A reader writes:

A reader writes: 2014-12-31T14:45:47-07:00

Some thoughts about subsidiarity: the first is that in so many cases it is “I” who can just manage the issue. I can take care of my brother or sister in need. The more this level of subsidiarity occurs in one’s life, the more likely the individual will spend less time fretting about “big government social programs” and instead be glad there’s something else out there to help these folk who are invading his heart. Subsidiarity makes sure that the poor are not an impersonal object. One begins to recognize and be grateful for the assistance that is available to help out the individual in front of them. Peter Maurin viewed Catholic Worker houses of hospitality as schools for people to meet across tables and become involved with one another. It works just like that. The “personal” becomes important.

Also, America is not Australia. Or France. The minute Americans can get away with not paying for the poor, they will stop. When the need is gone, welfare will go. Most Americans resent being on welfare, under-utilize its services and are glad to be done with welfare the minute they can afford be without it. The Reaganesque image of a system of utter dependency for most users, in which an individual who gets a welfare check with his or her name on it suddenly becomes attracted to welfare like they are inhaling crack, is glorious piece of myth embedded in our American psyche. Thankfully, it is fiction. Most are delighted to be done with welfare, find the system and its workers rude, impersonal, and ignorant and find being on welfare humiliating.

Subsidiarity has a “doing” bit to it. Its hard to imagine that dispensing money to Mercy Corps (supposedly some icon of subsidiarity) ends the personal responsibilties one has by subsidiarity. Subsidiarity means “I” do it as best as I can, then my family. These are the first and front line building blocks of the community. While most pro-family discussants seemed possessed of the idea that families are under attack and the community provides them with little (I disagree…we have great resources in our little middle class town), few reliably articulate the responsibilities of the family, beyond some Ozzy and Harriett image of raising good citizens. Catholic images of family have to do better. The family has a responsibility of being open to the poorest members of society too. How that is done…well….that is part of the experiment in our age.

Hmmmm….


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!