The specifics of the 2012 Budget proposed by the Speaker and his colleagues are, the letter’s authors contend, the result of either ignorance or “dissent.” I think they are neither; they simply reflect a different, and in many people’s estimation, more accurate and economically-informed way, of proposing how we achieve worthy goals. Indeed, it could be said that what these Catholic academicians are proposing is not a “preferential option for the poor,” but rather a preferential option for the State. They make the unfortunately common error of assuming that concern for the economically weak and marginalized must somehow translate into (yet another) government program.An explanation of subsidiarity here. How ironic that Rep. Boehner, a Congressional state representative, has more appreciation and respect for the independence of religious thought and religious freedom than these priests themselves.
That assumption is wrong, and flies in the face of another principle of Catholic social teaching — the principle of subsidarity. With good reason, this is something the Catholic Left — or whatever remains of it these days — rarely mentions or grapples with, because they know that it would raise many questions about the prudence of any number of welfare programs they support.
More. Newsbusters. Some Catholics are more important than others in the eyes of the NY Times.
To the left religion is only useful as a weapon to buttress their power.
Related posts: The Root of Tolerance, Solving Poverty--Wanna Know How?