Charity is at the heart of the Church’s social doctrine. Our responsibilities and commitments to each other are spelled out by that doctrine which at its core is about loving one’s neighbor.
So that’s why when I see signs like the one above saying “Your mortgage is not my problem” and articles and columns detailing similar ideals my mind reacts negatively because I know that I am my brother’s keeper. So, in short, I know that their mortgage is my problem.
I think that’s one of the main reasons that the Democratic Party is so enticing to so many Christians. They hear of people in pain and the only party talking of doing something…anything about it is the Democratic Party which…let’s face it… has marketed itself successfully as the party of compassion. The party that cares about the poor. Or to put it bluntly, the party that says your mortgage is everyone’s problem. It all feels very Christian if you ignore the fact that the government is forcibly taking people’s money from them to establish another version of the Department of Motor Vehicles which will employ political toadies with responsibility to no one but their patron party bosses.
The Republican Party on the other hand has a strong streak of libertarianism running through it. And those ideas are often promulgated with a heavy emphasis on freedom. But the connection that conservatives have to charity and love for the poor is often left undiscussed. And without that I fear the Republican Party will continue to lose the social justice voters.
When I see signs like “Your mortgage is not my problem” that’s a problem for me. Look, I know what they mean. It’s a reaction to collectivism. And collectivism worries the heck out of me. I’ve read studies that seem to show that conservatives give more money to charity than liberals. But I think Republicans need to talk more about why freedom is good for everyone including the poor. I think the GOP needs to not only the party of that stirs a passion for freedom but the party that inspires compassion for all. And I’m not talking about the “compassionate conservatism” of George W. Bush who simply meant more big government but not quite as big as Barney Frank would like it.
I know that in societies with big government, people witness their neighbors in trouble and they shake their heads and say in pitying tones “The government should really have a program to help those poor people” rather than just helping people out themselves. In societies with big government the people in trouble tend to feel like they’re owed help and that when they receive help from the government they’re often ungrateful and ask why the government can’t do more. So we end up in a situation where the people who had the money taken from them are angry and the people who eventually received the money are ungrateful. Who does that help?
A free society must inspire those with to help those without. A free society that is to remain a free society must accept that someone else’s mortgage is their problem.
July 22, 2009 at 6:16 am
Ugh… I know! This is seriously the tough Christian stuff. Yet, I still feel that for the most part there's the difference between that which demands the Christian home for the McMansion that they can't possibly afford because they both don't have the diligence or the intelligence (yeah, I went there) to have it, versus those that deserve the most basic level of homicide that our society can afford.
July 22, 2009 at 9:10 am
That's true! This warped view of Social Justice has really messed things up for conservatives….
July 22, 2009 at 1:24 pm
"[P]eople witness their neighbors in trouble and they shake their heads and say in pitying tones 'The government should really have a program to help those poor people' rather than just helping people out themselves."
man with black hat: Hope Breeds Eternal
July 22, 2009 at 1:32 pm
I'll be honest with you – the "bleeding heart", Democrat oriented, pseudo-socialist, leftward leaning way I'd always seen Catholic social justice portrayed really made it difficult for me personally when I first considered converting! I never beleieved Jesus meant for us to be socialist and this is something I struggle with often.
July 22, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I have NO problem with helping my neighbor, but you nailed it with the last paragraph about "In societies with big government the people in trouble tend to feel like they're owed help and that when they receive help from the government they'[re often ungrateful and ask why the government can't do more. …"
I live this every day because I have an older sister that refuses to acknowledge her adulthood and take responsibility for her actions, let alone make decisions that positively affect her and her children. Our parents bail her out EVERY SINGLE TIME she cries that she can't pay her rent or bills (but she can get her hair done for $300). I have learned to never ask for money from my parents because I've seen the level of hatred they have for my sister, not to mention the strings attached to the money.
I have no problem helping my neighbor, but since when do I have to pay for the stupidity for those that KNEW they couldn't afford something but bought it anyway on credit they didn't really have. THAT's the Christian social issue that I struggle with… having to love these people anyway. It's hard when I'm struggling to raise my own children with an absent father (due to deployments)and I see someone mooching off the government or expecting (demanding) help because they refuse to behave responsibly.
So how do we get to that level that your last line infers?
July 22, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Enabling and compassion can be a fine line. I think it's something that all people who try to help others deal with. You have to ask yourself if you're helping the person in the long term by helping them in the short term.
But what do I know, I'm just an idiot with a blog.
July 22, 2009 at 3:08 pm
There is no grace in paying taxes (and more taxes). We will be judged on how we practice the corporal works of mercy, not how we pay the government. When I hear someone say that the government should help a poor soul, what they really mean is "someone else should help that poor soul." I often what to say to liberals — why don't YOU write a check if you want to help. But that's not the mindset — they want someone else to help. Which is why liberals historically don't give squat to charity.
July 22, 2009 at 3:19 pm
I don't think that Catholic Social teaching intends that we be required – on pain of imprisonment – to help our neighbors. That's what using taxes to provide assistance does… it makes it a requirement enforced by the state that actually destroys the relationship between people.
I stand with the person holding that sign. I don't have a mortgage (I rent) and I deeply resent the fact that I am being forced (through the state) to render assistance who are actually better off than I am.
I volunteer and donate to organizations that perform corporal acts of mercy for the truly poor. However, I don't think that assisting those who greedily got themselves in a bind is really my responsibility. Nor that it is our responsibility to keep the well off comfortable according to the teachings of the Church.
July 22, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I agree with you as a matter of fiscal policy. But as a motto it leaves us open to the charge of not caring for the poor.
And as individuals we should be looking to help others which I'm sure you do.
I think sometimes we forget to talk about this.
July 22, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Just look around the Acton Institute web site for a bit and you will see how big government has harmed to poor in easily demonstrable ways. The current Democratic Party cares for the poor the same way President Obama wants to reduce abortions, that is they say one thing and do another. Their concern for the poor is only as far as getting them to vote for them. In that sense it is highly un-Christian to support their policies and tactics.
And regardless of what they say about the poor, they are anti-God, so what good can anything else they do be?
I am not saying that the Republican party is necessarily the answer, who have benignly neglected the poor; I am saying that voting Democrat goes against every Catholic moral fiber of my being because of what they have actively done to use the poor.
I agree that if the Republicans focus their conservatism on small business and helping the poor, and not on Big Business, that would make them the party to vote for.
There's some thing a pope wrote or something, Caritas in Veritate I think, that might help ;o)
July 22, 2009 at 4:53 pm
My neighbor's mortgage is my problem in the same way my neighbor's alcoholism is: I am obliged to help, but that doesn't necessarily mean helping to pay for it. The best help you can give to somebody who bought a home they can't afford most certainly is not to help them afford it. That would only reinforce reckless habits.
July 22, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Rather than the government take $1,000 from me, keep $600 of it, and then put $400 of it towards someone's mortgage, I'd rather just give them the $1,000 out right.
My big problem is that the goverment is big business basically. They make a lot of money by taking a lot of money. That's why I'd rather give to St Vincent de Paul and other charities that are there for no other reason than to help.
July 22, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Matthew, I really have to disagree with you on this one. We are called to help the poor, but the poor do not own their own homes. If you have a mortgage, you are not poor.
I'm all for providing shelter for those who have none, feeding the hungry, watering the thirsty, clothing the naked, etc. These are all corporal acts of mercy to which we are called.
However, helping one hold onto a home that they cannot afford does not seem to be something that I am required by Jesus (or the Church) to do.
July 22, 2009 at 7:22 pm
I have a hard time with this post. I understand what you are saying but at the same time when do people take responsibility for themselves. If the acquire a mortgage that they cannot afford, why should I have to pay it for them. I do not own a house and I do not have that much money in order to pay for someone else's mistake. I have made my own money mistakes but I am not about to ask someone else to take care of them for me.
There is a fine line between helping and people taking advantage of a situation. Often times if you are not careful someone will start taking advantage of a situation and since we all know how well the government monitor's their programs, this will be another program in which money keeps getting dumped down the drain. We have generations of kids who think that they should get everything for free without working hard to get. What are telling these generations? Buy as many things that you cannot afford and the government will come and bail you out because it is not your fault that you signed the loan papers or used your credit cards until they were maxed out.
We all make mistakes but there has to be a point where we draw the line. No one is expecting these people to go to money management classes. No one is expecting them to learn from their mistakes. When we have people on the streets without homes because of a drug or alcohol problem, we try to get them treatment to get out of their situation. What are doing for those people who have money problems? As far as I can see nothing so they do not learn their lesson.
July 22, 2009 at 8:04 pm
I completely understand the sentiment behind the sign "Your Mortgage is not my problem" in the sense that the person (and I) feel that we are in a free society which allows us all to make decisions on how to run our lives; good and bad. But the sign is completely wrong on two levels, both moral and financial: the mortgage crisis affects ALL of us living in the US at some financial level (decreasing home values, obviously and the impact therein). And of course on a moral level in that we as Christians need to make sure that every family has basic needs met (food, clothing, shelter, medicine if necessary).
To me, what the sign should read is "Your Mortgage should not be my financial responsibility".
July 22, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Matthew should we be assuming the person holding the sign is even Christian to begin with? If this person is NOT Christian, then he/she has every right to say, "not my problem" with a very clear conscience. But I agree with you that this is not a Christian message.
That having been said, we just found out over the weekend that two more family friends of ours have decided to short-sell their mansion. They can easily afford the monthly payments as she is a Pharmaceutical rep and he is a Psychiatrist. They said they are just tired of "throwing good money after bad" on an "upside-down house". They are using the same buzz-words we hear every day, and it infuriates me.
How about honoring your commitments, America? Does this mean anything anymore?
July 23, 2009 at 2:11 am
Bravo, Matt. You're right on target with Catholic social teaching.
Here's Pope Pius IX (Quadragesimo Anno, 50):
"Furthermore, a person's superfluous income, that is, income which he does not need to sustain life fittingly and with dignity, is not left wholly to his own free determination. Rather the Sacred Scriptures and the Fathers of the Church constantly declare in the most explicit language that the rich are bound by a very grave precept to practice almsgiving, beneficence, and munificence."
July 23, 2009 at 2:43 am
Anonymous said:
"the mortgage crisis affects ALL of us living in the US at some financial level (decreasing home values, obviously and the impact therein)"
And what is wrong with "decreasing home values"? We should be very glad that we have "decreasing home values", although they are still 50% above where they were in the year 1999 before the greed bubble occurred. Don't we want people to be able to afford a house? Let me repeat, house values are still 50% above where they were in the year 1999. Let's hope they continue to decrease so that more people can buy their own houses.
July 23, 2009 at 2:54 am
Julie, so does this mean that I'm not allowed to dictate where my extra money goes? Why does the government have to be involved and why should my money go to people that behave irresponsibly? If my neighbor unexpectedly lost his job and tried for a few months to make it… sure, I'd be more than happy to try to help him out. But the ones that don't fit into that category… THOSE are the ones that are pissing us off.
And that's what many of us are struggling to understand and of which are trying to grasp the Christian ethics. I *want* to help, I have (some) means to help… but giving to those that made their mistakes due to greed and selfishness… no thanks.
PJPII said in Laborem exercens, 71 "(Dignity is) extinguished within him in a system of excessive bureaucratic centralization, which makes the worker feel that he is just a cog in a huge machine moved from above, that he is for more reasons than one a mere production instrument rather than a true subject of work with an initiative of his own."
Let me be the one to dictate where my money goes and I'm more than happy and delighted to help others when they need it. But don't take it from my hardworking husband who is trying his darndest to support his own family by giving his hard earned money to someone that doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to get a job and NOT live above his means. Don't we deserve to retain our sense of dignity as well?
Forgive me if I've sounded harsh, but I struggle SO HARD with this topic due to how close it hits home.
July 23, 2009 at 3:15 am
To Julie, that is a good statement. However, government should keep its paws out of that sector. That is a "love your neighbor as yourself" kind of call, between the individual and God.
In addition to that the Church also advocates subsidiarity —- self-reliance in the smallest community: family, neighborhood, community, municipality,etc…..; government should only step in if and when the smaller community cannot fend for itself.
A couple of years ago we went up to Toronto for Christmas to visit my husband's family.
Christmas Eve morning we went into town for some breakfast and noon Mass – as we walked through town the sight was heart wrenching. We saw so many homeless – one woman scantily dressed in the thick of winter on the corner smoking a cigarette – a heap of bodies huddled under a blanket of tarp and newspapers, one purple hand sticking out…. we were all horrified and I admit paralysed into what to do? What do you do?
Fortunately, we came across quite a large sign in St. Michael's Cathedral addressing this very problem. It was a sign by the St. Vincent de Paul Society sponsored by the Archdiocese of Toronto. This society has facilities where the homeless can have food, shelter, clothing, a bath, etc…… So we were glad to be able to dump our money in the box for the St. Vincent de Paul Society….
We are all called to generosity which can show itself in different ways, large families is one way.
Socialism is NOT the way.
Look at Canada, Germany, France…… why do you think it is that America is (one of) the most generous nations when it comes to helping out in natural disasters, for instance….fat government ain't the answer.
Mercy!
Mum26