A couple of months ago, after reading an excellent column in the semi-official newspaper of the Vatican, I joked that we should send Obama to Rome for an economics lesson.
I now completely retract that statement. There may be some economically astute people who write for L’Osservatore Romano, but they are offset by the economic illiterates at the Vatican’s Justice and Peace department.
Here are some excerpts from Reuters about the spectacularly misguided thinking from this division of the Catholic Church. For all intents and purposes, they want to double down on the cross-subsidization policies that have undermined markets and crippled the global economy.
The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a “global public authority” and a “central world bank” to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises. The document from the Vatican’s Justice and Peace department should please the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrators and similar movements around the world who have protested against the economic downturn. “Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority,” was at times very specific, calling, for example, for taxation measures on financial transactions. …It condemned what it called “the idolatry of the market” as well as a “neo-liberal thinking” that it said looked exclusively at technical solutions to economic problems. “In fact, the crisis has revealed behaviours like selfishness, collective greed and hoarding of goods on a great scale,” it said, adding that world economics needed an “ethic of solidarity” among rich and poor nations. …It called for the establishment of “a supranational authority” with worldwide scope and “universal jurisdiction” to guide economic policies and decisions.
Wow. So many bad ideas in so few words.
Let’s look at the three main proposals and translate what they actually mean.
1. A “global public authority” is bureaucrat-speak for a world government. We’re already dealing with statist schemes like the OECD’s “Multilateral Convention” that will morph into an International Tax Organization. A supra-national government would be even worse since it would have power to wreck all sectors of the economy. These proposals are driven by the left’s desire for bureaucratization, harmonization, and centralization.
2. A “Central World Bank” is bureaucrat-speak for a Federal Reserve on steroids. But it would be even worse than that. In the current system, at least investors have the ability to dump dollars and euros and shift to currencies that are better managed, such as the Swiss Franc. A supra-national Fed, by contrast, will give the political elite more power to pursue bad monetary policy.
3. The notion of “taxation measures on financial transactions” is bureaucrat-speak for the Tobin Tax, which is a great scam for politicians since they would get to tax every transaction we make. If you think it is a good idea to put sand in the gears of the economy, sign up for this scheme. This idea is so bad that even the Obama Administration is opposed to it.
Last but not least, I’m flabbergasted by the report’s comments on the “idolatry of the market.”
What planet have these people been living on?
Do they blame the market for the financial crisis, when the mess was the result of the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and government-created moral hazard? Do they blame the market for the sovereign-debt crisis, when the mess is the result of over-spending governments?
[…] To be fair, there was plenty of bad economics in the Vatican before Francis became Pope. And also some sound […]
[…] popular (or, to be more accurate, I get a lot of clicks) in places like the Cayman Islands, the Vatican, Monaco, Bermuda, Jersey, and […]
[…] The bottom line, as I suggested above, is that the Pope may be wrong…or he may be right. Which seems inconsistent but accurate. After all, the Vatican sometimes has been very good on economic issues and at times very disappointing. […]
[…] Now we need to get others to climb on the freedom bandwagon. I suspect the Pope will be more receptive to that message than politicians, though the Vatican sometimes has been very good on these issues and at times very disappointing. […]
[…] Now we need to get others to climb on the freedom bandwagon. I suspect that Pope will be more receptive to that message than politicians, though the Vatican sometimes has been very good on these issues and at times very disappointing. […]
[…] Pow.. Historic Red Sky, Weather, Consumer Confidence, Homes, Police State, And th.. The Vatican Should Try to Save Souls, not Ruin Economies « Internatio.. A Misguiding Note from the Vatican Vatican meets OWS: ‘The economy needs ethics’ | […]
It appears that, like any large burocracy, the vatican has offices that understand economics and freedom, and offices filled with idiot one world socialists. It looks like the justice and peace department got all the idiot socialists. Hopefully an official vatican spokenman will disavow and reign in these socialist idiots.
By the way, to some other posters, who mentioned infallibility. It is only infallible if the pope personally signs off on it, and declares he is speaking ex cathedra (an invallible pronouncement on doctrine). It appears that is not the case here.
Still asking: have any of the commenters, both pro and con, actually read the document?
Well, at least the church is entitled to believe in miracles. Because divine miracle is what will be needed to override the simple arithmetic of compounding and turn a 1% growth rate into prosperity.
World taxation under authority from the Divine. Well, now that is heaven on earth!
————————
But snarky remarks aside, the sad reality is that Americans are probably a rather small worldwide minority to object to such thinking (and that not for long seems like…).
Dan,
Rick Perry just released his Flat Tax Policy.
Whad’ya think?
horotonin, thanks for your thoughtful reply.
One question to ask in this is: “who is the Vatican?” Just read the Acton blog that, for instance, Pope Benedict XVI did not see the document/statement. In addition, it is very very unusual for the Church to advocate any particular concrete political solution. Both of these issues bring up serious questions for me as a Catholic.
Dan,
I agree completely that the Vatican is horribly wrong on this.
I disagree completely with your arrogance at trying to tell them what their business is. How is it your business to decide what their business is?
when we ban abortion and contraception worldwide…then we’ll talk bank
It seems as though the Vatican has raised a wetted finger in the air and determined which way the economic and political winds are blowing. . .
I’m no Catholic, so for me there’s nothing “infallible” that can possibly come from the Vatican. But advocating for a “world bank” strikes me as wicked. It’s more than ignorance about economics, it displays a total misunderstanding of human fallibility, and that’s something the Catholic church should know something about. That it does not ought to worry congregants.
Another reason to be glad I was born stubborn, and Protestant.
The Catholic Church is loaded to the gills with cash, antiquities, jewels, etc.
I say we fund this new world bank with their assets. I mean, it’s all for the good of the common man, yes?
Oh, and any entity that is so &*%$ing opposed to paying ANY taxes whatsoever that it would literally declare itself a nation-unto-itself and then wall itself off from its host nation has no right talking about greed, sacrifice for the common good or global banking issues.
It’s a shame how many bigots come out when something is quoted from the Vatican. Patricia Walsh said it very well above in that there are other forces within the Vatican pushing certain agendas that is not official teaching of the Church. Don’t condemn an entire faith upon the musings of a few.
Those who seek to immediately disparage the document, here are two questions:
Have you read it?
Or are you reacting to what a journalist says what’s in the document?
The very last sentence from the English text that TM Lutas links to:
“Only a spirit of concord that rises above divisions and conflicts will allow humanity to be authentically one family and to conceive of a new world with the creation of a world public Authority at the service of the common good.”
Hilariously, this is immediately after it discusses the Tower of Babel.
Please also refer to an article by Thomas Woods. He is a Catholic convert, historian, and expert in Austrian School Econ.
http://takimag.com/article/truth_charity/print#axzz1bj6vCNJP
thanks
Since the Vatican has so often been misquoted in the press that I make it a policy not to react too strongly on initial reports. You are assuming that Reuters got the story right. Based on past evidence, it is extremely unlikely to have done so.
It is the job of good Catholics to work hard, create value, and then use our well formed consciences to distribute that value consistent with our faith.
I don’t think an official english language text exists yet but the vatican’s news site has a full text translation available here:
http://www.news.va/en/news/full-text-note-on-financial-reform-from-the-pontif
Thank you, Mr Mitchell, for making it clear that this was a “division of the Catholic Church” publishing a short policy paper and not the Pope saying this and supporting it as official Church policy (let alone spoken ex cathedra and having anything to do with infallibility).
It won’t be enough to dissuade the bigots just like nothing will convince those who believe in the international Jewish conspiracy seen so blatantly demonstrated at the OWS protests but I appreciate your rational attack on an irrational policy paper.
Render unto Ceasar the things that are Ceasar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.
Hey, I’ve got a great idea! Maybe the Vatican can open a futures market for the Sex Trade.
*a
http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=21986
For an factual reporting on what the Vatican actually said rather than the MSNBC or Reuters biased rehash.
If the Vatican were in Germany, this would be a whole different conversation.
To be fair to the RC church, a statement from the Vatican is only said to be “infallible” (FWIW) if:
(a) made by the Pope himself and not his underlings
(b) made “ex cathedra” (cfr. the difference between a SCOTUS ruling and an “obiter dictum” or off-the-cuff remarks by SCOTUS judges)
(c) speaking on matters of faith and morals
As Robert Hughes (an ex-Catholic himself) wrily put it: “Unlike postmodern “art”, not even an institution as old and cunning as the RC church could bear the weight of continuous infallibility on behalf of its leader.”
I am a practicing Catholic faithful to the orthodox teachings of the Church. The opinion of the “Social Justice” dept. is not within the scope of the principle of infallibility. In fact, it appears to me that many so-called “social justice” “Catholics” are simply leftists in disguise. Many orthodox Catholics see the so-called social justice crowd as also often undermining the Magisterial teachings of the Church. Our Church has huge divisions within it at this time; hence, at any one time you might find statements made that are hugely inconsistent. This call by the SJ dept. is completely lacking in knowledge of the principle of subsidiarity, which is indeed an actual social justice principle. As for the wealth and power of the Church. The power part is waning and with it will also the wealth part. In addition, the Church in fact is not all or only about wealth and power. Anyone who has taken the time to read the works of Pope Benedict XVI will not be able to doubt the sincerity and depth of his truly spiritual focus on life and in regard to his own role in the Church. For better or worse, the Church is full of lots of different people with different points of view and understandings. I am sure the sincere SJ people simply follow the latest leftist point of view as they naively believe that socialism is Christian. Pope Leo XIII made it explicitly clear that socialism is antithetical to the teachings of the Church and called it “evil.” The Catholic Church has historically advocated the principles of Natural Law and private property. This present aberration, I am afraid will persist in the Church for some time, as the seminaries and Catholic schools have also been under the influence of the “liberal” agenda for decades. This corrupted political and social thought is unfortunately as pervasive in the Church in the secular world. There are Catholic priests and laity who are engaged in attempts to rectify this situation. Please see Fr. Robert Sirico and the Acton Institute.
Unbelievable!
A “Central World Bank”, what could possibly go wrong with that? The European Central Bank has worked so well. Why in Athens, the Greeks are burning with enthusiasm.
It’s plain and simple economic ignorance from a religious organization whose members live too much in the past. And it’s the surest way to drive even more believers away from the church.
“It condemned what it called “the idolatry of the market” as well as a “neo-liberal thinking”
It’s so great to know that the Holy See sees economics in terms of modish European newspaper dialogue. Also, I love how they throw “idolatry” in there, to make it look like they’re discussing something within their purview.
“Idolatry” implies that the idolater attributes something with supernatural powers separate from God. Quite the opposite: the market is a natural force and entirely reducible to simple rules. You might as well rail at the Idolatry of Gravity. Conversely, the kind of people who use phrases like “neo-liberal” really are idolaters: the tantalizing prospect of a perfectible world dominates their psyche, crowding out other lesser devotions like, you know, God.
“that it said looked exclusively at technical solutions to economic problems.”
Wait, what? Isn’t that what these proposals amount to? Isn’t the lack of technical solutions what they’re condemning?
““In fact, the crisis has revealed behaviours like selfishness, collective greed and hoarding of goods on a great scale,”
Revealed? Revealed? This institution is supposedly the oldest and most historically literate organization on the planet. Have the councils of the Vatican completely lost touch with the nature of man over the last half-century?
Sadly, certain elements of the church have become post-Christian Europe. They lack the faith to truly believe in precepts of their catechism – heaven and hell, the salvation of Jesus Christ, the choices an individual person has to make to merit that kind of grace, and most of all the fact that the human race as a whole is sinful and secular harmony is impossible – and they lack the intelligence to navigate the universalist ecumenical course they mean to chart.
Basically, they’re striving to remain relevant in an imagined atheist future – a future whose notion they cannot escape because they themselves are secular Europeans who have lost faith in God. I say this as a Catholic, and not a particularly devout one. It’s simply obvious from their language, both conscious and unconscious. The person or persons who wrote this, if they believe in God, have less faith in God than they do in the goodness of all humans. This is singularly foolish and contrary to ten thousand years of evidence, no matter what you believe.
Just as soon as the Vatican opens it books with the same degree of transparency required of all these evil banks, I am all-in on this idea.
Until then, the Pope should tell George Soros to lose his private phone number.
Typical reaction of a large, powerful, and deeply corrupt institution caught with its pants down (in this case, literally). Lecture others and try to gain even more power.
It’s time we quit giving credit where none is due. The Vatican doesn’t save any souls. It only works to amass power and appropriate the wealth of productive people worldwide, with a doctrine based on archetypal fears.
I guess he’s not infallible after all.
[…] Related thoughts from Dan Mitchell: The Vatican Should Try to Save Souls, not Ruin Economies. […]
It’s hard to square this thinking with their repeated recognition of the very virtuous “law of subsidiarity”.