Monday, April 12, 2004
Papal Wisdom, Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, Part 3
My apologies for the delay in getting this part out, so let us continue:
"16. We approach the subject with confidence, and in the exercise of the rights which manifestly appertain to Us, for no practical solution of this question will be found apart from the intervention of religion and of the Church. It is We who are the chief guardian of religion and the chief dispenser of what pertains to the Church; and by keeping silence we would seem to neglect the duty incumbent on us. Doubtless, this most serious question demands the attention and the efforts of others besides ourselves -- to wit, of the rulers of States, of employers of labor, of the wealthy, aye, of the working classes themselves, for whom We are pleading. But We affirm without hesitation that all the striving of men will be vain if they leave out the Church. It is the Church that insists, on the authority of the Gospel, upon those teachings whereby the conflict can be brought to an end, or rendered, at least, far less bitter; the Church uses her efforts not only to enlighten the mind, but to direct by her precepts the life and conduct of each and all; the Church improves and betters the condition of the working man by means of numerous organizations; does her best to enlist the services of all classes in discussing and endeavoring to further in the most practical way, the interests of the working classes; and considers that for this purpose recourse should be had, in due measure and degree, to the intervention of the law and of State authority. "
Kevin Tierney: One can see here why the Catholic Church and Communism have been sworn enemies since day one. Recognizing the threat the Catholic church poses, communists have always done their best to keep the Church as marginalized as possible, if not completely excluded. A system that holds God cannot breed communism. This is why communism is athiestic, for if there is a God, then the state is subject to certain principalities in the natural and divine law. Yet for Communism, the state must reign supreme.
"17. It must be first of all recognized that the condition of things inherent in human affairs must be borne with, for it is impossible to reduce civil society to one dead level. Socialists may in that intent do their utmost, but all striving against nature is in vain. There naturally exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind; people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition. Such unequality is far from being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community. Social and public life can only be maintained by means of various kinds of capacity for business and the playing of many parts; and each man, as a rule, chooses the part which suits his own peculiar domestic condition. As regards bodily labor, even had man never fallen from the state of innocence, he would not have remained wholly idle; but that which would then have been his free choice and his delight became afterwards compulsory, and the painful expiation for his disobedience. "Cursed be the earth in thy work; in thy labor thou shalt eat of it all the days of thy life."
Kevin Tierney: One of the main tenets of socialism is that it seeks to "help the worker" by "leveling the playing field." There is only one problem, the playing field was intended not to be level, in the sense that there would be managers, and employers. The playing field is only level in the fact that man has an inherent dignity, and this dignity may not be stripped from him by anyone in what he does. This is part of the structured order. Leo XIII points out that man would have done these things freely, even had he not committed the Sin of Adam, that these diversities would be there.
"19. The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvelous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice. "
Kevin Tierney: I note this is the primary sin of today's Democratic party in America. This was also the sin of the socialists. Rather than one society with many facets, all being neccessary, liberalism thrives off of creating strife and warfare, so it can then move in and advance it's radical agenda. This is how communism succeeds. Man will not willingly give up his freedoms to the State for no reason. Yet under the guise of "giving equality, peace, and brotherhood" he will think that by sacrificing what is his to the State, this is a just sacrifice. In order to do this, liberalism must advocate that these classes cannot get along by themselves, therefore, the government must force them to do so. Once they have done this, government power is nearly unlimited.
Yet the most beneficial scenario, as the Holy Pontiff points out, is for classes to get along, without this needless intervention from the State. The owner of the company should strive to keep his workers happy, and make them part of the company, so they are now working on something that is truly theirs. Happy workers means better production. Likewise, workers should approach their job as something they are doing to better the society at large, and their families. There should be a balance and harmony between two classes, not workers are lazy and owners are just out to rob the rich, as partisans on both sides of the fence paint it.
Think about this as a pratical example. In a hockey team, there exists several positions. Should goaltender be naturally hostile to his defenders or forwards? Can he do without them? No, he needs his defenders, as they are the ones who the majority of the time protect him from constantly being pummeled by shots. Likewise, he needs the forwards to keep the puck out of the defensive zone, as a best defense is a good offense. Likewise, the forwards need defenders, for when they are in the defensive zone, they must come through, and all need the goaltender to stop shots put towards him. This unity is the kind of unity that is essential for success. This holds true for society at a smaller level, and society at a larger level. Those who work for the company and those who run the company need each other, otherwise they will both fail. Recognizing this, rather than seeing how much one side may gouge from the other is neccessary for a strong society. I would recomend paragraph 20 is read, as Leo XIII outlines just what the responsibilities are for each class. He covers them so well, I will only quote it, not comment on it.
"20. Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers -- that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this -- that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. "Behold, the hire of the laborers . . . which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth."[6] Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen's earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. "
"22. Therefore, those whom fortune favors are warned that riches do not bring freedom from sorrow and are of no avail for eternal happiness, but rather are obstacles;[9] that the rich should tremble at the threatenings of Jesus Christ -- threatenings so unwonted in the mouth of our Lord[10] -- and that a most strict account must be given to the Supreme Judge for all we possess. The chief and most excellent rule for the right use of money is one the heathen philosophers hinted at, but which the Church has traced out clearly, and has not only made known to men's minds, but has impressed upon their lives. It rests on the principle that it is one thing to have a right to the possession of money and another to have a right to use money as one ills. Private ownership, as we have seen, is the natural right of man, and to exercise that right, especially as members of society, is not only lawful, but absolutely necessary. "It is lawful," says St. Thomas Aquinas, "for a man to hold private property; and it is also necessary for the carrying on of human existence.''[11] But if the question be asked: How must one's possessions be used? -- the Church replies without hesitation in he words of the same holy Doctor: "Man should not consider his material possessions as his own, but as common to all, so as to share them without hesitation when others are in need. Whence the apostle saith, 'Command the rich of this world . . to offer with no stint, to apportion largely'."[12] True, no one is commanded to distribute to others that which is required for his own needs and those of his household; nor even to give away what is reasonably required to keep up becomingly his condition in life, "for no one ought to live other than becomingly."[13] But, when what necessity demands has been supplied, and one's standing fairly taken thought for, it becomes a duty to give to the indigent out of what remains over. "Of that which remaineth, give alms."[14] It is duty, not of justice (save in extreme cases), but of Christian charity -- a duty not enforced by human law. But the laws and judgments of men must yield place to the laws and judgments of Christ the true God, who in many ways urges on His followers the practice of almsgiving -- "It is more blessed to give than to receive";[15] and who will count a kindness done or refused to the poor as done or refused to Himself -- "As long as you did it to one of My least brethren you did it to Me."[16] To sum up, then, what has been said: Whoever has received from the divine bounty a large share of temporal blessings, whether they be external and material, or gifts of the mind, has received them for the purpose of using them for the perfecting of his own nature, and, at the same time, that he may employ them, as the steward of God's providence, for the benefit of others. "He that hath a talent," said St. Gregory the Great, "let him see that he hide it not; he that hath abundance, let him quicken himself to mercy and generosity; he that hath art and skill, let him do his best to share the use and the utility hereof with his neighbor."[17] "
Today before setting down to write this article, I came across a lecture by the eminent Catholic speaker Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. He made some extremely salient points on private property. He stated that while private property is a right, the use of private property is conditioned by society. What does he mean by this?
Say I have a horse, and my neighbor has a farm. Am I justified in using this horse to go eat off my neighbors farm? I am excercising my right to private property, since the horse is mine. Yet in doing so, I am violating his private property, by stealing what is rightly his, the crops his farm has grown. That is the first thing we must remember, that we cannot use our private property to violate the private property of others. There are two extremes. One on hand, you have your extreme capitalists who say we can use that private property however we want, and no government should tell us otherwise, and the communists on the other hand, who strip the right to private property, and the State owns everything. One overemphasizes the rights of the indvidual, the other the rights of society. Both situations arise from inbalance.
How are these rights applied? For the individual, he who labors, first and foremost, his right to private property is to better himself, and those whom he cares for, his family. This has been mentioned numerous times, but we must continue to stress this. As a Christian, that which is "extra" should be for others, so one can help them live a right ordering of their life. This could include donating that money to the poor, or eventually using those extra resources to start a venture of your own to help those laboring.
For he who owns a business, once again, he has a right to provide for himself, and those he cares for, his family. After this, his mandate to better society still stands. He can go about this by doing the same, by donating money to charity, and also expanding his business, bringing in more employment. What he should also do is find a way to make his workers truly part of the company, by giving them a share of the profit. Without the workers, that profit would not be generated, so beyond his wage, he should also receive some of the excess profits. Therefore, the man who works, is working for something that is truly his. One works better with their own possessions, than with the possessions of others. This in turn generates greater strive for the success of the company, since he is truly a part of it, not just as a worker, but as someone who shares in her success. This is how our rights are to be excercised, as Leo documents in this encyclical at great length, particularly in the passages we are covering.
"24. From contemplation of this divine Model, it is more easy to understand that the true worth and nobility of man lie in his moral qualities, that is, in virtue; that virtue is, moreover, the common inheritance of men, equally within the reach of high and low, rich and poor; and that virtue, and virtue alone, wherever found, will be followed by the rewards of everlasting happiness. Nay, God Himself seems to incline rather to those who suffer misfortune; for Jesus Christ calls the poor "blessed";[20] He lovingly invites those in labor and grief to come to Him for solace;[21] and He displays the tenderest charity toward the lowly and the oppressed. These reflections cannot fail to keep down the pride of the well-to-do, and to give heart to the unfortunate; to move the former to be generous and the latter to be moderate in their desires. Thus, the separation which pride would set up tends to disappear, nor will it be difficult to make rich and poor join hands in friendly concord. "
Kevin Tierney: Here we must understand that the true measure of a being is not in his goods, but how he uses them. We have all been given an approiate amount, and we are to use them wisely. Using them wisely betters society, our role in it, and the role of others. Many, in their quest to seek a short term answer, neglect these principles. They want to better society, but don't want to do it personally. Yet personally working for the betterment of society pays off in huge dividends at the end, in those things which are temporal, and those things which are eternal. These blessings to be utilized are found in all men, whether rich or poor in monetary wealth.
In our next installment, we shall discuss the duties of the State(which has a vested interest in the economy) and what they can, and most importantly, CANNOT do in bringing about a good solution.
My apologies for the delay in getting this part out, so let us continue:
"16. We approach the subject with confidence, and in the exercise of the rights which manifestly appertain to Us, for no practical solution of this question will be found apart from the intervention of religion and of the Church. It is We who are the chief guardian of religion and the chief dispenser of what pertains to the Church; and by keeping silence we would seem to neglect the duty incumbent on us. Doubtless, this most serious question demands the attention and the efforts of others besides ourselves -- to wit, of the rulers of States, of employers of labor, of the wealthy, aye, of the working classes themselves, for whom We are pleading. But We affirm without hesitation that all the striving of men will be vain if they leave out the Church. It is the Church that insists, on the authority of the Gospel, upon those teachings whereby the conflict can be brought to an end, or rendered, at least, far less bitter; the Church uses her efforts not only to enlighten the mind, but to direct by her precepts the life and conduct of each and all; the Church improves and betters the condition of the working man by means of numerous organizations; does her best to enlist the services of all classes in discussing and endeavoring to further in the most practical way, the interests of the working classes; and considers that for this purpose recourse should be had, in due measure and degree, to the intervention of the law and of State authority. "
Kevin Tierney: One can see here why the Catholic Church and Communism have been sworn enemies since day one. Recognizing the threat the Catholic church poses, communists have always done their best to keep the Church as marginalized as possible, if not completely excluded. A system that holds God cannot breed communism. This is why communism is athiestic, for if there is a God, then the state is subject to certain principalities in the natural and divine law. Yet for Communism, the state must reign supreme.
"17. It must be first of all recognized that the condition of things inherent in human affairs must be borne with, for it is impossible to reduce civil society to one dead level. Socialists may in that intent do their utmost, but all striving against nature is in vain. There naturally exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind; people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition. Such unequality is far from being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community. Social and public life can only be maintained by means of various kinds of capacity for business and the playing of many parts; and each man, as a rule, chooses the part which suits his own peculiar domestic condition. As regards bodily labor, even had man never fallen from the state of innocence, he would not have remained wholly idle; but that which would then have been his free choice and his delight became afterwards compulsory, and the painful expiation for his disobedience. "Cursed be the earth in thy work; in thy labor thou shalt eat of it all the days of thy life."
Kevin Tierney: One of the main tenets of socialism is that it seeks to "help the worker" by "leveling the playing field." There is only one problem, the playing field was intended not to be level, in the sense that there would be managers, and employers. The playing field is only level in the fact that man has an inherent dignity, and this dignity may not be stripped from him by anyone in what he does. This is part of the structured order. Leo XIII points out that man would have done these things freely, even had he not committed the Sin of Adam, that these diversities would be there.
"19. The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvelous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice. "
Kevin Tierney: I note this is the primary sin of today's Democratic party in America. This was also the sin of the socialists. Rather than one society with many facets, all being neccessary, liberalism thrives off of creating strife and warfare, so it can then move in and advance it's radical agenda. This is how communism succeeds. Man will not willingly give up his freedoms to the State for no reason. Yet under the guise of "giving equality, peace, and brotherhood" he will think that by sacrificing what is his to the State, this is a just sacrifice. In order to do this, liberalism must advocate that these classes cannot get along by themselves, therefore, the government must force them to do so. Once they have done this, government power is nearly unlimited.
Yet the most beneficial scenario, as the Holy Pontiff points out, is for classes to get along, without this needless intervention from the State. The owner of the company should strive to keep his workers happy, and make them part of the company, so they are now working on something that is truly theirs. Happy workers means better production. Likewise, workers should approach their job as something they are doing to better the society at large, and their families. There should be a balance and harmony between two classes, not workers are lazy and owners are just out to rob the rich, as partisans on both sides of the fence paint it.
Think about this as a pratical example. In a hockey team, there exists several positions. Should goaltender be naturally hostile to his defenders or forwards? Can he do without them? No, he needs his defenders, as they are the ones who the majority of the time protect him from constantly being pummeled by shots. Likewise, he needs the forwards to keep the puck out of the defensive zone, as a best defense is a good offense. Likewise, the forwards need defenders, for when they are in the defensive zone, they must come through, and all need the goaltender to stop shots put towards him. This unity is the kind of unity that is essential for success. This holds true for society at a smaller level, and society at a larger level. Those who work for the company and those who run the company need each other, otherwise they will both fail. Recognizing this, rather than seeing how much one side may gouge from the other is neccessary for a strong society. I would recomend paragraph 20 is read, as Leo XIII outlines just what the responsibilities are for each class. He covers them so well, I will only quote it, not comment on it.
"20. Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers -- that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this -- that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. "Behold, the hire of the laborers . . . which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth."[6] Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen's earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. "
"22. Therefore, those whom fortune favors are warned that riches do not bring freedom from sorrow and are of no avail for eternal happiness, but rather are obstacles;[9] that the rich should tremble at the threatenings of Jesus Christ -- threatenings so unwonted in the mouth of our Lord[10] -- and that a most strict account must be given to the Supreme Judge for all we possess. The chief and most excellent rule for the right use of money is one the heathen philosophers hinted at, but which the Church has traced out clearly, and has not only made known to men's minds, but has impressed upon their lives. It rests on the principle that it is one thing to have a right to the possession of money and another to have a right to use money as one ills. Private ownership, as we have seen, is the natural right of man, and to exercise that right, especially as members of society, is not only lawful, but absolutely necessary. "It is lawful," says St. Thomas Aquinas, "for a man to hold private property; and it is also necessary for the carrying on of human existence.''[11] But if the question be asked: How must one's possessions be used? -- the Church replies without hesitation in he words of the same holy Doctor: "Man should not consider his material possessions as his own, but as common to all, so as to share them without hesitation when others are in need. Whence the apostle saith, 'Command the rich of this world . . to offer with no stint, to apportion largely'."[12] True, no one is commanded to distribute to others that which is required for his own needs and those of his household; nor even to give away what is reasonably required to keep up becomingly his condition in life, "for no one ought to live other than becomingly."[13] But, when what necessity demands has been supplied, and one's standing fairly taken thought for, it becomes a duty to give to the indigent out of what remains over. "Of that which remaineth, give alms."[14] It is duty, not of justice (save in extreme cases), but of Christian charity -- a duty not enforced by human law. But the laws and judgments of men must yield place to the laws and judgments of Christ the true God, who in many ways urges on His followers the practice of almsgiving -- "It is more blessed to give than to receive";[15] and who will count a kindness done or refused to the poor as done or refused to Himself -- "As long as you did it to one of My least brethren you did it to Me."[16] To sum up, then, what has been said: Whoever has received from the divine bounty a large share of temporal blessings, whether they be external and material, or gifts of the mind, has received them for the purpose of using them for the perfecting of his own nature, and, at the same time, that he may employ them, as the steward of God's providence, for the benefit of others. "He that hath a talent," said St. Gregory the Great, "let him see that he hide it not; he that hath abundance, let him quicken himself to mercy and generosity; he that hath art and skill, let him do his best to share the use and the utility hereof with his neighbor."[17] "
Today before setting down to write this article, I came across a lecture by the eminent Catholic speaker Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. He made some extremely salient points on private property. He stated that while private property is a right, the use of private property is conditioned by society. What does he mean by this?
Say I have a horse, and my neighbor has a farm. Am I justified in using this horse to go eat off my neighbors farm? I am excercising my right to private property, since the horse is mine. Yet in doing so, I am violating his private property, by stealing what is rightly his, the crops his farm has grown. That is the first thing we must remember, that we cannot use our private property to violate the private property of others. There are two extremes. One on hand, you have your extreme capitalists who say we can use that private property however we want, and no government should tell us otherwise, and the communists on the other hand, who strip the right to private property, and the State owns everything. One overemphasizes the rights of the indvidual, the other the rights of society. Both situations arise from inbalance.
How are these rights applied? For the individual, he who labors, first and foremost, his right to private property is to better himself, and those whom he cares for, his family. This has been mentioned numerous times, but we must continue to stress this. As a Christian, that which is "extra" should be for others, so one can help them live a right ordering of their life. This could include donating that money to the poor, or eventually using those extra resources to start a venture of your own to help those laboring.
For he who owns a business, once again, he has a right to provide for himself, and those he cares for, his family. After this, his mandate to better society still stands. He can go about this by doing the same, by donating money to charity, and also expanding his business, bringing in more employment. What he should also do is find a way to make his workers truly part of the company, by giving them a share of the profit. Without the workers, that profit would not be generated, so beyond his wage, he should also receive some of the excess profits. Therefore, the man who works, is working for something that is truly his. One works better with their own possessions, than with the possessions of others. This in turn generates greater strive for the success of the company, since he is truly a part of it, not just as a worker, but as someone who shares in her success. This is how our rights are to be excercised, as Leo documents in this encyclical at great length, particularly in the passages we are covering.
"24. From contemplation of this divine Model, it is more easy to understand that the true worth and nobility of man lie in his moral qualities, that is, in virtue; that virtue is, moreover, the common inheritance of men, equally within the reach of high and low, rich and poor; and that virtue, and virtue alone, wherever found, will be followed by the rewards of everlasting happiness. Nay, God Himself seems to incline rather to those who suffer misfortune; for Jesus Christ calls the poor "blessed";[20] He lovingly invites those in labor and grief to come to Him for solace;[21] and He displays the tenderest charity toward the lowly and the oppressed. These reflections cannot fail to keep down the pride of the well-to-do, and to give heart to the unfortunate; to move the former to be generous and the latter to be moderate in their desires. Thus, the separation which pride would set up tends to disappear, nor will it be difficult to make rich and poor join hands in friendly concord. "
Kevin Tierney: Here we must understand that the true measure of a being is not in his goods, but how he uses them. We have all been given an approiate amount, and we are to use them wisely. Using them wisely betters society, our role in it, and the role of others. Many, in their quest to seek a short term answer, neglect these principles. They want to better society, but don't want to do it personally. Yet personally working for the betterment of society pays off in huge dividends at the end, in those things which are temporal, and those things which are eternal. These blessings to be utilized are found in all men, whether rich or poor in monetary wealth.
In our next installment, we shall discuss the duties of the State(which has a vested interest in the economy) and what they can, and most importantly, CANNOT do in bringing about a good solution.
