Before going out and hitting the town last night, I noted a post at DarwinCatholic: Where Religion, Philosophy and Demographics Meet that I want to make sure I got up today. It is called The Right to Life and the Right to Healthcare. It engages the subject of Catholic Social Justice. I have an interest in that more than just because "politics" are involved. Social Catholic Justice is not really an optional matter in our faith. It is part of a balanced Catholicism. I think he hits the nail on the head in these two paragraph:
The phrase "Catholic Social Teaching" seems to have an unmatched ability to unsheathe rhetorical claws. For instance, just the rhumor that Benedict XVI's next encyclical will deal with social and economic issues immediately called up this response from one of the main progressive Catholic blog platforms: "it will be interesting to see how Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, Michael Novak and Jimmy Akin try to spin this one! I'll never forget how badly they misinterpreted and butchered John Paul II's Laborem Exercens and Centisimus Annus, and Benedict's Deus Caritas Est." It's usually a sign of rather deeply entrenched bad feeling when someone is up for condemning others' as-yet-unmade comments on an as-yet-unpublished document.
I think that part of the reason that Social Teaching becomes such a hot button topic for American Catholics in particular is the peculiar dynamic into which they are forced (unless they are sufficiently willing to think outside the partisan box) by the current alignment of the two major parties in the US. On the one hand, the 'progressive' Democratic Party has become synonymous with support for abortion on demand, gay issues and euthanasia. On the other hand, for those who believe that the virtue of charity demands government sponsored action in the form of socialized healthcare and welfare (a dubious assertion in my opinion, but held by a number of people) the Democratic Party is again your only option. Thus, politically progressive Catholics sometimes find themselves in the position of justifying their party choice by insisting that socialized healthcare and other expanded welfare state programs will bring the country closer to the vision of a just society laid out in Catholic teaching than the outlawing of abortion and euthanasia and the preservation of the traditional legal definition of marriage would.
I think that is very true. Now I will say that many of the "progressives" do not attempt to whitewash the abortion issue. But I do find that about 90 percent of their post take on the Republican and conservative movements. Sometimes with cause. There is also a problem with I think painting concepts with a broad brush. Capitalism comes to mind. I think one problem that many advocates of Social Justice have is that they believe and in fact portray their "opponents" as believing and advocating some lazier-faire capitalism. That really is not the world we live in and I know few people that advocate that. One reason I want to engage Social Justice issues is to demand that others have a place at the table too on this issue.
That is one reason why I am watching with interest a series of post on Social Justice at Vox Nova. The first part of the series is out called “Though the Mountains Be Shaken”: Toward a Countercultural and Liberative Ecclesial Ethic for Appalachia (1) . This of course deals with the incredible poverty and legitimate Social and Christian concerns in that region of the US. I suspect I will agree with much of what he says but will disagree with several major points. I can see clues of that already. However I can going to wait till he finishes the whole series before making assumptions. In the end disagreeing with what I find objectionable is not enough. If I disagree I better try to at least propose solutions. But I want him to lay out his entire case.
No comments:
Post a Comment