The two bishops of Ohio make some news:
Bishops urge state assembly to raise taxes
Of course, as the article notes, "Ohio, like Michigan, its industrial neighbor to the north, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. The bishops say that now is not the time to cut programs that care for people in need and that the budget is a 'social compact' the state makes with its residents."
One of the reasons that Ohio has such high unemployment, other than the fact that it surrendered it's agriculture-based economy for one based on manufacturing, a sector that has fled overseas in recent decades, is that the tax rate is so high. Currently, Ohio holds the 6th highest tax rate in the nation. While this means some inconvenience for the individual tax payer, it has proved deadly to small businesses [I speak as the former owner of an Ohio-based small business]. Without a viable small business base, an economy loses its effectiveness, resilience, and drive. High unemployment is but one of the problems created in such a circumstance. Lower taxation, and less government waste of tax money, would do much to boost employment within the state.
More to the point, considering that Christianity gained its first hold on the world outside of Jerusalem by serving people's needs in a sort of "social compact", I'm surprised that the bishops didn't seize this as an opportunity to rededicate the human and financial wealth of their respective dioceses in counter-balancing what they perceive will be a loss of government-run social services. After all, Christianity became what it is by serving people in ways that governments cannot. It seems a bit indolent to simply write a theology-free letter that merely promotes the perspective of a secular political ideology.
If, in fact, the church's contemporary role is now to encourage government taxation, perhaps we can surrender the need for stewardship programs. After all, since the Church leaders now feel it is the government's role to fulfill a "social compact" with the people, it would seem to me that the money given to parishes and dioceses would be better utilized both through taxation and voluntary giving to the state. This is especially true since each diocese has been, in recent years, individually counting on approximately 8000 attending worshipers to support an expected plate/pledge income of $16 million annually. Judging from their letter, the state would be better able than the church to utilize that $32 million.
Then again, the bishops could simply willingly surrender the non-tax status of diocesan-owned buildings. Now that would generate some serious income for the state and serve as a true "prophetic" action. Let's see what happens.