Image via Wikipedia
Their letter, in stark contrast to the right-wing criticisms of Notre Dame's invitation to President Obama to speak at its commencement last year, did not excoriate the university for its decision to invite Congressman Boehner or urge the withdrawal of the invitation. Rather, the letter sought to engage Speaker Boehner in a discussion about the meaning and importance of Catholic social doctrine. In part, the letter stated, "We congratulate you on the occasion of your commencement address to The Catholic University of America. It is good for Catholic universities to host and engage the thoughts of powerful public figures, even Catholics such as yourself who fail to recognize (whether out of a lack of awareness or dissent) important aspects of Catholic teaching. We write in the hope that this visit will reawaken your familiarity with the teachings of your Church on matters of faith and morals as they relate to governance."
The letter further noted that, "Mr. Speaker, your voting record is at variance from one of the Church's most ancient moral teachings. From the apostles to the present, the Magisterium of the Church has insisted that those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. Your record in support of legislation to address the desperate needs of the poor is among the worst in Congress. This fundamental concern should have great urgency for Catholic policy makers. Yet, even now, you work in opposition to it."
"The 2012 budget you shepherded to passage in the House of Representatives guts long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society. It is particularly cruel to pregnant women and children, gutting Maternal and Child Health grants and slashing $500 million from the highly successful Women Infants and Children nutrition program. When they graduate from WIC at age 5, these children will face a 20% cut in food stamps. The House budget radically cuts Medicaid and effectively ends Medicare. It invokes the deficit to justify visiting such hardship upon the vulnerable, while it carves out $3 trillion in new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy...A just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons. It requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly."
Sadly, in response to that letter, the Speaker chose not to discuss his fidelity to Catholic moral teaching but, instead, devoted much of his commencement address to describe his life story, punctuated by copious weeps.
Shortly thereafter, Congressman Paul Ryan, the Republican legislator who authored the House budget and who is also a professed Catholic, released an exchange of letters with New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. In his letter of April 29, Ryan sought to justify his budget proposal with the argument that "The House Budget's overarching concern is to control and end the mortal threat of exploding debt. By scaling back Washington's excesses, the budget will reduce deficits by $4.4 trillion over the next decade compared to the President's budget proposal. The House Budget is intended to restore the confidence of job creators in order to encourage expansion, growth, and hiring today. The budget better targets assistance to those in need, repairs the social safety net, and fulfills the mission of health and retirement security for all Americans. The budget reforms welfare for those who need it -- the poor, sick, and vulnerable; it ends welfare for those who don't -- entrenched corporations, the wealthiest Americans. It's a plan of action aimed at strengthening economic security for seniors, workers, families, and the poor."
Archbishop Dolan's reply can only be interpreted as an endorsement of the House Republican's deeply flawed budget and a rejection of traditional Catholic social teaching: "I deeply appreciate your letter's assurances of your continued attention to the guidance of Catholic social justice in the current delicate budget considerations in Congress. As you allude to in your letter, the budget is not just about numbers. It reflects the very values of our nation. As many religious leaders have commented, budgets are moral statements".
"As is so clear from your correspondence, the light of our faith -- anchored in the Bible, the tradition of the Church, and the Natural Law -- can help illumine and guide solid American constitutional wisdom. Thus I commend your letter's attention to the important values of fiscal responsibility; sensitivity to the foundational role of the family; the primacy of the dignity of the human person and the protection of all human life; a concrete solicitude for the poor and the vulnerable, especially those who are hungry and homeless, without work or in poverty; and putting into practice the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, here at home and internationally within the context of a commitment to the common good shared by government and other mediating institutions alike."
Archbishop Dolan's response epitomizes what is terribly wrong with the current hierarchy of the American Catholic Church: They have become captives of the status quo who have apparently been chosen by the Vatican not for their intellects but because of their unquestioning obedience to the current pope and, in the worst sense of the phase, their "political skills"
Contrary to the arguments of those American Catholics who have explicitly endorsed the kind of politics espoused by Congressmen Boehner and Ryan or who, like Archbishop Dolan, have given their tacit support, Catholic moral teaching is very different. Because it traces its lineage from Aristotle, through Thomas Aquinas, to Catholic philosophers today, it is fundamentally at odds with the kind of anti-social individualism that dominates current U.S. political discourse.
For that reason, historic Catholic social doctrine is impossible to square with the current assault that is being waged by Republicans against the importance of government as a positive instrument to advance the public good. In his encyclical, Mater et Magister, Pope John XXIII emphasized the central role of the state in promoting social justice: "20 As for the State, its whole raison d'etre is the realization of the common good in the temporal order. It cannot, therefore, hold aloof from economic matters. On the contrary, it must do all in its power to promote the production of a sufficient supply of material goods, "the use of which is necessary for the practice of virtue." (7) It has also the duty to protect the rights of all its people, and particularly of its weaker members, the workers, women and children. It can never be right for the State to shirk its obligation of working actively for the betterment of the condition of the workingman. "
"21. It is furthermore the duty of the State to ensure that terms of employment are regulated in accordance with justice and equity, and to safeguard the human dignity of workers by making sure that they are not required to work in an environment which may prove harmful to their material and spiritual interests. It was for this reason that the Leonine encyclical enunciated those general principles of rightness and equity which have been assimilated into the social legislation of many a modern State, and which, as Pope Pius XI declared in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, (8) have made no small contribution to the rise and development of that new branch of jurisprudence called labor law. "
Contemporary events suggest that the current questions about the reasons for Church's loss of educated Catholic laity are misplaced. Rather, a different set of questions needs to be posed and answered: Why have the American bishops become so timid when confronted with injustice? Why have they abandoned their historic duty to teach Catholic moral philosophy?
