Numbers Don't Lie: Catholicism is Growing

It remains remarkable how a non-negligible portion of the world population can be classified under a single church with a single leader and a single history: the Catholic Church. I've been performing religion-related research and came across a 2013 Pew Research poll describing the extent of this faith. To be sure, there is fragmentation among Christian denominations: born-agains, charismatics and so on have mixed in with Anglicans and even Catholics. However, as fads in Christianity come and go, one thing remains fairly stable in terms of global proportion and growing in terms of absolute numbers--St. Paul's brand:

Over the past century, the number of Catholics around the globe has more than tripled, from an estimated 291 million in 1910 to nearly 1.1 billion as of 2010, according to a comprehensive demographic study by the Pew Research Center.

But over the same period, the world’s overall population also has risen rapidly. As a result, Catholics have made up a remarkably stable share of all people on Earth. In 1910, Catholics comprised about half (48%) of all Christians and 17% of the world’s total population, according to historical estimates from the World Christian Database. A century later, the Pew Research study found, Catholics still comprise about half (50%) of Christians worldwide and 16% of the total global population.

What has changed substantially over the past century is the geographic distribution of the world’s Catholics. In 1910, Europe was home to about two-thirds of all Catholics, and nearly nine-in-ten lived either in Europe (65%) or Latin America (24%). By 2010, by contrast, only about a quarter of all Catholics (24%) were in Europe. The largest share (39%) were in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Now, as then, the Catholic Church's critics are myriad. In the longer historical sweep, though, its geographic reach ostensibly in the business of saving souls is broader as stagnant-to-declining markets  (North America, Europe) are supplanted by more dynamic ones (sub-Saharan Africa, Asia-Pacific), while holding on to saturated markets (Latin America).

Read More

Liberation Theology, Leonardo Boff & 'Fixing' Catholicism

What is the difference between a socially active priest and one who dabbles in leftist politics? The dividing line was much clearer during the Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI eras when the latter was strictly verboten and priests were discouraged from engaging directly--especially in electoral politics. A few weeks ago I discussed the changes that may be in store at the Vatican given that someone from Latin America-- homeland of liberation theology spurred by the world's highest rates of inequality--has become pope. While Pope Francis has disavowed liberation theology in speech, in practice, many alienated (former) Latin Catholics believe that the hardline of the past will be replaced by a more tolerant and receptive outlook.

The highest profile critic of the Catholic Church so far as liberation theology is concerned is of course Leonardo Boff. Yet even he believes that while rhetorical disdain for godless Marxist elements of liberation theology may remain, in practice we may have a more nuanced and socially aware church emerging. Boff is positive, while the many priests killed in Latin America during the liberation theology period may even be regarded positively once more:

"Pope Francis comes with the perspective that many of us in Latin America share. In our churches we do not just discuss theological theories, like in European churches. Our churches work together to support universal causes, causes like human rights, from the perspective of the poor, the destiny of humanity that is suffering, services for people living on the margins."

The liberation theology movement, which seeks to free lives as well as souls, emerged in the 1960s and quickly spread, especially in Latin America. Priests and church laypeople became deeply involved in human rights and social struggles. Some were caught up in clashes between repressive governments and rebels, sometimes at the cost of their lives.

The movement's martyrs include El Salvador's Archbishop Oscar Romero, whose increasing criticism of his country's military-run government provoked his assassination as he was saying Mass in 1980. He was killed by thugs connected to the military hierarchy a day after he preached that "no soldier is obliged to obey an order that is contrary to the will of God." His killing presaged a civil war that killed nearly 90,000 over the next 12 years. The case for beatification of Romero languished under popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI due to their opposition to liberation theology, but he was put back on track to becoming a saint days after Francis became pope.

Boff narrates the familiar difference between theory and practice, with the idea that Pope Francis is oriented towards social action in a way his predecessors were not, really, despite lip service supposedly being paid to its features palatable to the Church (i.e., the non-Marxist ones):

While even John Paul embraced the "preferential option for the poor" at the heart of the movement, most church leaders were unhappy to see intellectuals mixing doses of Marxism and class struggle into their analysis of the Gospel. It was a powerfully attractive mixture for idealistic Latin Americans who were raised in Catholic doctrine, educated by the region's army of Marxist-influenced teachers, and outraged by the hunger, inequality and bloody repression all around them.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, hundreds of Argentine priests were affiliated with a movement that proclaimed Christian teaching "inescapably obliges us to join in the revolutionary process for urgent radical change of existing structures and to reject formally the capitalistic system we see around us ... We shall go forward in search of a Latin American brand of socialism that will hasten the coming of the new man."

John Paul and his chief theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, drove some of the most ardent and experimental liberation theologians out of the priesthood, castigated some of those who remained, and ensured that the bishops and cardinals they promoted took a wary view of leftist social activism.

Monsignor Chavez of San Salvador may make liberation theology more palatable by saying that there are many varieties of liberation theology (eat your heart out, Hall and Soskice), with Pope Francis being on the least extreme end in terms of Marxist overtones--Catholic social vision instead of Marxist social vision, if you will:

"There are many theologies of liberation," he said. "The pope represents one of these currents, the most pastoral current, the current that combines action with teaching." He described Francis' version as "theologians on foot, who walk with the people and combine reflection with action," and contrasted them with "theologians of the desk, who are from university classrooms."

Then again, even the would-be Pope Francis acknowledged that there are certain leftist overtones one can readily read into the Gospels if one is not careful:

"The option for the poor comes from the first centuries of Christianity. It is the Gospel itself," said then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio during a 2010 deposition in a human rights trial. He said that if he were to repeat "any of the sermons from the first fathers of the church, from the 2nd or 3rd century, about how the poor must be treated, they would say that mine would be Maoist or Trotskyite."

In other words, leftist critics hope that Pope Francis will ask the faithful to do as he does, not as he says.

Read More

Pope Francis & Liberation Theology's Latin Shadow

Well, well, I suppose this is a halfway decent result: Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, is someone from the third world even if he is a child of (white) Italian immigrants. As I suggested, it's partly a concession to the still-strong Italian contingent. Supposedly the runner-up from last time around before being bested by Benedict XVI, this time around he has the task of running the world's largest single denomination.

The choice of a Latin American pope, despite not hailing from the fastest-growing regions of Africa and Asia, is also an exercise in shoring up the faith in countries that are becoming increasingly secular or susceptible to charismatic / Protestant movements that offer more surface entertainment value. (They keep repeating the statistic that over 40% of Catholics are in Latin America. Among the more outlandish claims, Venezeuelan "leader" Nicolas Maduro suggests this result is down to Hugo Chavez lobbying Jesus upon his recent demise.) Still, I suppose that it's the politically astute choice for these reasons. Notably, while Francis has been an outspoken opponent of unfettered capitalism and the International Monetary Fund after the high neoliberal era of Argentina's crisis at the turn of the millennium, he is not fond of liberation theology either.

I have written about the emergence of liberation theology in Latin America and its application of Marxist ideology to questions of poverty and inequality--both of which remain unfortunately common in the region. From the site of Leonardo Boff, the former priest repeatedly censured by then-Cardinal Ratzinger and future Pope Benedict XVI:

Among the many functions of theology today two are most urgent: how theology collaborates in the liberation of the oppressed, who are today’s “crucified Christs,” and how theology helps to preserve the memory of God so that we do not lose the sentiment and sacredness of human life which is threatened by a culture of superficiality, consumption and entertainment. We should always unite faith with justice, where a perspective of liberation is born, keeping the flame of our sacred lamp burning so that it can feed the hope for a better future for the Earth and all humanity.

Well into his tenure as pope, Ratzinger continuously hammered liberation theology's doctrinal unsoundness. While Pope Francis is very much focused on social justice and is famous for interacting with the marginalized and oppressed, he is nevertheless opposed to mixing the inherent godlessness of Marxism with Church teaching:

Though he is averse to liberation theology, which he views as hopelessly tainted with Marxist ideology, Cardinal Bergoglio has emphasized outreach to the impoverished, and as cardinal of Buenos Aires he has overseen increased social services and evangelization in the slums. “I am encouraged by this choice, viewing it as a pledge for a church of simplicity and of ecological ideals,” said Leonardo Boff, a founder of liberation theology. What is more, Mr. Boff said, Cardinal Bergoglio comes from the developing world, “outside the walls of Rome.”

Jesuits--of which Francis is one--have at different times been sympathetic to liberation theology. I distinctly recall having to take a required course entitled "Liberation Theology" when I attended college at a Jesuit university. Being younger, I didn't fully understand that it was in bad odour with the leaders of the faith even then. However, the election of a Jesuit who disavows the whole gimmick probably will further marginalize its ideology.

Overall, though, I am satisfied with this result and wish the new pope the best. Contrary to media reports that portray the Catholic Church as being in a state of constant crisis, it remains a growing one in other parts of the world that haven't adopted European-style apathy. It's been there for two decades, and who's to say that its days are numbered or even that its best days are behind it?

And, unsurprisingly, he is no fan of the IMF-style structural adjustment imposed on Argentina and countless other countries which have caused any number of hardships for folks of lesser means:

He became archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and Pope John Paul II proclaimed him cardinal in 2001. It was reported that he declined to live in the archbishop’s palace, favouring a more frugal lifestyle. As economic problems buffeted Argentina at the turn of the century, Cardinal Bergoglio spoke forcefully for the poor and against neo-Liberalism and the International Monetary Fund. “We cannot permit ourselves to be overcome by inertia, to act as if we were impotent or to be frightened by threats,” he said in a sermon.

Both IMF economic fundamentalism and liberation theology's brand of warmed-over Marxism are undesirable; who am I to disagree as we search for a more acceptable middle ground?

UPDATE: Slate has a brief backgrounder on the Jesuits and liberation theology. 

UPDATE 4/28: AP has more on how leftist priests are pinning their hopes on Pope Francis

Read More

More Than WTO, Vatican Needs Third World Head

Aside from China's arranged leadership succession, there are two more noteworthy ones this year at global institutions. The one we had long expected is that of WTO director-general. Since the WTO's formation in 1995, there has only been one from a developing country, Supachai Panichpakdi of Thailand. Adding insult to injury, he only served half a term because of internal politics at the WTO which meant he headed the institution for three years from 2002 to 2005. Meanwhile, the Frenchman Pascal Lamy served one full four-year term from 2005-2009 and is currently serving another from 2009 to September 1, 2013.

For his second term, I thought that he was not an ideal candidate since (1) he failed to move forward the Doha Round of trade negotiations--then in danger of becoming the most protracted in WTO/GATT history--and (2) he failed to gain the support of developing countries to move things forward despite them gaining an ever-larger share of world trade. The past four years appear to have validated my concerns: Not only has the Doha Round become the most protracted in history by quite some margin with no end in sight, but developing countries have also been lukewarm about its completion. Here's a chart that tells the tale:

To make a long story short, let's just say that someone from an LDC has headed the WTO for far less than around forty percent of the time that the organization has been in existence. Bottom line: we are overdue for a WTO director-general from the developing world.

The more surprising succession event, meanwhile, is at the Vatican. With the rather unexpected resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, the door is opened to what I have long advocated aside from someone from the developing world heading international organizations alike the World Bank (it's never happened there), IMF (ditto) and WTO (only once). That is, someone from outside Europe or the developing world should head the Catholic Church. Actually, three successors to Saint Peter (San Pedro) have already done so--albeit a very long ago: Pope Victor, Pope Miltiades and Pope Gelesius were from North Africa.

A definitional problem here though is of constructing an argument for the underrepresentation of LDC voices at the Vatican. It's more challenging to obtain descriptive statistics alike that for merchandise trade on the growth of the Catholic Church in the developing world vis-a-vis the developed world. INdeed, you can look at any number of pertinent things here:

1. The number of ordained priests and bishops;
2. The number of regular church attendees;
3. The number of baptized

I am more inclined to use 1 and 2 as metrics given the rapid secularization of Western Europe in particular, but there are methodological issues for determining the number of practicing Catholics
that even Vatican bean counters recognize:

The percentage of Catholics practicing their faith is declining almost everywhere around the globe. Almost all bishops report it, but it's difficult to prove statistically. Each year, the Vatican's own statisticians compile mountains of data about the number of Catholics, baptisms, priests and religious, weddings and annulments in each diocese and country.

The numbers illustrate trends over time, but many factors lead to the variations, said Enrico Nenna, the chief statistician in the Vatican's Central Office for Church Statistics. "It's very difficult to quantify Catholic practice, although many have tried with many different formulas," he said. "The only way to get an accurate picture of religious practice would be to carefully choose a cross section of the population, do a census, and then conduct interviews repeated over time." 

Absent longitudinal surveys, it is harder to make sense of the faith's fate. However, what you can be sure of is that traditional strongholds in Western Europe are in clear decline whereas there are more signs of hope in the developing world going by metrics alike those identified above. That is, Western Europe is a markedly shrinking market. Add in the fact that it's been scores of centuries since a non-European pope was elected and the case is made even stronger for one. Interestingly enough, British bookies are already offering odds on various putative successors should you be a betting man.
 
Care to take a punt on the next pope, as the Brits would say? As long as he's from the developed world, I am quite indifferent actually.

Read More

South Korea as the Catholic Church's Asian Tiger

Long lay the world in sin and error pining...

The Roman Catholic Church is savvy enough to know that its game is for the most part up in Western Europe. Lip service to a "Catholic revival" in that part of the world aside, we all know a declining market when we see one. Its resources are not really being used to fight a rearguard motion for a European reconquista. While there are some holdouts alike Poland, it's obviously in Eastern Europe. Nosediving church attendance, skyrocketing rates of illegitimacy and all the rest of it tell the tale. I fear that a Catholic revival in Europe is as much a lost cause as a surplus-running United States. At this rate, it will not be long before Catholic voices will start wondering why their headquarters remain in such an unappreciative continent when there are many other places where the Church would receive a much better reception. That is, what is the cost-benefit calculation of losing the "Roman" bit?

A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn...

But, the Good News is that the Church still manages to gain adherents in developing parts of the world alike Africa and Asia, with the number of priests increasing to meet new demand. Just like any old business, the Catholic Church appreciates that this is a game of numbers--albeit its concern is saving the most souls as opposed to more temporal concerns alike ROI. Moreover, its "investment" in the developing world is more likely to pay dividends given the more promising demographics there of followers yet unborn. That said, Asia is a funky place to promote religion. Just as China is famous for its intellectual property, er, lapses, so is it known for its habit of ordaining fake bishops. Since the Communist Party regards all other possible sources of authority with suspicion, it is hard to imagine the world's most populous nation gaining many more converts.

South Korea, meanwhile, is highly atypical in many respects. It is an OECD member and thus considered by most as a developed country. Its population is comparatively small as well at under 50 million. Alike other Asian tigers, it has among the world's lowest fertility rates. You would think increasing affluence would render more Koreans less religious and its demographic profile less attractive to the Church, but surprise, surprise: In South Korea, Roman Catholicism has spread like wildfire in recent years. Unlike Europe that could certainly use an opiate for the masses given its less-than-stellar economic fortunes, the still-rising Koreans have turned to the Gospel. Fr. Pierro Gheddo of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions lays out the landscape:

There may be no other country in the world that over the past half century has seen growth as sustained as that of South Korea, including conversions to Christ. From 1960 to 2010, the number of inhabitants went from 23 to 48 million; per capita income from 1,300 to 19,500 dollars; Christians from 2 to 30 percent, of which about 10-11 percent, 5.5 million, are Catholic; there were 250 Korean priests, today there are 5,000.

I first went to South Korea in 1986 with Fr. Pino Cazzaniga, a missionary of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions in Japan, who speaks Korean. Even back then it was a Church with many conversions, and it is still so today. Every parish has from 200 to 400 baptisms of converts from Buddhism each year. Most of the converts are city dwellers. Each year there are 130-150 new priests, one for every 1,110 baptized. In 2008, the proportion of Catholics exceeded 10 percent of South Koreans, and grows by about 3 percent each year. In 2009, the number of baptized reached 157,000, and 149 priests were ordained, 21 more than in 2008. More than two thirds of the priests are under the age of 40. "Over the past ten years, the Catholic Church in Korea has gone from three to five million faithful; in Seoul we are 14 percent," Cardinal Nicholas Cheong Jin-suk, archbishop of Seoul, has said in an interview.

It is certainly contentious to relate Europe's economic decline with its spiritual one so I won't even go there, but in South Korea's case you can make the opposite argument that secularization does not necessarily accompany economic progress. It appears increasingly prosperous Koreans have sought to find meaning beyond material well-being. As long as the Roman Catholic Church provides answers that are meaningful to them, it's a win-win proposition. Even for a centuries-old institution, it appreciates like pretty much everyone else that the future belongs to Asia.

And that is your religious political economy instalment for New Year's Eve 2012. A Merry Christmas to one and all from the IPE Zone...

...O night, O Holy Night, O night divine!

Read More

Sooper Franc KO's Calvinist Global HQ in Geneva

John Calvin before the Geneva Council, 1549

On the Sabbath day, I guess it's time for another weekend feature. For, after a long while, we have another instalment of religious political economy ("RPE"). John Calvin should be exceedingly well-known to students of social science as Max Weber's Exhibit A in the transition to a Protestant Work Ethic from Catholicism (and what we can only presume to call, ah, the Catholic Sloth Ethic by way of comparison). That is, material success was taken by Calvinists as suggestive that their destination lay beyond the Pearly Gates and not the Gates of Hell.

Now, the Swiss have traditionally been more tolerant of differences in opinion and dissenters throghout their history, so it was perhaps inevitable that Calvinism with its zero-fun, hair shirt outlook would be welcomed in Geneva--a town that has since been associated with sybaritic accoutrements alike the world's finest chocolates and wristwatches. In time, Geneva as the "Protestant Rome" even became a target for the separation of church and state. Yet, it bears remembering that the arrival of Calvin in Geneva in the mid-sixteenth century was much-lauded by those partial to him as an epochal event not only for the faith but also for the city:

On the very day of his arrival Calvin presented himself to the Council. During this session the general programme of his duties was determined; he returned home with a well-developed plan of activity; his desire was to establish in Geneva a State of which God Himself would be Head and the citizens of which would have to strive to lead a life in the closest possible conformity with the precepts of the Gospel. This idea has been called theocracy. It is indispensable, in any attempt to understand Calvin and his writings, to remember that he remained true to this principle all his life, and that any of the mistakes for which he may be reproached today are based on this system...

The founding of the College and the Academy marked an important date in the history of Geneva. The poor, modest city became, so to speak, the Protestant Rome. The running of its schools became a model for a large number of other academies. Thenceforth the young students of Europe flocked to Calvin's Academy.

So, where's the RPE here? A few months ago I talked about how the Swiss franc was becoming incredibly strong as a result of the Eurozone crisis. Safe haven capital flows and all that jazz. Swiss authorities have thus been compelled to intervene on behalf of its export industries alike the aforementioned food producers and watchmakers, but it's not only them who have been hurt. Geneva was already one of the most expensive cities in the world to begin with, and this dubious distinction has only been exacerbated by the mighty Swiss franc. Somewhat unsurprisingly, the Calvinist umbrella group the World Communion of Reformed Churches recently decided to pull the plug on its Geneva headquarters because foreign donations did not stretch very far in (converted) CHF. From the press blurb:

The Executive Committee of the World Communion of Reformed Churches (WCRC) has voted to relocate its offices from Geneva, Switzerland to Hanover, Germany. The results of the vote taken via email were announced today by WCRC President Jerry Pillay...

The move comes in response to concerns about the cost of running an organization in Switzerland. These include staff salaries and the high value of the Swiss franc. Most WCRC membership fees and donations are made in Euros or American dollars that have dropped in value in the past several years against the strong Swiss franc. The move to Hanover is scheduled for the end of December 2013. The new offices will be located at the Calvin Centre owned by the Evangelical Reformed Church of Germany where the Reformed Alliance has its offices. WCRC has a seven-member staff. 

And so here ends 463 years of close association between the Calvinist Church and the city of Geneva. A financial crisis on Europe's periphery that has resulted in a remarkably strong Swiss franc has done what centuries of bloody conflicts in continental Europe have failed to do. Then again, the euro isn't exactly a wimpy currency either, so it does make me wonder if they could have chosen a lower-cost location than Hanover, Germany in line with their ascetic philosophies. Hungary, anyone?

Read More

Of Payday Lender Football Sponsorship and Islam

Shirt sponsors obviously occupy the best camera-estate you can buy on football jerseys. In the past, there have been infamous companies occupying this space alike the late AIG with the world's most famous football club, Manchester United. Unfortunately for the Mancunians, they had to sport the disgraced firm's logo even after its spectacular implosion during the global financial crisis. That said, Manchester United too has its own share of American stinkers.

Earlier on, I was rather dismayed that one of the top economics blogs in the blogosphere cataloguing the various follies of high finance had banner ads from, of all things, a payday lender. While I understand if blogs wish to gain some advertising revenue, surely they could choose better businesses to advertise than those preying on folks who've fallen under hard economic times by extending short-term loans at exorbitant interest rates? Fortunately, most of these blogs became more selective in choosing advertising on their sites since then.

I wish the same could be said about the English (British?) Premier League. While there have been outright stinkers alike the aforementioned AIG, there have been heartwarming instances too alike Aston Villa having the children's hospice Acorns as its unpaid shirt sponsor. (Yes, I am a Villa fan since I am partial to championing lost causes.) Then again, commercial pressures led Aston Villa to sponsor a Cypriot forex trading site then a Chinese casino developer.

However, how about having a payday lender for a shirt sponsor? Is it really that much worse than online financial speculation or bricks 'n'n mortar gambling? UK lawmakers apparently believe so as they've criticized Newcastle United's new deal with payday lender Wonga (it's British slang for money):

Newcastle United's £24m four-year sponsorship deal with Wonga, the high interest, short-term "payday" loan company, has been greeted by a storm of protest from MPs, campaigners against debt and supporters. Derek Llambias, the club's managing director, said the deal will provide money for the club's youth academy and community work, as well as to boost the first team...

The backlash began even before Newcastle confirmed they had signed the deal with Wonga, whose loans charge interest at an average annual percentage rate of 4,214%. Wonga says although that figure is accurate, it does not represent the reality of its loans, which are for a maximum 30 days at 1% interest a day, with compound interest not being charged as for the APR calculation.

However Stella Creasy, the Labour MP for Walthamstow, who has for two years led a campaign against Wonga, including its sponsorship of the [lower division] Blackpool and Hearts football clubs, describes payday loan companies as "legal loan sharks". She wants the government to impose a legal cap on lending rates, at much lower than 4,214%, as happens in most other European countries.

In July the Football Supporters' Federation called on the football authorities to ban Wonga from advertising or sponsorship until such regulation of the industry comes into force. Nick Forbes, the leader of Newcastle city council, said he was "appalled and sickened" that Newcastle would "sign a deal with a legal loan shark".

Northumberland and Newcastle MPs including Ian Lavery, MP for Wansbeck, and Chi Onwurah, MP for Newcastle Central, also expressed outrage. "Some of the richest young men in Newcastle to wear shirts calling on the poorest to go to a legal loan shark," Onwurah tweeted.

There's also the quite relevant factoid that Newcastle United has several (actually quite good) players of Islamic faith. Their religion of course looks down on charging interest--let alone at rates that are quite honestly usurious. Is there a player boycott in the offing with regard to Wonga?

Four Muslim players – Demba Ba, Papiss Cissé, Cheik Tioté and Hatem Ben Arfa – started against Manchester United on Sunday. "Assuming all four are on the pitch at the same time, if you have seven out of 11 [with the sponsor on their shirts] you have sufficient coverage," Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra, assistant secretary general of the MCB, told the Independent. "It is not asking too much, I believe."

It's a very interesting brew of sports, commercial pressures, multiculturalism and religion. Consider too that the UK is well and truly in recession with the north of the country being particularly hard-hit. I do believe that having a payday lender as a title sponsor crosses the line. While football and finance are inextricably linked, some things are just too crass even for me.

Read More

Catholic Church on Finance and Financial Crises

I once again came upon the pre-Benedict XVI Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004) while looking for something else. While Marginal Revolution's all-purpose commentator Tyler Cowen may be no fan of Caritas in veritate, he does state that "our versions of capitalism and democracy are still based squarely on Christian ideas, and I believe this marriage of liberalism and Christianity has been for the better." While I generally agree with this statement, I do take issue when he characterizes much of Catholic Church writing as circuitous and by committee in mentioning a laundry list of ways to improve, say, globalization.

To gain a better appreciation of Caritas in veritate, for instance, Cowen should read some of its predecessors that provide a lot of the specificity he is after. For instance, the social teaching embodied in the Compendium was quite accurate in describing the dynamics of separating the financial economy from the real economy and the dangers it posed well before the subprime crisis occurred. The Compendium even manages to prefigure global economic economic imbalances:

369. A financial economy that is an end unto itself is destined to contradict its goals, since it is no longer in touch with its roots and has lost sight of its constitutive purpose. In other words, it has abandoned its original and essential role of serving the real economy and, ultimately, of contributing to the development of people and the human community. In light of the extreme imbalance that characterizes the international financial system, the overall picture appears more disconcerting still: the processes of deregulation of financial markets and innovation tend to be consolidated only in certain parts of the world. This is a source of serious ethical concern, since the countries excluded from these processes do not enjoy the benefits brought about but are still exposed to the eventual negative consequences that financial instability can cause for their real economic systems, above all if they are weak or suffering from delayed development.[760]

The sudden acceleration of these processes, such as the enormous increase in the value of the administrative portfolios of financial institutions and the rapid proliferation of new and sophisticated financial instruments, makes it more urgent than ever to find institutional solutions capable of effectively fostering the stability of the system without reducing its potential and efficiency. It is therefore indispensable to introduce a normative and regulatory framework that will protect the stability of the system in all its intricate expressions, foster competition among intermediaries and ensure the greatest transparency to the benefit of investors.

What economics blogs like Cowen's talk about nowadays were already identified by the Church in 2004: the rise of the financial economy; the disconcerting pursuit of deregulation and innovation of financial markets in the developed world having a blowback potential on the developing world when the system fails; spiralling notional amounts of derivatives products; and the search for institutionalizing mechanisms to foster systemic stability. To be fair to the Roman Catholic Church, can the doubting Tyler cite another religion that has devoted significant attention to such matters, let alone provided meaningful social teaching in thinking about them?  

As some would say, it is a whale of a document in its insight. It is better to level criticisms from a position of knowledge than from ignorance about widely disseminated documents alike the Compendium.

Read More

Catholic Melinda Gates vs Church on Contraception

For reasons you are doubtlessly aware of, the emphasis on population control of most in the development mainstream has long attracted criticism from the Roman Catholic Church. What we have here is a new twist on an old story: as cash-strapped Western nations have become warier about providing development aid, other actors have stepped up--especially wealthy private interests alike the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In theory, these foundations combine the best of both worlds by avoiding electoral politics--witness tied aid--and applying a business-like sophistication to social problems.

But some things never change. It was perhaps inevitable that the Gates Foundation would bump up against the Church when it came to matters dealing with contraception. While there has been a change of emphasis on the rationale for it--instead of allaying fears of large Malthusian population increases in the postwar period, it is now on female empowerment concerning reproductive health decisions--the controversy remains.

An interesting twist on this story is that the main proponent of contraception is Catholic. Melinda Gates' religion invites media scrutiny as well as, I am sure, no small amount of introspection on her part about practicing her faith. As with many controversial issues, her plan to fund contraception research and dissemination adopts the "technocratic pose" which goes something like this--we are applying scientific method here, hence we should leave the politics out of this. Here is a key excerpt from the Newsweek article:

Perhaps more importantly, there’s her Catholic faith, which has always informed her work. “From the very beginning, we said that as a foundation we will not support abortion, because we don’t believe in funding it,” she says. She’s long disagreed with the church’s position on contraception, and the Gates Foundation did some family-planning funding early in its history. Still, she went through a lot of soul-searching before she was ready to champion the issue publicly. “I had to wrestle with which pieces of religion do I use and believe in my life, what would I counsel my daughters to do,” she says. Defying church teachings was difficult, she adds, but also came to seem morally necessary. Otherwise, she says, “we’re not serving the other piece of the Catholic mission, which is social justice.”

Gates believes that by focusing on the lives of women and children, and by making it clear that the agenda is neither coercive population control nor abortion, the controversy over international family-planning programs can be defused. Right now, she points out, 100,000 women annually die in childbirth after unintended pregnancies. Six hundred thousand babies born to women who didn’t want to be pregnant die in the first month of life. “She is somebody who really sees this as a public-health necessity,” says Melanne Verveer, the United States ambassador at large for global women’s issues. “I think she believes, and I hope she is right, that people of different political persuasions can come together on this issue.”

Do a quick search on this article and you can see very strong denunciations from church and family groups [e.g. 1, 2]. (If you think I'm snarky, wait till you read these folks' scribblings.) As a Catholic myself, I would like to expand on points for consideration that the Newsweek article does bring up:

(1) For better or worse depending on your point of view, you have to differentiate between the Roman Catholic Church and Catholics at large regarding contraceptive practices. The former sticks to the doctrine that contraception is unacceptable, but the latter have been more open to if not exactly being forthcoming about the use of contraceptive devices. In Catholic teaching, you often come across idealized analogies of the family as reflections of Christ's own. In the real world, Catholics too must deal with single parenthood, forced marriages, abusive spouses and so forth that are not necessarily conducive to such ideals.

Economists speak of first-best conditions where development theories are more likely to deliver. Similarly, Church teaching is often similar to first-best in the social realm, whereas the likes of the Gates Foundation have to deal with more practical, less ideal, situations. Call it the theory of second best applied to social matters. Out there, Catholics are undoubtedly among those who've decided to not follow Church teaching on contraception. While the Church derides this sort of "cafeteria Catholicism"--so we'll avoid abortions but we're OK with contraception--it wouldn't have coined a term for it if it didn't exist.

(2) This matter is unavoidably "political"--especially for Catholics. While there may be a silent majority that tacitly approves of contraception by using it despite not loudly trumpeting the fact, the important adjective is that they are silent. In any political contest, the ability to organize and mobilize count for a lot, and you certainly don't see large groups alike "Catholics 4 Contraception" and so on. There's also the centuries-old tendency to stamp out those unfaithful to Church doctrine, and in this respect it doesn't matter if you're Martin Luther or Melinda Gates.
-------------------

Personally, I am not so heavily involved in these debates for my (empirically verifiable) belief is that population size is mostly a function of economic growth. That is, births generally fall as societies become wealthier. So, while Mrs Gates and her critics engage in a heated debate over the matter, I would focus more on increasing per-capita income as a relatively uncontroversial objective (except for deep greens, perhaps) in achieving similar goals.

That's just me, though. Some folks apparently prefer giving themselves an especially difficult time. Rest assured that Melinda Gates' allusions to promoting contraception being in line with Church teachings on social justice will not go down well with the orthodoxy and its followers. The technocratic pose simply does not work when you are addressing an especially evocative issue.

Though I do not side with Melinda Gates here, I do acknowledge that the Church could explain its case better in terms of "second-best" situations Catholics in poor countries do find themselves in. Moreover, the widespread phenomenon of cafeteria Catholicism when it comes to contraception is a wake-up call to those who believe that fire-and-brimstone rhetoric discourages those with more immediately pressing concerns.

It isn't like that anymore, if it ever was.

Read More

Shariah Banking: Islamic Financial Services Board

The Commonwealth news outlet Global Briefing has an interesting interview with Jaseem Ahmed, secretary-general of the Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB). Although its history is not very long, there has been a veritable explosion of interest in shariah banking, especially given the renewed resurgence of Middle East oil exporters and dissatisfaction among a number Muslims about the state of conventional banking services. You also have fast-growing, mostly Islamic states elsewhere alike Indonesia and Malaysia which have significant demand for such services.

To be sure, many like myself think that shariah banking is not quite a novel practice. While charging riba (interest) is technically not permitted alongside other conventional practices, instruments offered by shariah banking concerns are often merely interest and so forth by other names. That is, the concepts remain the same even in practice even if they fall under different rubrics [1, 2]. 

But again, who am I to disagree when shariah banking obviously floats the boat of so many others? As the interviewee notes, shariah banking is now a mainstream activity with IFSB members including the BIS, IMF and the World Bank (which perhaps begs the question of just how different it is, but I digress):
----------------------------------

How does Islamic finance differ from its conventional counterpart?

I would start with what it shares with conventional finance. The underlying values of Islamic finance are universal and common to Judeo-Christian beliefs, and are derived from the body of Islamic law – known as shariah. Islamic financial transactions must comply with shariah, and thus must be both lawful and ethical. One way in which Islamic finance differs is that there is a ‘nega­tive list’ of what is prohibited by shariah, and this includes contracts that involve selling things that are not owned by the counterparties (hence no short selling), gambling, hoarding and dealing with un­lawful goods and services, which would include alcohol and pornog­raphy. A central difference is the prohibition on interest or usury, and this is linked to the idea that money cannot generate money – that there must be an underlying productive activity or real investment that generates a return. Amongst the most significant differences in the two systems is the attitude towards debt and the burden it places on individuals and societies. Islamic finance does not prohibit debt, but it con­strains debt and requires that it be encompassed by ethical con­siderations that impose obligations on both borrower and lender. Loans must be without interest; there is an obligation to return loans, but there is also an obligation on the part of the creditor to take the borrower’s circumstances into account. This is relevant for today’s post-crisis world in which the global economic recovery is weighed down by the huge burden of consumer debt.

What is the role of the IFSB? Where does its authority come from and which institutions are subject to it?

The principal role of the IFSB is to contribute to the soundness and stability of the Islamic financial services industry through the issu­ance of standards and guiding principles for prudential supervision and regulation of the industry. In this sense, our role is essentially similar to the roles played by the three global standard-setters for conventional finance: the Basel Committee for Bank Supervision, the International Organization of Securities Commissions and the International Association of Insur­ance Supervisors. The difference is that we combine the roles of the three bodies into one organisation. At the same time, we have a mandate to promote cooperation in our member jurisdictions. We also have a major work programme to assist in the implementation of the standards we issue. When the IFSB was established in 2002, it had nine founding members. Today, we have 189 members across 43 jurisdictions. One third of our members are regulators or supervisors, while two thirds are private sector institutions, so we capture the broad base of the global Islamic finance industry and help to provide a com­mon frame of reference. However, we do not have formal authority over our members – implementation of our standards is voluntary. The IFSB is headed by a council that comprises 21 members, of whom 20 are governors of central banks. This is similar to the structure of the Basel Committee and underscores the intent to put Islamic finance on a comparable footing in terms of its global fi­nancial architecture to conventional finance. I should add that the Bank for International Settlements is a member of the IFSB, as are the IMF, the World Bank and the Islamic Development Bank.
----------------------------------

So in Western-speak, I suppose the emphasis on the "real economy" and productive activities would equate to avoidance of rentier capitalism or casino capitalism. Hmm...I too may be warming up to shariah banking if it really does deliver on those fronts. Given how "co-opted" Islamic banking has been by mainstream finance in a Gramscian sense, you have to wonder if it's all that different, though.

Read More

Masters of the Game: Vatican Diplomacy in Cuba

By far one of the most underresearched areas in IPE I would argue is the role played by religious institutions as diplomatic actors. Not only were the imperial conquests of earlier European colonizers usually phrased in terms of enlightening the unwashed masses, but religion remains a very significant phenomenon even in today's world which is becoming secularized only in certain respects.
 
Imagine a nation whose diplomatic tradition stretches back centuries to when Saint Peter took up the mantle of leadership in spreading the Christian faith. Wait a minute...there is no need to imagine such a nation since it already exists. As heirs to Simon Peter--himself literally chosen by (the son of) God to establish the church in earthly realms--various popes have found it necessary to navigate shifting political currents for centuries on end. So, in terms of accumulating "tacit knowledge," perhaps the most experienced diplomatic corps extant do not receive the recognition they deserve.  I speak of the Vatican's, of course.

By necessity, the Roman Catholic Church has practiced the diplomatic arts uninterrupted for centuries on end. Continuity of mission has its advantages. While they've given sanction to quite frankly idiotic misadventures alike the crusades, they've since left that bit of holy war-style nonsense to, well, American neoconservatives. Today's modus operandi is subtlety and long-term vision--more Chinese than American. That is, while the Chinese see the passage of a few years as but drops in the oceans of time, Yanks cannot even see past the next election cycle. If the Communist Party is ultimately only responsible to itself, the Pope is ultimately only responsible to the man above.

So it was with great interest that I read a fine contribution in Foreign Affairs by National Catholic Register journalist Victor Gaetan about how the Holy See is approaching Cuba. Unlike the retrograde, sanction-loving Americans still stuck in a Cold War frame of mind, the Catholic Church has taken a more progressive approach. Hate the sin of godless Communism, not the sinners, indeed. It's an approach that's paid dividends in Eastern Europe, so what's to stop it from working in Cuba as the winds of change blow strange?

It is a controversial balance. Cubans in the exile community vigorously criticize the Church because they think Church leadership on the island should challenge the dictatorship. But the Vatican takes the long view. Rather than overtly push for change, the Church has come to pursue a strategy of "reconciliation." It has inserted itself as mediator between the regime and its most daring opponents, both those imprisoned and those out in the streets. The Church is present and persistent, but it is nonpartisan. The attitude harkens back to the ostpolitik it practiced during the Cold War -- in most communist countries, especially in those where Catholics were a minority, clergy hunkered down, ministered to the faithful, and survived. Today, in countries ranging from Albania and Montenegro to Romania and Ukraine, Catholic communities are thriving.

By not consciously offending the powers-that-be with freedom 'n' growth shtick in that usual American tradition, the faith has made a comeback after Fidel Castro's earlier purge of the religious orders:

In the years since, the Catholic Church in Cuba has been resurrected. It has nearly doubled the number of priests and nuns in the country, most of them moving in from abroad. Today, Havana regularly grants the Church permits and allows purchase of rationed construction materials to renovate churches. The Church provides everyday services such as daycare centers and care for the elderly. It teaches religion and computer skills, and screens foreign films for teenage groups. As long as the Church restricts its activities to its property, it gets relatively free reign. The Church even opened a new seminary a few miles south of Havana in November 2010, the first church constructed since the revolution. And alongside a large American Catholic delegation, President Raúl Castro attended the dedication.

And, of course, the Vatican isn't doing all this without keeping an eye on the prize of, well, saving souls:

Playing the role of holy reconciler has afforded the Vatican three advantages. The Church has gained physical and operational space to expand its presence on the island. Second, [Cuban Archbishop] Ortega has brokered conflict, which fulfills the Church's mission ("Blessed be the peacemakers," the Bible reads) and gives it a recognized role, both in the country and outside. And lastly, and perhaps most important, in taking the long view, the Vatican is laying the groundwork so that it helps facilitate a nonviolent post-Castro transition.

You can't be a mug while you're doing God's work. It just goes to show you how what many perceive to be an ideologically "inflexible" organization alike the Vatican actually runs rings around the United States as the latter takes up the white man's burden of various idiotic crusades. Fiascoes in Afghanistan, Iraq, soon probably Iran...the list goes on and on as the homeland of the Qur'an burners engages in all sorts of idiocy by painting the US as a for good in a fool's morality play. Some people never learn.

Given the contemporary state of the US diplomatic corps, you get the feeling that the world would be a much better place if it outsourced diplomacy to the masters of the game with over two millennia of experience dealing with haughty sorts, whether they be the brothers Castro or the BushBama destroyers of the American dream. Predating nation-states by tens of centuries, the Vatican was on the scene long before Pax Americana, and it will be there long after it.

Read More

The Agony of Wolfgang Munchau, Euro Hater

Brother will kill brother; spill blood across the land
Killing for religion is something I don't understand...

Do Financial Times columnists listen to Megadeth? I admittedly do--and proudly so. One of my trademark posts in the run-up to the global financial crisis concerned "The Subprime Wisdom of Megadeth" which was true then as it is now. However, it seems that the FT's Wolfgang Munchau wants to do me one better by implying that Europe is not only combating financial crisis but is also engaged in "Holy Wars...The Punishment Due" [padarumph...padarumph...padarumph (I can hear air guitars riffing the intro already)].

To avoid possible conflicts of interest, let me disclose that the FT once gave me a fairly lucrative prize a few years ago. While I still regard it as being at the pinnacle of financial reporting alongside the Wall Street Journal sans the latter's op-ed section, I'm beginning to wonder if the standards of the FT in the column writing department are now approaching WSJ neocon territory. Which, of course, is not quite good unless you're a firm believer in bombing Iran ASAP, reducing taxes to single digit rates and other wingnut causes that render you politically radioactive.

Which brings me to Wolfgang Munchau. In the past, I have found him to be a trenchant if pessimistic commentator on the European Union. The British famously produce many Eurosceptics whose dislike for "being enslaved" by Brussels borders on the fanatic. But while you may expect such writing from the worst lot of the Eurosceptic British press, you expect the FT to have higher standards. So it was a big surprise to me in late November when Munchau formed his own Euro-doomsday movement by stating that the Eurozone would expire on 7 December. I suppose that such prophecies not coming true would have quieted him somewhat alike other end-of-the-worlders who've found the world existing past its putative sell-by date, but I guess not. It makes me think that he may be a British Eurosceptic in disguise. After all, he has subsequently disparaged assertions that the French defenders of the euro will fare worse than the British with their neoliberal policies favouring financial services industries.

But that's not all. He now suggests that what we have with Europe's financial woes is nothing less than a rehash of the Thirty Years' War between Catholic and Protestant religions. In his scheme of things Catholic Italy, Portugal and Spain are engaged in a conflict with Germany:

But what remains unchanged from those times are the underlying cultural conflicts between Protestants and Catholics, north and south, Britain versus the Continent. The many decades of European integration have not ended this fundamental mistrust. This is also one the reasons why the Europeans have created such an irrationally unbalanced monetary union. Its rules were not the result of a rational economic argument, but designed to allay very old German suspicions.

While working in London, something striking is that I always had Catholic flatmates for some reason--French and Italians among others. Yet I was the only one who bothered with going to mass on Sunday. It is a fairly well-known observation that Europe is becoming increasingly secular. Many Europeans never bother to attend services, and this phenomenon cuts across Catholic-Protestant divides. Nor is there much stigma in out-of-wedlock births across Europe as evidenced by soaring rates of illegitimacy. Gay marriage in Spain raised nary an eyebrow elsewhere despite vehement opposition from the Catholic church. In other words to quote Munchau, something which truly unites Protestants and Catholics, north and south, Britain and the Continent is a pronounced increase in secularism. That is a cultural unity, not an underlying cultural conflict. The numbers back me up, not Munchau.

It is also odd that Munchau does not mention his bete noire France in this context given that it lies at the heart of the EU-2 Franco-German "Merkozy" leadership complex. Isn't it (nominally) Catholic as well--like thrice-married Nicolas Sarkozy? Again, it is very odd to compare today's goings-on with those of holy wars of so long ago when today's putative combatants are largely indifferent to religious culture. What's more the last I checked, Germany not only is about evenly divided between Protestants and Catholics but is also the proud homeland of the current Pope, Benedict XVI, and an admirable one to boot.

Bottom line: this comparison is ludicrous. While drawing (far-fetched) analogies is par for the course from economic commentators, this one goes far beyond imperial overstretch by invoking religion where it explains next to nothing. What's next, Turkish EU accession will be a re-run of the Battle of Gallipoli?

Read More