Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

March 5 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

The Pope, Chaplain to OWS? Rubbish

“Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish,” says voice therapist Lionel Logue to King George VI as the brassy Australian walks the about-to-be-crowned king through a particularly orotund part of the coronation ceremony in The King’s Speech. Logue’s comment nicely sums up the media and Catholic Left commentary on a “Note” released today by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, “Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary System in the Context of Global Public Authority.”

Drudge got it wrong: “Vatican Calls for ‘Central World Bank’.” CNBC got it wrong: “The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a ‘global public authority’ and a ‘central world bank’.” The best of the Italian Vaticanisti, Sandro Magister of L’espresso, linked Occupy Wall Street and “the Vatican at the Barricades” in the headline of his insta-commentary, a theme also harped upon by the deposed editor of America, Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J.

All of which was “rubbish, rubbish, rubbish.”

The truth of the matter is that “the Vatican” — whether that phrase is intended to mean the Pope, the Holy See, the Church’s teaching authority, or the Church’s central structures of governance — called for precisely nothing in this document. The document is a “Note” from a rather small office in the Roman Curia. The document’s specific recommendations do not necessarily reflect the settled views of the senior authorities of the Holy See; indeed, Fr. Federico Lombardi, the press spokesman for the Vatican, was noticeably circumspect in his comments on the document and its weight. As indeed he ought to have been. The document doesn’t speak for the Pope, it doesn’t speak for “the Vatican,” and it doesn’t speak for the Catholic Church.

Which, to their credit, the two senior officials of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace tried to make clear in presenting the document at a Roman press conference. Cardinal Peter Turkson, president of the council, said that the document was intended to “make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations of the [upcoming] G-20 meeting.” Bishop Mario Toso, S.D.B., the secretary of the council, was just as subjunctive as his superior, saying that the document was intended to “suggest possible paths to follow.” Both Cardinal Turkson and Bishop Toso indicated, in line with long-standing Catholic social doctrine, that the Church-as-Church was incompetent to offer “technical solutions” but rather wished to locate public policy debates within the proper moral frameworks.

To suggest, as most of the immediate reporting and commentary did, that the Catholic Church was endorsing one or another set of proposals for re-ordering international finance, and was doing so as a matter of exercising its doctrinal authority, was a very bad category mistake, reflecting either the pitfalls of instant analysis in the 24/7 news cycle, progressivist-Catholic spin, or both.

As for the document itself, no morally alert person objects to bringing discussions of global finance within the ambit of moral reasoning; that is an entirely worthy intention. Catholics (and others) are entirely free to disagree — as many already have, and vociferously — with the specific suggestions of the Justice and Peace document. Father Reese and other advocates of the Catholic Revolution That Never Was will likely try to brand those critics “dissidents,” which is more “rubbish, rubbish, rubbish.” That the specific recommendations of the document reflect what will seem to many an uncritical internationalism of a distinctly Euro-secular provenance is an interesting matter that will doubtless be discussed, vigorously, within the Catholic family for some time to come. So will the tension between more recent Catholic discussions of transnational and international political authority and the core Catholic social-ethical principle of subsidiarity, with its settled opposition to political and economic megastructures and concentrations of power.

Bottom line (so to speak): This brief document from the lower echelons of the Roman Curia no more aligns “the Vatican,” the Pope, or the Catholic Church with Occupy Wall Street than does the Nicene Creed. Those who suggest it does are either grossly ill-informed or tendentious to a point of irresponsibility.

— George Weigel is a distinguished senior fellow of Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies. 

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   89

EXPAND  

   10/24/11 16:22

On NRO, "tendentious to a point of irresponsibility" means "unfortunately all too true."

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 16:33

Seriously, folks, what's the rap here? That this "note" lacks Church authority? That it's covering a topic that's out of bounds for the Church, like the Church's position on what's the best cheeseburger in Cleveland? Or is the objection really that, while "no morally alert person objects to bringing discussions of global finance within the ambit of moral reasoning," the author strongly objects to the implications "no morally alert persion" would fail to glean from the note?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
John P
   10/24/11 17:41

Nope, it's pretty much the first one.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Alecto
   10/25/11 16:28

My objection is all of the above plus the fact that those nincompoops think they are in any way able to judge morality in markets or economics. I believe they're some of the most economically ignorant, brainsickly dolts on the planet. I of course do not mean any of that in the pejorative sense.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 16:45

MikeB, the rap here is that this was treated on Drudge, etc. as a papal endorsement of a particular policy when that is not the case. That's pretty clear from the article.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 16:56

I think it's a bit more than that:)

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Toddj
   10/24/11 16:52

If I read this right, the author objects to the definition of 'Vatican' being used in the reporting. He does not seem to refute that someone from the RCC published a document intended to be useful for an upcoming G20 conference calling for a 'supranational' agency with 'universal jurisdiction' to oversee the financial system. If it was 'just a note', then why was it published?

Surely, NR didn't just publish pure spin? someone tell me I missed something.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 17:01
   10/24/11 17:02

There are about a billion Catholics, when one of them puts out a press release it doesn't mean that the Pope is speaking ex cathedra. Hope that helps.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Mr Obvious
   10/24/11 16:53

Mr. Weigel sounds like Jay Carney defending his boss.

The RCC is a ginormous Cult, Mr. W. There will be no reward for defending it.

Sorry to sound so harsh/be so blunt.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 17:07

I think Jesus would be surprised that He founded a ginormous cult. Speaking of things there are no reward for doing, libellous comments not based in fact seem to fit the bill.

I would urge you to check out the writings of the early Church fathers; see what the first Christians had to say about worship, the bishops, etc. I would guess you think the Bible is important, so you might also want to ask yourself, "who decided what books went into the Bible." If you do some historical research, you might find out that it's the same "cult" you're badmouthing.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 18:29

Let them who are wasted in self-serving rational be merely called wasted.

If you really wanted to apologize for the thoughts of your post, then you would have posted more thoughtfully. This was a fair and fine article. Slamming it in such a weighless review speaks more harshly of you, than the information provided in the article.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Father Joseph LeBlanc
   10/24/11 18:39

I will certainly take issue with you pertaining to the term "cult". The Church neither chains its members to the pews and has always given its members the option to reject doctrine. At the same time, the church urges those who cannot follow its tenets to find a religion or way of life that fits their needs.

Ex umbris et imaginibus ad veritatem

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
J-Stew
   10/24/11 20:06

Obvious - it would only sound "harsh" or "blunt" if it were true. One "obvious" fact, Mr. Obvious, is that you are rather ignorant and tend to talk out of your proverbial posterior.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 20:41

Actually, I find that Mr. Weigel carries a bit more weight than Jay Carney. I have found much truth growing up in the Catholic Church, which, unlike a cult, acknowledges free will, unlike the current administration which wants us all to follow blindly.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 21:41

Liberalism is a much larger ginormous cult.

Catholics, at least, don't imagine that they can create Heaven here on Earth.

Sorry to harsh your buzz. Go light up a blunt.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 16:59

I really don't care what the Vatican endorses, or pontificates about. Whether that be banking or national dogcatcher. When they pass out all their holdings to the poor, I'll take notice.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 17:16

Yeah, we should sell all our churches because it's not like the Catholic Church and its Catholic agencies/programs are the biggest providers of charity in the world or anything.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/24/11 17:16

Yeah, we should sell all our churches because it's not like the Catholic Church and its Catholic agencies/programs are the biggest providers of charity in the world or anything.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Bob D.
   10/24/11 17:32

Kinda like social redistribution in the U.S.? For which we're about to go belly up? Give me a break. We will always have the poor but if one person stops going to work, 10 poor people will have nothing to eat. Have a reality check.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Load More Comments

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact