Prophetic and Public: The Social Witness of U.S. Catholicism

CHAPTER FIVE

We have already alluded to some of the ways in which these case studies of Catholic political advocacy organizations shed light upon the theological foundations and theoretical distinctions that have emerged. In some instances, the cases serve to exemplify theological conceptions of church-society engagement , and in other instances the organization’s practices pose challenges to the classic typological divisions we have explored. Putting theory and praxis into conversation will help to determine what finally constitute the possibilities for and limits to public theology and political advocacy in the U.S. Catholic context. The normative conclusions that result highlight the ways in which different theories and practices exhibit different strands of the tradition, and suggest that fidelity to the fullness of the tradition calls for mutual clari- fication of the different strands by one another. Several specific methodological directives emerge from our investigation to help guide public theology and political advocacy, in particular: (1) strengthen the connection between embodiment and advocacy, (2) install mechanisms for self-critique, and (3) address a comprehensive range of issues. In the end, a theoretical approach that is fully theological and fully public holds most promise for achieving an authentic and responsible social ethic. THEORY AND PRAXIS Now that we have completed our investigation into theoretical understandings and practical expressions of public theology in the contemporary U.S. context, we are better able to discern ways in which Catholic political engagement on the ground both corroborates theological tensions and challenges standard typological categories. CHAPTER FIVE Catholic Public Theology for the Twenty-first Century Corroborations On the whole, the case studies exemplify the perennial tensions intrinsic to relating faith and tradition to contemporary social and political issues. In particular , the ambivalence inherent in the fullness of the Christian tradition highlighted in chapter 2 and embodied by J. Bryan Hehir’s and Michael Baxter’s approaches plays out concretely in some of our case studies. For example, whereas Pax Christi USA’s (PCUSA’s) mission is particularly enlivened by the Sermon on the Mount, Pacem in terris serves as its charter and framework, perhaps the quintessential natural law encyclical in the Catholic social tradition , reflecting the tensions between the scripture’s hard sayings and natural law–arguments that we have encountered. Although its work for peace often places PCUSA in opposition to mainstream patriotism or militarism and it remains very attentive to the divergences between the pax Americana and pax Christi, the organization uses Catholic social teaching and empirical arguments in its witness and advocacy work. The political advocacy groups surveyed also reflect the outlooks of Hehir and Baxter in more decisive and particular ways. Perhaps most apparent are the ways in which the work and outlook of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) distinctly reflects the theology and strategies of J. Bryan Hehir. As noted, Hehir’s influence at the bishops’ conference has been considerable, and the continued impact of his work there remains evident. Both Hehir and the USCCB combine a positive conception of the state with an equally sanguine view of the need for contributions from other agencies in the social arena, including religious organizations . Each similarly operates with the assumption that the church’s role among people of goodwill is a persuasive one, and each opposes an approach that would impose the church’s views amid legitimate pluralism or retreat amid an unfriendly environment. John Carr’s characterization of the USCCB’s efforts to take empirical information seriously (“faith is not a substitute for facts or data”) also reflects Hehir’s methodology. The bishops’ nuance and restraint in language reflect Hehir’s own approach, which, he admits, sacri- fices prophetic edge for pastoral and public responsibility. Hehir himself has explicitly characterized the advocacy activity of the USCCB as fitting squarely within Troeltsch’s church type: “From the bishops’ arguments in defense of the rights of the unborn, to their human rights analysis of U.S. policy in Central America, to their just-war critique of nuclear policy , the Catholic leadership has tried to play this mediating role between faith and culture, between church and society. On all these issues there has been a conscious effort by the bishops not to adopt a sectarian posture. They have maintained this position in spite of criticism from quarters within the church who want a ’stronger’ or more ‘evangelical’ emphasis, less open to the balCatholic Public Theology for the Twenty-first Century 178 [3.140.185.170] Project MUSE (2024-04...