Our Lady of the Rosary
ON THIS PAGE:
Question: In what I had always considered a
Catholic publication, a women asking what to do about her grandson’s
conversion to Islam was told:
Islam is a religion that worships with us the one and
true God. Pray that your grandson may be a good and devout Muslim and
draw closer to God. Perhaps then he may show his girlfriend and child
the respect he owes them, and build his family on a foundation of faith.
Can this possibly be right?! (A.H.-New York)
Answer: No, it is not, and for a number of
reasons. One does not have to be a Muslim to realize that children are
to be conceived and raised in holy matrimony. It is precisely the
Modernist notion that “all religions are good” that has dragged
Christendom and Catholicism down to the level of accepting any and every moral
theory—and nothing at all—as being equally acceptable. Losing his
faith and becoming a Moslem clearly did not keep the grandson from “playing
house” with his girlfriend, nor did her Moslem religion keep her chaste.
Islam can only draw him further away from the true God.
“Faith,” the foundation on which the grandson is
urged to “build his family,” is the belief of all that the true God
has revealed to His people about Himself and what He asks of us in dealing
with Him and our neighbors. Faith is absolutely not a belief in
any of the errors taught by Mohammad in the Koran and the Hadith (collected
sayings and .deeds of Mohammad). If these errors have any supernatural
origin it can only be from the evil one—“all the gods of the gentiles are
The “one true God” does not reveal Himself in one way
to Europeans, in another way to Americans, and in yet another way to Arabians.
The “one true God” is “the Father of lights, with whom there is no
change, nor shadow of alteration,”—a
truth denied both by Islam, in which Allah is said to abrogate old revelations
in favor of new ones, and by Modernism, which holds religious truth to be
nothing more than changeable sentiment.
That “Islam worships with us the one and true God” is debatable.
A responsible Catholic parent or grandparent must, of
course, be loving—but also firm. Leaving the Faith was wrong, as was
fathering a child out of wedlock. The proper actions for the grandson
are to return to the practice of the Catholic Faith, and to take
responsibility for the needs of the child—the physical needs certainly, and
spiritual needs like Baptism and Catholic education if at all possible—and,
possibly, marriage to the mother, if that is appropriate. These actions
are what the parents and grandparents must urge, and for which they must pray.
And, while at it, they ought to pray for the conversion
of Franciscans as well.
[Continued from last
Question: Were there moral aspects to the
Great Depression? A lot of
people suffered for well over a decade. Shouldn’t someone be held
responsible? Can we prevent such a thing from happening again?
● CCC TVA WPA ●
Some of what the
“alphabet soup” agencies did during the depression was useful to the
nation. The Civilian Conservation Corps, CCC, planted enormous numbers
of trees. The Works Progress Administration educated, fed, and clothed
people, in addition to its less useful arts and literature programs. The
Tennessee Valley Authority, TVA, generated electricity with hydroelectric
plants. But all of these programs were financed by taking wealth away
from the private sector (businesses and individuals) through taxes, inflation,
and the accumulation of public debt. This burden on the private sector
postponed real economic growth, thereby prolonging the depression.
cases—the TVA is a prime example—the government forced private entities
out of business, either by law or by use of its “infinite money supply” to
squelch competition. Investors in these private businesses were wiped
out, and useful plant was sometimes abandoned.
As we have noted
before, there are only so many bridges, dams, and hospitals a municipality can
use, and afford to maintain after the federal government leaves.
● GNP GDP GPP ●
GNP, GDP, and GPP were not alphabet soup agencies. GPP,
gross personal product, is a realistic measure of what the economy produces.
It includes whatever is Consumed, Saved, and Invested.
(GPP=C+S+I) Clearly, what was consumed had to have been produced, and
savings and investments can only come from the surplus production that was not
consumed. Most people don’t keep much of their savings under the
mattress or in a bureau drawer for unexpected needs, but rather invest it in
short term bank accounts, so C+I is usually an adequate estimate of the gross
Gross national product, GNP (later gross domestic
product, GDP) are government collected statistics purported to measure the
productivity of the country’s economy. GDP is said to measure the
total of all goods and services produced in the course of a year. The
problem is that it adds the cost of Government to a nation’s
actual production. (GDP=C+S+I+G) That is a fallacy, of course, in that government produces nothing,
while its costs are borne by taking wealth away from the working and
productive citizens. Sometimes, what the government does is useful, and
even morally laudable—say, in providing national defense, or in feeding
those who would otherwise starve. But it does these things not by
producing, but by consuming what has been produced by the private sector,
always taking form the nation’s wealth, and sometimes taking years of a
man’s life, his limbs, or life itself in order to “produce” its
“product.” Having no profit motive, government is normally the most
wasteful means of doing anything. And some times what should be
“useful and morally laudable” is not—governments sometimes do fight
unjust and unnecessary wars, and sometimes their welfare programs keep capable
people from working and fulfilling their own needs.
So, if one counts
GDP as the government does (GDP=C+S+I+G), the nation’s real
productivity is grossly overstated—particularly in times when government
spending is high. The extreme case is wartime GDP, which is always high,
even though things are being destroyed rather than produced,
consumption and investment are cut way back, and the only saving is by those
owning shares in the munitions and military supply companies.
The situation during the depression was very similar to
what we have in 2009, with a positive growth in GDP, even though unemployment
is high, and both consumption and saving/investment is down. Even though
real production was (is today) down, increased government spending puts a
positive spin on the GDP—a government serving measure if ever there was one.
But that increased spending must come from taxes, inflation, or debt that one
day must be paid. All of these are burdens on real production, and can
only make a weak economy worse.
● AAA—Agricultural Adjustment
Keynesian economic theory predicted that the Depression
could be overcome by keeping wage and price levels artificially high, rather
than allowing to seek their natural level. On the contrary, such
practices interfered with the capital formation and volume of sales needed for
a recovery. In some cases—and this is one of them—the government’s
efforts went beyond counterproductive to bizarre. On May 12, 1933, the
Agriculture Adjustment Act created the Agricultural Adjustment Administration.
In an effort to raise farm prices, the AAA created artificial shortages by
taxing those who processed agricultural products, and then using the money to
purchase and destroy vast quantities of food—at a time when many Americans
were doing without, living on higher priced imports, or literally starving to
Curiously enough, while Wallace [named FDR's Secretary of
Agriculture in 1933] was paying out hundreds of millions to kill millions of
hogs, burn oats, plow under cotton, the Department of Agriculture issued a
bulletin telling the nation that the great problem of our time was our failure
to produce enough food to provide the people with a mere subsistence diet. The
Department made up four sample diets. There was a liberal diet, a moderate
diet, a minimum diet and finally an emergency diet - below the minimum. And
the figures showed that we did not produce enough food for our population for
a minimum diet, a mere subsistence.
The AAA produced all sorts of dislocations in our
economic system. For instance, we had men burning oats when we were importing
oats from abroad on a huge scale, killing pigs while increasing our imports of
lard, cutting corn production and importing 30 million bushels of corn from
Wallace himself said: "It is a shocking commentary
on our civilization." That was not so. That kind of thing was no part of
our civilization. It was, rather, a shocking commentary on the man who
engineered it. It was a crime against our civilization to pay farmers in two
years $700,000,000 to destroy crops and limit production. It was a shocking
thing to see the government pay one big sugar corporation over $1,000,000 not
to produce sugar.
more expensive and making sure that they were in inadequate supply brought no
relief to the depressed economy. Prosperity means that people have more
than they need, and don’t have to work long hours to get it—the AAA
brought not prosperity, but more of the already abundant poverty.
It seems also to
have introduced a new layer of insanity on top of the existing fraud, theft,
and corruption. But, at least this time, the Supreme Court struck down
the law establishing the AAA, something it failed to do with many other
unconstitutional New Deal initiatives.
[To be continued]