Glenn Beck's Interview of Newt Gingrich Calls for a Discussion of 'Good Government'

By Deacon Keith Fournier
12/8/2011
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

The first question we should ask is whether government is good, in a dual sense of the word, meaning both moral and efficient.

We need to ask whether the exercise of governance respects the family first and then the other proper mediating institutions - and defers first to them before assigning the task it attempts to accomplish to a higher level of government. The last level of governing should be the federal government. When the mediating institutions are bypassed, the common good is not served and subsidiarity is not afforded its rightful place.

On Tuesday, December 6, 2011, I heard Glenn Beck's radio interview of Newt Gingrich

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - On Tuesday, December 6, 2011, I heard Glenn Beck's radio interview of Newt Gingrich. I knew that Glenn Beck was not a fan of the Republican primary Presidential candidate, so I listened closely. What I heard in the exchange revived a long held concern I have with some aspects of what is being called "conservative" politics these days.

What is needed in campaign 2012 is a discussion of whether there can be such a thing as "good" government. Clearly, from the tenor of the interview, Glenn Beck seems to think not - while Newt Gingrich disagrees. After Beck's interview of Newt Gingrich he interviewed Michelle Bachmann who called Gingrich a "frugal socialist". Though that comment will garner sound bites in the press, it was inaccurate.

We need a discussion of the social ordering principle of subsidiarity. Many Catholics do not even know that there is such a principle within the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church. Instead they join in the charged rhetoric from both the political left and the political right concerning the role of government. They too often end up adopting it as their own - instead of offering the Nation an alternative which includes the principle of subsidiarity.

The current administration is rapidly expanding the role of the Federal Government in the United States. The most recent example was the passage of what is wrongly called "health care reform". In addition to obvious dangers within the legislation which threaten human life in the womb - and its failure to respect conscience and religious freedom - the federalized approach to health care delivery itself raises important questions concerning the nature, size and role of government.

Yes, we should acknowledge our obligation to one another in solidarity - we are our brother/sister's keeper. However, we should then ask, is the centralizing of the delivery of needed health care services through a federalized bureaucracy the best response to that obligation? Or is it a violation of the principle of subsidiarity?

It is time for Catholics to propose an alternative to the "government is always bad" notion which is prevalent in some conservative circles as well as the collectivism model of governing being called "progressive" by the left these days. We should propose a model of good government; an alternative to the mistakes of both the left and the right.

To view government as a "problem"- in and of itself - is at odds with the insights which are summarized in the Catholic Catechism concerning the human person, the family and human society:

"All men are called to the same end: God himself. There is a certain resemblance between the union of the divine persons and the fraternity that men are to establish among themselves in truth and love. Love of neighbor is inseparable from love for God. The human person needs to live in society. Society is not for him an extraneous addition but a requirement of his nature. Through the exchange with others, mutual service and dialogue with his brethren, man develops his potential; he thus responds to his vocation.

"A society is a group of persons bound together organically by a principle of unity that goes beyond each one of them. As an assembly that is at once visible and spiritual, a society endures through time: it gathers up the past and prepares for the future. By means of society, each man is established as an "heir" and receives certain "talents" that enrich his identity and whose fruits he must develop. He rightly owes loyalty to the communities of which he is part and respect to those in authority who have charge of the common good.

"Each community is defined by its purpose and consequently obeys specific rules; but "the human person . . . is and ought to be the principle, the subject and the end of all social institutions. Certain societies, such as the family and the state, correspond more directly to the nature of man; they are necessary to him. To promote the participation of the greatest number in the life of a society, the creation of voluntary associations and institutions must be encouraged "on both national and international levels, which relate to economic and social goals, to cultural and recreational activities, to sport, to various professions, and to political affairs.

"This "socialization" also expresses the natural tendency for human beings to associate with one another for the sake of attaining objectives that exceed individual capacities. It develops the qualities of the person, especially the sense of initiative and responsibility, and helps guarantee his rights. Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative.

"The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which "a community of a higher ...

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 34 Comments

JoAnn
1 year ago
Rob & Anyone else reading this: Why does the Federal Government have to replace healthcare if the SC rules it unconstitutional? Why, if the Republicans get in, do they have to replace healthcare. It is not the function of the Federal Government to take care of any of us, other than to protect our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and create an environment for prosperity. This notion of the Federal Government owing every citizen in this nation a living is really getting on my nerves. People, take care of yourselves!!! If the STATES want to provide all kinds of entitlements to their citizens, then let them. (With a vote from the citizens first) The Federal Government was never meant to baby its citizens. Period! Everybody has their hand out. Give me, give me, give me. How about, what are we going to do for our government. President Kennedy had it right. "Ask NOT what your country can do for you but what YOU can do for your country." (entrepreneurship) Why is it everytime a progressive gets into office they think they have to run our lives. We are NOT Homer Simpsons. We are NOT stupid! Get out of my life, I can do quite well on my own. I was taught, growing up, that I should prepare for my retirement/old age. I wasn't taught not to worry, the government will take care of me. This entitlement mentality the progressives have thrust upon this nation has damaged her so badly, I don't know if we will ever get her healthy again. People, muster up some pride, Get self-reliant. Invent things. Start new companies. Save some of your income. Prepare for emergencies. Prepare for old age and retirement. Get the government off your backs. Believe me, you will be so proud of yourself. If you have to depend on others, depend on your family. That's what they are for. Depend on your faith and your church. They will help you. I am so sick of progressives, I could scream. People, get some backbone. Start cleaning house. Get them out of Washington. If you do not get Obama and these Socialists/communists out of Washington, you will reap what you sow. It will take a time, Because of my age, I probably won't see the fruition of it, but hopefully my descendants will. If we lose our freedoms, this generation will never see it again. Hopefully, our offspring will be able to get it right. Sorry to be so testy, I have just had it.. Plus, my arthritis is acting up and I'm not feeling too well today God bless you all. Really I mean it, God bless you all.
Judy
1 year ago
Hi Rob, Newt gave a solution at one of the debates but it eludes me...they talked so much; I love the debates, but do not takes notes etc., so some of it is lost in my mind, and that, my friend, was one of them. Blessings...
Rob
1 year ago
In my profession, we've always enjoyed a certain level of autonomy. It's an understanding by the government agency that regulates us that so long as we self-regulate, they really stay out of our hair (accounting profession). However, when the industry proves that it cannot self-regulate, that is when the government has stepped in. Enron, which in part was a massive accounting failure, invited Sarbanes Oxley (SOX). It would have never happened if we had done what we promised to do. I think similar parallels can be made with health care. Since Nixon singned into law the HMO system, we've had a long time to get this right and have not. Healthcare has become one of those things private industry has refused to provide alternatives for. And those of us lucky enough to have health insurance enjoy what we have because the government picks up those who the insurance companies will not so they can turn a profit. But as the years have gone on, a larger and larger population of people are being left behind. And the states and private companies either have not or cannot deal with it. Like the accounting profession in Enron, they invited the government to the party. And now that the government has joined, now folks want to offer solutions etc. Well too little too late. I sure do hope that if the healthcare reform act doesn't pass constitutional muster, that these states and private companies solve our country's healthcare problems and it all wasn't hot air. I have heard zero solutions from the GOP candidates on this issue. Repeal is great, but what are they going to do in it's place?
Judy
1 year ago
Rob, No one wants to see anyone left behind in health care. Not even the Rep.! They will figure out something more fair and beneficial and not so draining on the Gov. Read my post for different avenues approachable. Also, I do not believe in paying health ins. for someone who rather buy a more expensive car, house, lifestyle, etc. If they Choose to live that way, and CHOOSE NOT to have health ins. That is their decision. Why then shouldn't everyone be able to live like them? If we did, Then where would we be? Illegals are another group that milk the Gov. IT is the POOR OF AMERICA that our Gov. should be concerned about. Charity's and Churches can help the others...Not the Gov. Look where it's got us...ALMOST BANKRUPT. No Rob, as JoAnn said, this is not the U.S. it use to be. And I can see where people who like Ron Paul would come in. But we can not be Isolationists. The world has grown too small. And Yes, all the world's people are our brother's and sister's. We must work tog. where we may, and give according to our MEANS, just like at Mass. Such is my humble opinion. We have allowed our Gov. to OVERSPEND, OVERSPEND, OVERSPEND, w/$ they do not have. Have people Lost along the way the meaning of the word Sacrifice?
Our soldiers sure do NOT. JoAnn's grandson does not. Blessings...
Rob
1 year ago
Hi JoAnne. I didn't mean to imply the programs actually worked to benefit the poor. I was merely pointing out that it seems that when the conversation of small government occurrs, it always involves cutting programs that primarily benefit the less well to do citizens of the country. But as you point out in your post regarding the elite, they are rarely brought into the discussion. Trust me when I tell you that when it comes to shorting positions (as Soros may have done), if you have the money to do it, you are. These guys only know one thing, how to make more money doing nothing. You can't have your cake and eat it to when you deregulate our financial system to the degree we have. I'm glad you brought up healthcare. While I agree 100% that the Healthcare reform act is terrible (save the few reforms to insurance companies), healthcare is already rationed. Today actuaries and accountants decide how much care you will be given. I think sometimes we confuse rationing with over taxing a system that can't handle the entire US population. If the numbers go up and providers do not, then of course we'll have a situation where the waits get longer etc. But I think the question for us to ponder is how best to ensure that every citizen has access to care. I'm not talking about ER care that will drive a person to bankruptcy, but the kind of care that keeps a cold from become a hospital stay. I'm not a fan of government run healthcare, but I am definitely not a fan of shutting people out because they are sick or can't pay. There is a certain reality that we all must admit and that is that very few of us could afford the majority of the care receive if we had to pay for everything out of pocket. Again, government healthcare is not the solution, but that door get's opened when the free market is not addressing the need. There are a lot of people that get left behind in our healthcare system and that just isn't acceptable. For my part, if I have to pay more tax to allow more people to have access to care, so be it. And I just can't take a politician seriously who wants to over turn this bill when they have the best healthcare money can buy....our money can buy while offering no real solution in it's place.
Judy
1 year ago
WOW! Do I ever love your thought provoking posts!!! JoAnn, you commented the most, and in each one said something differently, making yet another point. I saw the interview on Fox w/the author of -Throw Then All Out....it was scary and wonderful at the same time! Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it speaks more about corruption that has been going on in the U.S. under our noses for eons. And here is a man, who has been to jail for it, and wants to do away w/it. Well done! Rob, brought up avenues as well. This board is a brilliant honorable discussion. Deacon Keith, you should be pleased! I so enjoyed the article and All that all of you had to say. My slant on the combined article and posts, would be that of: (1) Less Gov. (2) Getting back to Corporal Works of Mercy= Both Catholics and Christians practicing their Faith (3) Atheists, etc. will auto donate to charity of their choice (4) Cleveland seemed to have it tog. (5) I think it depends at this time, where one lives as to how Christian/Catholic Community responds. And, how involved one is in that community. This is an area I am personally familiar with for a various number of reasons. And here is where Bulbajer's concern comes. Perhaps Rob. But Obama health care is not the answer. Others have spoke on this before. This issue can be solved like JoAnn said: by a persons state. It is as simple as your bank members belonging to a Group Insurance; which cut costs considerably. It is done in Nebr. In Ca. and Or. it is not. I cannot speak for others. Another issue, one that has literally drained the State of Ca. is illegal immigrants. Ca. is in such dire straits, partly because of paying medical and schooling to immigrants. We have such big hearts we are ready to go bankrupt (country) to help. Well, I feel for them. Living under horrific conditions, but people are stealing here from their own sisters and brothers because they are so in Need. Theft is up here now, >ever! Yes! This is a problem in more ways than one! I think it boils down to a matter of Soul. Who has lost it? Who has it? If our Gov. had Soul...and We the People had Soul...I wonder? So much to ponder... Prayers and Blessings...
JoAnn
1 year ago
Bulbajer: It can be done but it will take time. The progressives have been grooming this do nothing, take everything society that we live in now since the early 1900's. Thank God, I grew up in a time when the dirty deed of the progressives had not done too much damage yet. We were self-reliant, and proud. To depend on the government for anything was embarrassing. We always wanted to do it ourselves.. When friends and families were having hard times, we all pitched in and helped. Our churches were always there to help also. But change starts in the minds and hearts of people. We need to get back to God and the sooner the better. God bless.
Bill
1 year ago
As an independent conservative, I am amused at the reluctance of liberals, democrat or idependent, to reform the tax code. Conservatives would not object to eliminating deductions and tax loopholes and lowering income tax rates as well as doing away with corporate subsidies and lowering the corporate tax rate. Independent economic studies conclude that such a policy would dramatically increase revenues. Why then do liberals object and insist on increasing marginal rates for those "more fortunate citizens". The dirty secret is that the wealthy hire accountants and tax lawyers to take advantage of all the loopholes and tax breaks and end up paying less even at a higher marginal rate than if the loopholes were gone and rates were lower. I can only conclude that inciting class warfare to achieve political ends are their motivation. Moreover, I cant imagine why liberals refuse to reform entitlements when every independent economic study concludes that these programs are unsustainable and will implode. Who is hurt under this scenario - the poor of course!!!!!! I just dont get it!
Bulbajer
1 year ago
JoAnn, if you can get people to repeat what happened after Cleveland made that decision - if you can get people to donate much more money to charity and other good causes than they are currently - then I'll agree; welfare programs don't make sense. As it is, private aid - while having many advantages over public aid - does not make it to everyone. I think that instead of having one or the other, private charities and government welfare programs should work together to make sure no one gets left behind. Rob, exactly: capitalism is better than any other system out there (not sure about distributism), but it needs a few tweaks.
David W. Cooney
1 year ago
Rob,
Visit http://distributistreview.com/
You will find articles addressing the very things you point out.

Prev12 3 4 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