St. Thomas Aquinas, Thoughts on the Refugee Crisis

Great article. Note especially the comment about how the Good Samaritan puts his "neighbor" in a hotel, not in his home.

What’s our Catholic Response? The Samaritan Uses the Hotel We Christians should be generous with humanitarian aid toward Muslims and all people. We should send money and resources to those who have been dispossessed. We should be loving and generous with Muslims. Kindness brings about conversion and understanding. We should also try to topple the Islamic State and eradicate terrorism in our lands and in the Islamic lands. Remember the Good Samaritan! He did not take the roadside victim home with him. Rather, the Good Samaritan put the victim up in a hotel and paid for him to get better.

The Good Samaritan was good and commended by Christ. The Good Samaritan did the right thing: humanitarian aid. We are not required by Christ to take victims that oppose our faith and our way of life and make them into our political heirs. We are not required to take them into our homes. But we are obliged to help them. And if terrorists use our charity as a pretense to hurt us, then, as Thomas Aquinas says, they should be swiftly destroyed.

Read the whole article here, Islamic Refugee Crisis: Good Samaritan or Maccabean Response? Or both - Taylor Marshall What would Saint Thomas Aquinas say about the Refugee Crisis?

The Charity of Cardinal Merry del Val or the "Charity" of Wealth Re-Distribution

I've been reading a wonderful biography on Cardinal Merry del Val, Secretary of State under Saint Pope Pius X and one of the greatest statesman to ever serve the Church. While he will long be remembered for colloborating with Pope Pius X on reforming the Church and the battle against Modernism he is equally to be remembered for his humility and service to the sick and poor. He was also a Bailiff Grand Cross of the Order of Malta and his cause for canonization was introduced by Pope Pius XII and he is currently declared a "Servant of God." Here is a brief characterization of his charity from the author and an example of the charity he gave from a Canon of the Basilica of St. Peter.

Like all great souls, Cardinal Merry del Val had a passion for charity that knew no limits; merciful charity that helps a person without humiliating him; pious charity inspired not by any human motives but only out of love for God.

"No one ever had recourse to him in vain; no one ever left him without getting some sort of help and comfort. He gave to all, and in order to give even more he imposed upon himself a way of life that was parsimonious and at times even downright austere (he once took the sheets and mattress from his own bed to give to a family in need). He was always so courteous and genteel in exercising his charity it seemed as if he was the one accepting it."

One last example from a former member of the Pious Association of the Sacred Heart of Jesus which he founded to help the young boys of Trastevere, one of the poorest sections of Rome.

"It was he who paid the rent for families unable to pay it. It was he who found work for those that did not know how or where to find it. He was the one who went out and procured employment for needy young men. Finally, it was he who, disregarding the sacrifice entailed or the expenses involved, would provide the sick, the infirm, and the invalids with care, support, and medicines."

What would happen if more of us would live our lives by his shining example? Instead of community organizing or radical social activism we acted as true Christian disciples how much more would God bless our efforts? Rather than abdicating our responsibilities to "the Government" or slandering those who might have a different political or economic philosophy we ourselves took care of our brother in need. Government has a proper role to be sure but too often those who work for it have their own selfish motives and interests in mind far removed from true Christian charity. Contrast the anonymous charity of Cardinal del Val with the self-promoting paying off of special interests to ensure their votes in the next election. Too often among these individuals there is a self-aggradizing look at me, I have compassion for the poor, while the example of the Saints is to show us that what they do is solely out of love of God and neighbor and seen by Him alone.

Today at a labor rally in Detroit, union boss Jimmy Hoffa, used inflammatory rhetoric to motivate the "labor crowd" in a war against corporations, Republicans, and anyone else they imply is not a labor supporter. The problem with this rhetoric is that calling your opponent "s-ns of b--ches" and threatening to "take them out"  is a decidedly un-Catholic view of the relationship between labor and capital. In honor of "Labor Day" here in the States here is a portion of the encyclical Rerum Novarum of Pope Leo XIII. Though it has been updated by the encyclicals of subsequent popes, being the original document of the Church to address the changing social questions it still has relevance to us today.

1. That the spirit of revolutionary change, which has long been disturbing the nations of the world, should have passed beyond the sphere of politics and made its influence felt in the cognate sphere of practical economics is not surprising. The elements of the conflict now raging are unmistakable, in the vast expansion of industrial pursuits and the marvelous discoveries of science; in the changed relations between masters and workmen; in the enormous fortunes of some few individuals, and the utter poverty of the masses; in the increased self-reliance and closer mutual combination of the working classes; as also, finally, in the prevailing moral degeneracy. The momentous gravity of the state of things now obtaining fills every mind with painful apprehension; wise men are discussing it; practical men are proposing schemes; popular meetings, legislatures, and rulers of nations are all busied with it—actually there is no question which has taken a deeper hold on the public mind.

2. Therefore, venerable brethren, as on former occasions when it seemed opportune to refute false teaching, We have addressed you in the interests of the Church and of the common weal, and have issued letters bearing on political power, human liberty, the Christian constitution of the State, and like matters, so have We thought it expedient now to speak on the condition of the working classes.[1] It is a subject on which We have already touched more than once, incidentally. But in the present letter, the responsibility of the apostolic office urges Us to treat the question of set purpose and in detail, in order that no misapprehension may exist as to the principles which truth and justice dictate for its settlement. The discussion is not easy, nor is it void of danger. It is no easy matter to define the relative rights and mutual duties of the rich and of the poor, of capital and of labor. And the danger lies in this, that crafty agitators are intent on making use of these differences of opinion to pervert men's judgments and to stir up the people to revolt.

3. In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: for the ancient workingmen's guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hard-heartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.

4. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man's envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

The Charity of Cardinal Merry del Val or the "Charity" of Wealth Re-Distribution

I've been reading a wonderful biography on Cardinal Merry del Val, Secretary of State under Saint Pope Pius X and one of the greatest statesman to ever serve the Church. While he will long be remembered for colloborating with Pope Pius X on reforming the Church and the battle against Modernism he is equally to be remembered for his humility and service to the sick and poor. He was also a Bailiff Grand Cross of the Order of Malta and his cause for canonization was introduced by Pope Pius XII and he is currently declared a "Servant of God." Here is a brief characterization of his charity from the author and an example of the charity he gave from a Canon of the Basilica of St. Peter.

Like all great souls, Cardinal Merry del Val had a passion for charity that knew no limits; merciful charity that helps a person without humiliating him; pious charity inspired not by any human motives but only out of love for God.

"No one ever had recourse to him in vain; no one ever left him without getting some sort of help and comfort. He gave to all, and in order to give even more he imposed upon himself a way of life that was parsimonious and at times even downright austere (he once took the sheets and mattress from his own bed to give to a family in need). He was always so courteous and genteel in exercising his charity it seemed as if he was the one accepting it."

One last example from a former member of the Pious Association of the Sacred Heart of Jesus which he founded to help the young boys of Trastevere, one of the poorest sections of Rome.

"It was he who paid the rent for families unable to pay it. It was he who found work for those that did not know how or where to find it. He was the one who went out and procured employment for needy young men. Finally, it was he who, disregarding the sacrifice entailed or the expenses involved, would provide the sick, the infirm, and the invalids with care, support, and medicines."

What would happen if more of us would live our lives by his shining example? Instead of community organizing or radical social activism we acted as true Christian disciples how much more would God bless our efforts? Rather than abdicating our responsibilities to "the Government" or slandering those who might have a different political or economic philosophy we ourselves took care of our brother in need. Government has a proper role to be sure but too often those who work for it have their own selfish motives and interests in mind far removed from true Christian charity. Contrast the anonymous charity of Cardinal del Val with the self-promoting paying off of special interests to ensure their votes in the next election. Too often among these individuals there is a self-aggradizing look at me, I have compassion for the poor, while the example of the Saints is to show us that what they do is solely out of love of God and neighbor and seen by Him alone.

Today at a labor rally in Detroit, union boss Jimmy Hoffa, used inflammatory rhetoric to motivate the "labor crowd" in a war against corporations, Republicans, and anyone else they imply is not a labor supporter. The problem with this rhetoric is that calling your opponent "s-ns of b--ches" and threatening to "take them out"  is a decidedly un-Catholic view of the relationship between labor and capital. In honor of "Labor Day" here in the States here is a portion of the encyclical Rerum Novarum of Pope Leo XIII. Though it has been updated by the encyclicals of subsequent popes, being the original document of the Church to address the changing social questions it still has relevance to us today.

1. That the spirit of revolutionary change, which has long been disturbing the nations of the world, should have passed beyond the sphere of politics and made its influence felt in the cognate sphere of practical economics is not surprising. The elements of the conflict now raging are unmistakable, in the vast expansion of industrial pursuits and the marvelous discoveries of science; in the changed relations between masters and workmen; in the enormous fortunes of some few individuals, and the utter poverty of the masses; in the increased self-reliance and closer mutual combination of the working classes; as also, finally, in the prevailing moral degeneracy. The momentous gravity of the state of things now obtaining fills every mind with painful apprehension; wise men are discussing it; practical men are proposing schemes; popular meetings, legislatures, and rulers of nations are all busied with it—actually there is no question which has taken a deeper hold on the public mind.

2. Therefore, venerable brethren, as on former occasions when it seemed opportune to refute false teaching, We have addressed you in the interests of the Church and of the common weal, and have issued letters bearing on political power, human liberty, the Christian constitution of the State, and like matters, so have We thought it expedient now to speak on the condition of the working classes.[1] It is a subject on which We have already touched more than once, incidentally. But in the present letter, the responsibility of the apostolic office urges Us to treat the question of set purpose and in detail, in order that no misapprehension may exist as to the principles which truth and justice dictate for its settlement. The discussion is not easy, nor is it void of danger. It is no easy matter to define the relative rights and mutual duties of the rich and of the poor, of capital and of labor. And the danger lies in this, that crafty agitators are intent on making use of these differences of opinion to pervert men's judgments and to stir up the people to revolt.

3. In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: for the ancient workingmen's guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hard-heartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.

4. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man's envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.

Pope Speaks on the Corruption of Food as a Speculative Commodity

From CNA/EWTN comes this news story earlier today: Fr. McNabb would have applauded this speech given to the Rome-based Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Pope Benedict issued strong words on Friday against financial speculators spiking food prices and pointed to family-run farms as a way to help stave off world hunger.

“Nourishment is a factor which touches on the fundamental right to life,” the Pope said.

“How can we remain silent before the fact that food has become the object of speculation and is tied to the movements of financial markets which, lacking clear rules and moral principles, seem fixated on the single objective of profit?”

The Reign of Christ Over Nations

"So long as Christ does not reign over nations, His influence over individuals remains superficial and precarious.  If it is true that the work of the apostolate consists in the conversion of individuals and that nations as such do not go to heaven, but souls, one by one, we must not forget, nevertheless, that the individual member of society lives under the never-ceasing influence of his environment, in which, if we may not say the he is submerged, he is, at least, deeply plunged.  If the environment is non-Catholic, it prevents him from enmbracing the faith or, if he has the faith, it tends to root out of his heart every vestige of belief.  If we imagine Catholic social institutions, with Our Lord no longer living in the hearts of the individual members of society, then religion has there become merely a displeasing signboard which will  soon be torn down.  But, on the other hand, try to convert individuals without Catholicizing the social institutions and your work is without stability.  The structure you erect in the morning will be torn down by others in the evening.  Is not the strategy of the enemies of God there to teach us a lesson?  They want to destroy the faith in the hearts of individuals, it is true, but they direct still more vigorous efforts to the elimination of religion from social institutions.  Even one defeat of God in this domain means the weakening, if not the ruin, of the faith in the souls of many."  from the Kingship of Christ according to Cardinal Pie of Poitiers, p.59

Working Together Part 2

Pro-Life Catholics are often accused of lacking concern for the "other social issues" and caring more for the unborn than for the living. While this is patently absurd it is important for the sake of clarity to set down some basic principles of what Catholic teaching is on the economic issues. In a similar vein as my previous post on "working together" it is important to highlight how we define terms in contrast to non-Catholics. Here are some general principles governing economic reform highlighted by Pope Pius X and taken from the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII:

1) Human society, as God established it, is composed of unequal elements, just as the members of the human body are unequal; to make them all equal is impossible, and would be the destruction of society itself (Quod Apostolici muneris).

2) Consequently, it is conformable to the order established by God that in human society there should be princes and subjects, masters and men, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, nobles and plebians, who, united by the bond of love, should help one another to attain their final end in Heaven, and the their material and moral well-being on earth [A key point here is the bond of love necessary to help each other attain Heaven ultimately and their material and moral well-being on Earth. Too frequently today are people only concerned with their material well-being. This is particularly true of our secular government] (Quod Apostolici muneris).

3) To calm the strife between rich and poor it is necessary to distinguish between justice and charity. Only when justice has been violated is there a right to make a claim. [Two very misunderstand terms, especially that of "justice" as defined by the Peace and Justice groups} (Rerum Novarum).

4) The obligations of the poor and of the workman are these: to perform wholly and faithfully the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; not to injure masters in their property or person; to abstain from acts of violence, even in defence of their own rights; and never to turn their demands into disturbances (Rerum Novarum).

5) The obligations of justice for capitalist and masters are as follows: to pay a just wage to workman; not to injure their lawful savings by violence, fraud, nor by open or hidden usury; not to expose them to corrupting allurements, nor to the danger of scandal; not to entice them from a love of their family, and from careful thrift; not to impose on them work unsuited to their strength, age, and sex (Rerum Novarum).

6) It is an obligation of charity for the rich and for those who have means, to help the poor and needy, according to the precept of the Gospel. This precept is of such binding force that, at the day of judgment, as our Lord Himself tells us, a special account of its fulfilment will be required (Rerum Novarum).

7) The poor, on their part, ought not to blush for their poverty, nor disdain the charity of the rich, above all when they think of Jesus, our Redeemer, Who, though He could have been born in wealth, made Himself poor to ennoble poverty and enrich it with incomparable merits of Heaven (Rerum Novarum).

8) Capitalists and workmen may themselves largely help towards the solution of the labor question, by institutions formed to give timely aid to those who are in need, as also to draw together and unite the two classes. Such are societies of mutual help, numerous private insurance societies, what are called 'patronages' for the young, and, above all, workingmen's unions. [Regarding this last point, St. Pius X stressed the need for Catholic associations, in order that a Catholic's economic life and action may be in harmony with his religious beliefs: (Rerum Novarum)

Working Together Part 2

Pro-Life Catholics are often accused of lacking concern for the "other social issues" and caring more for the unborn than for the living. While this is patently absurd it is important for the sake of clarity to set down some basic principles of what Catholic teaching is on the economic issues. In a similar vein as my previous post on "working together" it is important to highlight how we define terms in contrast to non-Catholics. Here are some general principles governing economic reform highlighted by Pope Pius X and taken from the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII:

1) Human society, as God established it, is composed of unequal elements, just as the members of the human body are unequal; to make them all equal is impossible, and would be the destruction of society itself (Quod Apostolici muneris).

2) Consequently, it is conformable to the order established by God that in human society there should be princes and subjects, masters and men, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, nobles and plebians, who, united by the bond of love, should help one another to attain their final end in Heaven, and the their material and moral well-being on earth [A key point here is the bond of love necessary to help each other attain Heaven ultimately and their material and moral well-being on Earth. Too frequently today are people only concerned with their material well-being. This is particularly true of our secular government] (Quod Apostolici muneris).

3) To calm the strife between rich and poor it is necessary to distinguish between justice and charity. Only when justice has been violated is there a right to make a claim. [Two very misunderstand terms, especially that of "justice" as defined by the Peace and Justice groups} (Rerum Novarum).

4) The obligations of the poor and of the workman are these: to perform wholly and faithfully the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; not to injure masters in their property or person; to abstain from acts of violence, even in defence of their own rights; and never to turn their demands into disturbances (Rerum Novarum).

5) The obligations of justice for capitalist and masters are as follows: to pay a just wage to workman; not to injure their lawful savings by violence, fraud, nor by open or hidden usury; not to expose them to corrupting allurements, nor to the danger of scandal; not to entice them from a love of their family, and from careful thrift; not to impose on them work unsuited to their strength, age, and sex (Rerum Novarum).

6) It is an obligation of charity for the rich and for those who have means, to help the poor and needy, according to the precept of the Gospel. This precept is of such binding force that, at the day of judgment, as our Lord Himself tells us, a special account of its fulfilment will be required (Rerum Novarum).

7) The poor, on their part, ought not to blush for their poverty, nor disdain the charity of the rich, above all when they think of Jesus, our Redeemer, Who, though He could have been born in wealth, made Himself poor to ennoble poverty and enrich it with incomparable merits of Heaven (Rerum Novarum).

8) Capitalists and workmen may themselves largely help towards the solution of the labor question, by institutions formed to give timely aid to those who are in need, as also to draw together and unite the two classes. Such are societies of mutual help, numerous private insurance societies, what are called 'patronages' for the young, and, above all, workingmen's unions. [Regarding this last point, St. Pius X stressed the need for Catholic associations, in order that a Catholic's economic life and action may be in harmony with his religious beliefs: (Rerum Novarum)

Christ Must Rule Over Nations

One of the elements from President Obama's speech was the emphasis on diversity and working together to meet the problems we all face as individuals and as nations. Unfortunately what is absent from his plan is that it neglects the place Christ must hold. He stated that no religion holds all the answers. Well I beg to seriously differ.

Read the following excerpt from The Kingship of Christ by Cardinal Pie of Poitiers and the re-read the speech Obama gave at UND in light of this text.

"So long as Christ does not reign over nations, His influence over individuals remains superficial and precarious. If it is true that the work of the apostolate consists in the conversion of individuals and that nations as such do not go to heaven, but souls, one by one, we must not forget, nevertheless, that the individual member of society lives under the never-ceasing influence of his environment, in which, if we may not say that he is submerged, he is, at least, deeply plunged., If the environment is non-Catholic, it prevents him from embracing the faith or, if he has the faith, it tends to root out of his heart every vestige of belief. If we imagine Catholic social institutions, with Our Lord no longer living in the hearts of the individual members of society, then religion has there become merely a displeasing signboard which will soon be torn down. But, on the other hand, try to convert individuals without Catholicizing the social institutions and your work is without stability. The structure you erect in the morning will be torn down by others in the evening. is not the strategy of the enemies of God there to teach us a lesson? They want to destroy the faith in the hearts of the individuals, it is true, but they direct still more vigorous efforts to the elimination of religion from social institutions. Even one defeat of God in this domain means the weakening, if not the ruin, of the faith in the souls of many.

President Jenkins has supported his decision to honor President Obama because of his commitment to other issues that are consistent with other social teachings of the Church. The problem I have attempted to raise the past year is that while many rightly attempt to defend the right to life position as trumping these other social issues in terms of importance, they frequently fail to address the myth that Pres. Obama's understanding of these issues is equivalent with the Catholic understanding of them. One can search my past posts as I have shown that his positions vis a vis healthcare, education, economics etc are more often contrary to Church teaching than in agreement. Perhaps the problem is that too few Catholics fully comprehend the Catholic Social Teaching but take them to be the platform of the Democrat Party.

Recalling what Cardinal George had to say after his earlier meeting with President Obama,

"He'll tell you anything to make you think he agrees with you."

Christ Must Rule Over Nations

One of the elements from President Obama's speech was the emphasis on diversity and working together to meet the problems we all face as individuals and as nations. Unfortunately what is absent from his plan is that it neglects the place Christ must hold. He stated that no religion holds all the answers. Well I beg to seriously differ.

Read the following excerpt from The Kingship of Christ by Cardinal Pie of Poitiers and the re-read the speech Obama gave at UND in light of this text.

"So long as Christ does not reign over nations, His influence over individuals remains superficial and precarious. If it is true that the work of the apostolate consists in the conversion of individuals and that nations as such do not go to heaven, but souls, one by one, we must not forget, nevertheless, that the individual member of society lives under the never-ceasing influence of his environment, in which, if we may not say that he is submerged, he is, at least, deeply plunged., If the environment is non-Catholic, it prevents him from embracing the faith or, if he has the faith, it tends to root out of his heart every vestige of belief. If we imagine Catholic social institutions, with Our Lord no longer living in the hearts of the individual members of society, then religion has there become merely a displeasing signboard which will soon be torn down. But, on the other hand, try to convert individuals without Catholicizing the social institutions and your work is without stability. The structure you erect in the morning will be torn down by others in the evening. is not the strategy of the enemies of God there to teach us a lesson? They want to destroy the faith in the hearts of the individuals, it is true, but they direct still more vigorous efforts to the elimination of religion from social institutions. Even one defeat of God in this domain means the weakening, if not the ruin, of the faith in the souls of many.

President Jenkins has supported his decision to honor President Obama because of his commitment to other issues that are consistent with other social teachings of the Church. The problem I have attempted to raise the past year is that while many rightly attempt to defend the right to life position as trumping these other social issues in terms of importance, they frequently fail to address the myth that Pres. Obama's understanding of these issues is equivalent with the Catholic understanding of them. One can search my past posts as I have shown that his positions vis a vis healthcare, education, economics etc are more often contrary to Church teaching than in agreement. Perhaps the problem is that too few Catholics fully comprehend the Catholic Social Teaching but take them to be the platform of the Democrat Party.

Recalling what Cardinal George had to say after his earlier meeting with President Obama,

"He'll tell you anything to make you think he agrees with you."

Assassins of the Family - Birth Contol

Chesterton wrote an essay of Social Reform versus Birth Control which in light of news that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (who some try to pass as "pro-life" because he is a Mormon) filed a bill on the opening day of the new Congress that will provide more government money for birth control seems truly prescient. Ironically we were constantly told all last election cycle that we needed to vote for the Democrats because they were the politicians concerned about welfare, job creation and the other socio-economic issues. But when new jobless figures are released, with the highest levels in years, and many cities and states facing economic deficits placing more jobs at risk, Sen. Reid has as a priority increased spending for birth control. Perhaps we can understand this better after reading the following excerpt from Chesterton.

If anybody doubts that this is the very simple motive, let him test it by the very simple statements made by the various Birth-Controllers like the Dean of St. Paul's. They never do say that we suffer from a too bountiful supply of bankers or that cosmopolitan financiers must not have such large families. They do not say that the fashionable throng at Ascot wants thinning, or that it is desirable to decimate the people dining at the Ritz or the Savoy. Though, Lord knows, if ever a thing human could look like a sub-human jungle, with tropical flowers and very poisonous weeds, it is the rich crowd that assembles in a modern Americanized hotel.

But the Birth-Controllers have not the smallest desire to control that jungle. It is much too dangerous a jungle to touch. It contains tigers. They never do talk about a danger from the comfortable classes, even from a more respectable section of the comfortable classes. The Gloomy Dean is not gloomy about there being too many Dukes; and naturally not about there being too many Deans. He is not primarily annoyed with a politician for having a whole population of poor relations, though places and public salaries have to be found for all the relations. Political Economy means that everybody except politicians must be economical.

The Birth-Controller does not bother about all these things, for the perfectly simple reason that it is not such people that he wants to control. What he wants to control is the populace, and he practically says so. He aways insists that a workman has no right to have so many children, or that a slum is perilous because it is producing so many children. The question he dreads is "Why has not the workman a better wage? Why has not the slum family a better house?" His way of escaping from it is to suggest, not a larger house but a smaller family. The landlord or the employer says in his hearty and handsome fashion: "You really cannot expect me to deprive myself of my money. But I will make a sacrifice, I will deprive myself of your children."

The Welfare State = The All Powerful State

Bishop John Wright of the Diocese of Worchester, MA gave an address to 200 presidents and other officers of almost 40 State medical association on June 14, 1951. He warned them against "enslavement by absorption" into a state bureaucracy. As we approach the inauguration of a new President and Congress in the next few weeks who are committed to expanding Governemental intrusion into our lives may these words of the wise Bishop serve as a warning and a reminder to remain firm in our Catholic beliefs. He went on to say,

"You doctors should be the first to insist on morality, for once the moral law goes into eclipse, your profession is doomed to return to the slavery which was the condition of physicians and teachers in the pre-Christian days of amoral pagan totalitarianism."

Let us also pray for wisdom from our Church leaders as they address the problems in our current healtcare system that they not be blinded by the overly simplistic solution of "universal healthcare" offered by those politicians who will ensure that the systems provide numerous immoral practices in open conflict with the teachings of the Church and the consciences of our Catholic healthcare workers.

The State and the Kingship of Christ

For the first time in years a signifcant number of our Bishops have stood together and publicly proclaimed the moral teaching of the Church and its relevance in the recent elections. Although ignored by many Catholics who preferred the unjust moral equivalence of several law and other professors to the teaching authority of the Church's Bishops it was encouraging for many us to see them acting as true shephards. Many were criticized for becoming too involved in politics and violating a fictitious idea of the separation of Church and State. While certainly each operates in a distinct role it is wrong to deny the Church its legitmate place in preserving right order in society through its mission to preach the Gospel.

Thomas Storck wrote an article in The Catholic Faith originally published in 1996 and now available at The ChesterBelloc Mandate. Below is an excerpt of that article. It is a common error particularly among our Catholic politicians to deny the Kingship of Christ while elevating "The State" to His place.

This is the encyclical Quas Primas, on the Kingship of Christ, issued on December 11, 1925. To try to understand Catholic social teaching apart from the Kingship of Jesus Christ is to have only a partial and one-sided view of the matter. For "all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ." Moreover, "It would be a grave error...to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs, since by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures commited to Him by the Father, all things are in His power."9 If we develop these points we can see that, looked at as part of the kingdom of Jesus Christ, nothing that mankind does, either individually or corporately, can be alien to Christ's law and his kingly rule.

Therefore the Church, as the mystical extension of the Incarnation, is not doing anything foreign to her mission when she provides guidance for bringing about the realization of Christ's Kingdom in the affairs of men. We are all Christ's subjects, and as such we are bound to make our institutions and our customs reflect him. Catholics should not dare to have a conception of business or economic life that is based either on practical atheism or on a deism that sees God as simply a distant Creator, who left a kind of clockwork universe that runs by itself, as in Adam Smith's "invisible hand." Just as we would not allow the sexual appetite to rule itself, on the grounds that since it was created by God somehow it would ultimately work everything out for the good, so we cannot allow the appetite for economic gain to have free rein.

For as Pius XI taught, "Just as the unity of human society cannot be built upon 'class' conflict, so the proper ordering of economic affairs cannot be left to the free play of rugged competition."10 For to do so would be to think and act as if, whenever men gathered into societies or groups, including nations, somehow they could forget the kingly law of Jesus Christ. If it is wrong to hurt the person living in the next house, it is likewise wrong to hurt my employee or even my competitor, for are we not brothers and are we not all subjects of our common King? And if we cannot see how it is possible not to hurt them in order for myself to survive in the business world, then we need to rethink our approach to economic life and change the demands that our economic system makes upon each of us. For more basic and more demanding than any of its strictures are the moral law and the fundamental principles of justice and charity.

The laws of physics describe how particles of matter move and react under certain conditions. Because these particles do not have free will, they have no choice about their behavior and they cannot be blamed for what they do. The so-called laws of economics, however, are about the actions of free human persons.11 Because of this freedom they can yield or refuse to yield to their various concupiscible appetites. The laws of economics are descriptions of what human beings will generally do if they yield themselves fully to their concupiscible appetite for gain. But whenever this appetite for gain runs counter to the law of Christ, it is entitled to no more respect than when the sexual appetite similarly runs out of bounds. And just as with the sexual appetite, we must curb our appetite for gain if our activity is likely to bring harm or disruption to a social order that supports a civilization of love.

If the Kingship of Christ Jesus over all men and over every aspect of human affairs is a fact, not merely a fancy which we use to decorate our piety at appropriate times, then this fact requires our utmost attention, and all the other activities and institutions of human existence must be shaped to recognize that Kingship. Thus we see that far from being something extra added onto Catholic dogma, the social teachings are integral parts of the realization of the Lordship of Jesus Christ the King. Every year we celebrate the feast of the Kingship of Christ and thus every year we have a new opportunity publicly to reaffirm these truths. But every single day we have the opportunity not just to reaffirm them, but to try to see how they can be put into practice. Otherwise, how can we avoid the condemnation of that Supreme Pontiff, who said of social modernism, "We condemn it as strongly as We do dogmatic Modernism?"

Where are the Poor?

There is a re-print of an article by Dorothy Day titled, "Where are the Poor?" which can be read at the ChesterBelloc website. In it she quotes from the 1952 Christmas letter of Pope Pius XII which bears repeating here.

If we were convinced of the need, if our consciences were aroused, how much could we not do, even those of most modest income, in the way of helping the poor. We must reprint, and read again and again the words of Pope Pius XII, who cried out two years ago in a most noble encyclical, Christmas 1952.

"While our thoughts dwell on these scenes of poverty and utter destitution," he writes, "Our heart fills with anxiety and is overwhelmed, we can say, by a sadness unto death. We are thinking of the consequences of poverty,still more of the consequences of utter destitution. For some families there is a dying daily, a dying hourly: a dying multiplied, especially for parents, by the number of dear ones they behold suffering and wasting away. Meanwhile sickness becomes more serious, because not properly treated; it strikes little ones in particular, because preventive measures are lacking. Then there is the weakening and consequent physical deterioration of whole generations.

We cannot conclude without mentioning that the very best charitable organization would not suffice of itself alone to assist those in need. Personal action must intervene, full of solicitude, anxious to overcome the distance between helper and helped, drawing near to the poor because he is Christ's brother and our own.

"The great temptation in an age which calls itself social--when besides the Church, the state, the municipality and other public bodies devote themselves so much to social problems--is that when the poor man knocks on the door, people, even believers will just send him away to an agency or social center, to an organization, thinking that their personal obligation has been sufficiently fulfilled by their contributions in taxes or voluntary gifts to those institutions.

"Undoubtedly the poor man will receive your help that way but often he counts also on yourselves, at least on your words of kindness and comfort. Your charity ought to resemble God's, Who came in person to bring His help.

"These considerations encourage us to call on your personal collaboration. The poor, those whom life has rudely reduced to straightened circumstances, the unfortunate of every kind, await it. In so far as it depends on you, strive that none shall say any more, as once did the man in the Gospel who had been infirm for 38 years: 'Lord, I have no one.'"

The Bailout of Finance Capitalism

On the Remnant Newspaper website there is an online column dealing with the recent financial crisis and how to resolve the crisis according to Catholic social teaching. It is a good article to explain and understand why the violation of Catholic principles is responsible for this mess and how by properly ordering our lives on these principles we can began to restore our economy and society at large. As neither political party is willing or able to understand the nature of the problem we are justifibly pessimistic that conditions will improve anytime soon and that a greater danger lies ahead if people start to believe that solutions are to be found along socialist lines. One interesting item he mentions is the concept of "just price." We constantly hear about a "just wage" for employees but rarely the equally important concept of "just price."

The Catholic doctrine of the just price is another moral lens through which to view these transactions. In summary, it is a violation of justice to sell something for more than (or buy something for less than) its just price. For our purposes the definition of just price can be summarized as the general estimation of the value of human needs satisfied by the thing sold. Although in a particular case this may be difficult to calculate, it is an objective standard not based on the particular needs of a transaction participant. Just because I am very hungry, does not mean you can charge more than the common estimation of the price of a sandwich merely because I am in greater need of it. Let us apply the just price theory to the housing market.

Although Americans have been indoctrinated to think that they own their homes, such a belief is a mere delusion. A simple definition of ownership encompasses the ability to retain the possession and use of a thing. All one needs to do is fail to make a mortgage payment and he will learn that he does not own the house where he lives, as millions of Americans have been realizing daily.

It takes only a modicum of common sense to realize that if I do not pay for something I do not own it (unless it has been given to me as a gift). When a bank has paid 85%, 90% or even over 100% of the purchase price (as in negative equity mortgages) of a house how can we with a straight face claim that the consumer “owns’ that house? In substance the bank has bought the house at one price (the purchase price paid to the seller) and is reselling it over time to the borrower at a higher price.

Given the staggering amounts of money repaid over a loan’s life as seen in the chart above, can we really claim that the bank is reselling the house at its just price? This is especially true when we compare the rates of residential home appreciation over long periods of time (excluding the recent artificial bubble of value growth which has popped).

The Principle of Subsidiarity

A key principle to understanding Catholic social teaching is the principle of subsidiarity. This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom. It conflicts with the passion for centralization and bureaucracy characteristic of the Welfare State.

Pope John Paul II wrote in his encyclical Centesimus annus,

In recent years the range of such intervention 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.100

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. In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbours to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need. One thinks of the condition of refugees, immigrants, the elderly, the sick, and all those in circumstances which call for assistance, such as drug abusers: all these people can be helped effectively only by those who offer them genuine fraternal support, in addition to the necessary care.

49. Faithful to the mission received from Christ her Founder, the Church has always been present and active among the needy, offering them material assistance in ways that neither humiliate nor reduce them to mere objects of assistance, but which help them to escape their precarious situation by promoting their dignity as persons. With heartfelt gratitude to God it must be pointed out that active charity has never ceased to be practised in the Church; indeed, today it is showing a manifold and gratifying increase. In this regard, special mention must be made of volunteer work, which the Church favours and promotes by urging everyone to cooperate in supporting and encouraging its undertakings.

For a better understanding of this principle read the rest of the article here.

Yes, Who Should Get the Catholic Vote?

There was a recent article from Fr. Ray Schroth S.J. on Who Should Get the Catholic Vote? Presumably he feels it should be Sen. Obama. He lists the breakdown of Catholics and their political party affiliation, according to a recent poll by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) at Georgetown U. They found 38 percent of Catholics identify with the Democratic Party, and 21 percent with the Republicans, while 41 percent identify with neither. Meanwhile, those who most identify with church authorities, who look to the Pope and Bishops for moral decisions, tend to be Republicans.

Despite these numbers, Catholics failed to support Senator John Kerry in the 2004 election, why? Among the reasons, he cites the theory of a fellow Jesuit. "Perhaps they suffered from a trend pointed out by New Orleans Jesuit social activist Lou Twomey in 1957: As Catholics became more affluent and moved to the suburbs, they left behind their Catholic pro-labor social teachings and were co-opted by conservative Republican values. (I'm sorry but anytime a priest is referred to as 'social activist' rather than 'priest' or 'Father' should raise a huge red flag.)

Clearly for Fr. Schroth these people grew weak and abandoned their Catholic principles rather than began thinking critically for themselves. But it is misleading to state that Catholic social teachings are only pro-labor. Catholic social thought is built on the cooperation between "management" and "labor" and the responsibilities and duties one owes the other. Pope John XXIII wrote in his encyclical Mater et Magistra that "workers and employers should regulate their mutual relations in a spirit of human solidarity and in accordance with the bond of Christian brotherhood." Archbishop Sheen gave a wonderful talk on this matter too, Lesson One in Economics, which is well worth listening to. It can be downloaded from Keep the Faith for $1.

Fr. Schroth goes on to blame President Bush for failing to do anything to lessen the incidence of abortions and suggests that Democrats are ready to enact social and economic reforms dealing with the issues that prompt women to resort to abortion in the first place and are more effective in reducing abortion than efforts to criminalize it. As usual those willing to overlook politicians pro-abortion positions in favor of their economic policies frame this as an either or proposition. As though pro-life advocates were simply looking to make criminals out of women who have abortions. But most people working in the pro-life movement do not see overturning Roe v. Wade as the end but rather one facet of ending abortion. There are many crisis pregnancy centers and other agencies trying to meet the emotional, mental, physical needs of the women during and after pregnancy. Rather than it being a question of poverty many of the women considering abortion do so because of the pressure by their husbands or boyfriends or other family members.

Yet as long as Roe v. Wade is the law of the land then any attempts by legislators to pass laws that might be perceived to restrict abortion are sure to be challenged by the pro-death camp. In fact a plan by the Bush administration to help pro-life doctors and/or health centers is already meeting opposition from some members of Congress and the regulations are not even in place yet. The U. S. Catholic Bishops have issued a statement urging support for this measure which would allow for freedom of conscience on behalf of the doctors.

In California abortion advocates are upset at a recent court decision. More than 13 million California voters will get to read uncensored ballot arguments in favor of Proposition 4 – Sarah’s Law – after a judge ruled against a challenge to the language by Planned Parenthood and its allies.

“Sarah” is a pseudonym for a teen who died from complications following an abortion in 1994. Her case is being used by Prop 4 advocates to dramatize the danger posed to young girls when family members are unaware they have undergone an abortion.

Planned Parenthood had sought to force the removal of Sarah’s story from the pro-Prop 4 ballot arguments, including the statement, " Had someone in her family known about the abortion, Sarah's life could have been saved." Planned Parenthood’s lawyer characterized that claim as “absolutely false,” but the judge apparently did not agree.

In New York despite the easy availability of free birth control they have an extremely high abortion rate and abortion is the method of choice for birth control. But the solution offered by the department of human services is. . . , more free birth control. Read more of that story here.

The Catholic Vote

Recently several Bishops have issued documents describing under which circumstances Catholics could vote for a pro-abortion politician. The Bishops of Kentucky wrote, "There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable moral position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons." However, the bishops continue, clarifying what might constitute a "grave moral reason", "Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil." Now some will use this to justify voting for the Democratic candidate by suggesting that other issues such as an "unjust war," immigration, universal healthcare are equally morally grave. A Catholic journalist for the Washington Post wrote,

"So what's a pro-life, pro-family, antiwar, pro-immigrant, pro-economic-justice Catholic like me supposed to do in November? That's an easy one. True to my faith, I'll vote for the candidate who offers the best hope of ending an unjust war, who promotes human dignity through universal health care and immigration reform, and whose policies strengthen families and provide alternatives to those in desperate situations. Sounds like I'll be voting for the Democrat -- and the bishops be damned."

In an effort to keep any soul from damning himself I think there are a few things to keep in mind. First off, abortion is intrinsically evil and as such a mortal sin. The other issues that concern our country among others, war, immigration, healthcare, education, death penalty are not intrinsically evil and would be more akin to venial sins. Now no matter how many venial sins a person commits they do not equal one mortal sin. (This of course does not infer that a person is free to commit as many venial sins as they want as eventually that attitude toward venial sin will lead them to commit mortal sin.) Now if we accept as the Church teaches that a person supporting abortion has committed a mortal sin then being cut off from the supernatural life of grace how is this same person to make the appropriate decisions concerning the other moral issues facing society? Further the fact that the Democratic Party professes concern for these other issues does not mean their approach is the Catholic one or even the best one. In fact I believe that their "solution" to these evils is worse than the problem itself.

Today's Democratic Party has more in common with the tenets of Socialism than the social teachings of the Catholic Church. Even though their language is common their meaning is not. One example is trade unions. Now there is nothing wrong with unions per se and I agree with the rights of workers to organize against an unsympathetic or worse management but the current trade union is generally devoid of any religious connection. Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum wrote, "As a general and perpetual law, Workmen's Associations should be so organized and governed as to furnish the best and most suitable means for attaining what is aimed at, namely, for helping each individual member to better his conditions to the utmost in body, mind, and spirit....what advantage can it be to a workman to obtain by means of a society all that he requires and to endanger his soul for want of spiritual food?" They are a carryover from the old guild system but because they are utterly secular and disconnected from the teaching of the Church their function will always be incomplete. Archbishop Sheen was right on when he said that a solution to the labor/management dispute was a Chapel in the workplace where labor and management knelt down together at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But today's unions foment distrust and a hatred of management that the previous encyclicals warned against. This antagonistic mentality between labor and management is opposed to the cooperation necessary as written by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum. Remember that atheistic Russia had trade unions which by no means operated in accord with Catholic social teaching. Too often the aims of the unions are for their leaders personal agendas and motives rather than the collective good of the employer, employee and the consumer of the product or service they are providing.

Another issue for people to support pro-abortion candidate/the Democratic Party is education. But the NEA and its biggest education supporters, i.e., politicians and unions are openly hostile to Catholic principles in general and Catholic education specifically. Try suggesting at your local Democratic caucus that you think the money your child is allotted for the public school should instead be given to you or allocated to a parish school. Pouring more money down an endless black hole will not solve the education problem in this country. Especially when one considers how some of that money is spent. For instance teaching Bobby how to put a condom on a cucumber. Not to mention all the anti-Catholic/Christian bigotry in history, science and other text books. I wrote in another post previously a document from the Catholic Bishops of England to voters on the eve of an election in the U.K. Compare what they said with Democratic thoughts on education today.

Regarding the "unjust war" in Iraq I can only say that whether the war was right or wrong the public anti-war position has prolonged this war and emboldened the terrorists who are engaged against us. Support our troops is an empty slogan on behalf of those whose primary goal is the defeat of the Republicans and the disgrace of President Bush. Hilaire Belloc writes of the defeat of the Christians in the battle at Manzikert as being the turning point in defending Christian lands from the advance of Islam. "A Byzantine counter-attack upon Mohammedanism reached halfway down the Syrian coast. There was a moment when it threatened Mesopotamia. But the strength of this revival in the Christendom of the East, in the Christians of the Greek rite, was sapped by political intrigue at the center. That political intrigue was mixed up with an "intellectual" disease comparable to the movement called today in Europe by the barbaric name of "Pacifism," and "Anti-Militarism." The coming into power of such politicians as batten upon movements of that kind undermined the whole new strength which the Macedonian Emperors had built up. The last fighting emperor could no longer be certain of proper support in the field against the Turk.... The Emperor was left alone on the battlefield, his army overwhelmed and general massacre followed. Asia Minor lay open to a swirling hoard of Mongol barbarians who overran, devastated, destroyed all that land of hither Asia which had been the solid foundation of the Byzantine power. Hilaire Belloc, The Crusades.

The death penalty is not intrinsically evil, nor does the Church even outlaw it. It is true that Pope John Paul wrote that the use of the death penalty was not really necessary in modern times due to other methods of punishing the guilty but he did not say that it could never be used.

Immigration is a complex issue that needs a Christian solution but again that is not necessarily the equivalent of the Democratic party solution. It is interesting to note the immigration policies of some other countries though and how illegal immigrants are treated. For example in Germany and Austria it is required that the candidate for citizenship know the German language sufficiently well to live there.

Poverty, just wages and other economic issues again demand the proper understanding of Social Justice as the Catholic Church teaches. Creating more "programs" and taxing "the rich" makes people feel good but doesn't address the necessity of our personal involvement. The Gospel commands us to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, give shelter to the homeless, visit the sick and prisoners. Archbishop Sheen theorized that the priest and the Levite that passed by the injured man in the story of the good Samaritan actually went on down to Jerusalem where they reported the man to a social worker. Okay so it was much funnier coming from him but the point is valid. He points out that we cannot rely on people who work out of duty, who when the office closes at 5 p.m Friday, tell the needy to come back Monday morning. Remember the innkeeper who take care of the man received compensation for his efforts when the Samaritan returned. We cannot absolve ourselves from our personal obligation by advocating taxing the so called "rich Republicans." It is curious how it is assumed that these "rich" don't do anything for the poor and so they must be taxed more. Yet how do we know how much they give to charity? In fact most studies show that Republican voters donate more of their income to charity than Democrats. Moreover have we given sufficiently on our own to be concerned of the charitable giving of others? The Catechism quotes St. John Chrysostom, "Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs." The demands of justice must be satisfied first of all; that which is already due in justice is not to be offered as a gift of charity.

When we attend to the needs of those in want, we give them what is theirs, not ours. More than performing works of mercy, we are paying a debt of justice." St. Gregory the Great

Healthcare is also important for the dignity of the human person yet a blanket "universal healthcare program" administered by the Government is not the great panacea that it's advocates profess. Healthcare costs are an issue for a variety of reasons not least of which is the legal costs associated with the care.

Further the Democratic Party's advocacy of birth control, divorce, marriage are all in opposition to the proper nature and role of the family. Remember the rally cry "It takes a village?" Of course they demand more money "for the children" programs because they have been so effective at removing care for children from the proper role and responsibility of the parents.

This criticism of the Democratic party is not to be taken that the Republican party has the answers either. However I do think it is a myth to claim support for the Democratic pro-abortion candidate on the basis that they are more concerned with the other "social/moral issues." As in the story of the Good Samaritan it is not the responsibility of government to feed, clothe, give drink etc. It is our responsibility.