Tag Archives: Living the Domestic Church

Married Saint: St. Gianna Molla

St. Gianna Born: October 4, 1922
Died: April 28, 1962
Feast Day: April 28
Patronage: Mothers, Physicians, and Unborn Children

St. Gianna Berretta Molla was born in 1922 near Milan in Italy.

After completing secondary school, she decided to study medicine, specializing in pediatrics. Once she had completed her medical degree, St. Gianna considered joining her brother, a missionary priest in Brazil. However, in late 1954 she met Pietro Molla, an engineer and fellow member of Catholic Action. It became clear that she was called to the vocation of marriage. She and Pietro were married in September 1955.

Gianna and Pietro already had three children when she became pregnant in 1961. Early in the pregnancy, a dangerous fibroma was discovered on her uterus. Choosing the route of treatment least dangerous to her unborn child, Gianna underwent surgery to remove the fibroma.

The operation was successful and the baby survived, but Gianna knew that complications could develop. She made her wishes clear to her family, saying, “This time it will be a difficult delivery, and they may have to save one or the other — I want them to save my baby.”

On April 21, 1962, Gianna’s fourth child, Gianna Emanuella, was successfully delivered via Caesarean section. However, Gianna continued to have severe pain, and died of infection seven days after her daughter’s birth.

Pope John Paul II canonized Gianna Molla on May 16, 2004. Her husband and youngest child were present at the canonization ceremony. St. Gianna’s feast day is April 28.

St. Gianna Molla, pray for us.

For further reading

The Journey of Our Love: The Letters of Saint Gianna Beretta and Pietro Molla

Married Saint: Bl. Peter To Rot

bl-peter-to-rot Born: 1912
Died: 1945
Feast Day: July 7

Blessed Peter To Rot was born and lived most of his life in Rakunai, Papua New Guinea.

Peter’s father was a respected chief and village leader. Both his parents were converts to Catholicism. Peter attended Catholic missionary schools and at age 18 was sent to Catechist School. At 21 he returned to Rakunai and became the youngest catechist. Blessed Peter taught catechism to the village children, instructed adults in the faith and visited the sick.

At 22 he married Paula Ia Varpit. The couple had three children, one of whom was born after Peter’s death. The marriage was not only happy but exemplary—the couple prayed together every morning and evening.

In 1942 the Japanese invaded Papua New Guinea and put all priests and religious into prison. Because of this, Peter took on many new pastoral responsibilities, such as witnessing marriages, baptizing newborns, and presiding at funerals.

Although the Japanese did not outlaw all Catholic practices at first, they soon reintroduced polygamy in Papua New Guinea in hopes of gaining the support of several local chiefs. Peter To Rot opposed the legalization of polygamy, and continued to preach the Catholic teaching on marriage.

Because of his opposition, he was imprisoned and then murdered in 1945. He was given a chief’s burial at the cemetery next to the church where he had ministered. His people immediately recognized him as a martyr for the faith.

Pope John Paul II beatified Peter To Rot on January 17, 1995.

Bl. Peter To Rot, pray for us.

For further reading:

Read Pope St. John Paul II’s homily for the beatification of Bl. Peter To Rot

Married Saint: Bl. Giuseppe Tovini

Born: March 14, 1841
Died: January 16, 1897
Feast Day: January 16

Beatified in 1998, Giuseppe Tovini may not be a name that is familiar to readers. Giuseppe Antonio Tovini was born in 1841 into a devout family in far northern Italy, the eldest of seven children. Giuseppe’s childhood was uneventful. He progressed through school to university, where he chose to study the law. But before he finished his studies, his life took a more difficult turn, as first his father and then his mother died, leaving him to support his younger brothers and sisters.

Giuseppe’s first job was as a teacher and assistant principal at a technical school, where he gained a special interest in education. At around the same time, he began what would be a life-long parallel career of public service, as head of the city government in his hometown, Cividate Camuno. From the beginning, Giuseppe treated his political duties as a form of stewardship, paying off the town’s debts and improving roads and bridges.

When his term in the city government was over, Giuseppe moved to nearby Brescia in order to increase his law practice. There he met Emilia Corbolani, the daughter of one of the partners in his firm, with whom he fell in love. Three years later the couple got engaged and they married after a four-year engagement in 1875.

Even though Giuseppe was busy with work and public activities, he and Emilia had a happy domestic life. He made a point of writing letters to her whenever he had to be away from home. Their family steadily grew and they welcomed ten children over the 22 years they were married.

Emilia and Giuseppe ran a strict but loving household. They particularly believed that it was important to teach their children the faith and to pass on a strong work ethic. Although Giuseppe had high expectations of his children, he was known as patient and gentle father.

As his family increased, so did Giuseppe’s public work. He continued to hold public office and became very active in Catholic Action, serving for many years as an organizer for and participant in the Catholic Congresses. Among his many, many other endeavors, he founded two banks in order to provide low-interest funding to charitable organizations.

Giuseppe’s open involvement in both civic life and Catholic organizations at that time in Italy’s history took courage. Anti-Catholic sentiment was strong during the period of Italy’s unification. Giuseppe fought to preserve the Church’s role in public life in Italy, despite accusations that he was anti-patriotic for doing so.

Giuseppe Tovini died suddenly and peacefully at home in 1897 at the age of 56. He was beatified almost 100 years later by Pope John Paul II.

Bl. Giuseppe Tovini, pray for us.

Married Saint: St. Elizabeth Ann Seton

Born: August 28, 1774
Died: January 4, 1821
Feast Day: January 4
Patronage: Catholic School, Loss of Parents

Elizabeth Ann Seton was known for her work later in life as foundress of the Sisters of Charity and a pioneer in Catholic education. Because of the importance of this work, it’s easy to overlook her earlier, less obvious accomplishments as wife, mother and friend to the poor. Yet this was the initial context in which she responded to God’s call to holiness and became the first American-born saint.

Elizabeth Bayley Seton was born in New York City on August 28, 1774. Elizabeth experienced a troubled childhood; her mother died when Elizabeth was young and her stepmother rejected her and her sister. At age 19 she married William Seton, a partner in an import-export firm. Elizabeth had always been a devout member of the Anglican Church, and as a young woman she became known for her charity as well, nursing the sick and dying among friends, family and neighbors. She had five children, two of whom pre-deceased her.

William Seton’s company went bankrupt and the family lost their home. When William developed tuberculosis, the couple sailed to the warmer climate of Italy, where he died, leaving Elizabeth a widow at age 29. The Filicchi family, who had befriended the Setons, offered support and financial assistance and introduced Elizabeth to Catholicism. When she returned to the U.S. she was received into the Church in 1805.

The following few years were hard. Anti-Catholic prejudice prevented Elizabeth from establishing a school that would have helped to provide for her children. As she considered the difficult alternatives, she remained a mother above all else. As one of her official biographies points out, “She regarded her five ‘darlings’ as her primary obligation over every other commitment” (National Shrine of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton website).

Invited to Baltimore by the Sulpicians, a religious order of men, Elizabeth founded the Sisters of Charity in the spirit of St. Vincent de Paul and St. Louise de Marillac. In 1809 the sisters arrived in Emmitsburg, Maryland and opened St. Joseph’s Free School and Academy. Their numbers grew and the Sisters opened and maintained numerous educational and charitable facilities. Today their work lives on around the world.

Elizabeth died in Emmitsburg on January 4, 1821. Pope Paul VI officially declared her a saint in 1975. Her feast day is January 4.

St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, pray for us.

Eucharistic Adoration

Does your parish have Eucharistic adoration? It’s the practice of devout prayer before the body of Christ in the Eucharist, displayed outside of Mass. Once very widespread, it became less popular after the Second Vatican Council, which placed a greater emphasis on the active participation of the faithful in the liturgy itself. Although some liturgical theologians find Eucharistic adoration at odds with the purpose and practice of the Eucharist at Mass–that is to say, Communion–in recent years Eucharistic adoration has become more popular, particularly among younger Catholics.

The origins of Eucharistic adoration are not well-known. One of the first references to reserving the Blessed Sacrament for adoration is in the life of St. Basil the Great in the late fourth century. St. Basil supposedly divided the consecrated Eucharistic bread into three parts during the liturgy at his monastery. One part he consumed himself; the second was given to the monks; and the third portion was placed in a Golden Dove suspended above the altar. It seems likely that this reserved portion was kept for those who were unable to attend the liturgy because of illness or travel.

The practice of Eucharistic adoration among laypeople is thought to have begun in Avignon, France, on September 11, 1226. King Louis VII, having just won a victory over the Albigensians, asked that the Blessed Sacrament be placed on display at the Chapel of the Holy Cross. This exposition was so popular that the local bishop asked to have it continue indefinitely. Pope Honorius III gave his consent and the practice continued, nearly uninterrupted, until the French Revolution in 1792.

The longest-running Eucharistic adoration in the United States is with the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration in La Crosse, Wisconsin, who have been praying nonstop for more than 130 years.

Contemplative Prayer

In the Catholic tradition we have many kinds of prayer. We have liturgical prayer, which follows a set ritual and is prayed communally. Personal or private prayer has often been divided into prayers of praise, thanksgiving, contrition, and supplication. These prayers acknowledge God’s greatness, express our thanks for all God has done for us, express our sorrow for our sins, and ask God for what we need.

But throughout our history Catholics have also engaged in contemplative prayer. This sort of prayer or meditation is much less about saying things to God, and is more about listening to what God is saying to us. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in its section on contemplative prayer, quotes St. Teresa who wrote, “Contemplative prayer in my opinion, is nothing else than a close sharing between friends; it means taking time frequently to be alone with him whom we know loves us.” In its thirteen paragraphs on contemplative prayer, the Catechism eloquently describes aspects of this kind of prayer, calling it a gift, a gaze of faith fixed on Jesus, hearing God’s word, and an experience of silence (CCC 2709 – 2724).

What the Catechism doesn’t describe is how to do it. For that information, I’d recommend the writings of those who have excelled at this kind of prayer, specifically saints like John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Catherine of Siena, Therese of Lisieux, and Julian of Norwich. Contemporary expressions of contemplative prayer include methods like Scripture Prayer, centering prayer, and Eucharistic adoration.

Prayer is the essential communication of the Christian life, and contemplative prayer challenges us to make sure that we’re not just speaking to God, but actively listening to God’s speaking to us.

Where’s My Parish?

Periodically I’ll meet someone, and they’ll explain, a little defensively, “I’m Catholic, but I don’t have a parish.” What they mean, I suppose, is that they haven’t been inside a church in a long time. The fact is, everyone has a Catholic parish.

Catholic parishes are divided primarily along geographic lines. There are parishes set up for specific groups of people—often ethnic or language minorities—to allow them to worship in a community where they will feel most comfortable. These are officially called “personal parishes.” In the last century in the US, there were lots of these parishes in the US; there are fewer today.

But everyone, everywhere, is part of a Catholic parish. The church’s mission is to provide pastoral care to all people, and so every place on earth where people live, the church has appointed someone to provide that care. In sparsely populated regions, that pastor may be at a significant distance. But everyone is part of a parish.

Sometimes people believe that they’re only part of a parish if they’ve “signed-up” “registered” or if they get envelopes for the Sunday offering. But the church’s code of canon law doesn’t make any such distinctions. You’re part of a parish because the church offers you pastoral care, not because you’ve filled out a form.

If you aren’t sure what parish you’re in, the easiest way to find out is to call the office of your local diocese or archdiocese, and ask them. You can also visit a neaby Catholic parish, and they’ll be able to tell you if you live within their boundaries.

Local parishes are the center of the church’s life. They’re a place where you can find friends, a place to belong, and a place to worship. They are places where people like you find support, spiritual nourishment, and a community to share life’s sorrows and joys.

The Common Good: A Call to Charity and Justice

Some years back, a book was published called Thoreau: The Complete Individualist. The title raises a question: Is it possible to be a complete individualist?

Consider a life in which there is no common language, no neighbor to lend you a quart of milk, no police officer to protect you from a robber, nor fire fighter to save your burning house – a house, by the way, that you would have had to build yourself.

Imagine a world with seven billion complete individualists, all living in perfect isolation, none of whom can communicate with each other, help each other, fall in love with each other: no spouses, no friends, no families, no children.

It was considerations like these that prompted the Greek philosopher Aristotle, 25 centuries ago, to say that “man is by nature a social animal.” Who could imagine living a life without living in some sort of community, maintaining relationships with other human beings, depending on others for food and clothing and shelter?

But Aristotle went beyond the merely material and social benefits of community. When he sat down to write his book on ethics, he began it by saying simply: “The good is that at which all things aim.” In other words, every person on the planet, everyone who came before us or will come after us, whether consciously or not, aims in their lives to achieve “the good.”

Notice that Aristotle didn’t say “a good” or “goods,” but the good, meaning everyone shares the same good.

What Is “The Good”?

No one has decided to the satisfaction of everyone how “the good” is defined. In the mid-1930s, Fascists found the good to be synonymous with the state. Italy’s Fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini, offered this philosophy in opposition to the philosophy of individualism, which says there’s not one good but many goods, depending on personal tastes.

To the Church, neither statism nor individualism achieve the good, whether the personal good of human beings or the common good of society. A good that does not include God and does not promote a civil society is not a sufficient good at all.

As theologian David Hollenbach puts it, “The full common good exists only in the communion of all persons with God and with each other in God.” To Christians and many others, a life that doesn’t recognize God, who is both the creator and true end of people and societies, is a life without meaning.

When we find meaning, we find fulfillment. But we can’t find fulfillment in isolation. We find it when we love and serve God as well as other people. Not all societies make it possible to do that. Think of highly regimented North Korea, where fulfillment means serving the state alone, or the many other countries where there exists no personal or religious freedoms. Likewise, it’s hard to find fulfillment when we use our freedoms to benefit only ourselves without regard for the well-being of others.

The Church certainly has a clear idea of what constitutes the good life, and anyone who wonders what that is can find it contained in the Bible or in the many forms of Church tradition or by listening to the Word preached at Sunday Mass.

Social Conditions that Promote the Common Good

But instead of trying to impose the good life on people, an exercise with often sorry consequences, the Church offers what it considers to be the social conditions that give people and groups who want to pursue the good life the ability to do so.

What are some of those conditions? Among them is a commitment to peace. War and civil conflict not only affect armies that wage battle, but destroy the conditions of life for civilians as well. For example, the olive branch became a symbol of peace because in ancient Greece farmers wouldn’t plant olive trees, which take 15 years or more to bear fruit, if they thought that opposing armies would be running up and down the countryside destroying their orchards. The commitment to plant an olive tree was a sign of the farmer’s belief that peace would last.

But peace without justice is no peace at all. Today’s farmers want a strong government to protect their farms, but not an unjust government that would seize their orchards without due cause. Justice, a second condition of the common good, is more than observing contractual obligations and the laws against theft and violence. It is respect for the human dignity of other human beings, those next door and those around the world, perhaps best summed up by the injunction to “love your neighbor as yourself.”

A third condition of the common good is the protection of human rights, making sure that all people have an adequate provision of the goods and services essential to living a decent life, like food, housing and a productive job.

Other conditions include the protection of religious freedoms, freedom of communication and expression, and access to culture and a good education.

A final condition, one made apparent by the role of transportation and communication in shrinking the globe, is a nation’s contribution to the well-being of humanity around the world, particularly those in developing countries. That means sharing not only financial resources, but technological know-how as well.

The Universal Destination of Goods

But am I my brother’s keeper, particularly a brother thousands of miles away in, say, southern Africa? Or how about the Mexican immigrant mowing my front lawn?

The per capita income in the United States is $47,000 a year. In Burundi, a poor African country, it is $400 a year. And those figures take into account the respective costs of living in each country. The worldwide average? $11,000.

The common good does not demand an equalization of income around the world. The U.S. has a very productive economy; Burundi does not. Any utopian scheme to equalize incomes would be unjust and would certainly be bound to fail, as the average American family, for example, would be unwilling to surrender 75 percent of their income.

The common good does not demand a complete transfer of wealth, but it does suggest that all of us develop a new vision of economic wealth and social justice.

It does so by reminding us that the earth’s resources were placed there by God for the benefit of all, so that each person can access what he or she needs in order to develop fully as a human person. As Pope John Paul II pointed out, the common use of goods is a right, a natural right, inherent in being a human person. It is, he wrote, the “first principle of the whole ethical and social order” and “the characteristic principle of Christian social doctrine.”

But that right seems to conflict with the Church’s long-time stand that private property is also a right, a right that allows people a sphere of personal and family autonomy. In fact, neither right is absolute, but the right to private property may be regulated to achieve the goals of the common good.

Ideally, that regulation should come from within. In 2010, Warren Buffett, the investor, and Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft, challenged their fellow billionaires to give at least half of their net worth to charity. Buffett himself pledged to give away 99 percent of his wealth.

He said it was prompted not by guilt, but by gratitude, although his comments might lead people to believe that he was motivated not only by charity but by economic justice. He said he saw the distortions in a system that rewarded some investors with great wealth and rewarded soldiers who save lives and teachers who inspire students with little more than medals and nice notes from parents.

“Too often,” Buffett added, “a vast collection of possessions ends up possessing its owner,” a point made also in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church: The universal destination of goods, it said, is a principle that “corresponds to the call made unceasingly by the Gospel to people and societies of all times, tempted as they always are by the desire to possess.”

“Love for the poor,” the Compendium says, “is certainly incompatible with immoderate love of riches or their selfish use.” As a result, the Church urges its members, as well as governments and institutions, to a “preferential option for the poor,” urging people to use what wealth they have not only to provide for their families, but also to provide for the needs of those who live on the margins of society.

A preferential option for the poor is very much a part of the common good. It’s not only a matter of closing the wealth gap, but also of closing the gap between the lives we lead and the lives many of us believe we should be leading.

Interested in learning more about Catholic Social Teaching? Check out the following:

About the author
Tim Lanigan is a retired speechwriter, who worked for corporate chief executives, a Secretary of the Treasury, and members of both houses of Congress.

Catholic Social Teaching: Subsidiarity

Twenty years ago, the Soviet Union imploded. Since then, all sorts of reasons have been given for its collapse: Ronald Reagan’s defense policies, Mikhail Gorbachev’s foresight, Pope John Paul II’s charisma, the anemic Soviet economy, to name a few.

But one cause that seems most persuasive, a cause cited by Pope John Paul himself, is the Soviet failure to develop a civil society. The Soviet Union consisted of the all-powerful state and the powerless individual. Nothing in between.

What is a civil society? It is the accumulation, over centuries, of all sorts of institutions: economic, social, cultural, sports-oriented, recreational, professional and political.

Some thinkers have called such groups, “mediating institutions,” in that they come between government and the individual and protect the individual from the power of the state. The role of government is not to usurp the prerogative of these institutions but to support them.

It is the principle of subsidiarity that underlies the right of individuals to associate with other like-minded people and to organize themselves into groups, a right that was denied by the Soviet Union. This right is a natural right, a right that is not the government’s to extend but is the birthright of every human being. In the words of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, “it is impossible to promote the dignity of the person without showing concern for such groups.”

As a principle, it was first formulated in 1931, in the midst of the Great Depression. Pope Pius XI issued a major social encyclical, Quadragesimo Anno, which took issue with the centralization of political and economic power at the time. He envisioned the practice of subsidiarity as the way to restore civil society.

“Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community,” he wrote, “so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do.”

At the base of civil society is the family, the first and most natural institution. The family is where people learn to grow, to take responsibility. It is the first school of work, as any 12-year old who is asked to clean his room or mow the lawn can testify to. And most recently, during a time of economic upheaval, it is the one group that will take you in when you can’t find an affordable home.

The family may be civil society’s most basic institution, but society encompasses all sorts of institutions, from churches and schools to soccer and bowling leagues. In fact it was the decline of participation in bowling leagues over a 50-year period that inspired Robert Putnam, a Harvard political scientist, to track a decline in America’s social capital. The number of Americans who bowl has increased, but the number who bowl in leagues has declined. People grow primarily through their relationships with others, and if Americans spend all their time alone with their computers or alone in the bowling alleys, America’s civil society, and Americans themselves, will suffer as a result.

Subsidiarity does not stand in opposition to government. Some political thinkers, Thomas Paine and Henry David Thoreau, to name two, subscribed to the theory that government which governs least governs best. That is not the intent of subsidiarity, which maintains that every problem should be handled by the institution most competent to deal with it, while giving priority to the institution that is closest to the problem. Moreover, subsidiarity requires that those who are affected by policies have a voice in developing those policies.

Subsidiarity is a principle that can benefit not only society but government itself. In fact, it probably helps to visualize this principle by thinking of the way the United States is governed. Washington shares power with the states, which in turn share power with counties, cities and towns. If you want to report a broken water main, it’s a whole lot more efficient to get a hold of your local public works agency than to inform an agency in Washington. On the other hand, some things need to be done by a national government, like diplomacy and national defense.

Government at all levels has responsibility for the common good, the conditions under which true civil society is fostered. When individuals or groups use their power to weaken the social fabric, it’s the role of government to step in. For example, presidents and congresses have used the power of the federal government to confront the power of both large corporations and large labor unions when they felt that the common good was being undermined. The Supreme Court has supported individuals when their rights were violated by state and local governments.

The Church’s social teaching, as related in the Compendium, maintains that all human beings have an equal dignity, and that government has a special responsibility for serving the needs of the poor and most vulnerable. But at the same time, the Church opposes “certain forms of centralization, bureaucratization, and welfare assistance” when they “lead to a loss of human energies” and “are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients.”

Is there a golden mean between the helping hand of government and the heavy hand of government? Subsidiarity, rightly understood, is the Church’s answer.

But the principle, and the civil society it fosters, won’t flourish unless citizens participate in their communities. True subsidiarity depends on the willingness of people to become active participants in civil society, to engage with contemporary cultural and social issues, and to help order them according to God’s will.

Learn more about Catholic Social Teaching.

About the author
Tim Lanigan is a retired speechwriter who worked for corporate chief executives, a Secretary of the Treasury, and members of both houses of Congress.

Solidarity: Working for the Common Good

Dakota Meyer was a Marine corporal serving in Afghanistan on September 8, 2009. What he did that day earned him the nation’s highest military award, the Medal of Honor. When he learned that three fellow Marines and a Navy Corpsman were missing during an attack by a group of insurgents, he charged five times into a hail of bullets to rescue them, an action that one former combat veteran called “beyond comprehension.”

What Meyer later said is almost as interesting as what he did. “I lost a lot of Afghans that day,” he said. “And I’ll tell you right now – they were just as close to me as those Marines were. At the end of the day, I don’t care if they’re Afghans, Iraqis, Marines or Army; it didn’t matter.”

What Meyer did and said confirms what many combat veterans have reported: what motivates soldiers in combat is not hatred of their enemy, but love for their comrades. Soldiers fight because those next to them depend on them.

That motivation gets to the heart of one of the fundamental principles of Catholic Social Teaching – solidarity, a principle that in modern terminology is “hard-wired” into our human natures. As humans, we are social beings, and are dependent on the friendship and cooperation of others.

Few of us will have an opportunity to display the bravery of a Corporal Meyer. But all of us are given opportunities every day to rise above human flaws, such as egoism, fear or greed, that prevent us from serving others.

The Church’s emphasis on solidarity arose only during the last hundred years or so. The word “solidarity” suggests a relationship of unity among people, like the old phrase, “all for one, and one for all.”

A Social Principle. Solidarity is a social principle. The concept grew out of the change of a medieval, agrarian society based to a great extent on cooperation into a modern, industrial society based on competition. While the structures of such modern society are organized for competition, the Church maintains that, as humans, our basic orientation is towards cooperation and harmony.

Most Americans work for large organizations and know that, despite all the rhetoric about competition, the ability to get their work done depends on cooperation. Some years ago, a chief executive of one of America’s largest companies was speaking to a group of executives. He said cooperation had been very important to him in his career.

“I spent the first 15 years of my career working in research,” he said. “The popular image of a research scientist is the lone genius. His hair is sticking out every which way; he is surrounded by smoking test tubes; and whatever discovery he comes up with will be the result of his own peculiar genius.”

“I’ve got a dozen or so patents under my name,” he said. “But there is not a one of them that hasn’t been the result of a whole lot of cooperation with colleagues in the laboratory.”

The Church sees solidarity as a better way to orient the structures of society, to conform human institutions to human nature so that society can avoid the excesses of “unbridled capitalism,” on the one hand, and oppressive socialism, on the other.

A Moral Virtue. Solidarity is not only a social principle, but a moral virtue, as well. Like any other virtue, such as temperance or humility, solidarity is a virtue we need to keep working on. The goal to be realized is the commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself,” or as the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church has put it: Solidarity “translates into the willingness to give oneself for the good of one’s neighbor, beyond any individual or particular interest.” By sacrificing our own selfish interests to serve others, we work for the common good, which is the goal of all Catholic social teaching.

For those of us who don’t have our hands on the levers of economic and political power, or who aren’t on the front lines of combat, how can we promote solidarity and make it part of our way of life? Here are a few ways to live this principle.

Give Freely. Pope Benedict has written about the importance of gratuitousness, in other words, giving without expecting a return. The logic of commerce is: “I’ll do this for you if you do that for me. If so, we’ll have a deal.” The logic of gratuitousness is: “I’ll do this for you because I think it will help you and serve the common good.” That’s the true spirit of cooperation – and of solidarity.

Live Simply. The more we get, the more we want. Some people may remember the 1980s bumper sticker: “He who dies with the most toys wins.” America has become a consumption society, replacing the good things it already owns with things considered a bit better. It’s easy to spend so much time acquiring that we have no time left over to give.

Work Diligently. If you want to help raise the standard of living for people all over the world, work diligently. It’s important to work hard so that others don’t have to pick up your slack. Don’t slough off and let others do the work. When everyone works together, they contribute to the common good and help ensure that all have what they need.

Serve Others Actively. As Pope John Paul II put it, true solidarity is not just a “feeling of vague compassion” for others, but “a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all.”

Interested in learning more about Catholic Social Teaching? Check out the following:

About the author
Tim Lanigan is a retired speechwriter who has worked for corporate chief executives, a Secretary of the Treasury, and members of both houses of Congress.

SPONSORED BY

AFFILIATED SITES

DISCLAIMER