NEWS: July 29, 2026
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Bird’s Eye View of the News
MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS, PROS & CONS - II –
Another positive point of Magnifica humanitas – MH – is the good summary it offers of the social encyclicals from Leo XIII to our days, which is made in Chapter I (§§ 29-44).
r
Inequalities & private property: Apples of discord
Therein we see that until John XXIII, the previous Popes, when considering the problems of society, proposed solutions based on the common good of both employers and employees. They supported inequalities as well as the right of private property as being in conformance with the Natural Law and the Decalogue (the Fourth Commandment guaranteeing inequalities; the Seventh and the Ninth backing private property).
/bev319_App.jpg)
The Popes recommended that employers give a fair salary to their workers so that they and their families could live with dignity, since each man is made in the image and likeness of God. They also counseled moderation in seeking profit because the frenzy to make more money often feeds greed and may create disproportional large fortunes. To employees they recommended obedience and conformity following the example of the Saints, and also warned them against the temptations to revolt and class struggle.
In short, the Popes blessed social inequality and private property, and suggested solutions based on virtue and maintaining a balance in society. Importantly, they did not abandon their own spiritual sphere: They respected the autonomy of the temporal sphere and only suggested solutions ratione peccati: when the risk of sin was involved.
New siren’s song
With John XXIII, however, a shift of parameters occurred in the papal social teachings: The Popes started to attack inequalities and sabotage the right of property under the pretext that it would only be legitimate when subordinated to its “universal destination.” That is, they took an approach much closer to Socialism.
Also, the salary that was at first recommended to be fair as a counsel of wisdom, became a demand of human rights and justice based on the Charter of Human Rights of the UN. The distribution of fortunes and properties became an imperative of “social justice” in the Church’s agenda. The worker now has “the right” to have a share in the owner’s property, echoing the plus valia theory of Marx.
Capitalism, previously approved as according to Natural Law, is now labeled “structures of sin” (cf. MH §§ 36, 79). Consequently, a Liberation Theology was officialized in Medellin (1968) and Puebla (1979) as the new “prophetic” voice of the Church in her “preferential option for the poor.” Although the more communist branch of LT was bent and pruned, the whole tree continued to thrive strong and healthy, and found its way to elect Pope Francis, its notorious partisan.
/bev319_Con-2.png)
Distributism, Self-Management,
Inclusive Capitalism or the “Economy of Francis” are the successive names that translate the same social-economic system defended by the Conciliar Popes. This system happens to coincide with the next step beyond Communism and represents the ideal of the Revolution, also known as
Tribalism.
I observe that this course of action represents an invasion into the temporal sphere by the spiritual sphere, abusing the Church’s competence as it was always conceived for almost two millennia of the Catholic Magisterium.
I offer this comparison of the two clashing papal doctrinal thinking on Social Doctrine to bring my reader atop the mountain to have a panoramic view of the changes made in the last 60 years.
MH pretends that after John XXIII, the Social Doctrine of the Church is the same as before. It is not. It is a reading of the previous teaching through socialist or communist lenses. I will reproduce some excerpts of Leo XIV’s papal encyclical where it measures the problems of society with the new progressivist parameters regarding inequalities and private property.
Against inequalities/bev319_Hie.png)
Against private property
I still have several more points on MH that I hope to address soon.
To be continued
Inequalities & private property: Apples of discord
Therein we see that until John XXIII, the previous Popes, when considering the problems of society, proposed solutions based on the common good of both employers and employees. They supported inequalities as well as the right of private property as being in conformance with the Natural Law and the Decalogue (the Fourth Commandment guaranteeing inequalities; the Seventh and the Ninth backing private property).
The apples of discord are the concepts of inequality & private property
In short, the Popes blessed social inequality and private property, and suggested solutions based on virtue and maintaining a balance in society. Importantly, they did not abandon their own spiritual sphere: They respected the autonomy of the temporal sphere and only suggested solutions ratione peccati: when the risk of sin was involved.
New siren’s song
With John XXIII, however, a shift of parameters occurred in the papal social teachings: The Popes started to attack inequalities and sabotage the right of property under the pretext that it would only be legitimate when subordinated to its “universal destination.” That is, they took an approach much closer to Socialism.
Also, the salary that was at first recommended to be fair as a counsel of wisdom, became a demand of human rights and justice based on the Charter of Human Rights of the UN. The distribution of fortunes and properties became an imperative of “social justice” in the Church’s agenda. The worker now has “the right” to have a share in the owner’s property, echoing the plus valia theory of Marx.
Capitalism, previously approved as according to Natural Law, is now labeled “structures of sin” (cf. MH §§ 36, 79). Consequently, a Liberation Theology was officialized in Medellin (1968) and Puebla (1979) as the new “prophetic” voice of the Church in her “preferential option for the poor.” Although the more communist branch of LT was bent and pruned, the whole tree continued to thrive strong and healthy, and found its way to elect Pope Francis, its notorious partisan.
The preamble of the Soviet Constitution affirmed that the ‘supreme goal’ of Communism is self-management; click here to read
I observe that this course of action represents an invasion into the temporal sphere by the spiritual sphere, abusing the Church’s competence as it was always conceived for almost two millennia of the Catholic Magisterium.
I offer this comparison of the two clashing papal doctrinal thinking on Social Doctrine to bring my reader atop the mountain to have a panoramic view of the changes made in the last 60 years.
MH pretends that after John XXIII, the Social Doctrine of the Church is the same as before. It is not. It is a reading of the previous teaching through socialist or communist lenses. I will reproduce some excerpts of Leo XIV’s papal encyclical where it measures the problems of society with the new progressivist parameters regarding inequalities and private property.
Against inequalities
- “The originality of his [Benedict XVI’s] contribution lies in showing that development, justice, institutions and the market are not neutral realities, but spaces where charity in truth must find historical expression. This teaching is especially relevant today in light of growing inequalities, pressures in the financial markets, the environmental crisis and a lack of trust in politics.” (§41)
- “The idea of “social justice” helps us recognize that injustices do not arise solely from the wrong choices of individuals, but also from structures, mechanisms and economic and cultural systems that produce inequality almost automatically.” (§79)
- “Technological innovations, including artificial intelligence, are not neutral, for they can either foster participation and justice or exacerbate inequality, control and exclusion.” (§85)
- “Living out justice in the Church means purifying ecclesial relationships and structures from distortions that give rise to inequality, lack of transparency and abuse of power.” (§ 89; cf. §§ 95, 144, 151, 161, 226, 240)
Attacking inequalities the Conciliar Church undermines Christendom’s hierarchy,
which is still alive in several aspects of Western Civilization
Against private property
- “Certainly, there is a right to private property, which has its own specific meaning and purpose, yet it is always subordinate to the universal destination of goods.
According to John Paul II, this subordination is the golden rule of social conduct and the “first principle of the whole ethical and social order.” In the Church’s tradition, property has been viewed as a means of protecting and managing goods so that they may better serve the common good. Since “the Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable,” its social function must not be considered a mere theological opinion, but a doctrine of the Church, already present in Sacred Scripture and in the writings of the Church Fathers. For this reason, Pope Francis reminded us that solidarity, when lived out in its fullest sense, also means “to restore to the poor what belongs to them.” (§66)
- “Moreover, ownership of data cannot be left solely in private hands but must be appropriately regulated. Data is the product of many contributors and should not be treated as something to be sold off or entrusted to a select few. It is necessary to think creatively in order to manage data as a common or shared good, in a spirit of participation, as Saint John Paul II already suggested regarding collective goods.” (§108)
/bev319_Nik.jpg)
The seemingly simple Pope is implementing Francis’ boldest agenda
- “We cannot condone naïve enthusiasms, nor fuel unfounded fears. Instead, let us establish standards for discernment — the dignity of the human person, the universal destination of goods, the preferential option for the poor, care for our common home and peace – and let us translate these standards into practices such as responsible planning, the assessment of human and social impact, the inclusion of the most vulnerable, the promotion of digital literacy and guiding research and industry toward justice and peace.” (§14, cf. §§ 43, 45, 46, 183)
- “In this perspective, justice is not merely about the fairer distribution of resources or the correction of current injustices but also assumes a restorative dimension. It aims to mend broken bonds and reintegrate those who have been excluded, taking into account the wounds caused by injustices, such as wars, colonialism, racial or gender discrimination, violence against entire peoples and exploitation.” (§79)
I still have several more points on MH that I hope to address soon.
To be continued
/bev319_Con.png){kind=link}
______________________
______________________
 Volume I |
 Volume II |
 Volume III |
 Volume IV |
 Volume V |
 Volume VI |
 Volume VII |
 Volume VIII |
 Volume IX |
 Volume X |
 Volume XI |
 Special Edition |