It certainly looks like the Marxists believe their ‘revolution’ has come about in America as in other western countries. Social Credit seeks a Resolution of conflict not a Revolution and republishes a letter which appeared in a Social Crediter edition of 1942 . It is taken from Quadragesimo Anno, the great encyclical on the Reconstruction of the Social Order issued by the late Pope Pius XI.
The letter reads: Sir,
The difference of opinion between H. E. Cardinal Villeneuve and the social crediters of Quebec revealed in the Montreal journal vers Demain presents an opportunity not to be missed.
There are two passages in Quadragesimo Anno, the great encyclical on the Reconstruction of the Social Order issued by the late Pope Pius XI, which are of great importance in dealing with uninformed criticism from members of the Catholic Church.
From paragraph 75 of the Latin version, the English translation reads,
“For then only will the economic and social order be soundly established and attain its ends, when it secures for all and each all those goods which the wealth and resources of nature, technique, and the social organisation of economic affairs can give. These goods should be sufficient both to supply all necessities and reasonable comforts, and to uplift men to that higher standard of life which, provided it be used with prudence, is not only no hindrance, but is of singular help, to virtue.”
The first part of this quotation is in my opinion a general statement of policy. Critics should be faced with it and asked whether they accept the Pope’s policy or not. If objections are made on technical grounds the following passage (paragraph 42) may be quoted.
“But she [the Church] never can relinquish her God-given task of interposing her authority, not indeed in matters of technique, for which she has neither the equipment nor the mission, but in all those that fall under the moral law.”
The critic can then be asked what is his competency in financial technique and whether the clergy and laity are accustomed to go into all the details of the various callings of those employed in building, say, a church.
But as the best form of defence is to attack, then procure the Latin text of the encyclical from the Catholic Social Guild, Oxford, price one shilling, and ask why the local church authorities have not attended to their own job by providing a correct translation in the vernacular for the laity.
In paragraph 75 “recta proportio pretiorum” is translated, “a proper proportion between prices.” The whole point of this sentence is lost in a confused jumble of words where the Latin plainly conveys that prices should be proportionate to incomes so that they can purchase the various products of industry. The significance of the error is apparent when one considers the consistent ignoring of the price factor, with its book-keeping implications, by “organised” Labour. I should be interested to hear from anyone if the same mistake is made in the French translation.
The English translation can be obtained from the C.T.S., 38-40 Eccleston Square, London, S.W. 1., price 2d.
Yours etc., PASCO LANGMAID, Cardiff; January, 1942.
A Canadian friend helped with the following translation. He writes: “I put the sentence in an internet translator and got this:
75 Apposite etiam ad rem facit recta inter salaria proportio: quacum arcte cohaeret recta proportio pretiorum, quibus illa veneunt, quae a diversis artibus progignuntur, qualia habentur agricultura, ars industrialis, alia
This appropriately between the salaries, too, the proportion of a straight line to the unclean thing: he: a straight line and coherent with which the proportion of the value added, of which these things for all, that comes from the different methods: seeds produce, such as are had the agriculture, the art of the industrial, another of the...
This is obviously a messy mechanical translation, but it seems to support the letter writer’s contention that the proportionality is between salaries and price values.
recta proportio pretiorum seems like “the right proportion of prices” to me ... though my latin is merely second hand.
I have just now asked a Latinist (a contact on Facebook) and he translates the section as follows:
“A just proportion among salaries also suitably contributes to the matter; and with it a just proportion of prices is closely and harmoniously joined whereby they sell those things which are produced by different trades such as those considered agricultural, industrial, etc. If all these [relations] are appropriately preserved, the different trades will join and coalesce into one, like a single body, and the nature of members will provide mutual assistance and completion. For only then will the social economy be rightly established and attain its end if all the goods that are necessary to everyone and individuals, which can be furnished by the wealth and resources of nature, by technical skill and the constitution of the social economy. And indeed, these goods ought as many as are necessary to satisfy genuine and appropriate needs as well as to convey men to that happier refinement of life which, provided he manages his affairs prudently, are not only not an obstacle to virtue, but exceedingly beneficial to it.”
In Social Credit understanding the Cultural Inheritance is a Communal Possession
“… both Labour and Capital are subject to private ownership, but our Cultural Inheritance is a communal possession. Who, for instance, has the right to claim an idea, conceived originally by someone, long since dead, whose name is now forgotten? From such origins the inventions of civilisation in their manifold forms are developed and handed down. The legacy belongs to the whole community in the way that inventions do when their patents expire. It is not subject to the appropriation of the individual. They are no more the owners of it than a stenographer who types a scientific treatise on a typewriter can be said to be the owner of the scientific treatise.”