JIM ASKS:<\/p>\n
Conservative commentators ridiculed [Pope Francis\u2019s decree Evangelii Gaudium<\/em>] for its criticism of the free market system. But how different, really, is Francis\u2019s thinking from his predecessors?<\/p>\n THE RELIGION GUY ANSWERS:<\/p>\n The Catholic Church is experiencing Hurricane Francis, the early phase of what may become the most liberal pontificate in a half-century. The new pope\u2019s eyebrow-raisers including his words on economics. An April 28 Twitter feed from Francis (or his handlers) said \u201ciniquitas radix malorum,\u201d (\u201cinequality is the root of evil\u201d \u2014 or should that first word be translated \u201cinjustice\u201d?).\u00a0 David Gibson of Religion News Service says some wonder whether\u00a0the Vicar of Christ is \u201cplaying into the hands of President Obama and the Democrats, who have also made the wealth gap a major talking point\u201d in the 2014 campaign.<\/p>\n The papal tweet followed the\u00a0November text Jim asks about. Francis declared, among other things: \u201cSome people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and na\u00efve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.\u201d UPDATING May 8: In a talk to U.N. officials Francis called for \u201cthe legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state.\u201d<\/p>\n There\u2019s broad continuity between Francis and the prior popes in warning against greed and materialism, insisting that moral concerns must control money-making, and mandating concern for ordinary workers, their families, and those mired in poverty. But what economic setup best helps the dispossessed? On that, various Catholic conservatives have fretted that the Argentine pontiff\u2019s views are \u201chighly partisan and biased,\u201d or \u201cinaccurate and even irresponsible.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s important that Evangelii<\/em> is a preaching document or \u201capostolic exhortation,\u201d as opposed to an \u201cencyclical,\u201d the highest-level papal pronouncement to \u00a0carefully define official teaching on a single theme. Francis\u2019s headline-grabbing economic comments were a minor aspect of a verbose text (47,600 words in English translation) that bounced among numerous topics.<\/p>\n Modern popes have issued a series of \u201csocial encyclicals\u201d beginning with Leo XIII\u2019s groundbreaking Rerum Novarum<\/em> (\u201cOf New Things\u201d) in 1891. Leo applied perennial Christian concern for low-income families in a new era of industrial development. He fervently supported private property rights over against socialism, championed workers\u2019 moral claim to a living wage, and endorsed trade unions to negotiate fair labor conditions.<\/p>\n Subsequent social encyclicals that focused on economics have been Quadregesimo Anno<\/em> (by Pius XI, 1931), Populorum Progressio<\/em> (Paul VI, 1967), Laborem Exercens<\/em> (John Paul II, 1981), Sollicitudo Rei Socialis<\/em> (John Paul II, 1987), Centesimus Annus<\/em> (John Paul II, 1991), and Caritas in Veritate<\/em> (Benedict XVI, 2009). The third encyclical from John Paul (who was canonized a saint the day before Francis\u2019s \u201ciniquitas\u201d tweet) merits special attention since it marked both the centennial of\u00a0Leo\u2019s \u00a0first social encyclical\u00a0and the collapse of Soviet Communism.<\/p>\n Francis\u2019s Evangelii<\/em> had only one citation from Centesimus<\/em> and that had nothing to do with economics. The two popes agree on many points, but early indications from Francis suggest he\u2019d have a lively private debate with John Paul. Life experiences doubtless affected their outlooks. John Paul\u2019s Poland was crippled by Communism\u2019s harsh oppression in economics (and everything else), while Francis certainly laments the privation in Argentina\u00a0due to\u00a0decades of economic stagnation and instability.<\/p>\n A pope from Poland would have been expected to dance on Marx\u2019s grave. Instead, Centesimus<\/em> was carefully balanced. John Paul sounded almost Francis-can in warning against any \u201cradical capitalist ideology\u201d that \u201cblindly entrusts (the) solution to the free development of market forces.\u201d But he also stated flatly that \u201cthe Marxist solution has failed\u201d and that this removes a major obstacle to economic realism. John Paul upheld capitalism if it \u201crecognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property, and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity,\u201d all fostered by democracy and the reliable rule of law.<\/p>\n John Paul was understandably nervous\u00a0about centralized power. He believed the state\u2019s\u00a0proper task is\u00a0to assure individual freedoms, private property rights, a stable currency, efficient public services, and sustenance of business in order to provide jobs. He said government could intervene in the economy, but only briefly and in \u201cexceptional cases\u201d where business is \u201cnot equal to the task.\u201d<\/p>\n His German colleague and successor, Pope Benedict, is fonder toward central planning. His 2009 encyclical advocated some sort of \u201cworld political authority\u201d to aid the poor, and said \u201cthe social doctrine of the Church has unceasingly highlighted the importance of distributive justice.\u201d That ideal sounded (again) like doctrine from the U.S. and West European Left, but Benedict\u2019s social idealism lacked guidance on which power-brokers should use what mechanisms to remove how much wealth from which citizens and redirect it by\u00a0what criteria.<\/p>\n The most interesting\u00a0analysis of Francis to date comes from U.S. lay theologian Michael Novak, a youthful socialist turned defender of free markets as moral. He notes that Argentina began the 20th Century among the world\u2019s top 15 nations economically. But then it\u00a0fell into\u00a0\u201cdestructive\u201d populism, brutal government power over the economy, favoritism, unstable law, ruinous inflation, and resulting lack of opportunity for the poor to rise. Novak figures Francis has yet to grasp that his Argentina is \u201cnot yet capitalist, in invention and enterprise.\u201d<\/p>\n These are mere glimpses. The Guy confesses that an adequate answer to Jim would require thorough assessment of all the above texts, and much more. In other words, a doctoral dissertation. See what you make of these papal pronouncements:<\/p>\n John Paul in 1991:<\/p>\n www.vatican.va\/holy_father\/john_paul_ii\/encyclicals\/documents\/hf_jp-ii_enc_01051991_centesimus-annus_en.html<\/a><\/p>\n Benedict in 2009:<\/p>\n www.vatican.va\/holy_father\/benedict_xvi\/encyclicals\/documents\/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html<\/a><\/p>\n Francis in 2013:<\/p>\n