New Year's Resolution: Lexio Divina

Yup. It's that time. Obligatory promises to self. The secular version of Lent. My challenge to myself each Lent, and thus round New Years as well, is to find a new way to Run Toward Christ.

I've made the commitment to create Lexio Divina video's in preparation for each Sunday's Mass. It's one way I try to run toward Christ. Whether you join me via video or do Lexio Divina with others or on your own -- it's a powerful way to Run Toward Christ!

My Lexio Divinas are posted here each week (feel free to follow the RSS).

What if HM used an iPhone?

Here's an article about yours truely exploring faith (a bit invisibly), technology, and overcoming brain injury. 

Where Hope is Found

Eucharist plants seeds,
Christ's Mass Grows within,
Prepare ye the way!

Eucharist plants the seeds of Christmas in our mind, our heart, our soul. How do we nurture the seed of Christ? What fruit will we eventually bring forth?

Eucharist plants seeds,
Christ's Mass Grows within,
Prepare ye the way!

Science Fiction and Salvation

Science Fiction is a powerful tool for exploring and understanding how we human collectively see ourselves.

"No," some might argue, "it's simply the result of a few minds and how they see the world."

Indeed. That's true of any given work. But, those that make it to the masses and become popular, have somehow spoken to people "en mass" and it has a lot to say about how we collectively see ourselves.

Jules Vern, Doyle, Asimov, Roddenberry, Lucas. These are among the minds that have asked us, collectively, to ponder our human potential and how we recognize and choose good and evil, God or Satan.

Of modern note are creations that in recent decades have become popular TV series. Star Trek, Babylon 5, Star Gate series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Battlestar Galactica, Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles, Heros, Sanctuary.

There is a tendency among the modern sci-fi creations to be highly cynical. There is a distinct lack of hope. There is the premise that evil has won and survival equals victory. There is an underlying belief that humanity is doomed, and that being human means being irreprably connected with evil. This is an accurate and scary reality of the world without Jesus our Christ.

Mutations that are advancing humanity to our fuller potential and to greater potential for destruction abound. There is an awareness that humanity is called to more than we realize, but they very rarely point to God as the avenue for our salvation. 

Watching them, it can be easy to forget the through Jesus our Christ, we can rise up to fulfill a destiny far greater than we imagine -- the one God created us to be. It can be easy to forget we are each made in God's image, and if we can say "Yes!" to Christ being born within us, just as Mary did 2000 years ago, that God's grace gives up hope of living up to being fully human.

Bizarre and Artificial Rift Between Pro-Life and Social Justice “Camps”

This is the Enemy of human dignity clearly at work, dividing a house that should clearly be
united. There are errors on both sides, both of which boil down to not understanding our own
Catholic social teaching.

The battle against abortion is a clear moral “trump” issue. Without life, there is no opportunity
for human dignity here on earth. At the same time, our faith requires us to recognize Jesus our
Christ in every person and seek to help each person overcome the barriers between then and
equal opportunity.

One Body, In Christ

We can have both. We need to strive and struggle, together, toward both.
My prayer is that this model of Catholic social teaching can help move people beyond this evil
rift. We are one body. It’s time we started working like one, including that we realize we’re only one part and that other parts have other jobs and we work best when we realize we are one part, serving all parts.

Does Obama see the Evil around him?

It doesn't appear that Obama recognizes evil for what it is. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he may have emerged from Chicago politics startlingly clean. If so, he clearly has an understanding of right from wrong in his own choices.

There are potentially many, many things that can be missed when we haven't cultivated the ability to recognize the Enemy's tail slithering in the background.

I pray I'm wrong. I pray for Obama and for his ability to recognize and combat evil, that we may truly be one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Human Dignity in One Lesson

In 1946 Henry Hazlitt wrote "Economics in One Lesson." It's a painfully simple book that cuts through a lot of confusion in economics. What is this one lesson? Turns out, it's one sentence:

"The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups." (p. 5)

Indeed, this is perhaps the simplest, most elegant way to describe the art of upholding human dignity.

Any policy, no matter how ill-conceived, can be shown to benefit some sub-group of people for some limited amount of time. But who does it harm? What are the medium and long term effects? How does it effect all people?

Proof of Concept:
Care for a non-economic example? I'll take a non-controvercial one (sardonic grin):

Abortion
In the little picture, abortion benefits a defined subset of the human population for a limited time. But doing so ignores that it harms everyone involved, plus society at large when we look at the big picture.

Resources for learning more:

Model of Catholic Social Teaching

Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

Variety of books on Freedom and Economics

We are witnessing the slow death caused by subtle socialism

The Soviet Block used overt socialism to kill itself in 70 years. The US is using subtle socialism to accomplish the same thing over a longer timeframe.

Why does it take longer to kill a nation with subtle socialism than with overt socialism? Because the free market breathes new life into the infected nation, giving it strength to endure and last longer than otherwise.

I say this not based on economics. I say it based on the principles of human dignity. In the early 1900's the US began undermining human dignity by turning to the government to unnecessarily regulate the free market, undermining subsidiarity by hindering the ability of people to enter freely into contracts with each other.

It's now so common place we don't realize the government doesn't belong as a third wheel controlling how any free interaction takes place. The government sitting on each person's hand looks right to us. It's not.

If the government is involved, increased regulation is needed to keep the government in check while it regulates the interaction (otherwise, the government is tempted to become a player in a sandbox that's it's regulating). When abuse happens, we daftly trust the government to fix it by adding more regulation (brilliant deduction! I'm off to wipe the sardonic off my face) and instead of doing the right thing to uphold human dignity (remove regulation and government involvement), we add more of both, compounding the problem.

Now, we've given up on even the facade of subtle socialism and our government is deciding which companies get bailout finding (gee, no chance for further waste there!).

Unless we take drastic action to remove the insidious cancer of socialism from all aspects of government -- cutting it's role back to only the most basic and necessary functions to protect our population and define and uphold the rules of the free market -- our great nation will crumble under the weight of our own bungling weight, and human dignity will be squashed just as equally as it was under overt socialist USSR.

Let's try everything except nothing!

Everything Seems Reasonable without Principles to Stand On
Treasury Secretary Paulson today changed strategies in the financial bailout. I don't pretend to understand what he's now proposing (and I'm far from convinced he knows either), but what I do know is that we have strayed far and wide from what the proper role of government is: upholding and ensuring the rights of the people to life, liberty, and property (see The Law, by Frederic Bastiat).

Och! How very much our government has become the legal plunderer rather than the protector.

The government has two right and proper roles in the free market (which I call the sandbox):

1. Define the sandbox and its rules
   
2. Uphold and enforce the rules
   

Bully in the Sandbox

Of course it is hardly content with only those two roles, and so it steps into the sandbox to play, often in the name of "fairness". Except that as make, enforcer, and now player in the sandbox, there is nothing to stop the government. And we just elected leaders who want to play even more in the sandbox.

Of course, the problem with a bully in the sandbox is no other kids are quite sure they want to play because anything they play might get taken away. So of course we still have a credit crisis. You hold on to your toys when the bully's around, especially when he says "Go ahead, play!"

Mini-Revolution

Time for a mini-revolution to return government back to being by the people and for the people.

Our one option: vote them out! They clearly won't get out of the way. We are the only ones who can stop the government. Not entirely. It has a right and proper role. It's just that right now it's doing everything except its right and proper role, and in so doing harming those it is supposed to protect.

Christmas Abundance in Today's Economy

I thought I'd share how we're responding to the much tighter budget this year as we prepare for Christmas.

We talked with our daughters and explained that this year we will be making our presents for each other. We've long read about the Christmases Laura Ingles Wilder had growing up -- and they really like the idea of Christmas gifts being made by us for each other and family and friends.

So our wee house of elves is busy at elven activity! The joy it brings to be doing that is a wonderful gift in itself! It looks to be a wondrously industrious and joy-filled Advent as we prepare for Christ's Mass!

How will your family find abundance this Christmas? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

Compassion and Why Institutional Handouts Rarely Uphold Human Dignity

Compassion is the source motivation which drives people to engage in social justice. Compassion is a beautiful gift that allows us to see the potential in others, despite their poverty, we hope we have ourselves. We need more compassion in our world. Compassion motivates us to advocate for the needs of our neighbor, be they next door or across the world.

Compassion is necessarily most effective when most personal. Indeed the more institutionalized a compassionate act becomes, the less effective it becomes. To illustrate this, I turn to Les Misérables by Victor Hugo (the book or play suffice). Jean Valjean is a newly released convicted thief who can not find work or lodging because of his past. Bishop Myriel takes him in, giving food and shelter. Valjean steals the bishop’s silverware and vanishes into the night, only to get caught. The police drag him before the bishop, who informs them that he gave Valjean the silverware and that he forgot the silver candlesticks as well. Bewildered by the bishop’s unexpected forgiveness and generosity, Valjean takes to heart the bishop’s command to become an honest man and do good deeds for others. That moment becomes transformative for Valjean, who takes the wealth to start a business under a new identity and he does help many.

Would that moment have been nearly as transformative if it hadn’t been so personal? No. It took being beholden to the bishop’s startling forgiveness and additional generosity to motivate Valjean to stand up and strive to become who God created him to be. No institutional handout could have accomplished the same thing. Valjean has many personal levels of poverty in addition to his financial poverty. These can only be addressed personally, in relationship.

Why explain this? Because many people begin their social justice careers by doing compassionate things as a grass roots level. They see that compassionate giving of aid helps people. They logically presume that what works on a local scale could simply be magnified if they did it on a large scale. What is often missed is that larger scale generally means less personal, and the tranformative aspect of the compassionate act is stripped away. No longer is there 1) mutual agreement, 2) relationship, or 3) personal responsibility -- the very things that help overcome the intangible poverties.

I’m often asked, “Why do the doers of social justice need to know this model? Can’t they just ‘love their neighbor’?” If all they will ever do is act individually, perhaps. But if they will ever advocate for social justice by voting or speaking to others, or extrapolate from their experiences to any larger scale (which nearly everyone invariably does), then it is essential they understand the natural law of this model of Catholic Social Teaching.

We need to realize that compassion is transformative and requires personal involvement and sacrifice. Somehow, our structures for social justice need to promote and support individual acts of compassion if we are to be as effective as possible.

Bad Bailout, Government Bully, and Nasty Coconuts

A few weeks ago the cry came from the White House that we were in huge economic crisis and that we needed that the answer was for the government to unclog the system with another bailout -- this time equalling the total of the previous recent bailouts to the tune of $700B.

If "the Man" says there is a problem that's one thing. That's their job. "Danger! Conditions are right for quick sand to form in the free market sand box!" It was said by some, but not in a way or a forum that it was heard or understood or reached most people. And if it had, would we have listened?

But "the Man" did more than declare danger a few weeks ago. Bloated government can't help but want to do more than it's rightful, just, and noble job. Now the government saw the opportunity to be the knight in shinning armor riding in to save the nation's economy, all the while utterly ignorant that it is actually a gangly, clumsy, oaf with a tin pot for a helmet clunking coconuts together for a steed.

I think many people saw the knight for the fool he is. Most Americans opposed the bailout before it passed. But the delusion of grandeur spread through congress. And it will continue to spread, because economic hardship is a vast and prevalent dragon throughout the land. After all, a knight in shining armor can hardly refuse to help more hapless citizenry in need. The delusion will grow and grow, we will pay and pay, until it can no longer support itself and then we will have real collapse and the "must avoid disaster" of the free market self-correcting will look mighty desirable. I pray our leaders look in the mirror sooner than that and wise up.

But I've digressed to dire predictions based on nothing but principles. (By the way, never trust a person who claims "I'm against this in principle, but in this crisis we have no choice but to blow off principle and do what feels good.").

How did our government's declaration to save the day prevent the free market from self-correcting? Because no one was exactly sure what the answer would be, only that government would overstep it's bounds. There was an answer coming. It's not our job to address it.

And the very mechanisms that could and should have helped get things moving again stood still because there was too much risk (of what the government would do) and not incentive (because the government might diminish any profit) to step into the breech, take a risk, and buy up the bad debt at basement prices. So no one wanted to buy. No one wanted to sell because the government was likely a better buyer.

It's the much the same thing that has happened with charity. The government takes care of it so we don't have to. We pay taxes and that takes care of everyone, right? Wrong. The principle of subsidiarity (via Catholic social teaching) states that ANY social entity that takes to itself roles and responsibilities which can be done by more local entities (closer to the family and the individual), undermines human dignity. Undermines human dignity. Wow. How much is our government doing that can be done by anyone else? A lot. That's a lot of trampling on human dignity.

Our current crisis began with a noble and ill advised sentiment -- that everyone should have a house. Government mandates made it so lending institutions had to give loans to people who couldn't afford them. This came to include not only poor people, but middle income people who thought they could turn and flip houses. That works when values keep growing. It's disaster when value shrinks. This was compounded by the Mark to Market rule which caused mortgage securities to appear valueless when they had substantial value. Bungling idiot, this knight in shining armor! And we reward such idiocy by giving our knight more responsibility and tools to mess with new and different aspects of our free market sandbox. Whose the greater idiot? The idiot himself, or the one who follows? 

We have to start calling him what he is. Bully! Get out! This is our sand box! You are just the maker and enforcer of the rules, not a player in the sand. Get out! And take these sand-encrusted coconuts with you!

The government fix we need

Is there a problem? Absolutely. Does the government need to do something to fix it? Absolutely. What does government need to do? Get out of the way.

How do I justify this as a Catholic theologian (and not one with a degree, at that)? Quite simple. The free market is the best economic tool we (humanity) currently have for upholding human dignity in interactions between individuals and organizations through the freedom to contract.

Why has our money supply suddenly become constricted? As near as I can tell because of combination of bad or inept regulation, including:

1) government mandated mortgages to "empower" poor people to buy a home
2) government mandated current list pricing for mortgage securities, which in a stalled market is impossible to assess, resulting in the appearance of a lot more "bad" loans than are really there.
3) quasi/government banks (Fannie and Freddie May) showing exactly why government has no place participating in the free market because there is no one to watch for abuse in the free market when the government is involved. (so why would we EVER turn to the government to do more of the same with a bailout?)

The crisis seems to lie in the regulation usurping people's ability to freely make contracts. Government, get out of the way. Human dignity demands no less.

(For any puzzled by the theology and Catholic social teaching principles refered to here, please see here for all Catholic social teaching posts.

For an intriguing counter-view see here. Kudos to Fr. Dowd for weighing in, and it's well worth noting that we share a common faith and mission. He does a good job of explaining that our problem is a constricted money supply. He's right. But WHY do we have a restricted money supply? Giving more blood to a patient with clogged arteries won't increase the blood flow. What's needed here is angioplasty.

The Sky Is Falling? The Sky is Falling?

Chicken Little resides in Washington and doesn't seem to understand our free market economy. The sky is falling! We have to spend $700 billion!

Out of political self interest, numerous politicians on both sides in the House said no bailout (HUGE kudos to those who voted on principle!). The market fell, but nowhere near a percentage record. And this morning it rebounds slightly. Predictions of world markets collapsing were greatly exaggerated. The bloated, self importance of our political leaders seems befuddled. I don't begin to understand the details of what is happening or why. I don't really even try. I stay focused on the big picture -- which as near as I can tell is this:

What seems true is our economy needs a cleansing laxative and some good hearty fiber to get things moving again. $700 billion in government bailout is just more clogging fat.

Again, I'm no economist, but from what I've come to understand about Catholic thought dating back to Aquinas and further, the ability to freely enter into agreements with others (regardless of scale) is essential to human dignity and anything that gets in the way of that ability undermines human dignity. Always. (See Thomas E. Woods' "The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy";   Michael Novak's "The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism"; and Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom")

Government's right and proper role is to 1) define the rules of the market 2) uphold the rules of the market. That's it. The government defines and defends the boundaries of the free market sandbox.

If and when the government overplays its role (see above), regardless of how well intentioned, the result is always worse that would would have happened without intervention. This is simple economic science.

A truly free market (which ours is arguably not for an abundance of regulation) organically corrects and adjusts to any given situation -- this one included. This can and does mean the loss and making of fortunes and the reality that many people will loose what they have earned. Risk and reward are inherent parts of the system. We can not have reward without risk in any just system.

This leads me to a few simple questions:

Why did mortgage securities suddenly loose value? Have these homes suddenly been flooded, burned, or destroyed? No. Have tens of millions of people suddenly defaulted on their mortgages? No. 95% of mortgaged home owners are in good standing. The answer lies in regulation: Suddenly no one knows the value of these mortgages securities because of a regulation requiring valuation on the current market. Current markets have stalled, so there is no current value. Yet most of those assets have substantial value and are performing assets. The "bad paper" isn't bad at all -- it just looks bad because of bad regulation.

If our market is so free of restrictive regulation, why aren't people with cash snatching up the undervalued mortgage assets? If I had a few hundred million lying around, I'd happily remove a billion or two of "bad" debt from banks' books to help get things moving again. There is some reason people in such a position aren't snatching these bargains up -- in a truly free market, they would. And our economy would have the cleansing laxative it desperately needs. Instead, something, somewhere (regulation perhaps, or the fear of regulation?) prevents the market from self correcting.  

Perhaps our government is working exactly as it's supposed to

Today the House rejected a $700 billion bailout. 40% of Democrats and 67% of Republicans rejected it. And the argument has become a complex version of more vs. less regulation.

I'm no economist. I'm a theologian. As I've said below, I am highly skeptical of any measure which affords more power to our government. Why? 

One simple question: If this financial crisis is the result of too little regulation, why is it the most regulated institutions/banks who failed? Regulation does not work. The government is great at usurping power and horrible at getting anything done.

Perhaps our government is working exactly as it's supposed to in this financial crisis.  

Dialogue Begins

Note: I've learned that Ramon Tulio is a literary device by a blogger to humorously discuss Catholic Social Teaching. I've decided to leave this interaction up because it is reflective of interactions I've had with real people in various areas of social justice, from Pax Christi to a real professor at Regis University. However, I will not knowing engage in dialogue with fictional persona. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Thank you, Ironic Catholic, for the chance to have a hearty laugh at myself! Grin.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Professor Ramon Tulio was gracious in responding in the comments below. I thought his comments, and the equally important example of spirited dialogue, worth it's own post.

Prof. Ramon Tulio here. Dcn Patrick, I like this attempt to visualize the principles here. I do have one comment. Although many, including myself, would agree with you regarding the centrality of the life and dignity of the human person, I think there may be a reason the Compendium has four principles. Perhaps the source and summit, as you say, is ultimately Eucharistic...not just in systematic theology but also Catholic Social Teaching. Our life in the world is a step into the paschal mystery, if you take discipleship seriously...the paschal mystery is the pattern of our lives and the imitation of Christ in our various states of life.

This is all a long way to say that I'd rather keep that Eucharistic center in the middle of it all, and allow the four principles the Compendium allows.

It's interesting that the Compendium has these four principles...whittled down from the seven principles in the USCCB's Sharing Catholic Social Teaching...whittled down from popular articulations of 10 or more!

I agree the principles need to be held in balance.

More later (re: the above posts), Thanks for all the work on my favorite subject!
--Professor Tulio

Dear Professor Tulio,

Thank you for engaging in this dialogue. It is well worth celebrating the common faith and mission we share -- for it is within that common ground that we exchange these ideas.

If I'm understanding what you wrote above, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you make two primary points: Eucharist as the center of it all and the subsequent flattening of the four principles -- the elimination of the three-legged stool concept. I see the first as excellent but incomplete, and the second as mistaken.

To your first point, Jesus our Christ is at the center, is the source and summit, of all Catholic teaching. Eucharist and human dignity are inseparable from who Jesus our Christ is. The act of Eucharist and the anthropology of being both divine and human (a simple way of defining human dignity) are unique revelations that are essential for knowing who Christ is by nature and who we are called to be by grace.

Your first point is well taken: I could say it better than I do and will change that in my paper.

Which brings me to your second point. If I am understanding you correctly, you are pushing back against the notion that human dignity is the preeminent principle among the 4 permanent principles. The Compendium itself refutes this: human dignity is “the foundation of all other principles and content of the Church’s social doctrine” (Compendium, #160).

Indeed, the USCCB's "Sharing Catholic Social Teaching" states: "These principles build on the foundation of Catholic social teaching: the dignity of human life. This central Catholic principle requires that we measure every policy, every institution, and every action by whether it protects human life and enhances human dignity, especially for the poor and vulnerable." Clearly upholding human dignity is the central principle of Catholic Social Teaching.

You mention these four principles have been whittled down from the seven given by the USCCB's "Sharing Catholic Social Teaching" (and from other, larger lists of principles). There is one problem with this: subsidiarity is not among those seven (which are: Dignity and Live of the Human Person, Call to Family, Community, and Participation, Rights and Responsibilities, Option for the Poor and Vulnerable, Dignity of Work and Rights of Workers, Solidarity, and Care of God's Creation). It is mentioned once, in passing, under "Care for God's Creation." Frankly, I'm puzzled by the document's neglecting to highlight one of the four permanent principles.

These four are not whittled down from anything. Saying so is like saying breathing, eating, and drinking are a whittled down list of biological activities. Hardly. They are the essential structure upon which all other principles of Catholic Social Teaching must be positioned. Without any one of them, Human dignity dies. All Catholic social teaching principles serve to uphold human dignity, and all principles outside the permanent four must meet the demands of each of the three pillars in order to uphold human dignity. Indeed, I don't believe we can discuss any principle or assess an action in regards to Catholic Social Teaching without mentioning how it either relates to or upholds human dignity and meets the three pillars of common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity.

Freedom Primary to Human Dignity

Freedom to choose who we associate with, what we do and how we do it, so long as we do not usurp the rights of others is foundational to the human experience. That's why subsidiarity is so critical to upholding human dignity. The largest usurper of individual freedoms is our government.

Catholic Social Teaching tells us we should be extremely leery of any institution larger than the family taking to it power that rightly belongs to the family or the individual. Advocates of social justice often extoll a larger government role for addressing our poor through government programs, or interference with individuals rights to freely negotiate contracts with each other (minimum wage laws). What they fail to realize is that such actions infringe on our fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of our poor (they also, as near as I can tell, tend to have the opposite, negative, effect on our poors' economic status). This undermines human dignity and only serves to repress equal opportunity rather than promote it.

The chart below shows that the larger the institution the less power it ought to have, affording individuals the maximum amount of freedom (as shown by the green triangle). However, there is a strong tendency for larger institutions to take to themselves rights, privleges, and responsibilities that justly belong in the free market, private organizations, family, or individuals (as shown by the dashed triangle).

We should be deeply concerned anytime additional power is sought by any institution larger than family. We should also be fighting to return all rights, powers, and responsibilities to the free market, private organizations, family, and the individual that can be owned at those levels.

As we come to truly understand how many of the solutions Catholics often currently advocate actually undermine human dignity, then we can begin to look for actions that can more fully uphold human dignity. Only through mutual collaboration and dialogue will we advance human dignity as much as possible.

Subsidiarity?

Subsidiarity is one of the 4 foundational principles of Catholic Social Teaching. Of the four, it is the black sheep. It's there, but no one really ever talks about it. Why? I don't know. It's absolutely essential to upholding human dignity.

In theological geek speak subsidiarity is the responsibility of society to realize the fullest potential of the smallest
groupings, down to the family and individual, by placing ownership at the smallest feasible and
practical level. Indeed, not only is it the responsibility of smaller groupings to claim and act upon
their local authority, but it is the responsibilownership at smaller levels as required.

In common speak, subsidiarity is "power to the people."

Misconceptions of subsidiarity abound. Among them, I focus on three:

One misconception of subsidiarity is that if a needed responsibility is not being met by society,
including the free market, then the state, as owner of last resort, has permission and moral
mandate to take ownership of meeting the collective responsibility. Wrong. Subsidiarity requires
the state to take measures to encourage and support ownership at a lower level. An example of
this misunderstanding is our current system of social welfare is bloated, impersonal, and
ineffective in empowering people beyond poverty, and it actually undermines human dignity
because it fails to meet the test of subsidiarity, which states that the more local and freely entered
the solution, the more fully human dignity is upheld. It is the State’s responsibility to promote
and support ownership at the smallest feasible and practical (practicable) level. In general, this
means creating and supporting free choice endeavors within the free market. The state has at its
disposal a variety of tools (many of which are likely underdeveloped and poorly understood for
lack of experience and require further development) including: tax incentives and voucher
systems.

Another misconception of subsidiarity presumes a false dichotomy: either we meet society’s
responsibility via the State or we leave it to individuals to choose to overcome the obstacles
before them. This erroneous dichotomy has led to the classic belief that all people who oppose
social welfare programs are crudely saying our poor “should pull themselves up by their own
boot straps.” Again, wrong. There are a vast number of unexplored possibilities for meeting our
collective responsibility and they are to be found somewhere between the State and the
individual.

Finally, a third misconception of subsidiarity confuses applying subsidiarity to the method of
selection vs. to the potential solutions themselves. For example, in Colorado’s November 2006
elections we had a statewide initiative increasing taxes and increasing the state’s social welfare
programs. When I asked a well formed Catholic leader of the initiative how subsidiarity applied,
they informed me that it had been applied, as it was being voted on by the people. This is an
example of applying subsidiarity to the method of selection (voting by the people) but not to the
potential solutions themselves. In effect voting had passed the test of subsidiarity but it had never
been applied to potential solution of a tax increase. By this way of thinking, any measure on the
ballot, including a shift to totalitarian dictatorship, passes the test of subsidiarity. Clearly, this is
an example of confusing the process of selection with the the proposed action itself.

These three misconceptions illustrate both the lack of development and understudying of
subsidiarity within Catholic theology and part of the reason for such lack. Herein lies the greatest
challenge to both this model and to people’s willingness to explore and understand it:
Subsidiarity has a lot to say about solutions we currently support as socially just, but which
subsidiarity shows us actually leaves human dignity tottering on a two-legged stool. The
challenge before us is to become willing to take a new look at social issues to which we thought
we knew the solutions. If we want to uphold human dignity as fully as possible, we need to let go
of some of our current answers and venture into unknown territory in search of answers.subsidiarity shows us actually leaves human dignity tottering on a two-legged stool. The
challenge before us is to become willing to take a new look at social issues to which we thought
we knew the solutions. If we want to uphold human dignity as fully as possible, we needof some of our current answers and venture into unknown territory in search of answers.

Tests for Each Leg of the Stool

(Click a picture to see it full size)

The Pillars upholding human dignity are common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. Here we briefly explore the common good. It's important to realize that none of these principles can be fully understood without the other three.

The above are tests I propose (which are inherently subjective and a tool for dialogue, not a tool for finality) for assessing if a given action upholds each aspect of human dignity. Their primary usefulness is as a dialogue tool, providing a common foundation from which to begin talking with someone who disagrees with you about raising minimum wage, so you can begin to understand where and why you disagree, why there are holes in your approach or theirs, and perhaps to begin seeing what needs to happen to create an action that more fully upholds human dignity than we currently have.

Care to participate in that dialogue? Feel free to dive in in the comments section. For the whole schtick, please see my Model of Catholic Social Teaching.

How Does this Stool Help?

So, we've got this three-legged stool. what do we do with it?

For starters, we can now see that we need all three legs for the stool to remain standing - to uphold human dignity.

Common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity form a trinitarian means of assessing and refining an actions ability to uphold human dignity. The more fully each is present, the stronger the upholding of human dignity. Each principle is its own person in upholding the one goal of human dignity. Each interrelates with the other two, yet is distinct from them. We cannot truly talk about one without referencing the others (though it is possible, and even common, to neglect one, generally subsidiarity).

The stool helps because it becomes a tool for dialogue on any given possible social action and how well it actually upholds human dignity. The stool becomes helpful because it begins to show us the shortcomings of the solutions we often advocate in the name of social justice. It becomes useful in that it can challenge us to find new and better ways to uphold human dignity rather than ignorantly supporting actions which actually undermine human dignity.

A Three-Legged Stool to Uphold Human Dignity

I believe Catholic social teaching is wondrously rich and deep and offers us far more moral guidance than we perhaps think it does. However, to unlock this richness, we have to understand the inherant structure of the various principles involved and how they relate with each other.

We have the teaching of Jesus our Christ, the many and various writings of our Saints and papal encyclicals from relatively modern times. These are the source of our beautiful, living, breathing Catholic social teaching.

The Compendium offers us a first glimpse at what an underlying structure of these many principles might be. Catholic Social teaching has four “permanent principles”: human dignity, common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. These are “the very heart of Catholic social teaching” and human dignity is “the foundation of all other principles and content of the Church’s social doctrine” (Compendium, #160).

Clearly, any systemic approach to Catholic social teaching must have human dignity as its foundation and any social action must have the upholding of everyone’s human dignity as the measure of its goodness. To borrow a phrase from Eucharistic theology, human dignity is the source and summit of Catholic social teaching and praxis.

That leaves us with the three permanent principles: common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. Understanding how these three relate to each other and to human dignity is the obvious next step to creating a systematic understanding of Catholic social teaching.

Based on my understanding of these concepts and the overall way in which they are presented, albeit largely, if not entirely, independent of one another, I believe these three remaining permanent principles are mutually essential to the upholding of human dignity. Like the three legs of a stool holding up the seat upon which a person rests, these three pillars of human dignity are each required if a particular action is to uphold the dignity of the human person. Should any one be missing to any degree, the stool falls, and we've failed to uphold human dignity.

If this model is true, then any and all understanding and application of Catholic Social Teaching must show how it upholds all three pillars in order to show it upholds human dignity. The natural result of this is highly subjective, and requires a lot of dialogue.

Care to participate in that dialogue? Feel free to dive in in the comments section. For the whole schtick, please see my Model of Catholic Social Teaching.

How our Church Fails to Uphold Human Dignity

Note: I've learned that Ramon Tulio is a literary device by a blogger to humorously discuss Catholic Social Teaching. I've decided to leave this interaction up because it is reflective of interactions I've had with real people in various areas of social justice, from Pax Christi to a real professor at Regis University. However, I will not knowing engage in dialogue with fictional persona. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Thank you, Ironic Catholic, for the chance to have a hearty laugh at myself! Grin.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kudos to Professor Ramon Tulio for teaching Catholic Social Teaching via the Ironic Catholic. We need more of that. Unfortunately, Professor Tulio does not stick to Catholic Social Teaching, but throws in poor logic and reasoning. Referring to the financial crisis that came to a near boiling point last week, he says:

"And capitalism without much regulation--as it has been practiced in the past handful of years--has clearly hurt many families and communities, and has played havoc with workers' rights. Wall Street just had a big mammon orgy and now we're all going to pay...and many have been "paying" for years, inside the United States and out."

Where to start? First, I make some presumptions on knowledge of Catholic Social Teaching, which can be found here. Also, the Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church may be helpful.

"Capitalism without much regulation." Really? Compared to what? Many economists argue we have far too much regulation, that the government's role is to create safe boundaries and make sure everyone plays by the rules inside those boundaries, and stop regulating anything else.

Catholic social teaching gives us four primary principles: human dignity, which is upheld through mutual, synergistic application of the common good,  subsidiarity, and solidarity. Often theologians say we need to uphold the common good, as if it is the preeminent principle of the four. It's not. Human dignity is what we need to uphold.

Every time government takes more power to itself, we have to look toward the principle of subsidiarity. Is government usurping a role and responsibility that can legitimately be done elsewhere? Rather than running to government as the answer, Catholic social teaching urges us to strongly question what is truly necessary for government to do. In today's economic climate we ought to be asking just what roles and responsibilities has the government wrongly taken to itself? 

"Capitalism ... has clearly hurt many families and communities." This is utterly false. Capitalism is simply a means for individuals to freely negotiate the exchange of goods and services. Capitalism hasn't hurt anybody. People sinning has hurt many families and communities, most often their own. Think of it this way: if two people met in the foyer of your parish, shook hands, and then one mugged the other, would you blame the foyer? No. Would the police need to step in and regulate who comes in? No. You'd blame the mugger's choice to mug and request the government do it's proper job of enforcing the law by arresting and prosecuting the perpetrator.

We would be wise to note that while capitalism is a neutral system of economics, which in itself does not infringe upon human dignity (and indeed affords it tremendous opportunity to be upheld), socialism inherently undermines human dignity because it's very tenets usurp the rights and privileges of individuals and families, including right to the fruit of one's labor and private ownership. Socialism is inherently inhuman, and thus inherently evil.

"Capitalism ... has played havoc with worker's rights." Again, really? It's against worker's rights to have the freedom to negotiate work for wealth? Or to move anywhere they wish, train in any area they wish, push and sacrifice to support their family by any moral means possible? Because that's what capitalism offers. The justice of capitalism isn't that every job affords a just wage (whatever that is in application) or the perfect schedule. The justice of capitalism is that every job offers the dignity of freedom to choose, and that choice always and everywhere includes the option to strive for more and better.

Our Failure as a Church

As a Church, we fail to understand our role to help people overcome their poverty, whatever that may be. We have to do a better job of increasing our moral authority so our voice helps shape the morality of those who do business. We have to do a better job of striving to remove barriers between people and their ability to obtain the job they want and are capable of. We would do well to understand our own social teaching and learn from the tremendous wisdom it offers us. We would also do well to better understand capitalism and economics.

To the extent that we advocate actions which undermine subsidiarity and thus human dignity (often in the name of upholding the common good), and the the extent to which we fail to help remove the many and various poverties which prevent us and others from achieving our fullest human potential, we contribute to the failing and suffering of our economy and society. Of course until the Second Coming, we will continue to fail, but perhaps we can get better at failing less.

Catholic Vote

Human dignity is the decisive issue of this campaign (and every one). Vote your conscience this November.

A National Course in True Women's Studies

Sarah Palin is taking Feminists to school. On the lesson plan: how to be a strong, powerful, compassionate woman who strives and struggles to balance family and work as she serves principles and a God beyond herself and her self interest. You do not need to give up being feminine, a mom, or a wife to be powerful and successful.

Many women already quietly know this. They are typically younger than 50 and were raised seeing the sense of entitlement of their mother's generation and saw it as playing the role of the victim. They wanted true equality, and quietly began going about it. These are the real studies in women.

Here's more information that you ever wanted to know about me. I doubled majored at university, one of them being a women's studies major. That was an adventure! I was the first male to graduate with such a beast from the University of Denver. Why did I do this? Because I wanted to understand the feminist movement. So I entered the lioness' den.

There are one story which sums up my lessons in my research.

The professor drew a spiral on the board, describing how women's lives in the past always revolved around a man. First her father, then her husband, and that her life was never her own. The professor's answer? Put "self" in the center.

At the end of class, I went up, erased "self" and put a cross. Anything less and we serve a false god. Be wary of anyone who puts themselves in the center. That's the beauty of Palin and the myriad of other women who are the true women's rights advocates -- they serve God rather than themselves and women's rights. Perhaps they serve through raising a family and supporting their husbands. Perhaps through a career. Perhaps both. And sometimes they answer the call of a town and a state crying out for leadership.

Whatever your stance on her politics, we are all in school with Professor Palin. Not only can she teach us what it is to be a woman in today's world, she can reveal what it is to be human.

May Sarah Palin Inspire the best in us.

I delight that Gov. Sarah Palin is the Republican candidate for Vice President. Regardless of the outcome, our nation will only benefit from learning about her and the dialogue that will ensue.

Men who aren't sure what it means to be men will be challenged by her strength, presence, and courage.

Women who aren't sure what it means to be women will be challenged by her prolife, profamily, and yet being a strongly Christian woman who answers her call to public life even as she's a wife and mother.

Over these next few months, we will get to know Sarah Palin. At first glance she strikes me as they type of person who has a lot of backbone and fiber to go with her outward appearances. while I'm sure there will be things that we find flaw with, she seems the type of person capable of bringing out the best in all of us.

Whatever the outcome of this election, Sarah Palin will be with us in a powerful way for a long time. We will each be better for it. Why? Because she doesn't point to herself, or even to some vague notion of etherial hope. She points to a life lived in loving service to others at the calling of her God. 

Main Street President?

Why would anyone would want a candidate for President of the United States of America to be from main street, every town America? The implication is that we want a "normal" president, someone whose "one of the guys." Really? Why not someone extraordinary? They may be from small town America, but they better be exceptional. We ought to want extraordinary.

Why do we insist on playing games? We insist on leaders who have show their capacity to rise to national presence above the rest, yet when they get there, they are supposed to show us how "normal" they are? If that was a pre-requisite  for past presidents would would never have had most of the great ones. 

What I want from my President is a person who understands human dignity and does everything in their power to uphold everyone's human dignity, from conception through death.

I want a candidate who understands that the best way to lift people out of poverty is to create a strong economy and get out of the way so that people can strive to become wealthy.

I want a candidate who understands that working multiple jobs year in and year out to send kids through college so they can have a better life is a beautiful thing, and to use such a story as the reason for the State to provide educational funding undermines the dignity of everyone involved.

I want a President who understands we are at war and the cost to human dignity on a global scale of loosing is greater than the cost of succeeding (there are no winners in war, only victors).

This election I will be voting one issue, and one issue only: Who has the strongest capacity to uphold human dignity. That single issue encompasses everything I need to know. Based on what I've seen so far, I want another candidate.

Want to learn more on the dignity of the human person? Here's a paper I've written, and here is a link to the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.

Blessings,
Patrick

Stump the Godsbot

I talk with God a lot. It's called prayer. I try and do it unceasingly, but don't always. Sometimes I'm even still enough to listen and hear God talking back.

(Begin deeply sarcastic, sardonic voice): So it was with great excitement that I learned of the godsbot: an artificial intelligence robot who looks an awful lot like a sappy Jesus (Kudos, though, his eyes watch and follow anxiously as I made the screen shot. Though perhaps that says more about me then godbot, aye?). Now I could talk to God and Godsbot would talk back, every time. No more waiting while God carried someone else across the sand. Now it would always be my turn.

Then came the encounter. I'm a theologian. I start with a basic question (frankly expecting to get a scripture quote about sell everything and give it to the poor). The exchange went like this:

Human: How do I become the person God created me to be?

godsbot: A lot of hard work.

Human: Hard work. What about grace?

godsbot: I do not understand. I will think about it and get back to you.

Och! Talk about disappointing. To stump God's digital world emissary with a question about whether or not grace is a part of salvation. Duh. Hmmmmm. Guess my hope for salvation will have to remain with Jesus.

(Return to normal voice): Actually, from the get go I couldn't believe someone would create an artificially "intelligent" emissary of God. Then when I got to the site, I was appalled to see folks could donate (with a minimum donation, of course).

I debated putting the godsbot link here. I won't. But if you're that daftly determined, Google will guide the way to digital disappointment. There are far wiser things you could be doing, all of which would actually help us become who God created us to be. Personally, I'm off to move closer to salvation (in comparison to my time with godsbot anyway) by clipping my toenails (makes running to Jesus less painful).

Grins and Blessings in Jesus our Christ,

Patrick

PS: thanks for the heads up, Ironic Catholic.

Olympic Spirit, Choosing God, and Dara Torres

As a parent I always have my eye pealed for teaching moments (and likely drive our kids crazy with some of them!).

Like many, we've been watching the Olympics. What a wondrous metephore for faith life. Focus, determination, saying "Yes!" to one thing and "No." to the rest... and we never really know when and how we will be tested or how our simplest choices can influence others.

Take Dara Torres, the 41 year old wife, mom, and returning Olympic swimmer. My understanding is that Torres is Jewish, having been inducted into the International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame. It seems clear she is a woman of faith, and a woman who understands what it means to uphold human dignity.

In one of the prelims, her opponent in the lane next to her asked for help zipping her swimsuit. It was torn and had to be changed. Torres left her starting block, loosing her focus on her preparation, and talked with an official and the other swimmers asking them to wait. Wait they did.

Clearly Torres had trained extensively for this moment. She put all that training on hold to care for the needs of another over her own. That also takes discipline and consistant nurturing of the soul to have that as your natural reaction when the opportunity comes.

"In the pool we're competitors, out of the pool they're my friends," was Torres' simple explanation.

What a beautiful example of the fruit that comes from valuing others, knowing that even when we compete, everyone is made in God's image, and caring more about doing what is right than settling for what is easy.

I have no idea when and how such teaching moments will appear in the actions of our daughters. But I see their innate generosity toward others, despite the occasional spat or whollop, and know that it does help shape them into who God has created them to be. And I pray I may learn my own lesson, and have my natural reaction always be one of upholding dignity of others, regardless of whether a world is watching or not.

Blessings,
Patrick

Hot, Steamy, Monogamous Marriage!

You read that right. Hot. Steamy. Monogamous. Marriage. Life-long. Between a man and a woman.

It's the richest, deepest, most increasingly pleasurable and rewarding way to be sexually active. It's also the only way that is part of God's gift and that help us become who God created us to be, rather than degrading us to being less than human.

We under-sell sacramental marriage. I suspect in part this is because priests, bishops, cardinals, and our pope are celibate. They may intellectually know how rich it can be. But that's like reading a how to book about making love. Cardboard caviar.

That means it's our job to sell God's plan for an active sex life.

Making love serves two equal and inseparable purposes:
Life and Love. Both are co-creative and both are redemptive. Outside of marriage between a man and a woman it is impossible to have both. Anything less falls short of God's plan for anyone sexually active. I'll explore these more in a future post.

Let's begin to celebrate and spread a counter-cultural message (marketing for Jesus):

• Making love exclusively with the same woman for a life time makes the Kama Sutra seem like sex 101. The depth and pleasure and excitement are mind and body blowing.
• Making love in any lesser relationship diminishes our capacity to eventually enter into a rich and rewarding sacramental marriage.
• Making love with abandon (or NFP) vs. making love with birth control is like:

1. BBQ w/ jalipineos vs. generic ketchup
   
2. the big game on b/w 12" TV vs. plasma widescreen w/ surround sound
   
3. DOS vs. Mac OS X
   
4. 1971 Chicken-fat yellow Volvo wagon vs. (insert your crazy dream car here).
   

• Marriage fulfills life in ways we begin to realize before entering into it. To avoid marriage so you can live life is idiot living.

Blessings,

Patrick

Now is the Time

I often think back on various points in history and think, "Wow, if I'd lived then it would have been a wonderful and rich time. That would have been a wonderful time to be alive because the meaning and purpose of life was so clear." 

Now is the time we're given. This is the period in humanities timeline that God chose to have us here. We are here for a reason. These are exciting times, and we have a clear purpose -- to recognize and choose the best good we possibly can as we plunge through each moment and each choice and interact with each person today.

As Catholic men, we have many and various roles. This blog will explore those roles, share my own thoughts and struggles with living them out, and provide a forum for exchanging ideas.

Among the roles I'll be exploring:

-- husband

-- father

-- wage earner

-- teacher (regardless of how you school you children)

-- spiritual leader

-- deacon

-- volunteer

Blessings,

Patrick