Bishop Barron on Pope Francis and Catholic Social Teaching

Find more videos at WordOnFire.org. In the wake of the publication of Pope Francis’s encyclical letter ''Laudato Si'', and of the Pope’s recent speeches in Latin America, many supporters of capitalism might be forgiven for thinking that His Holiness has something against them. But Pope Francis’s remarks, though strong, even a bit exaggerated, in the prophetic manner, are best understood in the framework of Catholic social teaching.

[@ChinAMAPutatoDragun]

Congrats on being appointed Auxiliary Bishop in LA! God bless! I'm praying for you!

[@JRLeeman]

Congratulations on your Auxiliary Bishop appointment, Fr Barron. You've been a great aid the credibility of the Church, and your videos and series have helped a great deal of people, such as myself. I wish you luck in your new role, and I'm sure you'll be able to reach and engage an even wider audience with this new move. Use it well. :)

[@joedonohue1424]

Thanks Bishop Barron. I always love your nuanced analysis, even if I have my disagreements. Question: What happens when the ultra-wealthy control the political structure through lobbying and corporate donations and then use that power to roll back any regulations of the economy? Should we rely on the morality of the wealthy, or should we instead build people power through social movements and activism? Let’s keep in mind that most regulations that we take for granted (minimum wage, child labor laws, right to unionize, social security, etc) came after long and intense periods of struggle. I believe Pope Francis is reminding us to lovingly and compassionately engage in this struggle and to be on the side of the poor and oppressed.

[@patrickbarnes9874]

If you build people power through social movements and activism, then the leaders of those movements and the most prominent activists will become the new elite and the poor will remain in the same position they were in under the wealthy. Ideological leftists refuse to acknowledge the clear history on this. Chairman Mao, Stalin, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-un -- in every single case, without any exception, when a "people power building social movement" succeeds, its leaders become authoritarian dictators who commit mass human rights violations and leave the society in economic ruin. Meanwhile, the standard of living, scientific progress, art and literature, guarantees of human rights, are all indisputably advanced to greater heights in free market Western societies. Pope Francis was not lovingly and compassionately reminding us of anything. Apart from religion, he is another clueless leftist who values his rhetoric above reality just like the Democrats here in America. Remember how they touted the greatness of Venezuela? When Venezuela collapsed into poverty and anarchy, they just quietly stopped mentioning it. Didn't learn anything from the mistakes, just stopped acknowledging Venezuela at all. They did the same with the Soviet Union. They trumpeted how amazing the Soviet Union was in the 1920s and 1930s, and then when the brutality of the Soviets became public knowledge, they simply stopped talking about it. Pope Francis is in this same tradition of leftists who use theory and rhetoric to criticize capitalist society while refusing to acknowledge that every single non-capitalist society is worse in almost every area of quality of life for the average citizen.

[@jonathanquist7863]

Father Barron I think you should qualify what you mean by Socialism. Pope Pius XI did in Quadragesimo Anno where he distinguishes it from Communism and says that "[moderate] Socialism inclines toward and in a certain measure approaches the truths which Christian tradition has always held sacred; for it cannot be denied that its demands at times come very near those that Christian reformers of society justly insist upon." But then goes on to say "If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist."

[@Acta-nonVerba]

In your opinion FEUDALISM is good as well, isnt it ?? You moron !!!

[@stphnmrrs3982]

My granddaddy who was a Baptist minister used to say that making a lot of money isn't sinful, keeping a lot is.

[@JesusPedroza]

Very well explained and reflected Fr. Robert Barron, as always. Incredibly profound indeed. "The voice crying in the wilderness" indeed. God Bless His Holiness Pope Francis, and God Bless you Fr. Barron for all of your excellent work!

[@JesusPedroza]

God Bless you Keith Hinton.

[@maninibuthelezi951]

Thanks brother its wonderful word this morning bless you

[@JesusPedroza]

God Bless you Manini Buthelezi.

[@maninibuthelezi951]

Amen thanks brother you are welcome!

[@catesmike]

Congrats Father Barron!! You helped me out tremendously In my journey into the church this past year. I'll be praying for you. God speed.

[@tyliful]

Congratulations to Father Barron on your appointment to Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles.

[@Finsirith]

Congratulations, Bishop-elect Barron! I have enjoyed working through four of your study programs--Los Angeles is greatly blessed by your assignment!

[@jamaicanification]

Great commentary here Father Barron. Also....congratulations on your appointment as auxiliary Bishop.

[@glennc3570]

Another outstanding and insightful commentary, Fr. Barron. Congratulations on your appointment as auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles! I pray for you, your lucky Diocese, and for the rest of us, that we may continue to benefit from your unfettered insights and loving critiques of our secularist society. I hope you can continue in this ministry with the same degree of restraint. I pray for you sincerely as all of our bishops, priests, religious and laity are certainly under attack.

[@vivacristo1000]

The problem is that most Catholics have never read Pope LeoXIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum on Capital and Labor.

[@janinas9873]

Congratulations, Father Barron!!! God bless You on your way as Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles!!! Greetings from Poland:)))

[@xanh01]

Congratulations to Bishop-Elect for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Robert Barron. May God be always with you on your new assignment.

[@AJMacDonaldJr]

Jesus wasn't a neoconservative capitalist?

[@Acta-nonVerba]

@@thundercrow777 u re idiot

[@dimetronome]

thundercrow777 You do realize that capitalism didn’t exist until over 1,500 years after Jesus?

[@patrickiezzoni2052]

@@dimetronome You realize no one invented capitalism? Capitalism is the name we gave for the natural state of free markets. If capitalism was invented by Adam Smith in 1776 like you seem to think, then why are the first written documents receipts for trade and tax policies? These are older than the written Bible. You don’t even know what capitalism is, yet you proselytize on it.

[@patrickiezzoni2052]

If Capitalism didn’t exist in the time of Jesus, then why was Jesus so mad at those money-changers in the temple? Capital and its speculative character didn’t even exist yet, according to you

[@656trav]

The premise often expressed is that the "market" in some way speaks....I agree that it does and in many, many ways in languages and phrases not easily understood. To hold to the premise that it speaks suggests that there are "listeners" to its language, however subtle or not so subtle. The problem is always with the "listener" such as Marx, Keynes, and lately churchmen, such as the Pope. This is all benign until those who have listened to the likes of Nietsche settle on an answer and proceed to employ solutions. Free men, morally informed, (duty of the church), remain the best solution to affect Social justice. The Pope is properly suited to this role....Good luck in the effort.

[@ronnieamituanai5254]

Dear Excellency Bishop Barron. What you said is excellent, for this is how I was formed for six years in the Seminary of the SSPX. Mercy is good. i)When someone desire to amend a life of mortal sin, is one thing. ii)When someone has said I am not sorry is another yet because I am in the state of becoming, is another. In order to keep continuity in our Holy Faith, which one of these will give Holy Communion to? To me this answer the question of rupture or hermeneutic of continuity concerning Cardinal Gasper's Gradualism.

[@ronnieamituanai5254]

Excellency forgive for the first one, this is the correct question. Dear Bishop Barron. What you said is excellent, for this is how I was formed for six years in the Seminary of the SSPX. Mercy is good and so fitting a context to run our relationship with God. i)When someone desire to amend a life of mortal sin, is one thing. ii)When someone has said I am not sorry yet, is another, because I am in the state of becoming; iii)then a third I am sorry and I ask for forgiveness. In order to keep continuity in our Holy Faith, which one of these will give Holy Communion to? To me this answer the question of rupture or hermeneutic of continuity concerning Cardinal Gasper's Gradualism.

[@harryvederchi5237]

As a regular listener of Father Barron's homelies, I strongly urge him to get acquainted to economics under the classic liberal light. For as enlightening he may be with regards to theology, his command of economics lags - in a time when wrong choices have led to severe damage and to a danger zone. For example he could read Economic harmonies and other works by Frederic Bastiat, who it is said had influence on Leo XIII and Rerum Novarum's endorsement of capitalism. What Bastiat proves through simple logic is that all flaws attributed to the free economy (in other words real capitalism, as opposed to crony capitalism) are superstitions (irrational prejudices). For example the marxist superstition states that in a free economy the gap between the rich and the poor would widen: Bastiat demonstrated before 1850 that the opposite is true. Indeed, any productive capital increases the value of work by more than its own value, otherwise it would be scrap - a pure loss. At first the investor makes a profit, which is fair because he improved the technique. Then the discovery spreads and eventually the price of labor absorbs the gain - either as wage increase of price decrease. This proves that profits in a context of economic freedom always reduce inequalities. Alas our world is less and less economically free. Governments command more than half of resources, closely regulate the use of much of the rest, and the cornerstone of economic liberty is missing more and more: Sound currency. The reason for the widening gap is not unregulated capitalism, but the lack thereof. Now you may not believe me, but keep in mind that those who want pure capitalism want it for moral reasons and have every logical evidence for them. As a believer, it would be a conundrum to me if God's social order was not good or required some men to lead the rest of through their regulation - men who would have to be of higher moral and intellectual value than the rest of us. That doesn't square with what I understand of the Bible. It seems a lot more christian to suppose that Bastiat is right, and that the social order based on the decalogue is the best possible.

[@Acta-nonVerba]

DONT JUSTIFY YOUR GREED by criticising POPE.

[@cookielemons]

Catholic thought on political-economy is usually termed distributism (private property + democratic control of enterprises), which is neither capitalist nor socialist. The Church has existed long before the advent of capitalism and has no reason to be its cheerleader, just as it doesn't have to officially embrace socialist utopian visions.

[@alextremodelnorte1905]

Former popes weren't "suspicious of socialism". They utterly condemned it in no uncertain terms.

[@bern7777777]

Congratulations Bishop-Elect Barron.

[@tracieholladay9412]

OMG Fr Barron I just heard that you're now Bishop-elect! I'm so happy for you! What an excellent choice they made! Best of luck to you moving forward! Aaaahhhh I could do a happy dance right now! Way to go! :dances across the table: oops, sorry...

[@jameslawlor6125]

BISHOP BARRON excellent. Congratulations. God bless.

[@marcussmall8145]

Interesting and informative. One observation. If the market is to be fettered both politically and morally, in what what way is it completely free? I am glad that it is not entirely free, but if it were would it be in keeping with Catholic social teaching? I suspect not.

[@chavezery09]

While I think that this clarifies a lot, and is useful as a reference, I completely disagree with the comments on "unfettered" capitalism. The only legitimate market is a market in which people may make the choice to be virtuous or evil, so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others; in other words, a market based entirely on voluntary interactions. From a moral lens, however, I can really appreciate (and even agree, to some extent) about what's being endorsed. But I can't agree with the idea that some people should be forcibly coerced into doing things which they would not do voluntarily (e.g. minimum wage laws, etc.).

[@bottomhead2518]

I think one of the muddy problems in this issue is the notion of private property. I see little difference in a country where government owns most of the private property and a country were a banking elite owns most of the private property. The point is, and I don't know if the Catholic Church makes this clear, that most (if not all) the people ought to own private property: house, land, car. And I mean own them outright: no mortgage, not property taxes, no car payments. The majority of people should be owning significant forms of private property outright. This is something that Adam Smith made clear. There's a famous saying in Course on General Linguistics: "The map is not the territory." The writing above is the territory. Words like "capitalism, socialism, and communism" are maps. The names of economic systems are next to useless and mostly deluding. That's why conservative capitalists and conservative communists produce the same conditions (territories). And that's why liberalism is actually the middle ground between left and right wing economic systems. Discussing the territory, as Pope Francis does, is not anti-anything besides anti-poverty.

[@francescacrema8209]

Congratulations on becoming an Auxiliary Bishop-elect of the Los Angeles Archdiocese, Fr. Barron!

[@Michael-rx7ff]

CONGRATS FATHER!!! Make that Bishop Robert Barron

[@krecikowi]

Congratulations on being Auxiliary Bishop in LA, I hope you will still find time to make youtube commentaries!

[@larryalobo]

Part of the problem of this pope and past popes and their comments or thoughts about wealth are they look at life as it is now (at the time they are living) and say basically if you have enough to live life to take care of your necessities and a little more for comfort, then you need no more. Give the rest away - money, shirt, stuff. In a scarcity society, this may play - for so many centuries, there were the rich who had a lot and the poor who scraped by. Today's poor in many countries are not the poor of decades ago, some live quite well. If you want to stop time and live in a nice situation and not advance, then it might make sense to give away beyond your necessities. If you want to advance society, even if not out of generosity, then the capital you use or invest works for you and for many others. Living at a time period frozen in time does not take care of the new born since that's how we add to the population. The dooms and gloom people of decades ago were wrong about the population bomb. We do have enough for people to have and eat. Why some are starving is more a matter of what their government or rulers are doing, not the generosity and sharing of some people and countries. Too much condemnation of building wealth and not enough of types of governments that deprive people of necessities - dictatorships, communists, some socialists, etc. This is why I and may others don't that this pope and others seriously on these issues. You exhort what you believe the gospel says but have little true understanding of economics. Every system has its flaws and blind spots since they are fashioned by humans. What system has helped more poor people around the world than any other system - capitalism, free market economics. Too many clergy have an attitude about caring for the poor as they stay poor but not many good ideas about how to get them out of poverty so if you want to care for the poor and let them say where they are, by all means, listen to religious leaders.

[@Unclenate1000]

Of course most regulations, on top of being immoral (since they violate the fundamental right to a person's control of property) also don't work and are often unnecessary for social justice. Capitalism needs to be controlled by morality indeed, but most certainly not by the state.

[@seannyfraze]

I completely agree with this perspective.

[@SeanFitzPatrick100]

Capitalism must be governed by Christian Virtue as stated by Adam Smith himself! Thank you Father for hitting it out of the park and articulating the Church's tradition for the poor!

[@rustyshackelford3590]

The founding fathers understood that the states purpose was to protect the people and there rights and that although state and church are to be separate this can only work with virtuous people who uphold judeo-Christian values

[@GiantsHunt]

Fr Barron, you often defend theism by appealing to a vision of God as being 'outside the universe'. This sounds like a deistic formula. How do you go from this concept of a God 'outside the universe' to accepting a specific scripture written by human beings as the word of a force that is, as you say, outside the universe?

[@Socialolic]

A LOT of people in the church have no idea what socialism and capitalism truly is and blindly praise/criticize it.

[@manweelder4387]

I have a severe disliking of politics in general. It's just slimy business. I agree with St. Augustine in saying 'Men were not meant to possess power over other men." If that makes me an anarchist, I guess I am an anarchist. I just tire of having to contextualize free speech of religion within political speech. The Pope was rather clear that capitalism insofar as it means excessive accumulation of wealth is bad, and I agree. I'm sure the Pope also agrees that unnecessary influence and control over others is also bad, and I also agree. The fact that so many take problem with these views as though they contain political spin is absolutely saddening. Why do we care so much about temporary and unsatisfying politics as a people?

[@TheLongSummer]

Manwe Elder I guess we care so much about politics since we are largely creatures of this world, instead of the world to come, as we should be.

[@ClassicPhilosophyFTW]

Manwe Elder Because, as Aristotle noted, "Man is a political animal." This follows as a consequence of us being "social animals", also. Politics, rightly understood, is about how humans ought to live together, as societies and communities. It is thus inseparably bound to ethics. It need not have the power chasing, scandal and conspiracy you allude to in your comment. I sympathize with you. Laws and political principles ought to be about the common good, not about proscribing what *you* personally should do. These days, everything has been tied up into politics, especially with the endless appeal to vaunted rights, where those rights are understood as concessions of the state you live in. Hence, that people believe the Pope is always speaking politically is just an unfortunate consequence of the culture we have created, centuries in the making. Hope that helps. Take care.

[@ClassicPhilosophyFTW]

TheLongSummer God created us so that we could be with Him in heaven, yes, but he also created us in and for this world; we are meant to be here and enjoy it, and leave it in a better state than we found for our children. Politics is a natural outgrowth of our social tendency, and is therefore good.

[@TheLongSummer]

ClassicalPhilosophyFTW We shall live our lives in this world, with the life to come in mind. Remember, Christ's Kingdom is not of this world. The reason why life has become so corrupt is because we have forgotten the life to come in our daily lives in this world. Ideally conceived I agree with your last sentence. However, if you(generic) observe how we promote our self-interests in our lives on a regular basis politics is not an element of good in human existence. In short, in reality politics is not a good thing, it is a power struggle in pursuit of our self-interest.

[@ClassicPhilosophyFTW]

TheLongSummer You make some fair points. However, because we can know we should care about others, and not merely ourselves, and because we at least generally do make laws concerning the common good, we can see that politics really is a good thing, and is in fact necessary. There can be no good coming from a society without government. Power itself does not corrupt, but the *desire* for power does. A lot of the time politics can seem as nothing more than power struggle, but it really isn't. We always want power for something, and that something is always considered good, even if it is not in fact good.

[@rop2530]

As shepherd and teacher of all Christians, the Pope's proclamations are considered infallible in areas of faith and morals.

[@Llanc_traddodiadol]

What do you make of this quote by Pope Francis: "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 naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system." This quote seems to make it pretty clear that he does not support the sort of trickle-down economic system that you currently have in the USA where all the wealth stays at the very top and there is very little by way of a social safety net for the poor. Indeed, compared to the UK and most other countries of northern Europe, America has an almost non-existent social safety net for its people.

[@boyertb]

That is indeed his concern, which is spelled out in the rest of the paragraph that you took that from.

[@patrickhenry1092]

Too bad it's not consistent with what Pope Francis has said.

[@boyertb]

Actually, it is.

[@Maciejfw]

Democracy is the system where people have the right to vote on who is human and who is not. As the do and have done on the subject of slavery and abortion. I can not understand how rationaly thinking person can see this system as legitimate.

[@henrybn14ar]

The economic system sloppily referred to as "Capitalism" is not a truly free market. There two groups of people. There are those who own land and receive rent, and there are the rest, who create wealth, pay rent to landowners and work for wages. The much praised entrepreneurs of the "capitalist" system are under the thumb of landowners to whom they must pay rent, and bankers to whom they must pay interest on the credit they need to run their operations. Landowners have a monopoly on the surface of the planet, whilst bankers have a near-monopoly on the creation of credit. That makes the so-called free market anything but free.

[@TheLongSummer]

Henry Law Land ownership is of little relevance to capitalism. It was important within the feudal system that preceded the capitalist economy. What is crucial in capitalism is the ownership of the means of production. Thus wealth was transferred from the aristocracy to the bourgeoisie, what to some degree was one of the causes leading up to the French Revolution. The division you describe within the capitalist system is wrong. You have to owners of the means of production, the capitalist and employers on the one hand, and the rest that offer to work for payment. The free market refers to the competition among the producers in the market which ideally have no power over the market itself. In many ways the bankers are just as dependent on the capitalists as vice versa, it is supply and demand for money which regulate this market just as much as any other market. If there were no investors willing to invest the money saved in the banks, there would be no banks, they are interdependent. There is no such thing as creation of credit, however there is creation of money. How the money supply in the economy is best handled is a matter of dispute among economists. The alternative to private property is government owned property, which has proved not to be so good. The free market could very well be freer, but in a very different way than you indicate.

[@harryvederchi5237]

Henry Law In a capitalist economy, land is like any other form of capital, it has a value as a means of production, and one only ever pays for services, not for nature's liberalities - otherwise capitalism could not increase productivity. Your perception is related to economic contexts that were not capitalist (liberal in the classic sense). As for interest, you are misled by the current situation where the State imposes a currency and dictates a rate of interest and manipulates at will the quantity of money. In essence, a currency is just some kind of good that facilitates economic transactions (lower the cost of exchange). A free economy requires free banking, competing currencies and standards, or at the very least sound currency. And then interest rates render an economic reality, the availability of savings. Naturally they tend to zero because a purely capitalist economy is prosperous (and no, inequalities don't grow but diminish, marxism is a superstition).

[@Alnonymous2000]

He's not necessarily speaking of The United States. Few nations have the environmental laws that we do. He speaks to the world and he has a point.

[@xDevacorex]

There is a real case happening soon that free markets will no longer function for anyone's benefit. Free markets work perfectly if M -> M + I. This means you invest in an item (stock, bond, private etc) and you will receive the value plus a return on the investment. On average, save a few moments in time, the markets have grown. If a market grows, investors get the return on investment. We have reached our limits within the given resources to expand. The lack of growth is the reason for the great recession. It looks like from zero sum we are headed to a global shrinking. What investor would put money into market which is guaranteed to shrink. Capital will freeze and markets will become chaotic to a final collapse. Possible solutions would be fusion power, traveling outside our own planet to harvest from other planets or celestial bodies. If we do not find those or other solutions, the church will have to return to the old ways in managing economies.

[@henrybn14ar]

"Capitalism" is so vague a term that it should quite simply be avoided. Free markets are one of the components of "capitalist" systems. The other component is private monopolistic appropriation of what is a gift of God ie the surface of the earth and its natural resources. Talk of "property" is a confusion which lumps together the product of human labour and the gifts of God. When land is privately appropriated, the free market is no longer free. Those who speak for the capitalist system never seem to notice this contradiction. Another component is lending of money for interest, which the Catholic Church long condemned. Fr Barron has not picked up these key points. They are, perhaps, however, implicit in the new encyclical.

[@TheLongSummer]

Henry Law Capitalism is less vague than most terms thrown around these days, like socialism, which used to mean state control with the means of production, but today means everything the speaker things is good or to the benefit of himself. Free markets are one of the components of the capitalist system, sure. You seem to be against private property. To my understanding the Catholic Church is not, and it would be rather hypocritical since the Catholic Church own quite a lot of private property itself. The alternative to private property is government owned property, like the large collectives in agriculture during the communist era in the USSR for example or the tragedy of the commons. It is always easy to be against something due its apparent short comings. However, in the case of private property, the alternatives are far worse they lead to poverty, misery and in the worst cases mass starvation. Your claim that "when land is privately appropriated, the free market is no longer free" you will have to justify, since private property is since as essential to a free market economy within economics as social science today. Your talk of property, product of human labor and the gift of God seems rather confused. I would leave out God when discussing free market an capitalism, God is not part of economics as a scientific analytical tool. Human labor adds value to the product, but it is not property. Hence there is no contradiction between the capitalist system and the free market. Free market capitalism is one form of capitalism. The interesting point you make is lending money for interest, is the one interesting point you make. Christianity, Judaism and Islam long banned this practice, which is hardly touched upon in today's world. If Francis would make himself useful in the discussion on economics this is the issue he should touch upon since it is unique to the Church and challenge the orthodoxy of our time, instead of the amateur economists he has chosen to become for the present. The parts of the new encyclical with direct reference to economics and ecology is a prescription for economic disaster, increased poverty and environmental degradation, written by amateurs.

[@5446mick]

Henry Law Good points.

[@jesusagonzales9485]

Why does the worldwide church pay money or give a percentage to the Pope? Seems that is like a tax.

[@williamhauser3686]

How anybody could possibly oppose or be offended by what pope Francis said is beyond me. People are obsessed and worship individual freedom at the expense of the common good and these words of Francis offend them. What a shame.

[@alextremodelnorte1905]

How can someone who doesn't know whether he's a heretic or not be a prophet?

[@Tomster22]

Fr. Baron, I am hearing conflicting accounts over a Hammer and sickle crucifix that the Pope received from Bolivian president Evo Morales, it was first reported that Pope Francis said "That's not right" upon receiving it and left it behind, yet I also heard conflicting reports that he accepted the gift, and that would baffle me, if its true. So, Could you address the gift that Pope Francis received from the president of Bolivia?

[@ipso-kk3ft]

Tom Sena That would be a great topic! I'd actually wanna know what Bolivia thinks (first-hand). Pero... no hablo bien español :D

[@jamaicanification]

Tom Sena That hammer and sickle crucifix was a replica of one that was made by a Jesuit priest during the height of liberation theology according to the Pope. He says he was not offended by it at all

[@TheLongSummer]

JANHOI MCCALLUM Sounds disturbing.

[@5446mick]

JANHOI MCCALLUM Yes, he said it was a form of protest art and he took it home with him. It's a little pathetic, Catholics on this thread scrambling to apostate bishop Barron wanting to hear him sanitise the pope's message and reassure them he is not making a definite and historic stand against the system. The church is no longer aligning itself with the dominant powerful groups in the world and many are running scared. On the other hand the true faithful are standing strong with him.

[@ipso-kk3ft]

mick rick Out of interest Mick, what's your stand/view on the current situation of Catholics and Pope Francis? I can't really think of a response to what you said cause I think I didn't understand your comment that well. :D

[@rondaria]

It seems like Pope Frances always has to be explained. Too bad he's not clearer so neither Catholics nor others have to spin what he says.

[@capone70]

As a long time follower/listener/commenter, Just want to say CONGRATULATIONS on the news!!! Los Angeles is in DIRE need of catechesis and good priests. As your first order of business, you should sell the property of the Cathedral (prime real-estate), donate much of the proceeds to the poor, then choose any number of smaller/dwindling churches as the "new" Cathedral and renovate it as such with 1/16th the money Mahoney spent on the Roj Mahal. You will be an instant Saint/champion of the poor, give vitality to some deserving neighborhood/parish and bring back the beauty of our artistic tradition and legacy that Mahoney the pedophile-hider tried to destroy (along with Catholicism in general). Once again, congratulations, Father!!!!

[@kimcheewee4]

Every priest before Fr. Barron got a promotion for covering up child abuse: Timothy Dolan, Josef Ratzinger, George Pell, Bernard Law. Congratulations Bishop Barron on being different.

[@4455matthew]

I Distinguo, moderate. Also reminds me of some Alasdair MacIntyre, how capitalism is the right system, but always must be contained and checked, as such. Great, again.

[@5446mick]

Matthew D Didn't MacIntyre write a book called Marxism and Christianity where he argued the two were morally compatible?

[@palashvictor]

Devotions upon emergent occasions

[@Unclenate1000]

Capitalism is a system of free trade. In other words humans freely interacting in ways to benefit themselves and society. A free market and a free society in general clearly have at least an implicit favor of CST since authentic human dignity requires respect for individual liberty as much as practically possible

[@chessgeek10707]

Here's the issue I have with the Pope's "defense" of the poor and the environment. The rich aren't causing the poor to be poor. The Pope has this Malthusian view, which has not borne out in practice. The rich countries aren't the ones burning down the rain forests. It's the rich countries that place any value on stuff like clean air, clean water, and biodiversity. Are North Koreans starving because we are eating too much in the States? Do Greeks, with a quarter of the labor force in unemployment and structurally low labor participation rate, have a right to ask its European neighbors to perpetually subsidize their leisure? What about the poor countries' corrupt institutions, their choice of endless war instead of peace, and their often utter disregard of humanity? Don't these factors, better than rich countries' exploitation, explain the sorry state of poorer countries? The Pope is not really addressing the issue of true poverty in developed countries. In the US and most of the countries he would classify as rich, secularization is producing a spiritual blindness and moral poverty that have their own devastating effects, the kind St. Augustine describes in his works such as Confessions. Contraception and abortion are not just tolerated; they are now an entitlement; they are our idea of health care; they are indicators of women's freedom -- to be imposed via the tax system on those who object to the practice. How far can the decline of the family go? Divorces, children out of wedlock, no children at all, foregoing marriage, and allowing homosexual unions to count as marriages (is there even a historical precedent for this?) .... Political correctness keeps us from properly fighting our enemies, honestly addressing the racial divide, and coming up with a sensible role for women in the military. Religion explains so much of history, and yet, we are stripping God out of our schools to the point that my son's social studies class understates the impact of religion. Nowadays, if we don't like our sex, we celebrate a reassignment with Bruce Jenner as the poster boy (or, shall we say, girl?). Lately, we now have the news of selling fetuses by Planned Parenthood ..... The developed countries are the ones mostly turning away from God, and it is this drift into the greater depths of moral decay that is concerning. Only the Lord's grace can turn the peoples of these societies back to Him. Right now, I'm hearing quite a bit that is just not becoming of one that is given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Instead of using his office to ignite class warfare, the Pope should remind those who are economically poor to ask not just for the things of this world, but to beg the Lord for those of the heavenly world. He should urge those in the poor countries to get integrity into the institutions, stop the fighting, and love their enemies. That's better than pointing the finger of blame to the "rich", who in the Lord's eyes may even be all the poorer. Yes, the morality of Christianity compels us to love the poor, and indeed, it is the wealthy of this temporal world that will have a tougher time getting to heaven. Instead of wagging the finger at the wealthy, for they are as aforementioned, blind, the Holy Father should help them see!

[@dimetronome]

A lot of what you say about the poorer nations (ex. corrupt institutions, conflict, instability, lack of human rights) is a part of the legacy of imperialism and colonialism, which is at the roots of current global inequality between rich and poor countries. After decolonization, business corporations and institutions of economic globalization (such as the IMF and World Bank) based in the rich nations have continued to economically exploit poorer nations and further stall development. So, yes the rich are causing the poor to be poorer. Making people poor and keeping them poor is the historic reality and it is how neoliberalism and economic globalization operate.

[@renee-mariekrugkrug3989]

WHY IS he not researching the cause not the symptoms...see Gabrielle Brigitte author and witness

[@reddy2c]

Guess spreading heresy gets you far in the councillor church. GOD HELP US!

[@chessgeek10707]

Nice appointment by the Pope. Congrats, Bishop-Elect Barron! Fr. Barron here does a nice job toning down the Pope's opinionated views, but I really hope that the Pope would just not open his mouth on matters such as economics, politics, and climate change. The Church doesn't have a great history of making authoritative statements on matters of science; it just brings up too much deja vu dating back to Copernicus and Galileo. The Pope should just stick to talking about the heavenly kingdom.

[@VictorSanchez-kx5hb]

Pope Francis just needs to fade away. Hope the Good Lord sends someone with some heart.

[@koolkatklan3414]

Great video

[@retsea1]

Congratulations on the "promotion", Fr. Barron.

[@larryalobo]

If all people just gave away their money after they had necessities and a little more for comfortable living - and gave the rest to the poor, no one would invest money for the future development of new ideas and things that could help (and harm) society, we would not be able to live well in retirement beyond owning some place and the little we would have from some sources, society would stay about the same as when we were born, etc. It may be an idea from the Christian community after Christ died and rose but it is not how societies progress and enrich each other and the world, including being able to build all the churches and cathedrals and religious treasures we have plus the media, printing, etc. tools we've developed to reach more people.

[@larryalobo]

+rosegarden23 - "once one's necessities and proprieties have been met, the rest (of the money one earns) belongs to the poor" - that is what Barron quotes that Pope Francis said. Therein lies the rub. Who defines necessities and proprieties? Should how homes are built be standardized so we all have about the same dwelling as others and no more? This is where I detect the message that there is no reason to have more than you need for today, the necessities and the rest that you own, earn belongs to others - the poor and by implication, the extra is not yours so you must give it away or we take it away or you sin and sin lots.

[@larryalobo]

+rosegarden23 - You're welcome. Part of all of this depends on what Baron or anyone thinks Francis is saying, what it means and what it means practically in everyday life. If Francis was respectful of earning your own wealth/resources, then he should respect you keeping it and encourage you to give some of it to the needy or your causes. Of course there will always be greedy people under any system but criticizing capitalism or free market economics for greed ignores other greed in many other systems (even the hierarchical system of the church can foster greed, depends on the person in power or as head, even if he or she has been trained in poverty or humility. We all sin but base it on what we do, not the system of economics we use though perhaps some systems are better for more people than others for their well being.

[@markturner8471]

My class should be more like this

[@Marcello1b]

Absolutely, Absolutely... You could think Communists or Capitalists at extreme isn't the way of healthy zone. Both are extreme ideas of elites of "profit at the expense of the poor", Healthy should be to reach the philosophy to encourage your neighberhood, helping in teaching fishing as "giving sometime some fishes" Idealically the good philosophy of "The good salary over the salary" or "The profit over the salary" as "Being aware in helping people over your minimum salary", this should be the "profiting your self humanity benefice". The rest of money should be the "too much"... A short example: You could have the money to get a collection of cars, your motivation of having all type of cars... that could sound great at first but, in fact, you will always only need one car at a time. You could drive a Ferrari once; you know how it feels, how it sounds; Good! Now you know... Tomorrow, you will need only one car, As we use to say, you need only one toilet once in a while... If we were thinking in term of "satisfaction is already plenty"... But, to get to work only for the profit of your company, or "to get best profit ratio, otherwise you are working for the wrong company" (as they use to say, "That's the way you get the best profitable "Shares ratios"). In such case, if we were courageous to say.... "Okay, it's true; I guess I do work for the wrong company"... Oups!.... I don't think that any Cie would accept it easly. Though, idealistically, that's what we should focus on to change mentalities. We have a long way to understand a basic, but we have a way... If Pope Francis give a great direction, with the Holy Spirit in us, everything is possible. The courageous will make a good decision for the best, one step at a time, in the good direction. Example: "Today we will have a good 'PepCall'; All 'Over profit' will go to help this organisation"... or "That cause"... etc. The other courageous people (or Cies) will get inspired... and that's the way it should go. Thanks for the video!!

[@saints51]

Fr. Barron told us what the Church considers to be the hallmarks of socialism. Pope Francis, by those hallmarks, is a socialist.

[@michaelhoward4318]

Good luck in your new position.

[@aleksandragieralt1532]

I think the controversy here is about greedy people being uncomfortable with the Pope cracking down on the vice of greed. I was shocked when conservatives - of all people - were up in arms that Pope Francis declared himself in favor of trickle-down economics - a free market economic system which assumes that if the rich have the right to get rich, they will take their responsibility to share with and provide for the poor seriously. Its an old, conservative system that does not depend so much on government intervention and regulation as on people setting aside their greed. The greedy among us got offended, claiming that a Pope who harps on one of the seven deadly sins is a communist if that sin is greed because the are so insistent on persisting in their greedy ways. The Pope is not against the free market (which can provide employment opportunities for the poor) so long as greed is not the gear that makes it tick, and he's calling governments, businessmen, middle class people, the poorest of the poor, the young and the old to stop being greedy and start taking our responsibility to share with each other seriously. Keep your businesses open, but let your greed go.

[@jerseycitysteve]

His Holiness certainly made a marvelous decision today to raise you to the episcopacy. Please accept the congratulations of this United Methodist minister! Axios!

[@RUBYLUD]

Pope Francis is a brilliant pope and a wonderful man. He is changing the Catholic church and for the better. God bless him

[@brucewilliams8414]

did this guy used to work with ronald reagon?

[@research1982]

I love this!

[@chrismcpake438]

I'm a catholic who is a socialist and I see social things in bible such as love thy neibour

[@magister343]

I just cannot support an encyclical whose incipit is not even in Latin.

[@JRLeeman]

That's pedantic - Latin is like in the Church so as not to dilute the meaning of the original translation. There's nothing particularly sacred about Latin, it's a bastard tongue of Greek and Etruscan origin. Like all languages of the last 10,000 years or so, it is an amalgamation of nearby tribal dialects. It's Harvey divinely revealed.

[@gideonjudges7]

magister343 I would hope you could support an encyclical whose incipit isn't in Latin...otherwise you'd have to say Hitler and his Nazis were a good thing... (See Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, the Encyclical On the Church and the German Reich--written in German, only available in German, English, Spanish, and Italian)

[@TheLongSummer]

ThoseTolerableNoobs Destroying the sacred Latin of the Church for our own purpose are we?

[@JRLeeman]

TheLongSummer Not that i think you're capable of rational thought on this issue, but I would have hoped you'd resort to better arguments than "it's not in Latin". Then again, I'm sure this all tucks in nicely with your fascism.

[@TheLongSummer]

ThoseTolerableNoobs Your claim that "there's nothing particularly sacred about Latin" is at best doubtful. The traditional Latin Mass is not so highly revered solely for the reason "not to dilute the meaning of the original translation", more the sacred impression of Heaven that ensues in the Latin Mass. You chose to describe Latin as "a bastard tongue of Greek and Etruscan origin", a comment clearly written to dismiss Latin in a rather common way, and again inaccurate. Latin was one of the Italic languages spoken on the Italian peninsula, prior to the Roman Empire. Greek and Latin are not of the same origin, which you would have known if you had studied linguistics, they are different branches of the indo-european languages. Since my nick is not magister343 I will let him answer for himself concerning his objections of the incipit not being in Latin. When it comes to fascism, which is besides the point here, you could not be further from the truth. I am strong defender of liberal democracy and the rule of law. You on the other hand should google the French term "les extremes se touchent" if you are not familiar with it, then will realize that you are much closer to fascism than you think, you are its twin so to speak.

[@chrismcpake438]

Socialism can exist in a democratic state aswell

[@josecosta2938]

congratulation

[@Mzsofrito]

Hmm?

[@wildvoice7770]

How sad this is...

[@Lerixlol]

bruh

[@douggyberry7451]

hi

[@brucewilliams8414]

im not going to let a sails man ruin my faith and you shouldnt eather

[@byrddust]

After 1) defining socialism extremely unfairly, then 2) claiming the Popes are for a "market system," you then go on to describe all the ways in which socialism and socialists have advocated for constraining the markets. In other words, you're aggressively "constrained market system" is SOCIALISM!!! Jesus may not have been a socialist, but he definitely was not a capitalist. Capitalism isn't moral in any way: it's only allegiance is to the maximization of profit, at any cost... it's sheer atheistic idolatry! To restrict private enterprise and make it subject to the morality you speak of, is to transform it into socialism. That's precisely why capitalists hate socialism - it subjects their profits to those values and ideals you speak of. "The mentality of profit at any price with no concern to social exclusion" IS CAPITALISM!!! The "unfettered pursuit of money" IS CAPITALISM!!! The disregard for the common good IS CAPITALISM!!! CAPITAL is a GOD for CAPITALISM!!! GREED for money IS CAPITALISM!!! Pope Leo XIII: "Once the demands for necessity and propriety have been met, the rest belongs to the poor".... that's completely AGAINST CAPITALISM!!!, as capitalism cares nothing for the poor: they are the losers of history according to capitalists. "The church stands with the Free Market," ... unfortunately it always has... but that's not the question. The question is "SHOULD the church stand with a free market," especially when it rapes, kills, hoards, destroys, excludes, belittles, dehumanizes, and turns Western society into a bunch of mindless, egocentric and material-driven idiots and the third world into paupers. Paul Tillich's "Socialist Decision" would help us here. Let's not attempt to reconcile Ayn Rand with the Gospels (like Sirico), it doesn't work! Sorry Father, I'm normally with you on most things, but this analysis was not one of them.

[@jeanniemayer8114]

He is a max

[@JanakaSuranga-we4qm]

Jasugaa kathaavaa anya bhaasha vilasaya saha anya bhaasha suddhddha varayata asaveema thami vadha gath jusaa vaass piya thumaa thami sinhala bhaashava suddhavarayata osava dunnaa

[@5446mick]

Even your definition of ''socialism'' is not only narrow, but highly contradictory and misleading. You part define it as ''an economy that increases the tension between labour and capital''. You've just described the market! Whereas socialism in western politics has always involved a program to ''tame the beast'' and establish a legal framework of rights as a bulwark against its avarice and dehumanising tendencies. For example, Britain's post-war Labour Govt under Atlee was socialist and introduced the welfare state and free education and healthcare for all, nationalising railways and public utilities to keep prices affordable and stop monopolies arising. So, why don't you use the term correctly? Because you live in a country run by corporate fascists behind the facade of democracy? We are told cowardly priests will line the road leading to the pit of hell. Don't be one of them. Stand with your people and the creation, not satan's market and its false imagery. And stand with your pope, don't undermine him with your weasel words.

[@TheLongSummer]

mick rick Socialism rightly understood is state control with the means of production. There has been a legal framework surrounding the free market and capitalism, wherever it has taken place. It is one of the prerequisites of capitalism, in order for contracts and the legal implications of transactions and ownership to be respected. Without a legal framework and a state with legitimate coercive powers to enforce the regulation capitalism and the free market would not function. There is not necessarily tension between labor and capital in a market economy it depends on how it is regulated. For example the French are always on the strike, whereas strikes are rare in the US or in Scandinavia for various historical, structural and cultural reasons. The legal framework of rights you refer to I guess is what has been achieved by the labor movement in western countries at least. This has nothing to with avarice and dehumanising tendencies, but a fight to get the as much of profit for oneself as possible. If you think the workers are any better than the capitalist on this issue, you are mistaken. Britain's post-war Labor Government was truly socialist since they nationalized industry etc. However, the economic policies of the Atlee government lead eventually to the UK becoming the "sick man" of Europe and the winter of misery before Thatcher ascended to power, due to labor unions reckless behavior. The UK was turned into a highly inefficient country run by unions. The welfare state in Europe was initiated by Bismarck ans is by no means a socialist invention. Your claim that the US is not a democracy is flat out false. The three major indexes used by scholars to measure democracies and autocracies always rank the US as a first class democracy. Evidently not of your liking, but that is besides the point here. If you believe there are any socialist countries in the world today apart from Cuba, North-Korea and Venezuela that is a delusion. With the debt crisis lingering on indefinitely in Europe, the last remnants of your cherished well-fare state might well be gone much sooner than you think. The NHS as you know need reform badly. No one should stand with Francis on the economic issues he is talking about, he is a fish out his water. He makes the Catholic Church look ridiculous. His proposed solutions would lead to economic disaster, increased poverty and environmental degradation.

[@5446mick]

You're brainwashed.

[@TheLongSummer]

mick rick At least you kept it short :)

[@jefflynch967]

St. Ambrose (quoted with approval by Bishop Barron): "If a man has two shirts in his closet, one belongs to him and the other to the man with no shirt."

[@darrengoldwyn1917]

francis lefty apologist fom my understaning ofyour fellow utuber e michael jones

[@tigresahd5698]

Bishop elet Robert Varron future pope!

[@beatrizmartinez5760]

Tigresa Yarexita Bergoglio it's the las pope. Be prepared.

[@Thaddeus61]

First!

[@mammyoriordan]

Thaddeus61 Nearly first!