Was about to make a online comment about an egregiously one-sided account in Our Sunday Visitor of Catholic social teaching about compulsory unionism —

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case overshadowed another ruling the court issued the same day, one Catholic legal scholars and activists fear might undermine the ability of public-sector unions to collectively bargain.

On June 30, the high court ruled 5-4 that home health care workers in Illinois could not be compelled to pay union dues because that requirement under Illinois state law violated the workers’ free speech rights.

etc. — when I (naturally) checked out already-made comments, which frequently give you a good idea of what an article says, where I found this:

jagnote: This is not a question of collective bargaining and it is certainly not a question of Catholic Social Teaching [but] a question of labor union leaders taking money from people forced to be in a union and then using the money . . . to funnel political donations to the Democratic party.  . . . union members are forced to support the Democratic political party even if they are fundamentally opposed to its positions….for example, abortion, contraception, same-sex marriage, removing God from any mention in the party platform.

Do you want an example of the end game for American public sector unions? I give you Detroit. Collective bargaining might have been necessary in the nineteenth century but today America has been “collective bargained” out of competitive salaries and benefits.

Most of us faithful Catholics are appalled at how the “social teaching” of the Church is continually used to support political positions which are diametrically opposed to the true teachings of Christ. To quote Pope Benedict XVI (Deus Caritas Est, section 28): “. . . Catholic social doctrine . . . has no intention of giving the Church power over the State. . . .  Its aim is . . . to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just.” [I]t is not just to force people to give their hard earned money to support an ideology in which they do not believe.

To which five readers responded, all in support of the first, of which two stand out:

Jim F:  Precisely! The days when James Cardinal Gibbons openly and correctly supported the union movement are long gone. Corporate greed has been replaced (or supplemented) by union greed. Does no one note that “women’s health care” (i.e. abortion) is always on the union agenda? “Activists” are concerned because their ability to compel others to pay for their activism may now be restricted.

Pamela: It’s bad enough that we have to fight progressivism from outside our fold…but seeing it held up and praised as “Catholic social teaching” is an outrage.

To which I added a sixth:

I would have found this article/essay/column far more interesting if it gave even lip service to differences of opinion among Catholic scholars about compulsory unionism as discussed in official Catholic documents.

Michael Novak comes to mind (The Catholic Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, which I have not read) but more to the point Thomas J. DiLorenzo, professor of econ at Loyola College-Maryland, and Thomas E. Woods Jr., author of The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy.

Even one of these could have offered an arresting comment or two. As it is, you have here a sort of catechism piece or pamphlet, nicely done but a trifle lame for all that.

So it goes. Oh, and that article. As I say, comments often tell it all, but you deserve a closer look, right here —

Catholics back unions after court decision Supreme Court rules dues aren’t mandatory; Church has long history of supporting labor rights

OK?