USCCB Urges Catholics to Lobby on Behalf of Anti-Poverty Programs

[jam070406]

The Church has an a preferential option for the poor, and it includes giving moral guidance to individuals, societies and nations on making sure we do everything possible to help them.

The Church doesn’t restrict itself to “personal obligations for Catholics”, it never has.

Yes. As a Faith community we have obligations, as individual Catholics we have obligations. I should have further stated that the Church condemns Socialism. Corporal acts of mercy are not left up to the government (especially one that is secular or hostile to Catholic teaching) to fulfill for Catholics.

 

[SanAgustin]

Yes. As a Faith community we have obligations, as individual Catholics we have obligations. I should have further stated that the Church condemns Socialism. Corporal acts of mercy are not left up to the government (especially one that is secular or hostile to Catholic teaching) to fulfill for Catholics.

The Church doesn’t just demand charity from individuals and the “faith community”. It invites society and governments to do everything they can for the further good, even help other countries with their riches!

This is not a socialist or capitalist concept, the Church is beyond those things. But to say that it only calls Catholics to watch for the least fortunate among us is incorrect.

I should have further stated that the Church condemns Socialism

It also condemns capitalism when it abuses the dignity of humans.

 

[jam070406]

They remain accusations unless supported with evidence. If you are going to provide one, it is only fair to provide the other. What if I can’t Google it?

It was never my accusation.
I could never image such betrayal of the Church, so it wasn’t I that discovered it.

I was unable to post links earlier. That’s why I tried to get you to look it up.

lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/sep/09092205

the-american-catholic.com/2010/02/02/usccb-under-fire/

reformcchdnow.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8&Itemid=6

fratres.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/all-scandal-ridden-usccb-brings-pro-abortion-lgbt-rights-activists-to-speak-at-4-day-event-cchd-promo-video/

 

[jam070406]

The Church doesn’t just demand charity from individuals and the “faith community”. It invites society and governments to do everything they can for the further good, even help other countries with their riches!

This is not a socialist or capitalist concept, the Church is beyond those things. But to say that it only calls Catholics to watch for the least fortunate among us is incorrect.

It also condemns capitalism when it abuses the dignity of humans.

Everything they can? I don’t think so. Like I said the Church condemns socialism, and collectivism.

 

[jam070406]

The Church doesn’t just demand charity from individuals and the “faith community”. It invites society and governments to do everything they can for the further good, even help other countries with their riches!

This is not a socialist or capitalist concept, the Church is beyond those things. But to say that it only calls Catholics to watch for the least fortunate among us is incorrect.

It also condemns capitalism when it abuses the dignity of humans.

First of all, the country doesn’t have “riches”. We are in GIANT debt. Any money it accumulates comes from individual citizens. And we are burdening future citizens with debt to pay for any programs that may help the poor.

 

[SanAgustin]

First of all, the country doesn’t have “riches”. We are in GIANT debt. Any money it accumulates comes from individual citizens. And we are burdening future citizens with debt to pay for any programs that may help the poor.

I’m not talking about a specific country, or its specific circumstances in that case.

But it is false to say the Church doesn’t call developed nations to contribute portions of their gross domestic product for aid to poorer countries. To say that that statement is against Catholicism is truly erroneous.

To also say that the Church only calls Catholics individually or as a religious community to help is also inaccurate, and is a political opinion, rather than one held by the Catholic Church.

 

[Carlan]

First of all, the country doesn’t have “riches”. We are in GIANT debt. Any money it accumulates comes from individual citizens. And we are burdening future citizens with debt to pay for any programs that may help the poor.

My dear Jamo, not to worry, we are to simply be obedient to the Magisterium in these matters and we trust our Bishops, it is God’s will. God bless us with his peace in all in all things. Carlan

 

[jam070406]

I’m not talking about a specific country, or its specific circumstances in that case.

But it is false to say the Church doesn’t call developed nations to contribute portions of their gross domestic product for aid to poorer countries. To say that that statement is against Catholicism is truly erroneous.

To also say that the Church only calls Catholics individually or as a religious community to help is also inaccurate, and is a political opinion, rather than one held by the Catholic Church.

I never stated these as the only means and I’m not sure I even disagreed with you, unless you continue to claim that the Church approves of socialism, which then you would be wrong.

 

[SanAgustin]

I never stated these as the only means and I’m not sure I even disagreed with you, unless you continue to claim that the Church approves of socialism, which then you would be wrong.

I never said anything about socialism or capitalism.

You replied to a simple statement I made to another poster called Ender. He said;

Calling for foreign aid not to be cut is undeniably the expression of a political opinion.
Show me the Church teaching on foreign aid and I might agree with you.

I replied;

You think a call for developed nations to contribute a large portion their gross domestic to poorer nations is incompatible with Catholicism?

He never replied, but you did.

You then said something about how the Church only calls individuals, then you changed it to the “faith community”. I’m clarifying that the Church calls developed nations to provide aid to poorer ones.

You keep talking about “socialism”, “collectivism”, I’m talking about Church doctrine and moral guidance; I couldn’t care less for temporal narrow political ideologies.

 

[jam070406]

I never said anything about socialism or capitalism.

You replied to a simple statement I made to another poster called Ender. He said;

I replied;

He never replied, but you did.

You then said something about how the Church only calls individuals, then you changed it to the “faith community”. I’m clarifying that the Church calls developed nations to provide aid to poorer ones.

You keep talking about “socialism”, “collectivism”, I’m talking about Church doctrine and moral guidance; I couldn’t care less for temporal narrow political ideologies.

Please quote the teaching you are referring to that calls developed nations to contribute a large portion their gross domestic to poorer nations

 

[SanAgustin]

In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all. What aid programme is there that can hold out such significant growth prospects — even from the point of view of the world economy — as the support of populations that are still in the initial or early phases of economic development? From this perspective, more economically developed nations should do all they can to allocate larger portions of their gross domestic product to development aid, thus respecting the obligations that the international community has undertaken in this regard

 

[seekerz]

Everything they can? I don’t think so. Like I said the Church condemns socialism, and collectivism.

It would be nice to see you define these two terms: socialism and collectivism…It seems to me that much good which we could do as a society to help the poor is being swept out the door in discussions like this. For example, more and more I’m see socialized medicine being condemned as socialism, when all it is is an approach that recognizes the social causes at the root of most illness.

The Church may condemn socialism, but that does not mean their definition is the same as the contemporary one being bandied about in political discourse.

A close reading of the lives of several Catholic saints, particularly those who held positions of power in the Church or in government, show both a deep sense of individual AND collective responsibility toward the poor. Nowhere have I seen these attitudes described as socialism.

 

[Ender]

You think a call for developed nations to contribute a large portion their gross domestic to poorer nations is incompatible with Catholicism?

Of course it isn’t incompatible but you’ve rephrased the issue.

First, the Church does not mandate that nations contribute a large portion of their gross domestic product to poorer nations so while it might be grandly charitable to do so it is not a moral obligation. Nor would she even attempt to define what “large” meant in this context (and in any event the word used in your citation was “larger”, not “large.”)

Second, the question is not as simple as “to give or not to give” - which is apparently how the bishops perceive it. It is surely valid to question whether the aid being sent is effective, wasted, or harmful. There can hardly be opposition to cutting wasteful spending but the determination of the effects of certain programs is prudential, not moral, about which Catholics may legitimately disagree. Therefore it is wrong to hold that cutting foreign aid is per se illegitimate.

In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all…

You didn’t identify the source of this citation. I didn’t find the comment in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church so I’m going to guess it’s in some document from the USCCB. If that’s the case then, as far as I’m concerned, it’s pretty meaningless. I think the best that can be said of them is that sometimes what they write accords with what the Church teaches.

Ender

 

[JaMc]

Perhaps the Bishops, know it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time or perhaps they acknowledge the link between poverty and abortion? At any length, they seem to be saying, quite rightly that care for the poor is to be a priority consideration in formulating government policy, particularly in one of the world’s richest countries…

They might be thinking that, I don’t know. But, all too often, when asked why they voted for a pro-abortion politician, a Catholic will pull out a statement like this, and say “yeah, he’s for abortion, but he supports these social programs, so it’s all O.K.!”

If it is made clear FIRST AND FOREMOST that one is NEVER to vote for a pro-abortion politician when there is a pro-life alternative, THEN, AND ONLY THEN will it prevent politicians from successfully using economic policy as a “trojan horse” to get elected to pursue a pro-death agenda. After that, THEN we can get around to debating as to what is the most effective way to care for the poor.

But, when the Bishops appear to put abortion, which is an absolute intrinsic evil, and economic policy, which is a matter of which means best achieves an end, on an equal plane, abortion will continue with the support of Catholic voters.

 

[JimG]

The best anti-poverty program is a growing economy and a shrinking national debt. Is this what the bishops are lobbying for?

 

[Ender]

But, when the Bishops appear to put abortion, which is an absolute intrinsic evil, and economic policy, which is a matter of which means best achieves an end, on an equal plane, abortion will continue with the support of Catholic voters.

That this is so obviously true one can only wonder what kind of mental gymnastics are involved in believing otherwise.

Ender

 

[SanAgustin]

You didn’t identify the source of this citation. I didn’t find the comment in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church so I’m going to guess it’s in some document from the USCCB. If that’s the case then, as far as I’m concerned, it’s pretty meaningless. I think the best that can be said of them is that sometimes what they write accords with what the Church teaches.

It was written by Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate. You might want to read it.

 

[Ender]

It was written by Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate.

Ah, well at least it’s from a document that deserves to be taken seriously.

You might want to read it.

OK, let’s see what it says … in the context of the comments from the USCCB.

CV - * development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all*.

• We are doing this … check.

CV - *more economically developed nations should do all they can to allocate larger portions of their gross domestic product to development aid
*USCCB *- We understand that the fiscal status quo is unsustainable

• *If even the bishops recognize our fiscal problem it should be understood that doing “all we can” in bad times may in fact mean doing less than we were doing in good times.

CV - *Such aid, whatever the donors’ intentions, can sometimes lock people into a state of dependence and even foster situations of localized oppression and exploitation in the receiving country.
*USCCB *- These programs need to be made more effective, efficient and responsive

• *Then we’re all agreed: programs that don’t work or are harmful should be improved or terminated but doing neither is unwarranted.

CV - * It should also be remembered that, in the economic sphere, the principal form of assistance needed by developing countries is that of allowing and encouraging the gradual penetration of their products into international markets
USCCB - …We especially fear the costs of undermining poverty-focused international assistance
**- *It does seem that what the USCCB has in mind is welfare while what BXVI had in mind was something else entirely.

Have I missed anything demonstrating that foreign aid programs should not be cut?

Ender

 

[Carlan]

Why is it that so many of us nit pick the Bishops when it comes to being encouraged to give generously to the poor? If you think they shouldn’t be concerned, or they are unduly pressuring nations or individuals to do their utmost to relieve poverty.Just don’t bother yourself, the Bishops are not holding guns to our heads. In the end there will be only one judge, in case you think not,and no one cares have another read of the Sermon on the Mount.Peace, Carlan

 

[seekerz]

They might be thinking that, I don’t know. But, all too often, when asked why they voted for a pro-abortion politician, a Catholic will pull out a statement like this, and say “yeah, he’s for abortion, but he supports these social programs, so it’s all O.K.!”

If it is made clear FIRST AND FOREMOST that one is NEVER to vote for a pro-abortion politician when there is a pro-life alternative, THEN, AND ONLY THEN will it prevent politicians from successfully using economic policy as a “trojan horse” to get elected to pursue a pro-death agenda. After that, THEN we can get around to debating as to what is the most effective way to care for the poor.

But, when the Bishops appear to put abortion, which is an absolute intrinsic evil, and economic policy, which is a matter of which means best achieves an end, on an equal plane, abortion will continue with the support of Catholic voters.

The Bishops, in their wisdom (in part, I would guess, gathered from the confessional) understand well the link between desperate poverty and multiple moral problems, including and contributing to, abortion. So asking the government to place priority on poverty relief is one part (not all) of fighting abortion.

I just never get how abortion and poverty are separable in the minds of so many. Just recently, in researching the Mexico City policy for a different thread, I learned that abortions had actually gone up among poor women in developing countries when the policy was reinstated (because they had decreased access to contraception). Not what proponents would expect if they fail to make the links between social issues.

This is not the same as making abortion and poverty equivalent, this is about recognizing that throwing a pebble in a pond produces waves - not simply a single splash.