Catholic thinkers examine Tea Party movement and Church teaching

By Kevin J. Jones
11/24/2010
Catholic News Agency (www.catholicnewsagency.com)

How does the Tea Party line up with Catholic Social Teaching

CNA spoke about the movement with Dr. Steven Schneck, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at the Catholic University of America, and Fr. Robert Sirico, president of the Grand Rapids, Michigan-based Acton Institute.

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

WASHINGTON, D.C. (CNA) - This past election season "Tea Party" rallies were held around the country to protest government policy or to call for a new direction for the country. The movement even showed some substantial political clout at the ballot box. But is the movement compatible with Catholic social teaching?

CNA spoke about the movement with Dr. Steven Schneck, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at the Catholic University of America, and Fr. Robert Sirico, president of the Grand Rapids, Michigan-based Acton Institute.

Fr. Sirico described the Tea Party as "an amorphous thing" with a lot of variety and as a "populist, spontaneous movement." He thought its common themes include a desire for less government and a desire "to limit the power that politicians have over peoples' lives."

Participants find motivation in a variety of philosophies. Some have "well-developed Catholic sensibilities" while others' sensibilities are "almost anarchistic." He thought it was "remarkable" that the Tea Party could bring so many non-political people into the political process.

The Church's teaching on subsidiarity can meet these people and "augment what they're doing," he said, while also guarding against "the more fanatical edges of the tea party."

Fr. Sirico explained subsidiarity as being the principle that higher levels of society should not intervene in lower levels without "manifest and real necessity," and such intervention should only be temporary.

"Needs are best met at the local level," he said, calling government "the resource of last resort."

For his part, Dr. Schneck agreed the Tea Party is still a movement being formed. He sees it as motivated in part by middle class frustration with "a political environment that seems to reward the rich and the poor but ignores or even undercuts the middle." He also sees a "libertarian dynamic that wants to end do-gooder, nanny government."

He told CNA that Catholics are called to practice politics based on four aspects: the dignity of the person, the common good rather than private interests, solidarity with our fellow citizens in community, and an understanding of subsidiarity that recognizes the appropriate role of the state and civil society in addressing community needs.

This approach also reveals other requirements for good politics, such as preferential consideration of the poor, welcoming the immigrant, the importance of family and community, and a "stewardship" understanding of property and creation.

Granting that no political movement conforms to these principles, Schneck said the Tea Party movement has its clearest tensions with Catholic teaching on the issues of the common good and solidarity, while immigration, poverty and stewardship may be other areas of tension.

"Solidarity reminds us that we must properly understand ourselves and others as part of the Mystical Body of Christ," he explained, saying that responsibility to others is "prior to our individual liberties."

"Our freedom is not limited by our responsibilities to others in community, but is rather enhanced by what we do for others."

Schneck also warned that a "hard-edged individualism" which sees justice best resolved in competition ignores solidarity's emphasis on "caritas," that is, Christian love.

On the issue of national health care, which many Tea Party participants have opposed, Schneck noted Pope Benedict's recent insistence that health care is an inalienable right and governments are obliged to ensure universal health care for all citizens regardless of their ability to pay.

Like Fr. Sirico, Schneck thought that subsidiarity "dovetails quite well" with Tea Party thinking, for example in arguing that education policy is best set by local government rather than national.

"As part of subsidiarity, however, it is also true that if local government or the private resources of civil society are unable to address the needs of the common good, then the national government is morally bound to respond," he continued.

Fr. Sirico had his own criticisms of the movement. He thought charismatic leaders could lead people in the wrong direction, and the Tea Party's lack of a "historical memory" of past mistakes means that it lacks safeguards against plausible-looking proposals that "end up being harmful." Some Tea Party rhetoric suggests it has no role for government to serve the poor.

However, Fr. Sirico said in his experience most people sympathetic to the Tea Party movement, including himself, are not of that mindset.

He compared the government policy to a dentist visit, saying "we just want to get through it with as little pain as possible."

Schneck added that it was "gratifying" to see individual Tea Party representatives oppose abortion "even though libertarianism theoretically is suspicious of government promoting moral or ...

1 | 2 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 68 Comments

Pat
2 years ago
Vance, don't forget to cut massive Foreign Aid except where starvation exists, United Nations waste, and tax dollars to Planned Parenthood. Then go after the Billion dollars in back taxes owed by White House, Congress and other Federal Employees. Stop all tax write-offs of interest for second and third homes, and homes over $500,000, and interest of more than 2 cars per household. Then review laws for shelters and Foundations for any needed changes. A few honest citizens could bring the budget under control - if we got rid of professional big-spending politicians.
Pat
2 years ago
Rob, we do not need more revenue. We need less spending; less government waste; and a smaller and much less expensive Federal Government.
vance
2 years ago
Rob, government doesn't need more revenue. I t needs to shrink. It can start with eliminating DO NOTHING Dept of Energy, Dept of Education, and Dept of Commerce. Education and Energy were established pure emotion that was stirred up by Pres Carter's "GAS SHORTAGES" and the continuous decline in academic scores across the nation. The Democrat Party ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN propagandized these issues daily to create this emotional frenzy. The politicians in both parties played into this emotion by creating these departments that are already established in all 50 states. Each Federal department should be cut by a third. Social Security needs to be changed now. It is obvious to everyone that the ritrement age needs to be raised to 65 to 66. Foreign nationals and people who claim to have an emotional problem need to be eliminated from the SSI roles. MEDICAID needs to be eliminated. I have known and still know people who should NOT be on the welfare rolls. They told me of other people they know who are collecting SSI, food stamps, medicaid, and free housing who are like them. The government can eliminate monumental waste and fraud without taking another cent out of taxpayer's pockets.
Rob
2 years ago
A flat tax would be great, but the majority of high income earners are already paying that effective tax rate. But you and I would benefit greatly from that. But unfortunately, the moment that tax policy became a tool to influence public and social policy, the gate opened wide to the disaster of a tax code we have now. If you could get politicians to leave the code alone and stop lawyers from figuring out ways around the tax, then sure it might just work. But those two trains are hard to stop. Seth, with all of the cost you just mentioned, why on earth would we not want to pay for them? I would much rather pay for everything you just mentioned than have bailed out wal-street who seems to be doing just fine. I don't disagree that the Dems have spent a lot of money, I merely want to pay for what our government has spent and is currently spending. But no matter how you spin it, we need more revenue. We really couldn't afford to add another trillion to the debt to finance this thing. And I do understand if they can cut a trillion from spending we have no debt, but I'm not holding my breath on that one since social security, medicare and military spending are sacred cows and a majority of the budget. Everything else is immaterial and will hardly have any impact.
Seth
2 years ago
Rob - the defecit spending started with the DESTRUCTION of the TWIN TOWERS in NY ($2 Billion) 2001, and KATRINA in New Orlenes ($81.2 Billion) and other cities and towns 2005. Big Waste and Big spending got totally out of control when the Democrats took control of both the House and Senate - Jan, 2007. Since he has taken office in Jan 2009, Obama and his Democratic Congress has QUADRUPLED the US DEBT. Remember that DEMS including Hillary Clinton (who had inside info from her husband) also VOTED to go to WAR - check the record.
Erasmus
2 years ago
As I recall, the four aspects of Catholic social teachings (dignity of person, common good, solidarity, and subsidiarity) are listed in the Church's Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church which was done by the Vatican (but can be purchased on Amazon). Hope this helps those who claim never to have heard of it.

:-)
JimS
2 years ago
Several things. The role of the government vis a vis "the poor" should never be to steal from some citizens at the point of a gun to redistribute to others as they see fit with all the prejudices inherent in such a plan. Rather the government should promote conditions whereby citizens can maximize their charity to those that they individually see as in need.
Also, I don't think Pope Benedict's statement that medical care is an inalienable right of all regardless of ability to pay is very well thought out. Is he proposing forcing those who spend 22-26 years of their life obtaining the education necessary to become a physician to provide service without pay? That's slavery where I come from. Or is he proposing that society through taxation should pay? That would lead toward a situation where 100% of an economy would have to be dedicated to medical care as a diminishing return is realized on increased life expectancy as continually more expensive treatments are require to marginally extend it. See the British National Health Service. It's a disaster as Doctor's flee the country and bureaucrats try to continually spread shrinking assets among more and more patients.
Remember the story of the Good Samaritan. The Priest and Levite (members of the governing class of the time) did not lay hold of the Samaritan and force him to pay for the care of the injured man. The Samaritan was moved by compassion and chose freely to be charitable. This should be the church's teaching and mission regarding regarding the poor.
vance
2 years ago
Rob, you are a tax expert? Then you know more than most people about how the government confiscates the people's money. I agree with you that BOTH parties have a hand in over spending. The Socialsit Democrat Party makes it quite clear that they intend to spend this country into the ground. The Republicans get beat up by the Socialist Democrat Party news media as being EVIL INSENSITIVE, AND CRUEL TO THE POOR, BLACKS, HISPANICS, WOMEN, CHILDREN, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. The Republicans want the vote from the 'BLUE' states so they go along with the Dems so they won't be demonized by the press. The People who are pulling the proverbial wagon are now standing up and saying ENOUGH. A flat Tax across the board with NO deductions is what we need. Churches and not-for-profit organizations are exempt from taxes.
Rob
2 years ago
Vance, of course I want more of my money in my paycheck. As I know you do, I work very hard for the money that I'm paid. And I don't disagree that our government spending is out of control, but I think it's intellectually dishonest to suggest that only Dems spend money. The government has not constricted under any administration for the past 20 - 30 years and that covers both parties. I think the spending that that has occurred in this administration is unprecedented, but it didn't start with Obama. As a registered Republican, I can't give my party a pass anymore when they say one thing and do another. This deficit/debt train started when we decided to go to war and borrow to finance it. I merely want us to pay for what we are currently spending and I'd like some semblance of equlity in the tax rates. If 35% of every dollar I earn goes to taxes, I would just prefer that the upper 2% of wage earners pay the same rate. The average, hard working American should not have a higher effective tax rate than the upper class. There is something horribly wrong with the tax code in that regard. I've been a tax professional for many years and it's actually quite amazing the how the law assists those who have wealth maintain it versus those who spend a majority of their income merely to live.
R.E.Craig
2 years ago
I think it should pointed out to all that during the last four decades not one single US President has pushed for the abolition of abortion nor for that matter have any shown the slightest inkling for the banning of state execution.

Prev12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment