Am I My Brother's Keeper?

By John Greenwald

A letter by Catholic bishops on U.S. capitalism whips up a storm of controversy

Feed the hungry. Clothe the naked. Shelter the homeless. With such biblical exhortations in mind, five U.S. Roman Catholic bishops have been examining American capitalism since 1981 to see how well it conforms to their church's social teaching. In Washington last week the group presented its long-awaited--and highly controversial--findings to the annual meeting of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

In the first draft of a pastoral letter, the committee praised the "impressive strides" of the U.S. economy in providing goods and services, but condemned what it called the "massive and ugly" failures of the system. Among shortcomings that the bishops cited were a "morally unjustified" current rate of unemployment and "gross inequalities" of wealth and income. Wrote the bishops: "The fact that more than 15% of our nation's population live below the official poverty level is a social and moral scandal that must not be ignored." The letter notes that in 1982 the richest 20% of Americans earned nearly as much as the rest of the country's workers combined.

The 136-page draft, which was kept secret until after the presidential election so that it would not become a campaign issue, goes beyond simply noting the presence of the hungry at the feast of American affluence. The letter calls for an aggressive, Government-led attack on economic problems. Said Archbishop Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee, who chaired the committee that prepared the letter: "We want to appeal to the generosity, good will and concern of all U.S. citizens. Our point is: do not remain complacent at this point in history."

Highlights of the proposed pastoral:

Unemployment. In one of its most controversial passages, the letter urges "a major new policy commitment" to reduce joblessness from its present 7.4%, to 3% to 4%, a level not seen since the late 1960s. To achieve the goal, the draft proposes such measures as Government-funded jobs programs and expanded private training and apprenticeship efforts. It strongly supports unions and appeals for a strengthening of labor laws to protect workers.

Poverty. Noting that 9 million more Americans slipped under the poverty line between 1979 and 1983, which the Government defined as cash income of $10,178 for a family of four, the letter recommends, among other steps, beefed-up welfare programs and the removal of barriers to full and equal employment for women and minorities. It stresses the importance of a thriving economy to the creation of jobs.

Social Cooperation. The bishops' draft declares that "America needs a new experiment in cooperation and collaboration" among all sectors of the economy. Such partnerships, it says, could create new jobs and promote community economic development.

International Affairs. The document endorses free trade and urges increased foreign aid. It notes that the U.S. is the largest single donor of economic assistance, but points out that "our nation lags behind most other industrial nations in the relative amount of aid we provide to the Third World." The letter specifically deplores a recent decline in U.S. support for the World Bank's interest-free loan program.

The report comes at a time of growing involvement by members of the American Catholic hierarchy in political and economic issues. Bishop James Malone of Youngstown, Ohio, the president of the bishops' conference, has been a strong supporter of such activity; he worked hard but unsuccessfully in the late 1970s to keep open the Youngstown Sheet and Tube mills in his diocese. More recently, Archbishops Bernard Law of Boston and John O'Connor of New York stepped into this year's election campaign by indicating that Catholics should consider a candidate's views on abortion before voting.

The conference of bishops' most dramatic incursion into public affairs prior to last week was a pastoral letter on nuclear war issued in May 1983. That document called for a halt on the testing, production and deployment of nuclear weapons, as well as reductions in the number of existing arms.

After the bishops adopt the economic pastoral, probably next year, it will become a teaching document in schools and churches for 53 million U.S. Catholics. They will be free to argue with programs advocated by the statement, but not with its goal of fostering economic rights and human dignity. "In our view," the draft declares, "there can be no legitimate disagreement on the basic moral objective."

It is uncertain how much influence the letter will have on an increasingly independent-minded American Catholic laity. Says the Rev. Richard McBrien, chairman of the theology department at the University of Notre Dame: "Now that so many U.S. Catholics are in the management class and enjoy a more positive economic situation, Catholic social teaching is no longer 5 something perceived as supportive but as a challenge. Many Catholics in business and government will be among those challenged by this pastoral."

Indeed, a self-appointed group known as the Lay Commission on Catholic Social Teaching and the U.S. Economy, headed by former Treasury Secretary William Simon and Social Philosopher Michael Novak, seems intent on engaging the bishops in a struggle for the soul of the U.S. church on this issue. Two weeks ago, the group, whose 31 members include former Secretary of State Alexander Haig and J. Peter Grace, chairman of W.R. Grace & Co., put out its own letter on economics. Said the 119-page document: "Poverty is not primarily a problem for the state. It is a personal and a community problem which each of us and all our appropriate associations, not only the state, ought to address."

The lay critics argue that the bishops' letter fails to acknowledge the power of American capitalism to create jobs and paths out of poverty. Instead, they contend, the prelates call for Government solutions that already have been tried and found wanting. Said Novak: "In a document that's supposed to be antistatist, it's amazing how many passages are from a statist framework." Adds Simon: "What we need is a larger pie, not a redistribution of the existing one. We threw a trillion dollars at poverty, and we have more poverty now than ever before."

In preparing the draft, the bishops heard from some 125 experts, ranging from theologians to business and labor leaders. Their testimony sometimes strongly influenced the letter. For example, committee members had been leaning toward a call for strong Government economic planning before hearing that approach sharply criticized by Marina von Neumann Whitman, chief economist for General Motors. After Whitman spoke, one panelist said, "Well, there goes the emphasis on central planning."

The bishops turned for advice to outside consultants and a four-member staff. Monsignor George Higgins, a lecturer in theology at Catholic University of America and an outspoken social activist, helped shape the group's position on labor. Staff Member Thomas Quigley, a lay specialist in Latin American affairs, played a role in the international section of the letter. Insiders say, however, that no single person was responsible for the document's overall tone or content.

The letter is the latest in a long series of Catholic pronouncements on economic questions. Beginning with Pope Leo Kill's 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum, which stressed the right of individuals to a living wage, the church has consistently called for improvements in the lot of workers. In 1919 the American bishops put forth a Program for Social Reconstruction that urged the establishment of a minimum wage, social security and un employment insurance. Pope John Paul II's 1981 encyclical Laborem Exercens decried what he considered the tendency of unregulated capitalism to reduce workers to the status of instruments of production. The bishops' proposed pastoral is actually more conservative than some of John Paul's statements on economics.

Last September in Edmonton, Alta., the Pope denounced the gap between rich northern countries and poor southern ones. Said he: "The poor people and poor nations--poor in different ways, not only lacking food but also deprived of freedom and other human rights--will judge those people who take these goods away from them, amassing to themselves the imperialistic monopoly of economic and political supremacy at the expense of others." In the Newfoundland fishing community of Flatrock, the Pope condemned concentrations of economic power and said that key industries like food production could become "controlled by the profit motive of a few rather than by the needs of the many."

American liberals last week welcomed the bishops' statement. Said Alice Rivlin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office and director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution: "Their letter helps to restart a national debate on what this country is going to do about poverty." Concurred Felix Rohatyn, a partner of Wall Street's Lazard Freres: "Their ideas may not be politically fashionable, but that doesn't take away from the moral weight of their argument. The issues are still valid."

Conservatives, on the other hand, felt the draft had little to offer. While applauding the well-intended goals of the bishops, they said that many of the specific proposals were shopworn ideas that had failed in the very recent past or might prove counterproductive. Many economists, for example, believe that the U.S. would suffer a new inflationary surge if the Government tried to push unemployment down to 3%, as the bishops propose. "The bishops' letter is a resurrection of old policies that are no longer supported by those knowledgeable in economics," said Alan Greenspan, president of the Townsend-Greenspan economic consulting firm and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Ford. Charles Murray, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, called the proposed pastoral "a restatement of the dogmas of the Great Society" and "a rehash of failed ideas." The bishops, wrote Columnist George Will, "hurl cliches at problems that have proven intractable in the face of strenuous efforts by persons of intelligence and dedication."

Among businessmen, the bishops' letter evoked mixed responses. "I came away with a feeling that these are well-meaning people who really don't understand our capitalistic system," said Admiral Elmo Zumwalt Jr. (ret.), chairman of Milwaukee-based American Medical Buildings. But Roger Altman, managing director of Shearson Lehman/American Express and a self-described "serious Catholic," was sympathetic. Said he: "Our society has an obligation to the underprivileged, and the degree to which we haven't made progress in raising their living standards is enormously troubling." Observed Joseph Pichler, a Catholic who is president of Dillon Cos., a major grocery and retail store operator: "There's much to agree on in the document, particularly when they speak of the dignity of man and the dignity of work. But their policy recommendations, I predict, are going to be widely ignored. They're bad economics."

The letter was greeted with a sigh of relief by White House officials, some of whom feared that the document might be polemically shrill. Spokesman Larry Speakes said that President Reagan "welcomed" the economics draft and shared "the bishops' concern for the poor." Speakes cited the fact that "more than 6 million people have gotten jobs in the last 22 months" as evidence of the success of the Administration's policies.

The nearly 300 bishops at last week's meeting roundly praised the letter. New York's Archbishop O'Connor said the draft would help "in stirring up a sense of personal and national emergency." Said Archbishop James Hickey of Washington, B.C.: "It challenges all ideologies."

The document should have a smoother passage to adoption than the nuclear letter, if only because it appears to be closer to established Catholic social teaching. But it might gain wider acceptance, both inside and outside the church, if the bishops heed criticism that some of their economic prescriptions are outmoded.

--By John Greenwald. Reported by James Castelli/Washington and J. Madeleine Nash/Chicago

With reporting by James Castelli, J. MADELEINE NASH