Miami archbishop: raise the minimum wage [CC]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
You are making a serious error is in saying that it has been only one bishop who has been calling for a raise in the minimum wage. For example, the position of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is:
“Work has a special place in Catholic social thought: work is more than just a job; it is a reflection of our human dignity, and a way to contribute to the common good. Most importantly, it is the ordinary way people meet their material needs and community obligations. In Catholic teaching, the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work. Wages must be adequate for workers to provide for themselves and their families in dignity. Although the minimum wage is not a living wage, the Catholic bishops have supported increasing the minimum wage over the decades. The minimum wage needs to be raised to help restore its purchasing power, not just for the goods and services one can buy but for the self-esteem and self-worth it affords the worker. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops supports legislation that would increase the minimum wage and is urging Congress to raise the minimum wage in a timely and meaningful way.”
So,specifically, they say: " In Catholic teaching, the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work."
This is the teaching of the Catholic Church, not just of one bishop.
old.usccb.org/sdwp/national/minwage206.shtml
Click to expand...
…and this is the point where theology crosses into ideology -especially the bolded section above. It’s just a dangerous path to follow because here is where the Church allows the State and it’s Institutions with their own ideals to take the reins over our conscience. Why would Catholics need to be stripped of their conscience in politics? Are the only holy choices really the choices that the State can provide?

I understand that the Popes have made no clear path for Political Catholicism within doctrine. But then there is this ‘Catholicist’ issue where the Bishops ask us to follow the ideals of random secular politicians. 🤷

Are we really going to get to where we want to be by taking advantage of random secular “opportunities”? Why not follow our conscience?
 
Tomdstone said:
You are making a serious error is in saying that it has been only one bishop who has been calling for a raise in the minimum wage. For example, the position of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is:
“Work has a special place in Catholic social thought: work is more than just a job; it is a reflection of our human dignity, and a way to contribute to the common good. Most importantly, it is the ordinary way people meet their material needs and community obligations. In Catholic teaching, the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work. Wages must be adequate for workers to provide for themselves and their families in dignity. Although the minimum wage is not a living wage, the Catholic bishops have supported increasing the minimum wage over the decades. The minimum wage needs to be raised to help restore its purchasing power, not just for the goods and services one can buy but for the self-esteem and self-worth it affords the worker. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops supports legislation that would increase the minimum wage and is urging Congress to raise the minimum wage in a timely and meaningful way.”
So,specifically, they say: " In Catholic teaching, the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work."
This is the teaching of the Catholic Church, not just of one bishop.
old.usccb.org/sdwp/national/minwage206.shtml
Click to expand...
Not so.

Declarations of the USCCB are binding only under two circumstances.

Canon law provides that declarations of organizations like USCCB are binding in conscience ONLY if adopted by 2/3 of the whole group of 500+ bishops and then approved by the Holy See and then promulgated. Alternatively, if the Holy See directs a conference to take up a particular matter which is then reviewed and approved by the Holy See, it is binding on catholics.

Otherwise, it’s just the opinion of whoever wrote it.
 
Tomdstone said:
What you are saying appears to be contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church which teaches that " the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work. Wages must be adequate for workers to provide for themselves and their families in dignity."
old.usccb.org/sdwp/national/minwage206.shtml
Click to expand...
It’s usually a mistake to use something from the USCCB as a guide to Catholic doctrine. As opposed to what the USCCB said, here is what the Church says:250.In order to protect this relationship between family and work, an element that must be appreciated and safeguarded is that of a family wage, a wage sufficient to maintain a family and allow it to live decently. … There can be several different ways to make a family wage a concrete reality. Various forms of important social provisions help to bring it about, for example, family subsidies and other contributions for dependent family members … (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church)
It is regrettable that the term “family wage” was used since, as the employer is the only one actually paying a wage, it has been assumed that he has the responsibility for providing it. In fact as the bolded section makes clear, the government has a responsibility through subsidies and other programs to make up what what the workers wage does not provide.

Ender
 
Tomdstone said:
You are making a serious error is in saying that it has been only one bishop who has been calling for a raise in the minimum wage. For example, the position of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is:…
Click to expand...
One bishop cannot speak for another. Pronouncements from the USCCB are not binding on any other bishop. They are recommendations only.
So,specifically, they say: " In Catholic teaching, the principle of a living wage is integral to our understanding of human work."
This is the teaching of the Catholic Church, not just of one bishop.
old.usccb.org/sdwp/national/minwage206.shtml
Click to expand...
It is fact neither, if by “living wage” you mean “the employer is responsible for paying his employees whatever is necessary for them to live on.” That is not what the church teaches.

Ender
 
TEPO said:
…and this is the point where theology crosses into ideology -especially the bolded section above. It’s just a dangerous path to follow because here is where the Church allows the State and it’s Institutions with their own ideals to take the reins over our conscience. Why would Catholics need to be stripped of their conscience in politics? Are the only holy choices really the choices that the State can provide?

I understand that the Popes have made no clear path for Political Catholicism within doctrine. But then there is this ‘Catholicist’ issue where the Bishops ask us to follow the ideals of random secular politicians. 🤷

Are we really going to get to where we want to be by taking advantage of random secular “opportunities”? Why not follow our conscience?
Click to expand...
I don’t think the Bishops are telling us how to vote. I think they are simply urging Pro Life politicians to look after the poor.

However, I strongly believe that most (if not all) Bishops would agree that raising the minimum wage is very short term solution to the financial issues the poor face. But sometimes we have to do both… short term & long term solutions. You can’t think just short term or long term – you must thing strategically (which most politicians don’t do today).

Let’s keep in mind that each of us appreciate individual raises. But not everyone gets one (even hard/good workers). And for those of us who usually receive an annual raise, sometimes we wish we could receive more than the “standard max of 3%.”

I used to be a regional manager, from Boston to Florida, for a Fortune 500 company. Every year, our annual raise budget for our department was 3%. If I was to give someone more than a 3% raise, I had to give someone else less than 3%. One year, everyone on my team received good reviews. I had to give my top earner (and 2nd best performer) a 1% raise in order to provide my lowest earner (who was also my top performer – and who’s review warranted a nice raise based on the HR “calculator”) a 7% raise. I basically had to “take from the rich and give to the poor.” As managers, we were taught that everyone is replaceable (division policy). We were very limited regarding what kind of raises we could give (was rarely in compliance with the HR policies stated about moving from “low-point” to “mid-point” and to “high-point”). Most top performers knew that the only way to get a raise was the threaten to leave or submit a letter of resignation. Then, upper management would counter-offer in order to keep the good performer employed. This happened often.

When corporations are always making to the budget and making people work harder, with less resources; hiring freezes; salary freezes, and under revenue plan and/or operating income plan… you would expect the corporate execs to not receive bonuses. But when they still receive $500,000+ or multimillion dollar bonuses the stock didn’t deep too much because they continue to cut salary and resources from the working stiffs… well you get frustrated with corporate America.

NOW: I am not personally a fan of simply raising the minimum wage and I’m not a liberal. But, I am a fan of “fair pay for **good **work.” And I’m also a fan of loyalty (from BOTH employee to company and from company to employee). As more and more corporations simply care of about stock value at the expense of quality products/services, we are going to see this kind of greed continue. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that stock values are important, but so is quality.

Needless to say, this company was no longer in the Fortune 500 when they were purchased after a failed hostile takeover attempt.

God Bless
 
Ender said:
That is not what the church teaches.

Ender
Click to expand...
Should US Catholics follow what the official United States Conference of Catholic Bishops say the Catholic Church teaches or should they follow what some anonymous blogger on the internet says?
 
Tomdstone said:
Should US Catholics follow what the official United States Conference of Catholic Bishops say the Catholic Church teaches or should they follow what some anonymous blogger on the internet says?
Click to expand...
There is a good reason why a national bishops’ conference has no official standing to teach. In 1968 the Canadian bishops issued a statement in Winnipeg that dissented from the prophetic encyclical of Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae. If a bishops’ conference cannot be trusted to teach actual doctrine, they certainly have even less authority when speaking on politics or economics, where they have no special charism.

scribd.com/doc/186647621/TRAGEDY-AT-WINNIPEG-The-Canadian-Bishops-Statement-on-Humanae-Vitae

It is Catholic teaching that workers deserve a fair wage timely paid, and that the responsibility and productivity of the worker should be taken into account. It is not specified anywhere what a fair wage is because there are too many factors that determine what the fair wage is. That is the job of workers and employers to determine, respecting the rights of both parties and the common good.
 
Tomdstone said:
Should US Catholics follow what the official United States Conference of Catholic Bishops say the Catholic Church teaches or should they follow what some anonymous blogger on the internet says?
Click to expand...
Actually the better question is whether Catholics should follow what the USCCB says or what the church says. Given that I provided a citation from the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church it should be sufficiently obvious that the disagreement is not between the USCCB and “some anonymous blogger” but between the USCCB and the church. Do you need more citations? Rerum Novarum? Quadragesimo Anno? Are the statements in church documents suspect because I cite them? Does section 250 of the Compendium not say what I excerpted, and if it does then on what basis do you justify ignoring it?

Ender
 
Tomdstone said:
Should US Catholics follow what the official United States Conference of Catholic Bishops say the Catholic Church teaches or should they follow what some anonymous blogger on the internet says?
Click to expand...
Great question…👍
 
Cafeteria Catholicism is alive and well among the American Right…😦
 
Silvio_Dante said:
Cafeteria Catholicism is alive and well among the American Right…😦
Click to expand...
I was just listening to an interview on the Catholic Channel (Sirius radio) with Cardinal Dolan. He pretty much said that we can’t pay lip service to helping the poor, but that its up to prudential judgment on how best to accomplish. He laid out the conservative perspective of helping them with job growth and the liberal position of helping them with expanded government programs. He didn’t condemn either, and said both had good points.

He also said that Archbishop Chaput had some very good comments on the subject. So I went and looked those up. Here is one of the quotes I found:

“(Archbishop Chaput) - Jesus tells us very clearly that if we don’t help the poor, we’re going to go to hell. Period. There’s just no doubt about it. That has to be a foundational concern of Catholics and of all Christians. But Jesus didn’t say the government has to take care of them, or that we have to pay taxes to take care of them. Those are prudential judgments.
“Anybody who would condemn someone because of their position on taxes is making a leap that I can’t make as a Catholic. … You can’t say that somebody’s not Christian because they want to limit taxation. Again, I’m speaking only for myself, but I think that’s a legitimate position. It may not be the correct one, but it’s certainly a legitimate Catholic position; and to say that it’s somehow intrinsically evil like abortion doesn’t make any sense at all.

I guess Archbishops Chaput and Dolan are “Cafeteria Catholics” as well?
 
shockerfan said:
I was just listening to an interview on the Catholic Channel (Sirius radio) with Cardinal Dolan. He pretty much said that we can’t pay lip service to helping the poor, but that its up to prudential judgment on how best to accomplish. He laid out the conservative perspective of helping them with job growth and the liberal position of helping them with expanded government programs. He didn’t condemn either, and said both had good points.

He also said that Archbishop Chaput had some very good comments on the subject. So I went and looked those up. Here is one of the quotes I found:

“(Archbishop Chaput) - Jesus tells us very clearly that if we don’t help the poor, we’re going to go to hell. Period. There’s just no doubt about it. That has to be a foundational concern of Catholics and of all Christians. But Jesus didn’t say the government has to take care of them, or that we have to pay taxes to take care of them. Those are prudential judgments.
“Anybody who would condemn someone because of their position on taxes is making a leap that I can’t make as a Catholic. … You can’t say that somebody’s not Christian because they want to limit taxation. Again, I’m speaking only for myself, but I think that’s a legitimate position. It may not be the correct one, but it’s certainly a legitimate Catholic position; and to say that it’s somehow intrinsically evil like abortion doesn’t make any sense at all.

I guess Archbishops Chaput and Dolan are “Cafeteria Catholics” as well?
Click to expand...
He’s referring to people who say that vulture capitalists are intrinsically evil. They aren’t. Sadly mis-guided self obsessed, but not evil…
 
Suudy said:
There is that subtle difference between support for intrinsic evils and matters of prudential judgement. But hey, who’s comparing? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
So the Left can only be menu hoppers on things like abortion?

Not at all…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top