One onto my self and one among many is consistent with conventional thinking. Presuming a democracy and free market system, an individual can move freely from one societal structure to the next. Being any part of a household does not preclude one’s status in the economy, the political structure, the denomination, or general social setting. On the other hand, one onto my self and one in the body of Christ, His Church, becomes paradoxical. Saint Paul uses the analogy of the human body to better explain this paradoxical interconnection. Yes, the eye is one onto itself, and yes, it is a unique entity, yet the eye only has substantive meaning within the context of the body; it is what it is because it is in the body and the body is what it is because the eye is what it is. All this gibberish is to utilize functionality, unity, and the comprehensible distinction between the worldly and transcendental. Using parody as our model we can conceivably better understand paradox as analogy.

Let us work backwards, let’s begin with a conclusion concerning this unity in a worldly way and how the individual through his inalienable rights can create the common good. Understanding paradox as a foundational factor in this discussion, let’s conclude government works better when some of the government functions are not performed by the government. Let’s return to the early days of our Constitution and reestablish the notion that promoting the common good means the government will not do anything to impede the common good. Today’s understanding of government is to design and execute programs and legislation which function as the common good. By its very nature, the government is created from and for empire building. When government makes the decisions concerning human rights and promoting the common good, a society can easily gravitate into a Fascist Germany or an Imperialistic Japan. Today’s China is more than a world competitor, China has become a global predator. Similarly, when religion takes the task of governing the society, a present-day Iran can emerge. OK, so how did we get to this conclusion that government in some areas should not govern?   

Firstly, we examine in a paradoxical way, human rights as the vehicle which gets us to the common good which are the same human rights that are found in the common good. In other words, the society has to have basic human rights to create the authentic common good and the common good will expand these  human rights. Either way, we will begin with human rights.

Pope John XXIII, in his encyclical letter of 1963, titled “Peace on Earth”, listed some of these rights as: the right to life and a worthy standard of living, food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, and necessary social services. Rights pertaining to moral and cultural values, such as the search for truth, to worship God, to meet and associate with others, and to immigrate. There are certainly political rights and far reaching economic rights: a right to work and work in a safe environment, receive a just wage, and a right to have private property. Certainly, these are all worthy rights and these rights can be easily expanded into greater detail pointing the way to the common good. We find the Catechism of the Catholic Church continues with this idea of worthy rights. Firstly, and foremost by putting the concerns of the common good on the rights and social conditions which allow the people to reach their fulfillment, emphasizing the individual’s participation and responsibility in and for the common good. The CCC beautifully ties the rights of a person to the common good by presupposing respect for and the wellbeing of the person. Human rights and the common good are strengthened by the social development of a group within a peaceful, secure, and just order.

Next, we might want to look at how the transcendental transitions into the worldly. We might see this as the abstract into the practical, theory into practice, interpretation into application, or subjective into objective. How we view this transition is not as important as getting it right, actually having the worldly model be expressive of the vision. I suggest a few mental steps into the process. Looking at the subjective into the objective can be accomplished by agreeing on a standard by which we can measure and evaluate the clarity of the vision, and the results of the implementation. Considering the human rights brings to mind the personal responsibilities associated with these rights, and in some worldly ways the burdens of the blessings. I offer you this, there is a God Standard we can use which demands we act out of love and humility. Taking ourselves out of the equation and loving as Bishop Baron explains, loving for the sake of others, as other. Also, when asking what I am about to do, will it appeal to everyone’s highest ideals and best intentions? Finally, is the underpinning based on right thinking, in other words, kindness, compassion, empathy, and bringing joyous motivation as in giving with a happy heart? If the answer is yes, to these prerequisites, then I can proceed in confidence that I am beginning to move forward in the right direction.

Another step in this idea of moving from theory into practice might be to consider, what is, what should be and what ought to be? Considering Einstein’s life work was never completed. On his death bed were his notes and equations as he spent his final hours working on the mathematical path from the sub-particle mechanics to the world of physics. I am suggesting we do the same by considering problems such as this have solutions, but mysteries do not. Problems will eventually be solved; mysteries will be experienced. Moving into practice, we will by necessity decide, what is. What are the current conditions, what have our institutions, agencies, government legislations and bureaucracies created or failed to create? We know our vision of a kinder and softer world demands we take the next step, what should be? This is where our clear and critical thinking becomes paramount. Not only are we capturing our vision, we are also considering all the resources available and how these resources will elevate what is, to what can be experienced. We are looking for the best of all worlds, the one we have, the incremental transition steps being taken and the accomplishment of our goals, unfolding before us. Ours is a quest of inflorescence, what the Bible calls fruits of our labor. This is the process of nurturing and cultivating, growth and harvesting in the season of plenty. This is much different than the deliberation of what ought to be. What ought to be is that Utopian idea of pie in the sky; what can be imagined but is beyond reach. What ought to be has no prerequisites, there can be no transition from theory to practice because the vision has no foundation. Granted the vision does incorporate love and harmony, virtues, unity, and every platitude known to man, but it lacks character and energy; it has no substance only a clouded vision of heaven on earth.   

Pope John XXIII laid out our human rights as a pathway to a rich and rewarding life. Considering the human rights in and of themselves are not experiences, they are to be experienced. Virtue is only virtuous because of a worldly experience, something accomplished in our world, perceived as authentic goodness. The idea leads to action, without the action the idea is only a shadowy reflection of what ought to be. The spoken idea is only rhetoric, without the man-made action, the Holy Spirit has no arena. The human rights capture the vision; the worldly event captures the experience.

Our mission becomes the work of the Church, with or without the church, moving from the abstract into the practical. Taking what was once the function of government or what was perceived to be a necessary function and creating a new structure for the common good. The goal being collaboration. Communication to coordination and cooperation, all leading to collaboration. In this way the government can become a recipient rather than the originator. In the light of the Covid-19 pandemic, much has been said about the restructuring of government and the opportunities to make changes for the common good, what the pundits see as a way forward through existing structures and the strengthening of government. What the laity sees as strengthening government as they promote the common good with structures tangent to the normal operations of government. We have all seen these unique entities in ordinary ways, such as, neighborhood watch groups, private and home schooling, nonprofits, rural volunteer fire departments, foundations for charities and church sponsored charities. I will leave structuring and labeling to the sociologists, the political scientists, and economists. Its time to put away the clichés like, human dignity for workers of the world or capitalism not corporatism. Its obvious some platforms make a better starting point than others, again, its not about empire building, its about saving our souls, human rights and promoting the common good.

So, here’s how it worked. As a representative of Catholic Charities, I met in committee with West Palm Beach Food Bank, United Way, other charity groups and some non-profit food providers. Our goal was to establish nutritional requirements for children of different age groups, base line pricing, distribution schemes, and coordination between entities to provide weekend food for kids living in insecure home kitchens. This program is customarily called, “The BackPack Program.” Our program is designed for kids up to the ages of ten to twelve. The school systems provide breakfasts and lunches for children in need, but nothing was being done for their weekend meals. Through the effective administration and fund raising of Catholic Charities, the work of a field liaison, and the volunteers at the Churches, approximately 400,000 meals have been given away over the last six years. The program evolved to a point where there are no prerequisites, reordering and inventories are controlled by distribution logs. Recipients are simply asked to sign a form with the kids name and the adult who is picking up the food. There are no questions asked, just show up and pick up the meals. The program is so popular and successful that the school districts are now directly sub-contracting with the non-profit distributors so the kids can take the food home after Friday’s school day. The program could continue indefinitely as long as there is private funding, on the other hand, this is a case where government did step in to promote the common good based on the work of a unique entity whose sole goal was to further the sanctity of the individual and the promote the common good. Blessings for all of us.