 |
| Fr. Thomas J Reese, S.J. |
Joining a chorus of Catholic bishops, theologians, priests, and social justice leaders, nearly 90 Georgetown University
faculty and administrators have called Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) to task for his misuse of Catholic social teaching in defending his budget, which hurts the poor. The group sent a letter to
Rep. Ryan in advance of his appearance on the Catholic campus on
Thursday morning to give the Whittington Lecture. In their letter to Ryan, the scholars make clear they are not objecting
to his speaking on campus, but rather his recent comments defending his
budget on Christian grounds.
“Our problem with Representative Ryan is that he claims his budget is based on Catholic social teaching,” said Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese, one of the organizers of the letter. “This is nonsense. As scholars, we want to join the Catholic bishops in pointing out that his budget has a devastating impact on programs for the poor.”Reese is a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. The letter quotes the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which wrote several letters to Congress saying “a just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons.” The bishops noted that “the House-passed budget resolution fails to meet these moral criteria.” Last week, Rep. Ryan dismissed the bishops’ critique, erroneously claiming the letters didn’t represent “all the bishops,” a point the USCCB media office denied.
“I am afraid that Chairman Ryan’s budget reflects the values of his favorite philosopher Ayn Rand rather than the gospel of Jesus Christ,” said Father Reese. “Survival of the fittest may be okay for Social Darwinists but not for followers of the gospel of compassion and love.”
The Georgetown scholars pointed to the devastating impact of cuts in
food programs that keep the poor from starvation. From personal
experience, they also “know how cuts in Pell Grants will make it
difficult for low-income students to pursue their educations at colleges
across the nation, including Georgetown.”
Link (here) to The Huffington Post
12 comments:
Leftist "c"atholics would decimate this country with their misguided social and fiscal policies. There is nothing in Ryan's budget proposal that contradicts Catholic moral teaching because the federal government does not have an obligation to perform or fund works of charity. Don't leftists understand and endorse subsidiarity? No, they only understand "steal from the productive." They are very generous with other people's money, and they love to use legislation to steal so they can feel virtuous by giving what they have stolen to people who don't deserve it.
Is the USCCB "leftist"?
As of 2001 Georgetown Universtiy's financial house was, well, not exactly "in order":
"...the University suffered numerous financial problems: Georgetown's involvement in Tax Court case [50 ? T.C.N.(CCH)14 4 4] regarding ownership of "Alban Towers"; the loss of NIH and FIDIA moneys; $7 million in taxes owed on the hotel in the Leavey center; in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia [Civ. Action #93-2267 (RCL), bringing suit against Georgetown Cogeneration, L.P., Dominion Cogeneration, Dominion Energy, Inc.; Tristar Georgetown General Corp.; Tristar Georgetown Limited Corp. (collectively in whole or in part, 'the Dominion Group') for "FRAUD, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, NEGLIGENT RETENTION, and CONSPIRACY."
www.tboyle.net/University/Farewell_to_Leo.html
Does it ever occur to Reese and his confreres that they ought to examine, well, their consciences, and take a look at how they are living?
It is oh, so, comfy at Woodstock Theological Center where Reese resides. Right in the heart of Georgetown. I guess if one has to "do theology" and destroy the faith one needs an expansive, expensive house in Georgetown. So much easier to destroy the faith with cocktails parties and the company of the Catholic intelligentsia who can provide free vacations and dinners at the Chevy Chase Club, don't you think?
I wonder just how far liberation theology would go if, say, Reese had to live in NE DC and cook for himself. Give me a break. How old is Reese anyway?
Plenty of clerics do and they are snubbed by righties as dreamers, e.g., Bishop Thomas Gumbleton.
How old is Reese? That's a creepy question.
But, Father Reese doesn't.
"But, Father Reese doesn't."
???
I wonder just how far liberation theology would go if, say, Reese had to live in NE DC and cook for himself. Give me a break.
Plenty of clerics do and they are snubbed by righties as dreamers, e.g., Bishop Thomas Gumbleton.
But, Father Reese doesn'ti.e., live in NE DC or cook for himself.
Do you know Fr. Reese's living habits?
The following comment was originally sent to Commonweal magazine on an article entitled "Plutocracy or Democracy" but is equally applicable to Father Reese and the Georgetown professors.
"Again and again, church teaching explicitly calls for the “redistribution” of wealth, and demands that government action show what John Paul II calls a “preference for the poor” by maintaining a safety net to protect the most vulnerable against poverty, homelessness, hunger, and poor access to health."
Does the writer propose that we no longer consider the Tenth Commandment "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods" in the rush to confiscate the neighbor's wealth for the "redistribution" theology. Is this simply another name for 'liberation theology" using taxation rather than a gun? When will the Catholic leaders recognize that the Church is among the wealthy and many world leaders, President Obama, Hugo Chavez among the top, two have no respect for religions especially the Catholic Church and could easily call for the redistribution of its holdings, an auction at the Vatican Museum?
The seven practices of charity toward our neighbor, based on Christ's prophecy of the Last Judgment (Matthew 25:35), that will determine each person's, not presidents, politicians, nor government bureaucrats, final destiny was taught us from the Baltimore Catechism:
1. Feed the hungry
2. Give drink to the thirsty
3. Clothe the naked
4. Shelter the homeless
5. Visit the sick
6. Visit those in prison
7. Bury the dead
For those who claim that Jesus was a big-government socialist provider with regard to helping those in need and reducing individuals personal responsibility to only "Love the Neighbor' and replacing it with government programs is a misreading of His message. Jesus Christ made the point "to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's" with no guidelines as to how the Romans were to spend the tax monies.
"For you will have the poor always with you" Matthew 26.11 and nowhere in the New
Testament does Jesus Christ lay the responsibility for caring for the poor, the sick the hungry or thirsty, the homeless or any oppressed people on any governmental body. He did not cite King Herod, the priests of the temple, the local politicians or the Roman powers as the source of Charity. He made it an individual responsibility time after time in His sermons, in His parables and in His own acts. The Good Samaritan was not an example of "Love thy neighbor" because he stopped at the inn to make a 911 call but because he acted, providing aid, comfort and financial assistance to his neighbor. Jesus Christ's teachings cannot be used be used to support states becoming the major or only source of charitable acts.
to be continued
con't
Is it the role of government to be the essential and probably soon the only source of Charity as the Obama administration and other presidential candidates offer plans to reduce the tax credits for charitable contributions for those who provide the most: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/the-war-on-philanthropy-15190
This would have a serious impact on the financial ability of all religious affiliated charities to carry out their good works.
When does confiscatory tax rates in the guise of 'for the common good' on wage earners who already provide 90%+ of all incomes tax revenues become a challenge to the ability of religious and non-government charitable organizations to carry out their own charitable functions? 47 percent of all wage earners pay no income tax and are already recipients of considerable welfare in the guise of tax credits and the untold number of government programs, both federal and State. It appears that the Catholic Church and other religious groups do not even recognize that Obama plans to reduce or eliminate religious organizations and non-government groups, from their historic roles and replace them with socialistic government run programs.
All one need do is to observe the complete and total failure of total government control in communist and socialist countries of caring for their poor. Why any thinking person would advocate inflicting government as the major or sole giver of help our poor is beyond belief.
Here's another article by a Jesuit(from Georgetown) on the same lecture:
http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2012/04/the-ryan-lecture.html
Sawyer's comment, about "leftist" Catholics, is derived from Protestant doctrine! Sawyer, do yourself a favor and do a little research before you post. It is Protestant doctrine that posits that wealth and prosperity are signs of righteousness and thus god's reward and thus redistribution via government is refuting god's will as the poor don't deserve what god didn't provide them. Father Reese knows what he's talking about.
Post a Comment