The Social Credit proposals explained in 10 lessons
Lesson 10: Social Credit and the Social Doctrine of the Church (Part II)
The subject that we treated in the previous lesson was the first of four basic principles, regarding the primacy of human beings over mere systems, as viewed through the social doctrine of the church.
So that means, according to Church teaching, the aim of the economic and financial system is the service of man. The goal of an economic system should be the satisfaction of human needs, the production of goods (the role of the producing system) and the distribution of goods so that they may reach the people who need them (the role of the financial system). Social Credit proposes a technique that would make the production and financial systems serve their purpose.
In his Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, Pope Pius XI defined the aspired end of an economic system in this way:
"For then only will the economic and social organism be soundly established and attain its end, when it secures for all and each those goods which the wealth and resources of nature, technical achievement, and the social organization of economic affairs can give.
"These goods must be sufficient to supply all needs and an honest livelihood, and to uplift men to that higher level of prosperity and culture which, provided it be used with prudence, is not only no hindrance but is of singular help to virtue." (n. 75)
The common good
Now, let us discuss the three other principles mentioned in the Compendium of the social doctrine of the Church: the common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity.
164. The principle of the common good, to which every aspect of social life must be related if it is to attain its fullest meaning, stems from the dignity, unity and equality of all people. According to its primary and broadly accepted sense, the common good indicates "the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily." (Gaudium et Spes, 26.)
167. The common good therefore involves all members of society; no one is exempt from cooperating, according to each one’s possibilities, in attaining it and developing it. Everyone also has the right to enjoy the conditions of social life that are brought about by the quest for the common good. The teaching of Pope Pius XI is still relevant: "The distribution of created goods, which, as every discerning person knows, is labouring today under the gravest evils due to the huge disparity between the few exceedingly rich and the unnumbered propertyless, must be effectively called back to, and brought into conformity with, the norms of the common good, that is, social justice." (Encyclical Letter Quadragesimo Anno, 197.)
168. The responsibility for attaining the common good, besides falling to individual persons, belongs also to the State, since the common good is the reason that the political authority exists. (Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1910.) The State, in fact, must guarantee the coherency, unity and organization of the civil society of which it is an expression, in order that the common good may be attained with the contribution of every citizen. The individual person, the family or intermediate groups are not able to achieve their full development by themselves for living a truly human life. Hence the necessity of political institutions, the purpose of which is to make available to persons the necessary material, cultural, moral and spiritual goods. The goal of life in society is in fact the historically attainable common good.
170. The common good of society is not an end in itself; it has value only in reference to attaining the ultimate ends of the person and the universal common good of the whole of creation. God is the ultimate end of His creatures, and for no reason may the common good be deprived of its transcendent dimension, which moves beyond the historical dimension while at the same time fulfilling it.
The universal destination of goods
171. Among the numerous implications of the common good, immediate significance is taken on by the principle of the universal destination of goods: "God destined the earth and all it contains for all men and all peoples so that all created things would be shared fairly by all mankind under the guidance of justice tempered by charity." (Gaudium et Spes, 69.) This principle is based on the fact that "the original source of all that is good is the very act of God, who created both the earth and man, and who gave the earth to man so that he might have dominion over it by his work and enjoy its fruits (Gen 1:28-29).
God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone. This is the foundation of the universal destination of the earth’s goods. The earth, by reason of its fruitfulness and its capacity to satisfy human needs, is God’s first gift for the sustenance of human life." (John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, 31.) The human person cannot do without the material goods that correspond to his primary needs and constitute the basic conditions for his existence; these goods are absolutely indispensable if he is to feed himself, grow, communicate, associate with others, and attain the highest purposes to which he is called. (Cf. Pius XI, Radio Message of June 1, 1941.)
172. The universal right to use the goods of the earth is based on the principle of the universal destination of goods. Each person must have access to the level of well-being necessary for his full development. The right to the common use of goods is the "first principle of the whole ethical and social order" and "the characteristic principle of Christian social doctrine." (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 42.)
For this reason the Church feels bound in duty to specify the nature and characteristics of this principle. It is first of all a natural right, inscribed in human nature, and not merely a positive right connected with changing historical circumstances; moreover it is an "inherent" right. It is innate in individual persons, and has priority with regard to any human intervention concerning goods, to any legal system concerning the same, to any economic or social system or method: "All other rights, whatever they are, including property rights and the right of free trade, must be subordinated to this norm [the universal destination of goods]; they must not hinder it, but must rather expedite its application. It must be considered a serious and urgent social obligation to refer these rights to their original purpose." (Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 22.)
176. By means of work and making use of the gift of intelligence, people are able to exercise dominion over the earth and make it a fitting home: "In this way, he makes part of the earth his own, precisely the part which he has acquired through work; this is the origin of individual property." (John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, 31.)
Private property and other forms of private ownership of goods "assure a person a highly necessary sphere for the exercise of his personal and family autonomy, and ought to be considered as an extension of human freedom... stimulating exercise of responsibility, it constitutes one of the conditions for civil liberty." (Gaudium et Spes, 71.)
Private property is an essential element of an authentically social and democratic economic policy, and it is the guarantee of a correct social order. The Church’s social doctrine requires that ownership of goods be equally accessible to all, so that all may become, at least in some measure, owners, and it excludes recourse to forms of "common and promiscuous dominion." (Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, 11.)
The heritage of progress
179. The present historical period has placed at the disposal of society new goods that were completely unknown until recent times. This calls for a fresh reading of the principle of the universal destination of the goods, the earth, and makes it necessary to extend this principle so that it includes the latest developments brought about by economic and technological progress. The ownership of these new goods — the results of knowledge, technology and know-how — becomes ever more decisive, because "the wealth of the industrialized nations is based much more on this kind of ownership than on natural resources." (John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, 32.)
New technological and scientific knowledge must be placed at the service of mankind’s primary needs, gradually increasing humanity’s common patrimony. Putting the principle of the universal destination of goods into full effect therefore requires action at the international level and planned programmes on the part of all countries. "It is necessary to break down the barriers and monopolies which leave so many countries on the margins of development, and to provide all individuals and nations with the basic conditions which will enable them to share in development."
For everyone to be a real "capitalist" and to have the access to the production of today’s world we need to install the Social Credit philosophy. As we have stated previously in other lessons, the dividend is based on two factors: inheritance of natural resources and inventions of past generations. Pope John Paul II said as much in his Encyclical letter Laborem Exercens on Human Work (n. 13).
"Through his work man enters into two inheritances: the inheritance of what is given to the whole of humanity in the resources of nature, and the inheritance of what others have already developed on the basis of those resources, primarily by developing technology, that is to say, by producing a whole collection of increasingly perfect instruments for work. In working, man also "enters into the labor of others."
Poverty amidst plenty
God has given us all of the natural wealth that is needed to feed everyone, but because of lack of purchasing power, the production is not meeting the needs; mountains of our country’s wealth is decaying under the gaze of millions of starving people. It truly is the paradox of poverty amidst plenty.
Pope John Paul II said to the fishermen of St. John’s in Newfoundland on Sept. 12, 1984:
"It is a cruel paradox that many of you who could be engaged in the production of food are in financial distress here, while at the same time hunger, chronic malnutrition and the threat of starvation afflict millions of people elsewhere in the world."
Pope Paul VI stated at the World Conference of Food in Rome, Nov. 9, 1974:
"No more hunger, hunger never again! Ladies and gentlemen, this objective can be achieved. The threat of starvation and the weight of malnutrition are not an inescapable fate. Nature is not, in this crisis, unfaithful to man. According to a generally accepted opinion, while 50% of cultivable land is not yet developed, a great scandal catches the eye from the huge amount of surplus food that certain countries periodically destroy for lack of a sound economy which could have ensured a useful consumption of this food.
"Here we are broaching the paradox of the present situation: Mankind has an incomparable control over the universe; it possesses instruments capable of exploiting its natural resources at full capacity. Will the owners of these instruments remain paralyzed and stuck in front of the absurdity of a situation where the wealth of the few tolerates the persistent extreme poverty of the many?... We cannot arrive at such a situation without having committed serious errors of orientation, be it sometimes through negligence or omission; it is high time we discovered how the mechanisms are defective, in order to correct, put the whole situation right."
"It is obvious that a fundamental defect, or rather a series of defects, indeed a defective machinery is at the root of contemporary economics and materialistic civilization, which does not allow the human family to break free from such radically unjust situations." (John Paul II, Encyclical Dives in Misericordia on Divine Mercy, November 30, 1980, n. 11.)
"So widespread is this phenomenon (poverty amidst plenty) that it brings into question the financial, monetary, production and commercial mechanisms that, resting on various political pressures, support the world economy. These are proving incapable either of remedying the unjust social conditions inherited from the past or of dealing with the urgent challenges and ethical demands of the present... We have before us here a great drama that can leave nobody indifferent." (John Paul II, Encyclical Redemptor Hominis, n. 16.)
Reforming the financial system
The Popes have denounced the money dictatorship many times and advocated reform of the financial and economic systems realizing that the economic system must be put at the service of man.
"One must denounce the existence of economic, financial and social mechanisms which, although they are manipulated by people, often function almost automatically, thus accentuating the situation of wealth for some and poverty for the rest." (John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, n. 16.)
"I appeal to those in positions of responsibility, and to all involved, to work together to find appropriate solutions to the problems at hand, including a restructuring of the economy, so that human needs be put before mere financial gain." (John Paul II in Newfoundland, Sept. 12, 1984.)
"An essential condition is to provide the economy with a human meaning and logic. It is necessary to free the various fields of existence from the dominion of subjugating economism. Economic requirements must be put in their right place and a multiform social fabric must be created, which will prevent standardization. No one is dispensed from collaborating in this task... Christians, wherever you are, assume your share of responsibility in this immense effort for the human restructuring of the city. Faith makes it a duty for you." (John Paul II to the workers of Sao Paulo, Brazil, June 3, 1980.)
The principle of subsidiarity
One of the most interesting principles of the social doctrine of the Church is subsidiarity, which acknowledges that higher levels of government must not do what families and lesser associations, that are closer to the individual can do. This is in complete contrast to centralization and world government. Governments should exsist to help families and other groups or organizations and not to destroy them. The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states:
185. Subsidiarity is among the most constant and characteristic directives of the Church’s social doctrine, and has been present since the first great social encyclical. (Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum, 11.) It is impossible to promote the dignity of the person without showing concern for the family, groups, associations, local territorial realities; in short, for that aggregate of economic, social, cultural, sports-oriented, recreational, professional and political expressions to which people spontaneously give life and which make it possible for them to achieve effective social growth.
This is the realm of civil society, understood as the sum of the relationships between individuals and intermediate social groupings, which are the first relationships to arise and which come about thanks to "the creative subjectivity of the citizen." This network of relationships strengthens the social fabric and constitutes the basis of a true community of persons, making possible the recognition of higher forms of social activity.
186. The necessity of defending and promoting the original expressions of social life is emphasized by the Church in the Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, (written by Pope Pius XI in 1931) in which the principle of subsidiarity is indicated as a most important principle of "social philosophy". "Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice, and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order, to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the social body, and never destroy and absorb them."
On the basis of this principle, all societies of a superior order must adopt attitudes of help ("subsidium") — therefore of support, promotion, development — with respect to lower-order societies. In this way, intermediate social entities can properly perform the functions that fall to them without being required to hand them over unjustly to other social entities of a higher level, by which they would end up being absorbed and substituted, in the end seeing themselves denied their dignity and essential place.
Subsidiarity, understood in the positive sense as economic, institutional or juridical assistance offered to lesser social entities, entails a corresponding series of negative implications that require the State to refrain from anything that would de facto restrict the existential space of the smaller essential cells of society. Their initiative, freedom and responsibility must not be supplanted.
187. The principle of subsidiarity protects people from abuses by higher-level social authority, and calls on these same authorities to help individuals and intermediate groups to fulfil their duties. This principle is imperative because every person, family and intermediate group has something original to offer to the community. Experience shows that the denial of subsidiarity, or its limitation in the name of an alleged democratization or equality of all members of society, limits and sometimes even destroys the spirit of freedom and initiative. The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to certain forms of centralization, bureaucratization, and welfare assistance, and to the unjustified and excessive presence of the State in public mechanisms.
The "Welfare State"
As Louis Even (the founder of the "Michael" Journal) wrote: "Because Caesar (the State) does not correct the financial system which only he can do, he then goes beyond his proper role and accumulates new functions, using them as a pretext for levying new taxes — sometimes ruinous ones — on citizens and families. Caesar thus becomes the tool of a financial dictatorship that he should destroy, and the oppressor of citizens and families that he should protect."
These new functions create a burdensome bureaucracy that harasses people instead of serving them. Pope John Paul II wrote in his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (n. 48):
"In recent years the range of such intervention (of the State) has vastly expanded, to the point of creating a new type of State, the so-called `Welfare State’. This has happened in some countries in order to respond better to many needs and demands, by remedying forms of poverty and deprivation unworthy of the human person. However, excesses and abuses, especially in recent years, have provoked very harsh criticisms of the Welfare State, dubbed the `Social Assistance State’. Malfunctions and defects in the Social Assistance State are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the State.
"Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.
"By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending."
Most of the taxes today are unjust and useless and could be eliminated in a Social Credit system. Debt service only exsists because of corruption — the interest charges the nation has to pay every year on its national debt, for having borrowed at interest from private bankers money that the State could create itself, but without interest.
The Compendium of the social doctrine of the Church continues (n. 187):
In order for the principle of subsidiarity to be put into practice, there is a corresponding need for: respect and effective promotion of the human person and the family; ever greater appreciation of associations and intermediate organizations in their fundamental choices and in those that cannot be delegated to or exercised by others; the encouragement of private initiative so that every social entity remains at the service of the common good, each with its own distinctive characteristics; the presence of pluralism in society and due representation of its vital components; safeguarding human rights and the rights of minorities; bringing about bureaucratic and administrative decentralization; striking a balance between the public and private spheres, with the resulting recognition of the social function of the private sphere; appropriate methods for making citizens more responsible in actively "being a part" of the political and social reality of their country.
188. Various circumstances may make it advisable that the State step in to supply certain functions. One may think, for example, of situations in which it is necessary for the State itself to stimulate the economy because it is impossible for civil society to support initiatives on its own. One may also envision the reality of serious social imbalance or injustice where only the intervention of the public authority can create conditions of greater equality, justice and peace.
To correct the financial system is certainly one of the duties of the State, in other words that money be created by society, and not by private bankers for their own profit, as we have said in previous lessons. As Pope Pius XI wrote in his Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:
"There are certain categories of goods for which one can maintain with reason that they must be reserved to the community when they come to confer such an economic power that it cannot, without danger to the common good, be left to the care of private individuals."
This principle of subsidiarity means families are in effect the first cell of society and they come before the State, so governments must not destroy families and the authority of parents. As the Church says, children belong to their parents and not to the State:
"Hence we have the family, the `society’ of a man’s house — a society very small, one must admit, but none the less a true society, and one older than any State. Consequently, it has rights and duties peculiar to itself which are quite independent of the State...
"The contention, then, that the civil government should at its option intrude into and exercise intimate control over the family and the household is a great and pernicious error... Paternal authority can be neither abolished nor absorbed by the State... The socialists, therefore, in setting aside the parent and setting up a State supervision, act against natural justice, and destroy the structure of the home." (Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, nn. 12-14.)
A salary to housewives
As a matter of fact, in its social doctrine, the Church also stresses the importance of recognizing the work of the mothers in the home, by giving them an income. This would be perfectly accomplished by the Social Credit dividend:
"Experience confirms that there must be a social re-evaluation of the mother’s role, of the toil connected with it, and of the need that children have for care, love and affection in order that they may develop into responsible, morally and religiously mature and psychologically stable persons. It will redound to the credit of society to make it possible for a mother — without inhibiting her freedom, without psychological or practical discrimination, and without penalizing her as compared with other women — to devote herself to taking care of her children and educating them in accordance with their needs, which vary with age. Having to abandon these tasks in order to take up paid work outside the home is wrong from the point of view of the good of society and of the family when it contradicts or hinders these primary goals of the mission of a mother." (John Paul II, Encyclical Laborem Exercens, n. 19.)
"It is an intolerable abuse, and to be abolished at all cost, for mothers on account of the father’s low wage to be forced to engage in gainful occupations outside the home to the neglect of their proper cares and duties, especially the training of children." (Pius XI, Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, n. 71.)
In October 1983, the Holy See issued the "Charter of the Rights of the Family" in which it called for "the remuneration of the work in the home of one of the parents; it should be such that mothers will not be obliged to work outside the home to the detriment of family life and especially of the education of the children. The work of the mother in the home must be recognized and respected because of its value for the family and for society." (Article 10.)
The principle of solidarity
Solidarity is another word for the love of neighbour. As Christians, we must care about the fate of all our brothers and sisters in Christ, for it is on this love of our neighbour that we will be judged at the end of our lives on this earth:
It is by what they have done for the poor that Jesus Christ will recognize His chosen ones... the poor remain entrusted to us, and it is this responsibility upon which we shall be judged at the end of time (cf. Mt 25:31-46): "Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from Him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are His brethren." (Quote from the Compendium of the social doctrine of the Church, n. 183.)
The Compendium continues with:
192. Solidarity highlights in a particular way the intrinsic social nature of the human person, the equality of all in dignity and rights, and the common path of individuals and peoples towards an ever committed unity. Never before has there been such a widespread awareness of the bond of interdependence between individuals and peoples, which is found at every level. The very rapid expansion in ways and means of communication "in real time", such as those offered by information technology, the extraordinary advances in computer technology, the increased volume of commerce and information exchange all bear witness to the fact that, for the first time since the beginning of human history, it is now possible — at least technically — to establish relationships between people who are separated by great distances and are unknown to each other.
In the presence of the phenomenon of interdependence and its constant expansion, however, there persist in every part of the world stark inequalities between developed and developing countries, inequalities stoked also by various forms of exploitation, oppression and corruption that have a negative influence on the internal and international life of many States. The acceleration of interdependence between persons and peoples needs to be accompanied by equally intense efforts on the ethical-social plane, in order to avoid the dangerous consequences of perpetrating injustice on a global scale. This would have very negative repercussions even in the very countries that are presently more advantaged.
The duty of every Christian
It is therefore a duty and obligation for every Christian to work for the establishment of justice and of a better economic system:
"Anyone wishing to renounce the difficult yet noble task of improving the lot of man in his totality, and of all people, with the excuse that the struggle is difficult and that constant effort is required, or simply because of the experience of defeat and the need to begin again, that person would be betraying the will of God the Creator." (John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, n. 30.)
"Such a task is not an impossible one. The principle of solidarity, in a wide sense, must inspire the effective search for appropriate institutions and mechanisms... This difficult road of the indispensable transformations of the structures of economic life is one on which it will not be easy to go forward without the intervention of a true conversion of mind, will and heart. The task requires resolute commitments by individuals and peoples that are free and linked in solidarity." (John Paul II, Encyclical Redemptor Hominis, n. 16.)
There are, of course, many ways to help our brothers in need: feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, sheltering the homeless, visiting the imprisoned and the sick, etc. Some people send donations to charitable organizations, either to help the poor of our country or of the Third World. But even though these donations can relieve a few poor people for a few days or weeks, they are not able to correct the cause of poverty.
What would be much more efficient would be to correct the problem at its roots, to attack the very causes of poverty, and to re-establish for every human being, his rights and dignity that belongs to a person created in the image of God, and who is entitled to a minimum of earthly goods:
"More than any other, the individual who is animated by true charity labors skillfully to discover the causes of misery, to find the means to combat it, and to overcome it resolutely. A creator of peace, he will follow his path, lighting the lamps of joy and playing their brilliance and loveliness on the hearts of men across the surface of the globe, leading them to recognize, across all frontiers, the faces of their brothers, the faces of their friends." (Paul VI, Encyclical Populorum Progressio, n. 75.)
What is needed is apostles to educate the population on the social doctrine of the Church, and the practical application of it, such as the Social Credit financial proposals. Pope Paul VI wrote, also in Populorum Progressio (n. 86):
"All of you who have heard the appeal of suffering peoples, all of you who are working to answer their cries, you are the apostles of a development which is good and genuine, which is not wealth that is self-centered and sought for its own sake, but rather an economy which is put at the service of man, the bread which is daily distributed to all, as a source of brotherhood and a sign of providence."
And in his Encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, Pope John Paul II wrote (n. 38.):
"These attitudes and ‘structures of sin’ (the thirst for money and power) are only conquered — presupposing the help of divine grace — by a diametrically opposed attitude: a commitment to the good of one’s neighbour..."
Principles and implementation
Some will say that the Popes never publicly approved Social Credit. But in fact, the Popes leave the faithful free to apply the system that would implement principles at the service of the human person, as the Popes have taught throughout the years, in the best way possible.
To our knowledge, no other solution than Social Credit would apply the social doctrine of the Church in a way that is truly Christian. That is why Louis Even, a great Catholic gifted with an extraordinarily logical mind did not hesitate to bring out the connection between Social Credit and the Church’s social doctrine.
Another one who was convinced that Social Credit is applied Christianity, that it would apply wonderfully the Church’s teachings on social justice, is Father Peter Coffey, who had a doctorate in Philosophy and who was professor at Maynooth College, Ireland. He wrote the following to a Canadian Jesuit, Father Richard, in March, 1932:
"The difficulties raised by your questions can be met only by the reform of the financial system of capitalism along the lines suggested by Major Douglas and the Social Credit school of credit reform. It is the accepted financing system that is at the root of the evils of capitalism. The accuracy of the analysis carried out by Douglas has never been refuted. I believe that, with their famous price-regulation formula, the Douglas reform proposals are the only reform that will go to the root of the evil..."
A study by nine theologians
As soon as C. H. Douglas published his first writings on Social Credit, the Financiers did everything they could to silence or distort Douglas’s doctrine, for they knew that Social Credit would put an end to their control over the creation of money. When Louis Even began spreading Social Credit in French around Canada in 1935, one of the accusations used by the Financiers was that Social Credit was Socialism, or Communism.
But in 1939 the Roman Catholic Bishops of the Province of Quebec appointed nine theologians to examine the Social Credit system in the eyes of the social doctrine of the Catholic Church, and give an opinion as to whether it was tainted with Socialism or Communism. After considerable deliberation, the nine theologians found that there was nothing in the Social Credit doctrine contrary to the teachings of the Church, and that any Catholic was free to support it without danger. (For the full text of the nine theologians, go to: www.michaeljournal.org/appenA.htm)
The Financiers were not pleased with this report of the theologians and in 1950 a group of businessmen asked a bishop, Most Rev. Albertus Martin of Nicolet, Quebec, to go to Rome and obtain from Pope Pius XII a condemnation of Social Credit. Once back to Quebec, the Bishop said to the businessmen: "If you want to get a condemnation of Social Credit, it is not to Rome that you must go. Pius XII said to me: ‘Social Credit would create, in the world, a climate that would allow the blossoming of family and Christianity’."
We need Heaven’s help
Divine assistance is especially needed in this fight for a just financial system based on Christian principles, when we know that the real goal of the Financiers is the establishment of a world government that has the objective of the destruction of Christianity and the family, and that the promoters of this "New World Order" are actually led by Satan himself, whose sole aim is the ruin of souls. Back in 1946, C.H. Douglas wrote the following in the Liverpool periodical The Social Crediter:
"We are engaged in a battle for Christianity. And it is surprising to see in how many ways this is true in practice. One of these ways goes almost unnoticed — except in its deviations — the emphasis put by the Roman Catholic Church on the family, against the implacable and continuous effort of the Communists and Socialists — who, together with the International Financiers, form the true body of the Antichrist — to destroy the very idea of the family and substitute the State for it."
And Louis Even wrote on the same subject, in 1973:
"Yes, the Pilgrims of St. Michael are patriots, and they wish, as much as anyone else, a regime of order and justice, of peace, of bread and of joy, for every family in their country. But since they are Catholics too, they know very well that order, peace and joy are incompatible with the rejection of God, the violation of His Commandments, the denial of faith, the paganization of life, the scandals given to children in schools where the parents are by law constrained to send them.
"The Pilgrims of St. Michael, relying on the help of the celestial powers, swore to use all of the physical and moral forces, all of the propaganda and educational tools they have, to replace the Kingdom of Satan by the Kingdom of the Immaculate and Jesus Christ.
"In an engagement against the financial dictatorship, we do not deal only with terrestrial powers. The Communist dictatorship and the powerful organization of Freemasonry, as well as, the financial dictatorship are under the command of Satan. Simple human weapons will never be able to overcome that power. What is needed are the weapons chosen and recommended by She who vanquishes all heresies, She who must definitely crush the head of Satan, She who declared Herself, at Fatima, that Her Immaculate Heart will triumph in the end. And these weapons are: the consecration to Her Immaculate Heart marked by the Scapular, Rosary, and penance.
"The Pilgrims of St. Michael are assured that by embracing Mary’s program, every act they perform, every ‘Hail Mary’ they address to the Queen of the World and every sacrifice they offer up, not only contribute to their personal sanctification but also to the coming of a sounder, more humane and more Christian social order with Social Credit. In such a program received from Mary everything counts and nothing is lost."
To conclude, the battle of the Michael Journal and the Louis Even Institute is a battle for the salvation of souls. The Pilgrims of St. Michael ask for what the Pope and the Church demand: a new evangelization — to remind Christians of the basic Christian principles that they forget or cease to practice — and a restructuring of the economic system.
To be a Pilgrim of St. Michael is then one of the most urgent and necessary vocations of our times. Who among those of us who read these words will have the grace and inspiration from Heaven to respond to the call to discipleship? How great and important is the promotion of the social doctrine of the Church through the work of Louis Even! All who thirst for justice should pray for the gift of understanding so they will realize the importance of learning and spreading Social Credit by soliciting subscriptions to the Michael Journal and informing those around them of the urgency of this work!
— The last text of Jacques Maritain
Maritain, whom Louis Even quoted several times in his articles, is a French
philosopher who died in 1973, at the age of 91, and who specialized in the study
of the writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas, and their implementation in today's
society. Having authored many books, he was held in high esteem in
ecclesiastical circles — Pope Paul VI had even chosen him to represent men of
science at the closing ceremony of the Second Vatican Council in 1966.
night before his death, April 29, 1973, he finished writing a text aimed at
summarizing all of his thoughts on the topic that he considered the most
important for today's society. What is very interesting for the members of the
Louis Even Institute and those who are sympathetic to the Social Credit idea, is
that this topic was money, and especially the denunciation of money lending at
interest, which creates unpayable debts.
In his text, Maritain speaks of a society where the State
would create “tokens” to represent money, and these tokens would be issued
as much as needed to be used by every citizen: “Each citizen would
receive enough tokens to allow every individual to live
comfortably, with the guarantee of a standard of living that is high enough to
enjoy an existence worthy of a human being, and cover the basic needs (shelter,
clothing, food, medical care, etc.) of a family, and its intellectual life. It
goes without saying that all taxes to be paid to the State would disappear in
this new system.”
having all of their technique and perfection, it is close to the Social Credit
principles of C. H. Douglas and Louis Even. But what we want to stress here is
Chapter 5 of this text of Maritain, that condemns straightforwardly money
lending at interest, recalling the centuries-old teaching of the Church that
usury consists of any interest that is exacted by the lender from the borrower
solely as the price of the loan. Here is this chapter:
our society every kind of loan at interest would lose its reason for being,
since the State would supply on demand, to anyone who wants to start a business
or an institution, all the tokens he needs
is since the 16th century, when it carried the day legally, that lending at
interest took for the present civilization an absolutely decisive importance, so
it is this practice of money lending at interest in the present days that I have
in mind with the following thoughts, without forgetting that the whole story of
money lending is highly revealing. In fact, this story is the most humiliating
one that can be found in human affairs. For while the human spirit condemned
this practice on behalf of the truth and of the nature of things, it made its
way into our practical behavior, and finally established its authority in
accordance with our material needs taken as an end in itself, but separated from
the total good of the human person.
a result, our field of action was split in two parts, and now we imagine that
the business world constitutes a separated world, with its own absolute values,
being independent from the superior values and standards that make life worthy
truth about money lending is told by Aristotle, in a decisive way, when he
declares false and pernicious the idea of the fecundity of money, and asserts
that, of all social activities, the worst is that of the money lender, which
forces money — a thing that is naturally sterile — to produce gains, whereas
the sole property of money is to be used as a unit of measurement of things.
use the money one owns to support one's life, to satisfy one's desires, or to
get new goods by spending it, to improve our existence, is normal and good. But
to use money to make breed more money, as though money was fecund, and yield
interest (in Greek, it was called the “offspring of money”), is, of all the
means of getting richer, the “most contrary to nature”, and can only take
place by exploiting the work of other people. One is therefore perfectly right
to hate money lending at interest..
Church, in her pure doctrinal teaching, condemned lending money at interest as
firmly as Aristotle did. For a long time, civil legislation was in keeping with
the teaching of the Church, and said that any loan must be free. All those (and
they were many) who infringed this law were punished.
was not long before the middle of the 17th century that civil law broke away
from the doctrinal teaching of the Church, thus allowing the business world to
consider as normal and legitimate the practice of lending money at interest. But
the pure doctrinal teaching of the Church, that condemned purely and simply
money-lending at interest, was still there
is much to the credit of the Papacy that, at a time when the market civilization,
which had begun in the 12th century, was triumphant, Pope Benedict XIV published
in 1745 the famous encyclical letter Vix Pervenit, which prohibited money
lending at interest, saying that it is a sin to admit that in a loan, the lender
must receive more than the sum he lent.
later, when 19th-century capitalism flourished, Pope Leo XIII denounced, in his
encyclical letter Rerum Novarum, “rapacious usury” as being a scourge
of the present economic system.
the business world could not care less about the Church's prohibitions, and in
modern times, money-lending at interest eventually imposed itself with
irresistible force, and it has become the essential sinews, the motor nerve of
the present economic system, which cannot exist without it
think that money can breed money is just an illusion. Money is not fertile…
Once the principle of money lending at interest is accepted, even if theoretical
studies and essays are accumulated to remedy all of its vices, they will never
succeed, because the whole system is based on a false principle, that of the
fecundity of money.