Do any of the Catholic Austrians on the forum have any comments concerning this article recently posted by The Remnant?
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-0215-ferrara-ludwig_von_mises_versus_christ.htm
I am interested in what Woods thinks about this. Also, I don’t see why it is unacceptable to be a student of Mises and still belong to the church. Plato and Aristotle were pagans but generations of Catholic thinkers have been studying their work to great benefit. Augustine and Aquinas both relied heavily on pagan philosophy and they are probably the greatest theologians of all time. Plato believed in a “false god” and Aristotle in the justness of slavery. Both of these beliefs are in conflict with modern Catholic teachings, but am pretty sure they still teach this stuff in Catholic schools all over the world.
I just joined this forum because this topic grabbed my attention. I think the article is bunk. The author continually mentions Woods being a new Catholic as if that somehow means his opinions should have less weight. Just as the Church was wrong about the Earth being the center of the universe it’s possible (probably in my opinion) that it could be wrong about economics questions.
I found the entire letter mean spirited and shallow.
If anything, the passion of a convert should give Woods more credibility. Most “Catholics” in the industrialized world these days are barely even Christian, let alone Roman Catholic.
I’d have to go with Mises. Especially after reading all of the quotes from him that they posted.
I can just make this up purgatory, I’m sure, though.
If the social teaching on just wages is true, it by no means follows (I think) that minimum wages are the means to gain it.
I am a regular reader of The Remnant, and much of their past criticism has been off the mark. This time they at least post von Mises’ misgivings about the Church, but fail to specify if Woods specfiically agrees with them. To rectify matters, all Woods would have to say is something along the lines of, “I dont agree with von Mises says about the Catholic Church”. I personally can say I disagree with von Mises’ statements, as well as Rothbard’s horrible positions abortion and on being allowed to starve your children to death (which was never brought up again after that essay, as far as I can tell)
And Mr. Ferrara simply states as fact, that “…and to sever your ties with the Institute that promotes his (and Rothbard’s) anti-Catholic, Christophobic and indeed immoral ideology of “liberty.”” Well, does the LvMI promote specifically his views on Christianity? I find no evidence of that. To claim that Rothbard was ‘anti-Catholic’ though, is a monstrous lie. They managed to find one critical statement from him, and they dont even bother to refute it. Popes will (and will continue to do so) relent themselves to current political reality; judging by recent statements of the Popes, you could assume that social democracy is the ‘Church preferred’ form of government - when it reality there is no form of government more hostile to the Natural Law with the exception of communism. As for some of his other quotes (in that thread on angelqueen linked within the article), Rothbard’s ill-thought and pandering ‘alliance’ with the socially destructive ‘New Left’ produced such wonderful gems like the eulogy for the murderous criminal Che. No wonder Rothbard seemed embarrassed by the whole ‘alliance’ later.
I do wish though that Woods, Rockwell, and Tucker would do a better job of answering their Catholic critics; reception to Austrian economics in Catholic circles has been mixed (as that thread linked on angelqueen shows the wide disagreement), and the reception could be improved by a more thorough reply.
The so called ‘Catholic economics’ promoted by some Remnant writers borders on silliness. Has anyone here heard of distributism? Its promoters claim it was most widely applied in Salazar’s Portugal, but all it did was create a resentful communist-inspired class that overthrew his successor.
Ferrara admit as such in that piece, “Furthermore, it is time to stop pretending, as you have for years, that the controversy your own words and deeds have aroused among the faithful is a debate about “economics” or such particulars as the wisdom of minimum wage laws.”
Yawn. Why does this guy sound as if he were the emperor of Catholics?
My advice to Tom Woods: repent you sinner.
Just a very short while ago you would have been burned alive, quite literally, for your egregious sin.
God needs these billionaires taking your money every Sunday in order for you to find Him. If they disapprove of you, God does too.
You dared declare that the pope may know about religion, but experts know about their own fields better than the pope does. You are dead wrong. The pope knows everything, especially if all the other popes going back for centuries back him up
Let Tom’s just chastisement be a lesson to us all.
Indeed, papal authority is not an argument.
Oh yeah , I re-read it. Basically it’s a big disagreement over nothing.
Within the context of Catholicism, it most definitely is.
Isn’t the peaceful, anti-coercive, cooperative, stance of the Austrian school more inline with Christianity than anything else?
This kind of shit is the reason why I don’t go to church any more. You can only be a good little Christian if your subservient to their cause only. I always had an issue with catholicism, and this quote above outlines why. They are not concerned with individuals relationships with god, they are only concerned with total compliance.
You’d have to prove that papal authority applies to x, which is precisely the disagreement woods has. As such saying you must agree with the pope won’t help woods or anyone else that disbelieves the pope can say things about x.
Much of it can be, but you would have to repudiate some of the more immoral philosophers and ideas (Walter Block in particular).
He’s speaking for himself, and totally out of the magistratum. His declaration that liberty is immoral (et all) does not come from the Catholic Church, but from his own clique’s (Traditionalist Catholics) judgment.
I am not in disagreement with Woods. Woods doesnt dispute (contrary to what his critics claim) that the Pope has the right and duty to make moral judgments concerning economics (Ie suddenly changing your employee’s pay from 10 h/r to 1 cent an hour would be considered immoral).
Sorry, I was using woods name as a stand in for anyone who didn’t believe. Again sorry. (like you’re able to read minds)
If changing your employees pay down to 1 cent per hour is immoral, firing someone must be mortal sin?
Is it immoral just cuz he said so or did Benedict work out an ethics to compete with Rothbard?
Do you have an actual argument, or are you just here to troll?