Actually Jesus would be appalled by how many of you so-called social justice warriors commit injustice, as fornicators and adulterers for example

A Catholic joins Pope Francis in misunderstanding "ideology" as single issue voting

One Paul Moses, here in Commonweal:

[Bishop Murphy] thus subordinated many other concerns of Catholic social teaching—and signaled to Catholic voters in the two suburban counties on Long Island to do the same. (Murphy was not available for comment in a phone call to his residence.) It was no small matter, given that Catholics are a majority within the diocese’s borders, that polling shows nearly nine in ten of them say religion is “very important” in their lives, and that many are the sort of moderate suburban voters who swing close elections in New York state.

In his apostolic exhortation Rejoice and be glad, Pope Francis warns against elevating any single social issue, including abortion, above all others. He includes this in a passage that assails two “ideologies striking at the heart of the Gospel.” The first is seen in those who elevate the quest for social justice over faith, over openness to grace. The second is found in those who see social engagement as “superficial, worldly, secular, materialist, communist or populist,” he wrote. “Or they relativize it, as if there are other more important matters, or the only thing that counts is one particular ethical issue or cause that they themselves defend.”

Single issue voting is hardly the same thing as "ideology". That is quite simply a terrible simplification of ideology.

What marks out ideological thinking from mere single issue voting is the overarching, undergirding character of an ideology's flight from reality, indeed, its denial of reality, over against those who accept the features of reality which happen to be the impediments to the ideology's realization.

In the case of abortion, the denial of reality is all on the side of its advocates, not its opponents. Its advocates say that the unborn child isn't a child, merely a fetus. And therefore when one terminates a pregnancy one isn't committing murder. To which the opponents reply, If it isn't really alive why do you have to kill it? The hoops one must jump through to deny the evidence plainly in view are self-evident. It's the abortion advocates who are the ideologues, not the advocates for life.

The case is similar with illegal immigration, the real subject of Paul Moses' advocacy. The ideologues deny the reality and legitimacy of nation states, their borders and the rule of law, and redefine the transgressors of same as "migrants" or "strangers" instead of what they really are, "illegals".

One suspects that this attack on single issue voting as ideology is not just another example of the penchant for projection characteristic of human nature when caught in a fault, but of contemporary liberalism generally. Frustrated with an ever intractable reality, the representatives of reality must be marginalized, maligned and disarmed if the liberal agenda is to have any hope of advancement.

Catholics used to be smarter than to fall for this sort of thing.    

Contra Mark Tooley And Michael Novak, Jesus Wasn't Interested In Alleviating Poverty, Funding Charity And Sustaining Liberty

Mark Tooley, here:

Creating new businesses is a Christian moral imperative, recalling the Savior was Himself a small businessman, and knowing that only business can meaningfully alleviate poverty, fund charity, and sustain liberty. Why aren’t more Christians speaking of business and economic expansion as central to true social justice???

This claim that Jesus was a small businessman stands on the strength of Mark 6:3 alone in the New Testament:

"Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.

But of course Matthew has corrected this narrative at 13:55 of his own gospel:

“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?"

Apart from the fact that I rather doubt that Michael Novak would find a happy audience among his fellow Catholics if he similarly pressed these passages to insist Jesus' brothers and sisters were the progeny of the ever virgin Mary, to insist that Jesus was a small businessman is to miss completely from the gospels his vocation as eschatological prophet and his message of repentance, which required "saying goodbye to everything that one has" according to Luke 14:33. Fisherman are called to drop their nets and follow, in other words leave their jobs behind and become completely dependent on God in order to escape the wrath that is to come. The same for everyone else, rich and poor alike, from miserable tax farmers to princes in soft raiment. All are required to give up their former pursuits and come follow, bringing nothing to the table. Indeed, the more you've got, the more it is likely to hold you back.

Jesus' message is not about alleviating poverty. It's about increasing it. The meaning of Jesus' gospel is to become the poor.

Yes, distribution to others who are poor is required. You can call this funding charity if you wish, but Jesus expected the recipients to give it all away, too, and also come follow so that his movement would give and give and give without producing anything new until the eschaton of God's judgment intervened, which Jesus believed would happen imminently.

In other words, sustainability was the last thing on Jesus' mind.

Actually, liquidation of businesses is the moral imperative of the teaching of Jesus, not creating new businesses, because God's judgment is right around the corner. Well, if you said that today, they'd call you nuts, too.

If there is a stumbling block in the gospel it's this, not the cross of later invention.