Abstract

The author considers the capacity of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) to contribute to the public debate about health care and then remarks on the capacity of CST to assist in the formation of “intentionally Christian institutions.” The author argues for two main points. First, there are some serious obscurities in CST's account of the derivation and interrelation of various rights. Hence, it is not altogether clear what ideal CST is seeking to promote in the public order. Second, the author argues that there is a serious political conflict in CST's commitment to both subsidiarity and the preferential option for the poor. He also claims that it does not follow from these criticisms that CST is useless as a guide for the formation of “intentionally Christian institutions.” Reflection on financing in the light of subsidiarity and the preferential option suggests that there is a need for Christian wealth-producing institutions and schemes of investment that will provide subsidium for healthcare enterprises. In the final portion of the paper, the author sketches out a few dimensions of that sort of vision.