Bishop criticizes USCCB committee’s reaction to Ryan budget

  • Thread starter Thread starter markomalley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

markomalley

Guest
From Catholic World News:
During the discussion leading up to the vote, Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing criticized the committee’s opposition to the budget plan put forward by Congressman Paul Ryan.

“There have been some concerns raised by lay Catholics, especially some Catholic economists, about what was perceived as a partisan action against Congressman Ryan and the budget he had proposed,” Bishop Boyea said in reference to the USCCB committee’s opposition to the House budget plan. “We need to be articulate only in principles, and let the laity make these applications … It was perceived as partisan, and thus didn’t really further dialogue in our deeply divided country.”

“I’m not sure that we have the humility yet not to stray into areas where we lack competence, and where we need to let the laity take the lead,” he added. “We need to learn far more than we need to teach in this area. We need to listen more than we need to speak. We already have an excellent, fine Compendium [on the Social Doctrine of the Church].”

(snip)

Echoing Bishop Boyea’s comments, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City said that the committee is “at times perceived as partisan” and needs to consider the principle of subsidiarity, which has been “neglected in past documents.” Archbishop Naumann added that solutions that place emphasis in enrolling people in government programs have been “tried for decades” and failed.
Like a breath of fresh air!!!
 
markomalley said:
From Catholic World News:
During the discussion leading up to the vote, Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing criticized the committee’s opposition to the budget plan put forward by Congressman Paul Ryan.

“There have been some concerns raised by lay Catholics, especially some Catholic economists, about what was perceived as a partisan action against Congressman Ryan and the budget he had proposed,” Bishop Boyea said in reference to the USCCB committee’s opposition to the House budget plan. “We need to be articulate only in principles, and let the laity make these applications … It was perceived as partisan, and thus didn’t really further dialogue in our deeply divided country.”

“I’m not sure that we have the humility yet not to stray into areas where we lack competence, and where we need to let the laity take the lead,” he added. “We need to learn far more than we need to teach in this area. We need to listen more than we need to speak. We already have an excellent, fine Compendium [on the Social Doctrine of the Church].”

(snip)

Echoing Bishop Boyea’s comments, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City said that the committee is “at times perceived as partisan” and needs to consider the principle of subsidiarity, which has been “neglected in past documents.” Archbishop Naumann added that solutions that place emphasis in enrolling people in government programs have been “tried for decades” and failed.
Like a breath of fresh air!!!
Click to expand...
It really is gratifying to see at least some attempt to “de-politicize” the USCCB bureaucracy. As Pope Benedict appoints more and more bishops, one can have some belief that someday the USCCB will be different from top to bottom.
 
Archbishop Naumann also said this: “We need to talk about the debt and the real seriousness of that debt. Sometimes we’re perceived as just encouraging the government to spend more money with no realistic way of how we’re going to afford to do this.”
 
Echoing Bishop Boyea’s comments, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City said that the committee is “at times perceived as partisan”

At times
Click to expand...
–yeah, a whole bunch of times. Gaaack! :eek: Agree with OP–breath of fresh air!
Click to expand...
 
Archbishop Naumann also said this: “We need to talk about the debt and the real seriousness of that debt. Sometimes we’re perceived as just encouraging the government to spend more money with no realistic way of how we’re going to afford to do this.”
Click to expand...
I never have understood why the USCCB defends the welfare state. Nationally sponsored welfare is not mentioned once by any offical social encyclical of the church. It completely contradicts the catholic teaching of subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity works against big government and big buisness, something both the democrats and republicans support.
Following his remarks, Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit called upon the committee to place greater emphasis on the “disintegration of the family” as a factor in the breakdown of the economy.
Click to expand...
For me, this is the most important issue. The black community is in poverty largely because of the breakdown of the family. Being a slave to welfare is just the symptom.
 
_Abyssinia said:
It was only two Bishops of the USSCB that criticised Paul Ryan’s plan, Bishop Blaire and Bishop Pates:

usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/federal-budget/upload/Letter-to-Congress-Federal-Budget-2012-03-06.pdf
Click to expand...
Indeed. But that release by those two bishops were used by the press (both secular and Catholic) to make it appear that ALL US bishops supported that position. And, sadly, the majority of people, including here at CAF, bought into that deception.
 
markomalley said:
From Catholic World News:
During the discussion leading up to the vote, Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing criticized the committee’s opposition to the budget plan put forward by Congressman Paul Ryan.

“There have been some concerns raised by lay Catholics, especially some Catholic economists, about what was perceived as a partisan action against Congressman Ryan and the budget he had proposed,” Bishop Boyea said in reference to the USCCB committee’s opposition to the House budget plan. “We need to be articulate only in principles, and let the laity make these applications … It was perceived as partisan, and thus didn’t really further dialogue in our deeply divided country.”

“I’m not sure that we have the humility yet not to stray into areas where we lack competence, and where we need to let the laity take the lead,” he added. “We need to learn far more than we need to teach in this area. We need to listen more than we need to speak. We already have an excellent, fine Compendium [on the Social Doctrine of the Church].”

(snip)

Echoing Bishop Boyea’s comments, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City said that the committee is “at times perceived as partisan” and needs to consider the principle of subsidiarity, which has been “neglected in past documents.” Archbishop Naumann added that solutions that place emphasis in enrolling people in government programs have been “tried for decades” and failed.
Like a breath of fresh air!!!
Click to expand...
Good to know. I don’t entirely agree with it, but the USCCB shouldn’t discard it because a few people don’t agree with nonessential issues. They need to articulate principles not policies. Maybe they should criticize a Democratic budget too. Oh, wait…:D:p
 
Pork_Roll said:
I never have understood why the USCCB defends the welfare state. Nationally sponsored welfare is not mentioned once by any offical social encyclical of the church. It completely contradicts the catholic teaching of subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity works against big government and big buisness, something both the democrats and republicans support.For me, this is the most important issue. The black community is in poverty largely because of the breakdown of the family. Being a slave to welfare is just the symptom.
Click to expand...
“Subsidiarity” is often used as a rationale for gutting government programs but it is not intended to abandon the poor to their own devices. It calls for solutions to be enacted as close to the level of local communities as possible. But it also demands that higher levels of government provide help – “subsidium”-- when communities and local governments face problems beyond their means to address such as economic crises, high unemployment, endemic poverty and hunger. According to Pope Benedict XVI: "Subsidiarity must remain closely linked to the principle of solidarity and vice versa.
 
Pork_Roll said:
I never have understood why the USCCB defends the welfare state. Nationally sponsored welfare is not mentioned once by any offical social encyclical of the church. It completely contradicts the catholic teaching of subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity works against big government and big buisness, something both the democrats and republicans support.For me, this is the most important issue. The black community is in poverty largely because of the breakdown of the family. Being a slave to welfare is just the symptom.
Click to expand...
the principle of subsidiarity is perhaps one of the most crucial and most misunderstood in Catholic social teaching. According to the principle of subsidiarity, decisions should be made at the lowest level possible and the highest level necessary.

catholicmoraltheology.com/subsidiarity-is-a-two-sided-coin/
 
“The conference pointed out to me how much I don’t know about the whole issue of Catholic social teaching and the economy,” said Bishop Boyea.

“One of the most exciting things about it is how many wonderful Catholics are really taking their faith seriously in the marketplace. It’s wonderful to listen to them and encourage what they are doing. They are doing the work of evangelization,” he said.

Joseph Kaboski, a Notre Dame economist who has participated in the Lumen Christi Institute conferences, said that their value “is really the exchange itself. The economy and society are always changing, and Catholic social thought is really a perfect example of the ‘living Tradition’ of the faith at work.”

He expressed the hope that the bishops’ statement would initiate a “conversation” among the faithful about essential matters.

The document will invite “Catholic conversations” on the moral dimensions and human impact of economic life among parishes and dioceses, college and universities and other Catholic organizations and movements. It will also seek to go beyond the ideological and partisan polarization on economic issues, briefly addressing the responsibilities and limitations of various economic players, including individuals, the private sector, religious and non-profit groups and the government.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could have such conversations without going to ideological extremes and insults.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
“The conference pointed out to me how much I don’t know about the whole issue of Catholic social teaching and the economy,” said Bishop Boyea.

“One of the most exciting things about it is how many wonderful Catholics are really taking their faith seriously in the marketplace. It’s wonderful to listen to them and encourage what they are doing. They are doing the work of evangelization,” he said.

Joseph Kaboski, a Notre Dame economist who has participated in the Lumen Christi Institute conferences, said that their value “is really the exchange itself. The economy and society are always changing, and Catholic social thought is really a perfect example of the ‘living Tradition’ of the faith at work.”

He expressed the hope that the bishops’ statement would initiate a “conversation” among the faithful about essential matters.

The document will invite “Catholic conversations” on the moral dimensions and human impact of economic life among parishes and dioceses, college and universities and other Catholic organizations and movements. It will also seek to go beyond the ideological and partisan polarization on economic issues, briefly addressing the responsibilities and limitations of various economic players, including individuals, the private sector, religious and non-profit groups and the government.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could have such conversations without going to ideological extremes and insults.
Click to expand...
It would be wonderful. Talk about the “good old days” I think many are trying to have this discussion, but many at this forum are not ready for that type of dialog.
 
My own experience with older bishops and priests is that they entered the seminary in high school and know about as much about practical economics as Nancy Pelosi knows about moral theology.

Now that I got my cheap shot out of the way,:rolleyes: I am not kidding about this. I was on that same track myself from the early 60’s. I attended a Catholic high school as a divinity student and the diocese and the school fought over me. The school wanted me in advanced math and science courses because I tested high in those, but the diocese wanted me in Latin and chant classes. In college seminary we were a separate building on the campus of a Catholic college. The college wanted two of us out of 40 freshmen, based on test scores, to be in a special program that included economics. The rector freaked out because he saw no reason for it. The rector of the college seminary used to talk about racial problems as how we treated our servants at home. He later became a bishop.

For my one year of theology, it was very clear that those in the religious order had vowed poverty, but it was the diocesan candidates who practiced it. They had no concept of where the money to support them came from. At least now our diocesan seminarians receive a modest stipend for living costs. We received nothing back in 1971-72.
 
Blessed Pope John Paul II’s encyclical 100 years (after Pope Leo XIII’s social justice encyclical) condemns the welfare state, largely for the deficits. Right of private property and the government’s responsibility to maintain a sound currency feature in it. Our Dominicans are running a review of all the social justice encyclicals, from Pope Leo XIII on, in their news letter. Congressman Ryan’s budget seems to be based largely on Blessed Pope John Paul II’s encyclical.
 
Red_Wolf said:
Blessed Pope John Paul II’s encyclical 100 years (after Pope Leo XIII’s social justice encyclical) condemns the welfare state, largely for the deficits. Right of private property and the government’s responsibility to maintain a sound currency feature in it. Our Dominicans are running a review of all the social justice encyclicals, from Pope Leo XIII on, in their news letter. Congressman Ryan’s budget seems to be based largely on Blessed Pope John Paul II’s encyclical.
Click to expand...
That seems to mean nothing to some of our politically amaturish clergy, which currently is held in low esteem by the American people. I hope word does not spread that despite our country’s shockingly precarious fiscal situation* the leaders of our religious and clergy (which people mistakenly perceive as the Catholic Church) want even more tax and spending. If however that does become common knowledge, the Catholic Church in America will lose most of the credibility it has left and will become the irrelevancy it is in Europe. Forget tax exemptions and other privileges religion currently enjoys in law and tradition.
 
Yet Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum:

“[W]hen there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the poor and badly off have a claim to especial consideration. The richer class have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy, should be specially cared for and protected by the government. ”
 
Red_Wolf said:
Congressman Ryan’s budget seems to be based largely on Blessed Pope John Paul II’s encyclical.
Click to expand...
Really? I’d like to know how Ryan’s budget proposals square with the infallible doctrine of the preferential option for the poor.

Also, this poster referenced an invaluable quote from Rerum Novarum.
Michael Mayo:
Yet Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum:

“[W]hen there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the poor and badly off have a claim to especial consideration. The richer class have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy, should be specially cared for and protected by the government. ”
Click to expand...
Conservative and libertatian supporters of the Ryan budget plan talk about the doctrine of subsidiarity as if there were no other doctrine in Catholic social thought. Subsidiarity doesn’t work apart from the other tenets of Catholic social doctrine. If lower levels of society are incapable of meeting the needs of the poor, then the higher levels must do so. Ryan’s budget plans appear designed to cut off necessary benefits for great numbers of people when state and municipal and private charities are unable to assume the burden. That’s not in line with Pope John Paul’s thought, as Pope John Paul II elevated to infallible doctrine the positions first enunciated in Rerum Novarum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top