A few brief articles I’ve written that explore key themes of Catholic Social Justice teaching which are particularly relevant for Faithful Citizenship.
Sources of Catholic Social Teaching
Justice in the Ministry of Jesus
The Nature of the Human Person
What is Faithful Citizenship?
by Fr. M. Keith LaBove
At the heart of the teaching on Faithful Citizenship is a document issued (revised) every four years by the U.S. Bishops.
The timing is no accident, since that is how often national elections in our country take place. The purpose of this teaching is to better enable Catholics of good will to take their proper place in the political system in our nation, specifically as Catholics. In essence, this means letting the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church inform one’s values and thoughts, thus leading to choices (i.e., votes) that are consistent with Catholic teaching.
In their 1998 statement, “Sharing Catholic Social Teaching”, the US Bishops stated that “Catholic social teaching is a central and essential element of our faith.” They spoke of this body of teaching as emerging from the truth of what God has revealed of himself to us. This teaching is based on and inseparable from our understanding of human life and human dignity, and must be rooted in our spiritual lives. It is a teaching founded on the life and words of Jesus Christ, who came “to bring glad tidings to the poor . . . liberty to captives . . . recovery of sight to the blind” (Lk 4:18-19). In other words, for Catholics, the embrace of Catholic social teaching is a necessity, not a luxury.
By its very nature, this rich body of justice teaching involves elements that are frustrating to some. Like all authentic Catholic teaching, the tenets of social justice teaching exist in a hierarchy of truths, with some values and realities being more fundamental and important than others. More to the point, each of the values and principles of social justice must be applied to the lived reality of human life in the midst of a variety of nations, communities and situations. It is here, in the concrete applications, that Catholics with the best of intentions will sometimes disagree even while upholding the fundamental principles. (E.g., two persons committed to a just wage may disagree on what that just wage amount might be.)
While the church’s justice teaching is addressed to a worldwide audience, our focus in these articles will be on applying these truths to the situation here in the United States. Several obstacles to making gospel truth a reality in our nation should probably be mentioned.
The first is that our nation has a long history of anti-Catholicism, what one author recently called “the last acceptable prejudice”. Even today, in the current atmosphere of “political correctness”, individuals and institutions ridicule and mock Catholic symbols, values and practices with impunity, in ways that would be unacceptable toward any other group in our society.
Secondly, it must be stated that the United States is not and never has been a Christian nation in the sense that Italy was once a “Catholic” nation. (Given the toxic nature of mixing political power with religious authority, this may not be such a bad thing.) While some fundamental Christian principles underlie the foundations of our country, we remain a nation where no religion may be given favored status, and where pluralism of religious belief (or the absence thereof) is the rule. As long as the terminally ill may be euthanized, and the unborn slaughtered at will in the womb, we are not a nation “under God”.
A third obstacle to the effective preaching of justice in our nation is perhaps more difficult to both perceive and overcome because it is a fault intertwined with one of our society’s greatest strengths. Our nation has always been at the forefront of advocating for individual rights (e.g., the Bill of Rights). We continue to hold dear those fundamental human rights as the bedrock of our national character. Alongside this virtuous commitment is to be found its dark side: a rampant individualism which ignores the importance of community and appears willing to sacrifice all to the whims and fancy of the individual. This self-centered exaltation of the individual is reflected today in a moral relativism which denies the existence of any abiding truth, as well as in the priority of special interest groups over the well-being of any and all others, especially over the needs of the poor.
Contrary to this, the social justice teaching of the Church demands responsibility as a necessary companion to individual rights and a concern for how the structures of society affect the most vulnerable in our midst. IFor this reason and for others, the justice teaching of the Church both affirms and confronts distinct elements of the national character and ethos of our nation.
Sources of Catholic Social Teaching
by Fr. M. Keith LaBove
What exactly is the Church’s social doctrine? Fundamentally, it is the application of the truths of the gospel to the lived situation of the day, at a particular place and time. As such, it basically has two constitutive elements. One element is the fundamental principles that are drawn from revelation and tradition, including from an adequate consideration of the human person. These principles are the core of this body of teaching, and will remain more stable over time.
The second aspect is the actual application of the fundamental principles to the concrete situation. For example, one application might be that this or that law ought to be passed or repealed, that this or that structure of society needs to be changed, etc. This aspect of the teaching will have validity only in that particular time and place. Unlike the fundamental principles of this teaching, these applications will offer room for much more disagreement among people of good will. The concrete ways and methods of bringing about justice in the world are not always as clear as are fundamental principles of justice and human dignity.
In light of this distinction between principles and applications, it would be good to mention a valuable resource that became available in 2004 from the Pontifical Council on Justice and Peace. Entitled “Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church”, this book length work does an excellent job of presenting a systematic and comprehensive overview of this body of Church teaching. There is probably no better compilation of the fundamental principles of Catholic social teaching available today.
That being said, the Compendium by its very nature leaves much unsaid. As the document itself states, “Herein the most relevant theological, philosophical, moral, cultural and pastoral considerations of this teaching are systematically presented as they relate to social questions. . . . The document limits itself to putting forth the fundamental elements of the Church’s social doctrine, leaving to Episcopal Conferences the task of making the appropriate applications as required by the different local situations.”
Alongside the Compendium, there also exist a broad array of documents issued by various popes, Vatican offices, Episcopal conferences as well as by individual bishops. These documents attempt to accomplish in most cases what a work such as the Compendium cannot: apply the Church’s social doctrine to individual concrete situations. Papal teaching addressing general trends in society worldwide will of necessity be more general than for example a particular bishop speaking to an unjust situation within his own diocese. Yet these documents are where we usually discover the “nuts and bolts” of Church teaching. For example, the US Bishops have spoken on issues such as racism, war and peace, the economy, welfare and immigration reform, etc. Each of these statements is an excellent example of applying doctrine to the lived situation confronting Catholics at that time.
Amongst this rather broad-ranging collection of documents, we would be remiss if we did not mention one in particular entitled “Rerum Novarum” (On the Condition of Labor), issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891. This document is usually recognized as marking the beginning of what is called “modern catholic social teaching”. It continues to be referenced and commemorated to this day, as for example Pope John Paul II did with his encyclical, “Centesiumus Annus”, marking the hundredth anniversary of Rerum Novarum in 1991.
Another document of particular concern to us in this series of articles is of a much more recent vintage. Through its various revisions, it has retained the title, “Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility”. Every four years, the Catholic Bishops of theUnited States revisit this document, publishing a revised version.
While stopping short of telling people how to vote this document strives to take the fundamental principles of social doctrine and apply them to the concrete situation of our country, with particular reference to the issues of concern in the upcoming elections. The document is intended to enable Catholics to take their faith all the way into the voting booth.
Justice in the Ministry of Jesus
by Fr. M. Keith LaBove
When one looks at the broad array of social justice issues, one sees things like biotechnology, the arms trade, abortion and stem-cell research, child tax credits and welfare reform, food security and the death penalty, affirmative action and care for the earth. One could search the Gospels high and low without finding specific teachings from Jesus on these issues. At the same time, each of these justice issues flows out of the life and ministry of Jesus, precisely because so much of Jesus’ life and teaching revealed a commitment to justice for all.
This justice teaching is first of all rooted in love. He gave us the Greatest Commandment as well as the second that is like it, uniting love of God with love of neighbor forever. He makes it clear that if we fail to do justice to our brothers and sisters, we fail to love God. “If anyone says, “I love God,” but hates his brother, he is a liar.” (1 Jn 4:20) How did Jesus live out this love of neighbor?
One of the most fundamental ways that Jesus challenged the structures and customs of his time was in the people he spent time with, those he spoke to, those he dined with, those he healed and called to salvation. He was criticized repeatedly for eating with those deemed unacceptable by “proper society”, the tax collectors and prostitutes, the poor and the unwashed. He spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well, even though “nobody does that”. He healed the daughter of that Caananite woman in the region of Tyre and Sidon, foreigner that she was. (She probably couldn’t even have gotten a green card!) Even the Roman official was not shunned by Jesus.
In all of this, Jesus breaks down the divisions that we so readily establish between “us and them”. And he proclaimed repeatedly, in word and action, that God loves “those others” as much as he loves us. He even broke down the barriers of family and clan (loving only those who look like us) by offering kinship to all “who do the will of my Father”, calling these brother and sister and mother to him. In living and ministering in this way, he rejected any and all forms of discrimination because of race or creed or color, even going so far as to teach us that any and all discrimination against women was unjust and unjustifiable.
But his teaching goes beyond rejecting the treatment of some as “less than” or “less equal”. He even went so far as to tell us on what basis we would be judged. When we ask, “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?”, he replies to us, “Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.” (Matt. 25:31-46) This concern for the “least ones” in the life and ministry of Jesus goes beyond the demands of equality, and challenges us to practice what the Church calls “the preferential option for the poor”. We are to pay particular attention to the neediest in our midst: the immigrant, the addict, the mentally ill, the obnoxious and the ungrateful. Why, he would even have us love our enemies, for they may be most in need of our love and forgiveness. Going two miles instead of one, giving up shirt as well as coat, turning the other cheek (Matt. 5) are all demands of the Gospel we would probably rather forget.
This is a Gospel that is truly radical, in the sense of going to the very roots of who we are and who we are called to be. And it is a radical Gospel that challenges us to examine the structures of government, the customs of our society and most especially the attitudes of our hearts. “Everybody’s doing it” will not suffice as justification or excuse.
There is a sense in which the commitment to justice, this option for the poorest of the poor, is rooted in the mystery of the Incarnation itself. St. Paul writes of Jesus in the 2nd chapter of his letter to the Philippians, “Who though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness, and found in human appearance.” How often is injustice rooted in our need to have more than the other? How often are we unjust because of our need to appear better than the other? How often do we think our happiness is rooted in getting rather than giving up, in power rather than surrender.
Yet Jesus was the one surrendered completely, humbling himself, becoming obedient even unto death. He surrendered even his own will, stating clearly that he was with us to do the will of the one who sent him. (Jn 5:30)
This is the one whom we claim to imitate, and so must we do, in the halls of government, in the workplace, in the home, and yes, even in the voting booth.
The Nature of the Human Person
by Fr. M. Keith LaBove
One thing that is striking to many is the variety and scope of the teaching. The list of issues which this teaching addresses is probably inexhaustible, since it is a teaching that applies to every aspect of human life in society. So concerns as diverse as landmines and cloning, children’s education and worker’s rights, along with the death penalty and immigration policy are all addressed in the Church’s social teaching.
Oftentimes, it is precisely this broad variety of “social justice issues” that makes it difficult to identify the fundamental truths on which the entire teaching is based. This body of gospel teaching includes basic principles and values which are then applied to the lived situation in and among families, communities and nations. Frequently, people reading about these issues are only attentive to the practical conclusions arrived at, (e.g., what do I do, what laws are just?). When we understand the fundamental principles we can begin to see how, for example a call to care for the environment is related to the teaching on a just wage and to abortion and the death penalty.
The most fundamental principle at work here is the understanding of the dignity of human person. This understanding is much more than mere humanism or sociology, because the Church’s view of the human person is precisely as one created in the image and likeness of God. So we read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Created in the image of the one God and equally endowed with rational souls, all men [and women] have the same nature and the same origin. Redeemed by the sacrifice of Christ, all are called to participate in the same divine beatitude: all therefore enjoy an equal dignity.” (n. 1934)
It is this common nature and origin which allows social justice teaching to develop positions which apply not just to this particular place, or time, or nation or culture. While there are valid differences between these diverse situations, there is also a commonality which cuts across all divisions and distinctions. It should probably be noted that this position directly contradicts the prevailing moral relativism in our society today which denies the validity of any enduring moral truth, and pretends to craft morality anew in each situation, for each individual person.
Several things need to be highlighted about this fundamental understanding of the human person. The first is that this basic human dignity is inherent in every human person from the very first moment of life itself. The founding fathers of our nation recognized this when they spoke of the Creator as having “endowed” us with certain inalienable rights. These rights are not earned or merited. They are a given.
This is important in a society which tends to see persons as more or less valuable depending on their accomplishments or achievements, or based on their wealth, social position or celebrity status. One need not achieve a certain level of knowledge or talent to attain this human dignity. One need not have reached a certain income level or achieved financial independence. The dignity of the human person is present and demanding of respect regardless of age, sex, race, religion or tax bracket.
Alongside the inherent nature of this dignity is the complementary truth that it cannot be lost or surrendered. In other words, just as this dignity exists in its fullness within the hours old embryo in its mother’s womb, so this dignity endures within the 99 year old Alzheimer’s patient who has lost control of all bodily functions. It is true that evil and choices contrary to God’s will (sin) can obscure this dignity. Yet even when obscured by wrongdoing, this dignity endures. Therefore no action, including criminal activity of any sort, can erase from the human person that fundamental worth and his or her fundamental dignity.
Within human society, there exists a broad variety of human institutions and organizations, from the most fundamental family unit to bowling leagues and sewing circles, churches and synagogues and federal and state governments. Another key value of this understanding of human dignity is it offers us a criterion by which we can judge each of these institutions. Quite simply, the measure of every institution is whether it protects and respects the life and dignity of the human person.
From the other perspective, each and every teaching of the Church on social justice can be traced to respect for human dignity.
