Francis of Argentina, he who is called “Pope” by the Roman Church, recently reiterated his call for an “equitable redistribution” of wealth among the economies of the world and defensively declared that “caring for the poor does not make you a communist.” Instead, says the Pope, he is merely “following the gospel.” Back in May he met with the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and insisted that governments should work to end the “economy of exclusion” that keeps people from moving up the economic ladder. Francis thinks that the United Nations is an organization to step in and assist people by its generosity.
Francis’ fuller May suggestions were these: “I do not hesitate to state . . . that equitable economic and social progress can only be attained by joining scientific and technical abilities with an unfailing commitment to solidarity accompanied by a generous and disinterested spirit of gratuitousness at every level. A contribution to this equitable development will also be made both by international activity aimed at the integral human development of all the world’s peoples and by the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society.”
What Shall We Say to These Things?
First, Francis shows vast confusion on the gospel as well as socialism/communism. The gospel of Jesus Christ preaches the caring for the poor; but that is a private enterprise that is fostered by the teaching of the precepts of our Lord. “State” or “Government” redistribution—which is forcible by the very nature of the case– by-passes teaching and instruction and utilizes the strong arm of a government that removes property from one and hands it to another. This is the very definition of PLUNDER, which is the root of Socialism. It is the difference between Jesus Christ and Robin Hood. For Francis to call this “the gospel” demonstrates confusion at best, deception at worst.
William Godwin’s Enquiry Concerning Political Justice (1793) may have been the first treatise on social justice. It is definitive. Per Godwin we do NOT have a right to do what we will with our own and “sees transfers of material benefits to the less fortunate not simply as a matter of humanity but as a matter of justice” (Thomas Sowell, A Conflict of Visions). Godwin thought that this transfer of material goods was a “debt” in the sense that it implied “the expansion of the governmental domain to produce social results to which particular individuals and groups are morally entitled.”
According to the National Association of Scholars the term “social justice” means the “advocacy of more egalitarian access to income through state-sponsored redistribution.” In other words, what I own or have accumulated does NOT rightly belong to me at all but to the masses of poor as a matter of right. Massive government is required to enforce this redistribution. A remodeling of society. The Pope calls this “holistic social engineering” the gospel of Jesus Christ. What a perversion!
Second, Francis denies the biblical principle of private ownership of property. One of the root laws undergirding biblical as well as civil law is “thou shalt not steal.” This clearly implies that there are some things which belong to me which should be guarded by law. Another simple biblical concept is that “if a man does not work, neither let him eat” (2 Thess. 3:10). These two passages alone should forestall groups of men utilizing force of law to accomplish a redistribution which, if practiced by an individual alone would constitute criminal activity.
The Pope might think that his recommendation of THEFT (redistribution of resources begins with plundering those resources) can be hidden under the subterfuge of a government body actually doing the dirty work. But this is no different than King David using the resources of his army to murder Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba. Uriah may have been killed in battle with the Ammonites and by the Ammonite sword, but David’s engineering of this tragedy did not abdicate him of responsibility.
So exactly with Pope Francis. To call for a “legitimate redistribution of resources by the State” cancels the biblical principle of private ownership of property while participating in the socialistic tactic of using the force of State to do it. This is not really “caring for the poor” as much as it is a disdaining of God.