Catholic Church - This Economy Kills: Pope Francis on Capitalism and Social Justice

When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. But when I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.

Hlder Cmara, Archbishop of Recife

Today we also have to say thou shalt not to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?...

Some 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 nave trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.

It took a few sentences, a handful of words, a few scant paragraphs in a large and complex document dedicated to evangelization, or rather to the joy of the gospel. Pope Francis, eight months after his election to the papacy, after publishing the exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, was branded a Marxist by conservative commentators from the United States. And some time later, The Economist even called him a follower of Lenin for his diagnosis of capitalism and imperialism. Jorge Maria Bergoglio, the Argentinian Jesuit, whoas superior of the Society of Jesus in his country and then as archbishop of Buenos Aireswas known for never having adopted certain extreme theses of liberation theology to the point of being accused of conservatism, found himself compared to the philosopher of Trier and to his many followersincluding the architect of the Bolshevik revolution. But even more striking than the crude allegations of Marxism and Leninism are the criticisms and caveats on this issue that began before the publication of the popes apostolic exhortation and have persisted ever since. This pope speaks too much of the poor, the marginalized, the underprivileged. This Latin American pope does not know much about economics. This pope coming from the end of the world demonizes capitalismthat is, the only system that allows the poor to be less poor. Not only does this pope make politically incorrect decisions (as when he went to the island of Lampedusa to pray in front of the sea that had become the graveyard of thousands of migrants, desperately searching for hope in Europe, and who instead drowned off the coast of the island), but he also interferes in matters that are none of his business, thus revealing himself to be a pauperist. The Italian newspaper Il Foglio, which during Benedict XVIs pontificate was known as Il Soglio (The See of Peter), even went so far as to call the Argentinian popes words heretical and find him guilty of referring to the poor and the suffering as the flesh of Christ. This was after embracing and blessing, for an hour and in silence, seriously ill children and young people in Assisi.

However, what is most surprising is not so much the shallowness of the allegations, but rather the apparent oblivion in which a substantial part of the great tradition of the church has fallena tradition that spans the church fathers to the magisterium of Pope Pius XI, born Achille Ratti, hardly a modernist or progressive.

For certain establishments and in certain circles, it is acceptable to speak of the poor, as long as it is done infrequently and especially as long as it is done in ways that are welcome in certain spheres. A bit of charity mixed with good feelings is fine. It helps to appease the conscience. Just do not overdo it. And, above all, do not dare to question the systema system that, according to many Catholics, is the best of all worlds for the marginalized because it teaches the right theories. The wealthier the rich become, the better it is for the poor. This system has even become dogma in some Catholic circles, like other truths of faith. As a certain adage goes: Christianity is freedom, freedom is free enterprise (and, therefore, capitalism); hence, capitalism is Christianity in action. And of course we should not quibble about the fact that we live in an economy that has little or nothing to do with capitalism, as its connection with the so-called real economy is almost nil. The financial bubble, speculation, the stock market indices, the fact that the oscillation of those indices can hurl entire populations below the poverty line as it suddenly pushes up the price of some raw materialsall these are realities that we are asked to accept in the same way as the side effects of the smart wars of this last generation. Not only do we have to accept them, we also have to stay silent. Dogma is dogma, and whoever calls it into question is, at best, an idealistor, worse, a dissident. Yes, because even before the catastrophe of the economic and financial crisis of recent years, all that the church, and Catholics more generally, are allowed to do is to make some appeals for more ethics. True, finance needs ethics! Those who operate in those spheres ought to have well fixed in mind the principles of natural morality, better still, of Christian morals. Without ethics, the world, we can see it for ourselves, is falling apart. But be careful not to go any further. Never try to lift a finger or to say that the emperor is naked; never put into question the sustainability of the current system. Never wonder whether it is right that those who die of hunger or cold, whether in Africa or in the streets below our houses, make less news than when the stock market loses two points, as it has often been observed by the man who sits on the throne of Peter today. Then you are called a Marxist, a pauperist, a poor dreamer from the end of the world, who needs to be catechized by those who, here in the West, know everything of how the world and the church go, and are just waiting to be able to teach it to you.