The next pope will be a socialist in some sense, writes William Rees-Mogg, since all bishops, to varying degrees, believe that state wealth redistribution is a good thing (notwithstanding the 8th Commandment). So, Rees-Mogg suggests, the new pope should read a little Adam Smith. I concur, but I would also slip him a copy of Thomas E. Woods’ important new book The Church and the Market. An excerpt:
Economics does not contain all the answers of life, nor does it claim to. It does, however, show how the morally acceptable desire for profit leads to spontaneous social cooperation that obviates the need for a bloated state apparatus to direct production. It shows us the fascinating mechanisms by which peaceful social cooperation, without the initiation of physical force, leads to overall prosperity. This means less disease, more leisure time to spend with our families, and greater opportunities to enjoy the good things of civilization. This, stated simply, is why so many orthodox Catholics can be found on the side of private property, sound money, and the free market. (p. 217)
{ 6 comments }
While on the subject of the Ten Commandments, and rightly so since the Catholic Church is a religious institution in the Judeo-Christian tradition, let us not forget the tenth commandment: thou shall not covet…
The state will always redistribute wealth. The only question is the mechanism. In true misean capitalism, with private property, wealth normally goes to the productive, the thrifty, and yet often the merely lucky.
In the current anarchies, the wealth is redistributed to the thieves and robbers. Same with the modern mixed economies where the thieves and robbers are elected and the victims appointed by the legislature.
The problem with the Shepherds is that they are lazy. Instead of using their pulpits to teach charity, and using their own church organizations to conduct it, they instead lobby for the state to do it, so when the atrocities occur (the poor lack basic needs, but lots of money goes through the system) they simply shrug their shoulders and call for more state intervention since they can’t possibly help the poor (although that was specifically assigned to them as one of their tasks – When I was hungry you went to rome and talked to the senators about more bread and less circuses? The good samaritan left the victim but lobbied for more patrols on the jericho road?).
The state can be a backstop against thou shall not kill or steal, but it is up to the church to “love thy neighbor”.
Also, he need not (and maybe ought not – given his labor theory of value) read Adam Smith. The church itself (as mises.org has pointed out) has much to say, especially from the Spanish Scholastics:
http://mises.org/content/juandemariana.asp
http://mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1516&id=71
Yes, but “thou shall not covet does not have “unjustly” at the end of it. There’s nothing wrong with wanting things that aren’t yours, the morality of the situation comes from your method of acquiring it.
Although, from my understanding of the poor translation of religious statements, the original language for “covet” implied an unjust-ness in the acquisition, just like the “kill” in “thou shalt not kill” implied an unjustness. Perhaps they would be better translated (as some do) as “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not murder.”
“This, stated simply, is why so many orthodox Catholics can be found on the side of private property, sound money, and the free market.”
I suppose I am confused at why the adherents of the Catholicism, one of the more anti-materialistic philosophies, would be any more pre-disposed towards such things than any other. I understand that “thou shalt not steal or kill” is a stated precept of Catholicism, but there are many more instances of anti-market principles being espoused by Catholics, from the first pages of the bible through Christ’s life and onto John Paul II’s dismissal of “mundane materialism”.
Orthodox Catholics dominate Latin/South American/European nations who have extremely non-free market policies. The influence of Catholicism must not be affecting their economic choices too much.
I believe that if Catholics are free-marketeers, it is despite rather than because of their religion.
Also, as TZ’s comment reminded me, the Church has not always been a private organization (if it can be considered one today). For a long time, it was a government of its own, complete with armies, laws, taxes, regulations, torture and executions.
Mr. Moore: I always understood the term “not covet” to mean that one should not be desirous or envious of the specific possessions of others. You can desire to have similar possessions, but not those that someone else already possesses. I assume that one must covet before he/she actually commits the act of stealing.
Comments on this entry are closed.