Catholic social economy : past evolution and present challenges

Introducción: This article provides a historical interpretation of Catholic social economy (also called Social Catholicism) in an attempt to give a Christian form to capitalism. The aim of this writing is to reflect on the evolution of Catholic economic thought and to offer some foreseeable development in light of the experience that characterized the early stages of this movement. By Catholic social economy, the author does not mean the social doctrine of the church, but the whole set of scientific work of Catholic scholars, with their different orientations and acceptance by the official documents of the holy soil. Roman Catholicism is the only religion that has produced wide and continuous scientific research about political economy. This should not be considered an anomaly, because the positivistic attitude of modern economics tends to crowd out the classic unitary view of man and of a good life that characterizes Catholic anthropology. As a consequence, it can be considered an attempt to address scientific research in a way compatible to the Catholic view of the “social nature of man”, and not an attempt to resist or to contrast the role of science. The fundamental concepts of this stream of research have been the idea of natural law intended as a moral order (vs. the equilibrium of conflicting strategies), the social nature of man (vs. individualism and individual autonomy) and the role that charity and justice assume for individual behaviour inspired by the common good (vs. freedom and laissez faire)...

Sources of contention and the emerging reality concerning Qohelet's Carpe Diem advice

Abstract: When Qohelet declares “there is nothing new under the sun,” his own words are no exception. It has been known for a century now that not all of Qohelet’s material is original to his own genius, and the idea that Qohelet is directly dependent on a literary source(s) is standard fare. The hallmark example continues to be Siduri the alewife’s advice to Gilgamesh which displays remarkable correspondence with Ecclesiastes 9: 7-9. However, what may have been construed as an instance of clear literary dependency a century ago cannot be maintained in light of the data that continues to emerge from the ancient Near East. New sources have risen that contend with the Gilgamesh Epic, and there has yet to emerge a definitive victor. This paper calls into question the very idea that Qohelet was directly dependent on a literary precursor and joins with a few select voices both past and present in suggesting an alternate interpretation of the data.