *structural injustice* of capitalism apart from its wealth-creating effects. As Alasdair MacIntyre has put it, “when apologists for capitalism point out quite correctly that capitalism has been able to generate material prosperity at a higher level and for more people than any other economic system in human history, what they say is irrelevant as a rebuttal of these charges of injustice.”
Morning’s Minion,
I don’t want to alarm you, but I think your excellent criticism of Novak’s misrepresentations of the financial collapse was just removed from the First Things comments. It was there, and then I refreshed, and then it was…poof!
wj- that may have been my fault. They hold comments in moderation. They send you an e-mail, thanking you for your comment, and with a link. I clicked on the link, thinking it would just take me to the post. Had it read it carefully, the instructions are to click on the link if you want to remove the comment. Weird!
Sorry, but he’s a liar.
If Michael Novak wrongly thinks that government policies led to the financial crisis might he not simply be mistaken? Is it really necessary to attribute intentional deception?
I am so sick of American Catholics on both end of the political spectrum who think that the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, founded 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ, should base her social teaching off of the Democratic or Republican party platform. Whatever the Pope has written, it will be based upon the age-old Catholic philosophy that man possesses an inherent dignity due to having been made in the image of God, and redeemed by the same God who Himself became man. The Pope will make liberals mad because he will apply this teaching to the modern-day issue of abortion, and he will make conservatives mad because he will also apply it to the modern-day issues of poverty, economic justice, and war. Thankfully, the institution that he leads will be around long after the heresy of Americanism (crudely, the belief that everything the American political system determines to be right is right) has been consigned to the dustbin of history.
To be fair, though, it looks like Mr. Novak’s column is more a criticism of the way the American political Left will view the encyclical as a validation of the Democratic Party platform, rather than as an attempt to apply the riches of Catholic social teaching to the modern world. However, I’d like to see him say the same thing about the Right’s attempt to do the same for the GOP platform.
Sorry, but Novak has a history of distorting economic facts to suit his ideology. He should be called on it.
Mikey
Actually here is the platform fo the GOP on Economics
http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/Economy.htm
I have a feeling on all sides when we are talking about the Democrat and GOP platforms hardely none of us have actually read it
JH, I suggest that you should do as I do and pay absolutely NO attention to what the Democrats OR the Republicans say is their agenda, and pay attention ONLY to what they do. When you do that, you will readily see that BOTH parties are part of the “party of the Devil.”
My comment was deleted? Nice.
[yes, and personal attacks will continue to be deleted.]
jh: What’s your point? That the GOP platform IS, in fact, infallible, that there is, in fact, nothing wrong with it?
You use this blog to viciously lie all the time, including this time about Novak. And now you’re going to complain when someone merely puts a “mirror” up for you to look at yourself?
It’s sad, and it says a lot about how much confidence you have in yourself. But don’t worry, you can keep up your nasty lies about Republicans if it makes you feel good about yourself.
Bye bye, Georgie boy, you’re out of here. The point of this blog is to defend Catholicism and Catholic culture, not your previous Republicans.