The Working Catholic: 125 Years by Bill Droel

As anniversaries go, the 125^th of modern Catholic social thought is a non-starter except perhaps in a small circle of specialists. Yet Catholic social thought offers a timely perspective on our society’s clash between what some people call our nanny-state and the libertarian free-for-all favored by others. Catholic social thought also suggests a way out of the paradox presented by a rejection of more taxes coupled with the desire for more services. Further, it has interesting things to say about the environment, wages, eldercare, parental responsibility and lots more.

It was 1891 when Pope Leo XIII (1810-1903) issued the first modern social encyclical. It is published in English under several titles; On the Condition of Labor being the most popular. It is also still referenced by its Latin title, Rerum Novarum. 

Catholicism says that short of the Garden of Eden, each society should approximate “the kingdom on earth.” That is, given the sin of the world, there is still an opportunity to apply realistic though general social principles to economics, culture and politics—first locally and eventually between countries. These principles are derived from Scripture and from the long reflection of Christians in hundreds and hundreds of settings.

These principles are not doctrinally binding on non-Catholics. They are, however, deliberately framed in civic language so that they can be persuasive in any setting. And, not surprisingly, other religious traditions have the same social principles.

Not all religious traditions, it should be noted, use the same method as Catholicism on social ethics—on, for example, issues related to labor relations, medical intervention, social service delivery and more. The difference in method often goes unappreciated when parties disagree on an issue, or agree for that matter.

There is no definitive list of Catholic principles. Most lists include: the inherent dignity of each life, social justice, subsidiarity, the common good, participation through bona fide labor unions and other mediating structures, and preferential option for the poor. Others are: preferential option for youth, gratuitousness, distributive justice, solidarity, family wage, universal destination of goods and a few more, topping out at, let’s say, 25 principles. The principles overlap and one should not be pulled too far from the others.

Finally and with emphasis, these are general social principles. Their specific application is the job of informed Catholics in concert with like-minded people inside their company, hospital, college, labor local, community group, professional association or legislative hall. Two equally moral parties can disagree once the application comes down to a specific policy.

This important point is why I use the term Catholic social thought, rather than top-down social teaching. While the papal encyclicals, beginning with the 1891 On the Condition of Labor, are the backbone, the full complement of Catholic social thought must include other ecclesial statements, some position papers from Catholic lay groups and the collective reflection of Catholics around the world on their experience. Of course, the social thought of the laity has to be consonant with the encyclicals and all the other pieces. One individual does not act or speak for the church. A prominent member of Congress, for example, says he is informed by Catholic thought and that his policy ideas flow from there. Not so, however, in his case. He is libertarian, even flirting with the extreme ideas of Ayn Rand (1905-1982).

Next up: Pope Leo XIII’s themes.

Droel edits INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a newsletter about faith and work.

The Working Catholic: Social Christianity by Bill Droel

A religion-labor coalition appeared during the first decade of the 20^th century, reversing the prior hostile suspicion that many Church leaders (upper case C) had toward unions. The change was led by the laity, not primarily by theologians, bishops and other pastors. Heath Carter, using Chicago as his case study, exhaustively combs old newspapers, letters, organizational statements and more to prove this thesis. The result is Union Made: Working People and the Rise of Social Christianity (Oxford University Press, 2015).

Workers, it turns out, are the church (lower case c) just as much as Church employees. Working people are “not systematic theologians,” writes Carter. But Carter uncovers evidence that many took their faith seriously, talked about it, and attempted to influence the Churchy types. Evangelization, he shows, goes in the opposite direction of the usual presumption. Workaday Christians actually evangelize the Church.

Protestant ministers, dependent on the collection basket and other private donations, had “long-standing ties [to] industrial elites,” Carter explains. Consequently, late 19^th century working families criticized the clergy for their lifestyle and for the ornate furnishings in many churches. Catholic clergy, though less connected to the wealthy, sometimes adopted the same posture. Chicago Catholic Bishop Anthony O’Regan (1809-1866), for example, was taken to task over his “palatial estate.”

Protestant theology developed a social analysis that can still be found in public policy debates and in street corner conversations. “Poverty sprang from individual—not systematic—defects,” common Protestant opinion said. Jesus’ saving grace was for sinful individuals, not for an unjust society. The corollary said that “prosperity was available to anyone willing to work for it.”

Though Carter does not dwell on the point, this individualistic theology was (and is) a companion to anti-Catholicism. Its signature campaign in days gone by was anti-drinking; today it is probably anti-immigration.

Protestant pastors scolded the laity for their interest in labor movements. Such involvement was divisive, a distraction from individual salvation and a violation of a contract, albeit a verbal one between and individual employer and individual employee. Catholic clergy tended to emphasize another supposed evil. The labor movements were susceptible to godless socialism.

There were exceptions among the clergy. But in Carter’s case study many clergy said no to labor campaigns, including the eight-hour day, wage increase for women, and racial justice in the workplace. In general the no was louder when a strike or boycott was involved.

    The persistent effort of lay leaders paid off. Through letters to the editor, presentations inside some churches, speeches at rallies, and more ordinary workers gradually influenced Church employees to reconsider the cause of labor. Also, as Carter details, working families (more among Protestants than Catholics) began to stay home on Sunday mornings. This became a wake-up call for Church leaders.

The New World is our Chicago Catholic newspaper. Carter makes extensive use of its archive. Until the mid-1890s the newspaper was cautiously reserved regarding labor movements. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII (1810-1903) promulgated a great encyclical, On the Condition of Labor. Though not in direct cause and effect, “a decisive shift” occurred shortly thereafter in New World reporting and editorials.

The mutually beneficial relationship between Church leaders and labor movements was part of the New Deal era and the civil rights era, Carter concludes. While each party to the relationship must maintain its distinctive identity, cooperation could benefit both today. The Church needs a point of contact with young workers because they do not worship regularly. Unions and other labor organizations need allies in a culture dominated by individual meritocracy.

There are two ecumenical groups in Chicago dedicated to a religion-labor dialogue: Arise (www.arisechicago.org) and Interfaith Worker Justice (www.iwj.org).  In addition and in keeping with Carter’s case study’s city, there are two or three other organizations here that have the dialogue on their agenda, including National Center for the Laity (www.catholiclabor.org/NCL.htm).

Droel edits a free print newsletter about faith and work; INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629) 

The Working Catholic: Grateful Employer by Bill Droel

There is the world of meritocracy and the world of grace. There is the world of: I worked hard and I deserve what I have. And there is the world of: There but for the grace of God and others I could be.

Once upon a time a landowner hired some day laborers for his vineyard. Going about his daily business the landowner thrice saw idle laborers in the plaza parking lot. Each time he hired them for the vineyard job. That evening he paid all the workers equally; the same total wage for those who worked a couple hours as for those who toiled all day. (See Matthew 20: 1-16)  

    

In 2005 Hamdi Ulukaya founded Chobani Yogurt (147 NY 320, Norwich, NY 13815). He hired five workers. Chobani is now the top-selling yogurt brand with over 2,000 employees at its New York and Idaho plants. Ulukaya, a Kurdish immigrant from Turkey, is quite wealthy.

Late last month Ulukaya told his employees that he is giving each of them shares in the company, totaling about 10% of the company’s worth. The initial math estimates the gift on average to be $150,000. Some workers will get more and the final calculation may well increase the value of the stock.

“I cannot think of Chobani being built without all these people,” Ulukaya told the N.Y. Times (4/26/16). Ulukaya has long said that a company’s moral conduct, including better pay, leads to success. “Business is still the strongest, most effective way to change the world,” Ulukaya told another interviewer. But companies must look beyond the so-called bottom line.

Matthew does not tell us the precise motivation of the vineyard owner. And Ulukaya, like all of us, does everything for multiple motives. The two employers though share a world view. They have a similar conviction about the nature of reality. And this is important: Their business philosophy stands irrespective of life’s ups and downs. The vineyard owner and the yogurt executive both suspect that inexplicable generosity haunts the world. They believe that the proper response to the gift of life and to all of life’s gifts is to give the gift away.

Neither executive denies suffering. Misery is part of the human condition. Specifically, Ulukaya has experienced business setbacks and personal failures. The same was probably true for Matthew’s agricultural executive.

Neither executive thinks that a gratitude attitude means acquiesce to injustice. Nor is there evidence that either thinks business is for saps.  They are realists whose take on total reality includes appreciation for the powerful but unpredictable spirit of benevolence.

A world centered only on meritocracy is always filled with cynicism and resentment. Those who live only by the art of the deal are always incomplete people who usually cannot sustain their ventures.

Belief in a grace-filled world will not result in constant, pervasive toe-tapping, hand-clapping happy times. It does, however, instill confidence. It disposes people to the abiding joy that percolates all around, yet hidden in normal business dealings and normal human interactions. Vaclav Havel (1936-2011), a president of Czechoslovakia and first president of Czech Republic, reminds us that power asserted out of macho haughtiness is deceiving. Realistic hope, he says, is genuine. “It is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.”

Droel edits INITIATIVES (PO Box 291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a free newsletter about faith and work.

Deceased Souls - a Spooky Cover-up?

Archbishop Listecki's article in the Milwaukee Catholic Herald, "Cemeteries show respect for deceased souls," (6-2-16) is interesting but troubling.  What is a deceased soul?  Christian theology has used the term soul in the Platonic - Aristotelean sense of the soul as immaterial therefore not subject to death as such.  Thomistic theology considers the soul and body as one - the soul as the spiritual, animating and defining aspect of the person.  People die - not souls.

   There was  a kernel of truth in Bishop Listecki's unorthodox article.  The spot of truth is that cemeteries have a cultural and religious value, but to make them a launching pad for justifying war or a place to bury funds is sad.  Listecki writes that our soldiers fought to save our democracy.   This is the ironic position of the righteous, religious right that struggles to limit democracy by trying to enforce their beliefs on others - as in the health care controversy.

   The war tragedies of death, destruction and disabling wounds including P.T.S.D. are made more devastating by the fact that wars such as Vietnam and Iraq were unnecessary.  Martin Luther King and other religious leaders condemned the Vietnam intervention. Misinformation from the Gulf of Tonkin resulted in a massive escalation of the war by the U.S. 

   Saint John Paul II denounced the Iraq war, but President Bush insisted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and went ahead with ‘shock and awe.’  The ‘weapons of mass destruction’ were never found.

   Is Listecki’s article defending cemeteries a feeble explanation of former Archbishop Dolan’s shift of funds to the cemetery account to protect them from pedophile victims?  A New York Times article (7-1-13) quotes a letter from Dolan asking permission to move the funds.

“I foresee an improved protection of these funds from any legal claim and liability.”

Obviously the Archdiocese of Milwaukee is indeed bankrupt in more ways than one.  Also the Vatican has never accepted direct responsibility for the cover-up. 

   This is the 125^th anniversary of Rerum Novarum and the beginning of modern Catholic Social Teaching, but who pays any attention?  Church teaching now, more than ever, has a serious credibility gap because of the continued efforts to bury immortal truth as a “deceased soul.”