From Episcopal Conferences: Historical, Canonical & Theological Studies,
edited by Thomas J. Reese, S.J. (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1989) For previous chapter and table of contents, see Structures of
Charity: Bishops' Gatherings and the See of Rome in the Early Church and Contents. The European war was over and Americans were beginning to cope with its aftermath when
a meeting of the American hierarchy was called to order on September 24, 1919, in Caldwell
Hall at Catholic University of America. In his first act as presiding officer, Cardinal
James Gibbons of Baltimore appointed a press committee from among his fellow bishops. The
gesture was rich in implications: These proceedings were considered to be of public
importance, and information must therefore be properly managed. The reasons for this
presumed interest lay in the proposal the bishops had come to consider. In annual meetings
since 1884, the archbishops of the United States, a scant dozen in number, had met to
review Catholic church matters in an informal and entirely private manner. Now nearly a
hundred members of the hierarchy met in Caldwell Hall to respond to a plan to create an
organization with the goal of achieving an effective Catholic voice in national affairs. Dubbed "the national idea," the plan was ambitious. It called upon the
bishops to adopt a new structure for mutual deliberation and to develop an agenda for
public leadership. As a result of the war, the public was newly aware of the strength of
the church in American political and social life. Catholic support of the mobilization
effort had left a major impression on American civic leaders, and any sign that this
Catholic show of strength would be extended into peacetime was cause for both interest and
concern. But few Americans, Catholics included, had any idea of the delicate
ecclesiastical issues raised by this proposal. Supporters of the proposal knew very well that the plan constituted an innovation in
ecclesiastical tradition. It called for an annual assembly of American bishops to act as a
consultative body on issues of common concern and social policy, and for a standing
committee or "secretariat" in the nation's capital to execute the decisions of
the assembly of bishops. The advocates of the plan recognized that the proposal could
appear to threaten the traditional independence of each bishop in his own diocese and to
intrude a potentially powerful decision-making body between the individual bishop and
Rome. Nevertheless, they urged the bishops in Caldwell Hall to vote for the "national
idea," describing it to both the hierarchy and the press as a necessary response to
the times. In the next order of business at the September meeting, the assembly elected Denis J.
O'Connell, bishop of Richmond and former rector of the North American College in Rome, as
secretary for the hierarchy. Although his duties were confined to taking the minutes of
the meeting, Bishop O'Connell's election had a larger significance. His ecclesiastical
colleagues were very aware of the role he played in the Americanist controversy of the
1890s. In that divisive period, members of the hierarchy broke into open dispute with one
another over the issues surrounding the Americanization or "inculturation" of
the church. Bishop O'Connell was an outspoken supporter of the Americanist view and had
argued for the positive relationship between the American culture to Catholicism. Now, as
the first officer to be elected by the American hierarchy in modern times, he would record
the discussion of his fellow bishops as they considered the national plan. Bishop O'Connell's minutes show that immediate concern and skepticism were voiced by
bishops as they reviewed the proposal. Bishop Charles McDonnell of Brooklyn, for instance,
felt that the proposed organization conflicted with canon law and threatened to interfere
with the jurisdiction of bishops in their own dioceses. He also privately thought the new
organization was the creation of certain "New York Catholics" interested in
wresting dominance from the Knights of Columbus in the social and civic affairs of the
church. And Cardinal William O'Connell of Boston brushed aside the arguments of supporters
of the proposal, declaring that the church was already "divinely organized" and
needed nothing more than perhaps "an annual meeting to discuss a few leading
questions and pass on them." Bishop Michael Gallagher of Detroit noted that, after
all, the proposed organization "would be only advisory [to the hierarchy] like a
similar committee in Ireland." But the minutes show that backers of the proposal had enough support and political
deftness to win a sympathetic hearing for the proposal, and the National Catholic Welfare
Council (NCWC) was approved by a majority of the bishops.(1)
The NCWC was announced to the press as the national organization of the American bishops,
structured around an annual meeting of the hierarchy and an executive secretariat that
would act as the agent of the hierarchy in the public interests of the church. In 1922 the
name was changed from the National Catholic Welfare Council to the National Catholic
Welfare Conference. A number of organizational initiatives had prepared the way for the 1919 Caldwell Hall
meeting. In 1900, several prominent lay Catholics, and a bishop or two, launched a
movement to federate the large number of independent Catholic societies then in existence.
The goal of the American Federation of Catholic Societies (AFCS) was to increase Catholic
strength in American civic life by uniting the power of Catholic organizations. And in
1910, the National Conference of Catholic Charities (NCCC) was founded to encourage
greater efficiency in Catholic social and civic work. When the United States entered World
War I in 1917, leaders experienced in both of these earlier movements collaborated to form
the immediate predecessor of the NCWC, the National Catholic War Council. A brief review
of these three organizations will set the context for the 1919 meeting of the hierarchy. The aims of the NCCC anticipated those of the NCWC, and many of the same Catholic
leaders figured in both conferences. The NCCC was a voluntary forum for national
consultation on questions pertaining to the reform of society and the delivery of social
services by Catholics. It was created and sustained largely through the vision and
energies of William Kerby, priest and sociologist at Catholic University of America. Kerby
had for many years stressed the importance of organization for Catholics who wished to
respond to the "social question."(2)
Eager to see Catholics develop organizational sophistication in support of their social
welfare activities, he had promoted the creation of a national federation of Catholic
women's organizations for social work in 1908. Called the St. Margaret's Union, its
existence was brief, but its intentions were carried over in the organization of the NCCC.
The NCCC drew under its purview the whole range of social issues, from the problems of
orphans and of single women working in the new industrial and service sectors of the
cities, to the concern to stimulate social research and international contacts in support
of Catholic charitable efforts. Modern charity is organized, Kerby argued, because modern
conditions require it, and modern conditions make new requirements on the church as well.
Meeting biannually until 1920, and then meeting once a year, the conference acted as
national focus for the development of a Catholic social agenda, and pressed Catholics
involved in charitable and social work to adopt the new methods of "scientific
charity" and professional education. Conference meetings were attended by an
ecumenical mix of clergy and laymen, particularly those involved in the activities of the
Society of St. Vincent de Paul. There was also a notable presence of laywomen at the
conference meetings. Both married and single, these women were eagerly seeking training in
the new methods of social work and anxious to make a social contribution as volunteer and
professional workers. The other early organizational initiative that should be considered in reviewing the
formation of the episcopal conference is the American Federation of Catholic Societies
(AFCS). Initiated in 1900 as a means of developing a common social agenda among the large
societies of lay Catholics in the country, the history of the federation bears witness to
the strength of lay Catholicism in the years before World War I. It also offers evidence
of the growing desire of some American bishops to exercise more direct influence on the
activities and resources of these societies. The federation movement, led originally by
lay Catholics from the large societies, sought to unite those ethnically identified
societies in an effort to improve the position of Catholics in American public life. In the years before the war, the inherent difficulties of the federation movement and
growing concerns about the independence of lay organizations voiced by Cardinal William
O'Connell of Boston and Bishop Joseph Schrembs of Toledo, led to the erosion of the civic
basis of the organization and to the end of the organization itself. The National Catholic
War Council took its place in 1917. Historian Alfred J. Ede has concluded that "the
story of its [AFCS] inability to maintain sufficient lay autonomy provides an important
link in the account of the centralization and bureaucratization of the American Church
following World War One."(3) When America entered World War I, the concerns and experience represented by the NCCC
and the AFCS were borrowed and reworked to become the substance of a new organization, the
National Catholic War Council. The architect of the new organization was William Kerby's
friend, the Paulist editor of Catholic World, John J. Burke, C.S.P. Burke, who
had long been interested in creating a national center for American Catholicism. He moved quickly and with evident sophistication to take advantage of the opportunity
offered by wartime conditions.(4) As mobilization proceeded, several interested organizations of Catholics began to
contribute to the American Catholic war effort. The Knights of Columbus entered war work
with great enthusiasm, eager to best the efforts of the YMCA in providing social and
religious support for the American troops. Catholic clergymen became involved in supplying
chaplains for Catholic soldiers, and Catholic women's organizations were eager to outfit
the chaplains and support the soldiers with home comforts. These women also provided
housing, travellers' aid, and general support for the women and girls who began to move
into industry and thus into new social circumstances during the war. Good will and organizational self-interest grew apace as the months passed, and the
combination provided an opportunity for the ambitions of John Burke. After consultation
with William Kerby and Charles Neill, a former U.S. commissioner of labor and another of
Kerby's long-time friends, Burke presented a plan for a national Catholic wartime
organization to Cardinals James Gibbons of Baltimore, William O'Connell of Boston, and
John Farley of New York. After these prelates approved his plans, Burke wrote all dioceses
and national Catholic societies, asking them to send representatives to a meeting at
Catholic University of America in August 1917. There, he urged the 115 delegates to form
the National Catholic War Council. The record of the War Council indicates that Burke was notably successful in his effort
to centralize Catholic war work under the control of his organization. He arranged in
particular to place the Knights of Columbus in a subordinate relationship to the War
Council, and he convinced the U.S. War Department to regard the council and its
administrative Committee on Special War Activities as the official agency of the church
for war work.(5) His success in creating a single national organization for the direction of Catholic
war work was complemented by his ability to raise funds for a war chest and to lobby for
Catholic causes. He was able to arrange an increase in the supply of Catholic military
chaplains, for instance, and to gain draft exemptions for divinity students. He also
established a training school to prepare Catholic women for war work in the cantonments
and in Europe. His attention to the energies and potential of Catholic women was well
rewarded, for they provided him with the work force for his organization's war and
reconstruction activities. His talent is further apparent in the manner in which he took advantage of concerns
about the moral atmosphere surrounding the training and deployment of troops to organize
an interdenominational committee of prominent clergymen, which he called the Committee of
Six. This committee was quickly granted advisory status by the War Department. As chairman
of the committee, Burke was able to make it his vehicle for representing Catholic
interests to the War Department. The chairmanship provided Burke the basis for cultivating
important public contacts and for claiming the role of government insider in dealing with
other Catholic leaders.(6) The picture of Burke's political and ecclesiastical finesse is rounded out by noting
his ability to gain episcopal approval for his organizational initiatives. He wanted to be
able to claim the sanction of the American hierarchy for his War Council, and he saw to it
that sympathetic bishops were appointed as the Administrative Committee for the council.
As there were no existing corporate procedures for arranging those appointments, Burke
turned again to Cardinal Gibbons as the ranking member of the hierarchy. He urged Cardinal
Gibbons to ask the American archbishops to assume formal control of the activities of the
new War Council and to appoint four bishops to assume responsibility for the ongoing
oversight of War Council activities. These included two bishops who had been prominently
active in the AFCS, namely Peter Muldoon of Rockford and Joseph Schrembs of Toledo. The
support of these two prelates for the goals of national organization and their efforts to
preserve the gains made during the war are evident in the account of the transition to the
National Catholic Welfare Council after the Armistice.(7)
Following the conclusion of hostilities in 1918, the leadership of the War Council
endeavored to build support for the continuation of the national organization. Bishop
Muldoon's postwar administrative report to the archbishops argued that "the general
impression among both priests and people is that the National War Council should continue
to care for the interests of the Church." And John Burke issued a strongly worded
memorandum on the necessity of a permanent organization to protect Catholic interests. He
rejected an alternate proposal for informal meetings of the hierarchy and argued that the
welfare of the church would suffer "irreparable damage" unless some provision
was made for "a national committee with headquarters in Washington constantly at
work."(8) Supporters of national organization recognized the opportunity presented by the
celebration in February 1919, of the golden jubilee of Cardinal Gibbons. On that occasion,
a committee of three archbishops and four bishops responded to a papal message calling on
Catholics of the United States to "unite in their efforts for the spread of justice
and charity among all the peoples of the world" by recommending both an annual
meeting of the hierarchy and a committee of bishops to plan a further response. They asked
Cardinal Gibbons to name that committee of bishops; and he complied, naming three of the
bishops of the Administrative Committee of the War Council. These bishops carried through
the spring and summer of 1919 as the Committee on General Catholic Interests and Affairs
and set the agenda for the 1919 meeting of the hierarchy. When the bishops assembled at Catholic University of America in September and approved
plans for national organization, they also elected the same War Council bishops to act as
their administrators with power to "pass in their name on all questions arising
during the year between the meetings of the Hierarchy." Those administrator-bishops
then named John Burke to be general secretary of the organization and "personal
representative of the Chairman of the Administrative Committee." Burke and his staff
eagerly returned to the Washington offices of the War Council at 1312 Massachusetts
Avenue, which had been purchased and financed with funds collected during the New York
Catholic War Work campaign, and completed the transition from War Council to Welfare
Council. The daily activities of the Washington office resembled those of other interest groups.
The NCWC acted as an information clearing house, issued pamphlets on social and
educational issues, attended congressional hearings, maintained a news service for its
constituents, worked to increase the number of its lay affiliates, and formed associations
with other national and international organizations. But to achieve its goals, the NCWC
had to depend on more than Washington contacts and political sophistication. It also had
to win the ongoing support of the hierarchy it existed to serve. The Washington
leadership, therefore, spent a great deal of time trying to foster the "cordial
association" of the diocesan ordinaries in the national concerns of the NCWC. NCWC
leaders could not afford to have voices of episcopal dissent raised against their
organization. They needed financing from the dioceses and the cooperation of local
ordinaries in efforts to organize diocesan affiliates of the national council. Toward these ends and to quiet the suspicions of those who thought the "national
idea" would interfere with local episcopal autonomy, the leadership of the council
consistently and emphatically presented the NCWC as a voluntary organization. Attendance
at the annual meetings of the hierarchy remained voluntary, and there was regular
reiteration of the fact that the decisions of the bishops who did attend had no formal
canonical status. The original choice of "council" rather than
"conference" in the title of the NCWC reflected the desire of the leadership to
avoid the appearance of creating a competitor to challenge existing Catholic diocesan and
lay organizations. They wanted both the bishops and the laity to see the NCWC as an
opportunity to "take council" with one another, and did not intend
"council" to be understood in canonical terms.(9)
Most bishops came to recognize the importance of establishing episcopal oversight in the
development of "the national idea" and responded with some degree of active or
tacit approval, as is evident from the fact that eighty percent of the bishops signed a
statement to Rome supporting the council in 1922.(10)
The Washington leadership remained the primary agent in developing the agenda of the
organization. Episcopal participation remained rather selective through the period until
Vatican II, and, after the death of John Burke in 1936, effective control of the NCWC
passed into the hands of only a few members of the hierarchy. The diocesan bishops of
Toledo, Columbus, Cleveland, Detroit, and finally New York dominated the leadership
positions throughout the thirty-year period from Burke's death to reorganization of the
conference as the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) in 1966. The early leadership of the council was an interesting group that included the
episcopal champions of national organization and clergy trained in the new social
sciences. Bishops Peter Muldoon and Joseph Schrembs had both been active in the American
Federation of Catholic Societies. Priest-participants in the NCWC included sociologist
William Kerby of the NCCC, anthropologist John Montgomery Cooper, and moral theologian
John A. Ryan. All three were faculty members at Catholic University of America and were
involved beyond the academy in a variety of social causes. The initiative also won initial
support from laymen with business or professional backgrounds and War Council experience.
These included Charles Neill, a former U.S. Commissioner of Labor, John Lapp, lawyer and
civic organizer, and Michael Slattery, president of the Young Men's Catholic Union. A great many laywomen with social service experience and reform concerns also supported
the initiative to create a national organization after World War I, and they ultimately
provided the work force for most of the activities of the NCWC, as they had for the War
Council. Leaders among the women included: Agnes Regan, longtime school board member from
San Francisco and executive secretary for twenty years of the women's affiliate of the
council, the National Council of Catholic Women (NCCW); Gertrude Hill Gavin, daughter of
railroad magnate James Hill and first president of the NCCW; educational psychologist Anne
Nicholson, who served as field director of the National Catholic School of Social Service
and field representative for the NCCW; and civic and labor organizers Linna Bressette and
Rose McHugh, both of whom were active on behalf of the NCWC, working most often for the
Department of Social Action. These leaders, both male and female, cleric and lay, agreed that the social philosophy
of the church and charitable activities of Catholics lacked efficiency and public impact.
In addition, their wartime experience convinced them that it was necessary to exercise
specific forms of political influence in order to make Catholic strength effectively
present in the American public policy process. John Burke's description of the methods of
interest-group politics expressed both his concerns about the potential damage such
practices might do to the American political process, and his determination to adopt such
of those practices as were ethical in order to improve the ability of the church to enter
into that process. He described the techniques of lobbying, constituency-building,
influence peddling, and manipulation of public opinion, and pointed out that the special
interests had learned to solicit endorsements from well-known individuals who knew little
of the real significance of the proposed legislation. These testimonials, he suggested,
impressed senators and congressmen who were voting on the measures. The interests further
magnified the volume of public opinion in support of their causes through the adroit
manipulation of the press, concerted letter-writing campaigns, and personal appearances.
"When the matter is actually presented in the halls of Congress they who are back of
it have the big advantage of position, of initiative, of planned campaign."(11) Burke argued that Catholics must be able to provide capable and ready representation in
Washington to combat such efforts and "to preserve our own fundamental religious
rights and contribute our preeminent share to the legislation that will shape and control
the destiny of our country." Thus, for example, the charge to the NCWC's Department
of Laws and Legislation included keeping current on proposed legislation, judging whether
legislation was "favorable or inimical to [church] interests," funneling
information on legislative proposals to Catholic organizations at the state and local
level, and counseling those organizations in their efforts to support or oppose
legislative initiatives. The Washington leadership was quite aware that these practices would draw charges that
the church was "in politics," and they took pains to draw a formal distinction
between their activities and those of the other interests. They considered themselves to
be pursing legitimate "policy" initiatives rather than narrowly self-interested
"political" activities. Bishop Edmund Gibbons of Albany, an early member of the
Administrative Committee of bishops, carefully insisted that the NCWC representatives were
not "lobbyists" or "backroom politicians." They "come out openly
and boldly into the light of day to invite an inspection of their motives and
methods" and "clearly proclaim Catholic needs, Catholic principles, Catholic
rights, and Catholic objections to measures that may be pending before the National
Congress."(12) NCWC leaders continued
to emphasize that difference even though they also yielded to the temptation to boast of
their own political skills and to contrast them with those of the Federal Council of
Churches and the YMCA. When the bishops assembled again at Catholic University of America in September 1920,
to review the results of the first year's activities of the NCWC, their discussions relied
heavily on the rhetoric of interest and defense. Archbishop Edward Hanna of San Francisco,
in his report as chairman of the Administrative Committee, emphasized the role of the NCWC
in defending Catholic interests, and argued that whatever our strength may be, if it is scattered, dissipated, unable to summon its
entire self, it will be weak and helpless before the trained, organized, watchful enemy.
It is not too much to say that the vigorous, progressive life of the Church depends upon
our ability to meet and defeat such opposition with a united Catholic body, with
representatives ever on the watch; a united Catholic body ready to act whenever necessary.(13) The protection of "Catholic interests" quickly became a staple of NCWC
self-understanding and was the key element in the successful defense of the organization
against a threat of Vatican suppression in 1922. When the bishops of the Administrative
Committee sent the Vatican an apologia for their organization, they echoed Archbishop
Hanna's remarks, recalling that the Welfare Council grew out of a great fear and a great hope: the fear that hostile
forces or organizations would make a successful attack upon Catholic interests,
particularly our schools: the hope that the bishops, by fraternal union, would be able not
only to protect Catholic interests, but to advance them, for the sake of religion and of
our country.(14) In the early years of the council, however, the rhetoric of defense was always
accompanied by a strong positive regard for America and a conviction that the best
interests of the church and the culture went hand in hand. To communicate this positive
regard, NCWC leaders relied on another kind of rhetoric with roots in the new theology of
the Mystical Body. In this usage, the Catholic "body" would flourish in the
American environment, drawing nourishment from its surroundings even as it defended itself
against attack. By maintaining a distinctive and strong identity of its own, the Catholic
body would also form the heart and sinews of the American "body," providing it
with strength, discipline, and vision. Indeed, in emphasizing the intimacy of the
connection, NCWC rhetoric often blurred the distinction between Catholic and American
bodies. "No part of the body may say it is independent of the health of the body
itself," according to a council statement in 1920, and "every part is
necessarily affected for good or ill by the good or poor health of the body." The
national interests of the church thus bore a strong positive correlation to the best
interests of the nation in the minds of the original leadership.(15) John Burke was particularly attracted to the theology of the Mystical Body and used it
to express his understanding of the American church and to provide a rationale for the
NCWC.(16) He presented the council as an
organic expression of the American church, aiding the church to grow and develop in its
new environment. He also relied heavily on Mystical Body language to explain innovations
within the organization itself, as for example, his decision to employ laywomen as the
backbone of his organizational work force. In a memorable instance, when Burke needed a
code for communicating with his agent William Montavon about diplomatic initiatives in
Mexico, he made the following cryptic assignments: the Holy See was the "head,"
the American bishops the "hand," and Burke himself the "heart" of the
body. More conventionally, however, he assigned the role of the head to "the
hierarchy." But the hierarchy's headship was exercised by the bishops' Administrative Committee and
the Washington leadership.(17) The vision
of a publicly active church with a positive contribution to make to the culture belonged
particularly to Burke and his colleagues in Washington. They were proposing, in effect, a
new American ecclesiology, using the figure of the Mystical Body to portray the church in
the United States as a living organism, thriving on a blend of Roman and American
nutrients, and being directed by the NCWC to make a positive contribution to American
life. These intentions can be highlighted by noting that NCWC leaders deliberately chose the
term "welfare" in their organizational title to announce their concern for the
health of both the church and the nation. "Welfare" was used to speak not only
of church interests in political terms but to address the need for greater organization
and rationalization of Catholic resources for public service. NCWC leaders intended to
offer institutional support to the initiatives of the National Conference of Catholic
Charities. They hoped to become instrumental in the efforts and to introduce the methods
of "scientific charity" into Catholic charitable work and to develop a
programmatic approach to issues of social justice and charity.(18) Therefore, they borrowed the term
"welfare" from the emerging profession of social work and adapted it to embrace
a broad range of public concerns, including child welfare and education, industrial
relations, immigration, and housing, as well as the new interest in social case work. Seeking a positive public role in American life, the NCWC framed its program in the
terms provided by the developing tradition of Catholic social teaching. That tradition,
and the NCWC expressions of it, depended on a particular understanding of the role of the
family in social life. The substance of the idea in Catholic social teaching was clear and
comprehensive. The family was viewed as the basic social unit, and it mediated between the
individual and the state. In its ideal form, it behaved in response to a growing body of
church teachings which defined the roles and responsibilities of family members and
reinforced the obedience of parents to church directives. The ideal family also
represented a bulwark against socialism and secularism, and, in its American version, was
regarded as a means of improving the economic circumstances and encouraging upward
mobility among members of the working class. NCWC leaders saw the family acting as the
bridge between immigrants and other Americans, even while it provided common ground among
the various groups of ethnic Catholics. They based their social program on this idea of
the family, and consistently championed causes that promoted the family in American life.(19) This view of family depended heavily on the role assigned to women, and it therefore
included very explicit prescriptions for the behavior of women as wives, mothers, and
church members. Any threat to this connection seemed to place the modern social teaching
of the church and the program of the NCWC in jeopardy, and NCWC leaders therefore devoted
a great deal of time to "the woman question." In their 1922 report to the
Vatican, the bishops of the Administrative Committee voiced their concern that women were
being malignly influenced by new ideologies and cultural practices. They drew Vatican
attention to "the feminist movement" and to "women's societies [that] are
in many cases the most active propagandists of evil." The Nineteenth Amendment was
passed in 1919 and ratified in 1920, and the report suggested that "the granting of
the franchise to women has made many of them aggressive, and their new power has excited
many and led them to adopt the most radical ideas."(20)
The growing use of contraceptives by American women particularly worried the NCWC
leadership, who saw it as a major challenge to their view of the family and thus to their
social program. The 1922 report to Rome concluded that "if the effort of the Birth
Control propagandists is successful, it will mean the degradation of the moral life of the
entire social body." The bishops of the Administrative Committee portrayed the NCWC
as a lonely defender of the society, insisting that "the power that has saved it [the
social body] so far from such degradation is the National Catholic Welfare Council. That
is the only strong organized power fighting this propaganda today."(21) Reproductive issues have, of course, remained a key element in the identity and social
program of the episcopal conference. The current efforts to pursue a "consistent
ethic of life," in the social teaching and policy initiatives of the bishops'
conference, originated in response to reproductive issues, although abortion has replaced
contraception as the chief concern. It is noteworthy that already in the 1920s, Catholic
leaders knew that the "propaganda of Birth Control" was reaching the Catholic
population, and they began to voice private concerns about the use of contraceptives by
Catholics, even as they publicly stepped up their opposition to the practice. In a
memorandum to the apostolic delegate in 1927, anthropologist John M. Cooper of The
Catholic University of America acknowledged that "it is generally recognized by the
Catholic clergy, and by Catholic and non-Catholic lay students of the problem, that
contraceptive practices are very widespread among our Catholics in the United
States." Cooper estimated that "perhaps up to 75% or at least 50% among the
well-to-do and educated" used contraception, although the numbers decreased among the
foreign-born Catholics and the working class. He informed the delegate that "we are
destined almost inevitably to see a great increase in the prevalence of the practice among
Catholics in this country within the next generation."(22)
The leadership of the council linked the social teaching on the family and the
associated concerns about reproductive issues and women to a range of other NCWC agendas,
including the promotion of Catholic parochial education, and the council's efforts to
control and direct the new cultural forces of film and radio. Meanwhile, the ideal of the
family, in which a woman worked at home raising children while the husband earned an
adequate salary, was the basic premise of John A. Ryan's "living wage" proposals
and of the NCWC's support of the proposed child labor amendment. John O'Hara's rural life
program was developed around the rural family, and the National Council of Catholic Women
devoted itself to promoting the NCWC's family-related programs. "Family" was the
touchstone for the legislative activities of the NCWC and the basis of its efforts to
enter the church into the formation of American public policy on behalf of justice and
charity. The NCWC continued to give programmatic attention to policy issues in the areas of
housing, employment, co-operative ownership of industry, minimum wage, immigration, and
peace, especially through the efforts of Raymond McGowan and Linna Bressette of the NCWC's
Department of Social Action. But these initiatives were consistently overshadowed by the
challenge to the family posed by birth control, the film industry, and the perceived
threats to parochial schools. As a result of the demand made by these issues on NCWC
attention and resources, and because of the ease with which these issues assumed priority
in light of the family argument, the NCWC failed to sustain strong initiatives in other
areas of social concern.(23) John A. Ryan criticized the NCWC for its lack of success in shaping public policy on
social justice issues as early as 1921, but he attributed much of the blame for the
failure to the reactions of Catholic businessmen. "A few years ago, if someone had
suggested to me that I should one day be in charge of a department on industrial relations
[the NCWC's Department of Social Action] under the direction and with the support of the
Hierarchy of the United States, I would have declared that it was an idle dream," he
observed. "Now that I have been in that position for about a year and a half, I do
not know that it is the beautiful situation that I had expected it to be." He judged
many of the laity to be either ignorant or indifferent. "We reached up into the
cloudland of Catholic social principles and pulled one down and set it going [in the open
shop campaign]," he reported, only to find that "our social principles are not
recognized by large sections of our own people, and when attempt is made to apply these
principles to actual conditions, the expression of them is given the lie by the practice
of powerful laymen."(24) Many of those same "powerful laymen" who opposed the NCWC on economic and
labor issues also repeatedly resisted calls to affiliate with the work of the council, and
their absence left a vacuum that was largely filled by the clergy. The Catholic laity
remained a missing or mismanaged ingredient in the development of the NCWC. John Burke
warned explicitly against this outcome. In his 1919 memorandum urging the formation of the
council, Burke insisted that the hierarchy "must not give the impression that it is
assuming leadership in all activities nor inspiring all" and added that it would be
"disastrous" to do so. "The laity must understand that they have both the
pleasure and the responsibility of the heat of the day." And the 1922 report of the
Administrative Committee to the Vatican argued that "in a democracy it is impossible
to have power without the cordial cooperation of the laity," and suggested that
Catholic lay societies "formed a channel through which Catholic influence could be
brought to bear in the lobbying efforts of the Council." NCWC leaders and field workers worked very hard in the early years of the council to
win the support of the large societies of lay Catholics, urging them to accommodate
themselves to the parish and diocesan organizational models prescribed by the NCWC. But
this plan to make the powerful organizations of lay Catholics redistribute their influence
through parish and diocesan channels reflected long-standing episcopal fears of lay
independence. It clearly signaled the hierarchy's intention to exercise greater control
over lay initiatives. The 1922 report to Rome noted that "there is a danger that
ecclesiastical authority may not be duly regarded or consulted [by Catholic societies]. .
. . Clerical control or direction is not always welcome. We have felt therefore, that
there is need of the Hierarchy taking a more active interest in Catholic societies."(25) Thus, in spite of the efforts of Washington and the support of many of the bishops, the
lay organizations of men continued to resist "the national idea" under NCWC
leadership. The Knights of Columbus, to cite only the most prominent example, had been at
odds with War Council leadership during the war and continued to refuse to affiliate its
large membership with the NCWC. The continued weakness of the men's affiliate, the
National Council of Catholic Men, deprived the council of the financial and professional
support of active laity, and is an example of the passivity that developed toward the NCWC
after the initial period of independent leadership and enthusiasm.(26) Besides being unsuccessful in attracting the support of organizations of Catholic
laymen, the NCWC was unable to overcome the racism of its own constituency in order to
incorporate the energies and good will of black Catholics into its program. The most
obvious example of that failure is available in the account of a group of black Catholics
led by Thomas Wyatt Turner. Turner organized his group for the express purposes of
opposing racism in American Catholicism and furthering the participation of black
Catholics in the church. Initially calling themselves the "Committee against the
Extension of Race Prejudice in the Church" (1917) and then the "Committee for
the Advancement of Colored Catholics" (1919), Turner and his supporters eventually
formed the Federated Colored Catholics in the United States (1924) and met annually until
1932. These Catholics consistently sought to establish some connection with the NCWC in
order to advance its causes and strengthen its own organization, but the NCWC was
completely unresponsive, and the black leadership was given to understand that the time
was inopportune.(27) In the case of white Catholic women, however, the record is distinctly different. The
NCWC sought the support of women and received a dedicated response from both individuals
and organizations. Incorporated as the National Council of Catholic Women (NCCW), they
successfully organized diocesan councils, created an international network of Catholic
women, and enlisted thousands of women in support of council initiatives. NCCW members
also acted as the paid field organizers of the Social Action Department (SAD) and
travelled extensively on behalf of its initiatives and causes. The major commitment of the NCCW was to finance and conduct their own school of social
work, the National Catholic School of Social Service. This initiative endured in the face
of great financial and organizational difficulties, sustained by the conviction of women
like Agnes Regan, who acted in leadership capacities in both the NCCW and the NCSSS until
her death in 1943. The women who attended the school located on 19th Street in Washington
studied the new social sciences, received instruction in social work methods, and listened
to lectures on Catholic social thought and moral theology from priest-activists like John
A. Ryan, William Kerby, and Raymond McGowan. They completed a two-year graduate program
and went on to employment with diocesan Catholic charities and to secular social work
positions. Their schooling and professional contributions figured prominently in the
larger agenda of the "national idea." The NCWC also intended to open a school for men. But the tepid response from the male
lay societies made such an initiative impossible. Eventually, John O'Grady, who was
Kerby's student and his successor as secretary of the NCCC, opened a school of social work
for men at Catholic University. His primary goal in that initiative was not to train lay
Catholic men in social work, but to train priests to become directors of diocesan Catholic
charities. O'Grady acted as the first dean of the school, but did not survive long in the
office. The school was not solidly established until it absorbed the students and
resources of the women's school after the death of Regan.(28)
In the meantime, the NCWC continued to form the agenda for the women being trained at
the NCSSS. The 1922 report of the bishops of the Administrative Committee to Rome
emphasized the importance of social work and social workers and underlined the NCWC's role
in founding the school for women. The bishops noted that the American Catholic church was
not "nearly as well equipped for this work as our non-Catholic fellow-workers,"
and then using the rhetoric of defense, they went on to explain to the Vatican that they
sought to obtain workers from the NCSSS "to counteract the influence of social
centres which have become centres of radical propaganda or of Protestant proselytism, and
thus have seduced many from the Faith."(29)
The bishops drew a close connection between the work of these professional women and the
interests of the American church, and although their assignment was couched in very
defensive terms, women workers were clearly becoming an important part of the program of
the NCWC. Through its school of social work, the NCCW was providing a new professional
woman for the American church. Perhaps because of the importance of the women's council to the goals of the NCWC, the
parent organization persistently cautioned against NCCW independence and urged the
subordination of women to episcopal authority. The desire to retain control of the NCCW
was evident in the initial insistence of the bishops of the Administrative Committee that
NCCW must organize itself along diocesan lines rather than by affiliation with independent
national societies of Catholic women, such as the Daughters of Isabella or the Christ
Child Society. There was a good deal of reaction to this plan, and the reaction eventually
forced the bishops to compromise and permit affiliation through the societies as well as
through the diocese. But the episcopal fears of NCCW independence persisted. An admonition
of Bishop Joseph Schrembs provides an example of the episcopal style. Bishop Schrembs was the bishop administrator of the NCWC's Department of Lay
Organizations and had oversight of the NCCW in the 1920s. He addressed the yearly
conventions of the NCCW and stressed on each occasion the importance of obedience.
"Don't imagine for one minute," he told 800 delegates in 1921, "that you
can pull away and go out on your own personal responsibility, loose from the leaders of
the church." That action, he added, would constitute "one of the most damnable
heresies of the present day."(30) The
bishop then went on to urge the women to commit their organization in opposition to the
Equal Rights Amendment and to the campaign for birth control, and they did so. The
subsequent record of the National Council of Catholic Women demonstrates that the
contributions of women were central to the goals of the NCWC. Women had come out to work
for the church and for the "national idea" after World War I. As the vision of
the public work of national Catholic organization was translated into specific programs,
the presence of women was clearly welcomed, and their energies and talents were carefully
controlled and channeled to support the family foundation of that public work.(31) Although their original leaders saw them as necessary partners in "the national
idea," the National Conference of Catholic Charities remained quite distant from the
NCWC and, under the leadership of John O'Grady, the national charities organization seemed
committed to maintaining a separate organizational identity. But the diocesan charities
that formed the NCCC experienced a development parallel to that of the NCWC, and became
committed to a similar "family" approach to modern social questions and to
public policy issues. Under the impact of the development of co-operative fund-raising for
charities in the 1920s, state welfare in the 1930s, and the evolution of the profession of
social work away from social reform and toward casework and psychiatric models, Catholic
charities became increasingly devoted to the practice of family casework and eager to
incorporate the family argument of modern Catholic social teaching. They also became
centralized under diocesan control and developed a characteristic organizational structure
in which professionally trained women constituted the vast majority of case workers and
supervisors, while clergy acted as executive officers of the increasingly powerful
diocesan charity organizations. The NCCC did not join the NCWC's efforts to shape national
policy, nor did it succeed in establishing a substantial position on its own in public
policy decisions, in spite of several efforts by John O'Grady to represent social justice
issues in Congress.(32) In the meantime, "the national idea" remained alive in the NCWC, but in a
much transformed manner. The organization survived an attempt on the part of its opponents
in 1922 to have it suppressed by the Vatican, but it seemed to lose the original vision of
an organization in which the church--laity, clergy, and bishops--could together make a
positive contribution to American public life. The change of the title of the organization
at the behest of the Vatican in the 1922 from "Council" to
"Conference" seems in retrospect to have marked the eclipse of that original
animating spirit and to announce instead the mood of defensiveness that became
characteristic of the work of the conference. The leadership of the conference did become Washington insiders. And the NCWC did come
to be perceived by politicians and other national interest groups as the "voice"
of American Catholicism, as it continued to act as the liaison between the church and the
White House and Capitol Hill. But the conference leadership grew increasingly suspicious
of modern America, and lost its desire to mobilize a positive Catholic contribution to the
public life. Instead, the NCWC spent its dollars and time defending Catholic interests,
urging Catholics to keep a distance from culture, and concentrating on the management of
its own internal organization. Neither Burke's public theology of the Mystical Body nor
the later Catholic Action initiatives of the bishops were able to overcome this growing
sense of cultural suspicion and internal preoccupation. In spite of the loss of the original vision, however, "the national idea" did
provide the necessary inducement to persuade a majority of the members of the American
hierarchy to accept a national episcopal organization and to acknowledge a public role for
the church. The history of that conference since its reorganization in 1966 suggests,
furthermore, that the goal of making the church a positive presence in American public
life in support of justice and charity has been reanimated. These reflections on the NCWC
are therefore intended as a context for the current discussions of Catholic social
teaching and the public policy role of the church. The focal issues which have emerged
from these discussions have important parallels in the history of the NCWC. These issues
include: the exercise of joint episcopal authority; the relationship of the teaching of
principles to the practice of policy formation; the developing roles of professionals and
citizens, men and women, in the public work of the church; the relationship of justice to
charity and of politics to spirituality in Catholic tradition; and the role of family and
of reproductive issues in Catholic social teaching and practice. In light of the parallels thus suggested between the NCWC and the NCCB, and with a
large sense of the scholarly work yet to be done to develop those parallels, a preliminary
conclusion might be stated as follows: Just as efforts to develop the "national
idea" led to the creation of the episcopal conference in the United States and
encouraged Catholic concern for the public good, so the current activities of the
conference may serve both to refine the process of decision making in the American church
and to enhance the ability of Catholic Christians to make a positive contribution to
American public life. If so, the lessons gained from the history of the NCWC should prove
to be very useful. 1. "Minutes of the First Annual Meeting of the American
Hierarchy," September 24-25, 1919. NCWC Papers, Archives of the Catholic University
of America (ACUA). (The first day ended with a more mundane matter: "At this time
there was a discussion, participated in by Archbishop Glennon and Bishop Curley, in regard
to raising the offering for low masses to $2.00. Bishop Donahue moved, seconded by Bishop
Schrembs, that the stipend be as it is at present, $1.00. Carried.") 2. Details of Kerby's involvement in both the National Conference of
Catholic Charities and the National Catholic Welfare Conference are available in Timothy
Michael Dolan, "Prophet of a Better Hope: The Life and Work of Monsignor William
Joseph Kerby" (Master's thesis, Catholic University of America, 1981). 3. Alfred J. Ede, The Lay Crusade for a Christian America: A
Study of the American Federation of Catholic Societies, 1900-1919 (New York: Garland,
1988), 379. Ede also concludes that "The National Catholic Welfare Council would
speak with greater authority. . . . The American Church would operate with greater
efficiency through the new agency, but such centralization came at the cost of the kind of
grass roots organization and lay leadership that the Federation had struggled to attain,
but which in the end it was unable to adequately provide." 4. John Burke's biographer John B. Sheerin, C.S.P., notes that many
of Burke's associates were aware of his prior interests in national organization. His
secretary Helen Lynch indicated that she had "often seen him working on a plan in his
office years before [the war.]" And Loretta Lawlor, a graduate of the National
Catholic School of Social Service, wrote that Burke had "occupied himself with a
scheme of organization for some sort of ecclesiastical agency through which Catholic
action might be provided. . . . The thinking behind it became part of himself." Burke
himself later said that "the NCWC was not thought out by me: it was given to me. From
the beginning it was like a self-evident proposition." John B. Sheerin, C.S.P., Never
Look Back: the Career and Concerns of John J. Burke (New York: Paulist Press, 1975),
38-40. 5. Knights of Columbus historian Christopher J. Kauffman provides an
account of the relationship between Burke's NCWC and the KC during the war. Kauffman
stresses the role of the "Wall Street Catholics"--influential New York Catholic
laymen who supported Burke's initiatives and opposed the claims of the Knights to a place
of priority in war work. Kauffman suggests that the intervention of Bishop Muldoon as a
member of the NCWC's Administrative Committee brought peace between "the Wall Street
Catholics" and the Knights. Because Burke sought to create just this sort of
episcopal oversight, Kauffman's conclusion underscores the sophistication with which Burke
was able to pursue his goals. Christopher J. Kauffman, Faith and Fraternalism: the
History of the Knights of Columbus, 1882-1982 (New York: Harper & Row, 1982). 6. The other members of the committee were John R. Mott of the YMCA,
Episcopal Bishop James DeWolf Perry, Robert E. Speer and William Adams Brown of the
Federal Council of Churches, and Colonel Harry Cutler of the Jewish Welfare Board. The War
Department's Commission on Training Camp Activities under the leadership of Raymond
Fosdick quickly granted official advisory status to the Committee of Six. 7. For fuller treatment of these events see my account of the
history of the War Council in Elizabeth McKeown, War and Welfare: American Catholics
and World War I (New York: Garland Press, 1988). 8. John J. Burke, C.S.P., "Memorandum on the Necessity of a
Permanent National Committee with Headquarters at Washington for the Study, Advancement,
Protection and Promotion of Catholic Needs and Catholic Interests," July, 1919, NCWC
Papers, Archives of the United States Catholic Conference, Washington, DC. 9. Administrative Committee member Bishop Edmund Gibbons offered
this 1920 account of that important distinction: I might remark in passing that the selection of that word "Council" was not
haphazard. The Bishops regarded themselves not exactly as a new organization. They were
already an organization. They were the representatives of the greatest organization in the
world, an organization after which any merely human organization might well pattern;
namely, the Catholic Church. There was no need of an organization, strictly so-called, but
rather that the representatives of that organization and the members of that organization
already existing should come together in common council, unite their efforts and forces
for the general welfare. So they denominated this body a "Council," the National
Catholic Welfare Council. Edmund Gibbons, "How the Hierarchy Aids the Nation through the Welfare Council:
Address to the Albany Diocesan Council of Catholic Men," The National Catholic
Welfare Council Bulletin 2 (October 1920): 15. 10. Details of the threatened suppression of the NCWC in 1922 and
an account of the defense made to the Vatican by council leaders are available in
Elizabeth McKeown, "Apologia for an American Catholicism," Church History
43 (December 1974): 514-28. 11. John Burke, "With Our Readers," Catholic World
111 (May 1920): 279-87. 12. Gibbons, "How Hierarchy Aids the Nation," 16. 13. "Important Functions of the N.C.W.C. Executive
Department," The National Catholic Welfare Council Bulletin 2 (October
1920): 10. 14. "Report to His Holiness Pope Pius XI on the Work of the
Administrative Committee of the National Catholic Welfare Council," April 25, 1922,
p. 8, NCWC Papers, Chairman's File, ACUA. 15. See, for example, "Bishops Bring United Counsel to
Problems of National Importance," The National Catholic Welfare Bulletin 2
(October 1920): 1. 16. John Sheerin notes that "among Burke's literary and
theological works were several translations from the French, notably The Doctrine of
the Mystical Body of Christ by J. Anger [New York: Benziger Books, 1931]. The
doctrine of the Mystical Body runs like a golden thread through all his [Burke's]
spiritual writings." Sheerin, Never Look Back, 34-35. 17. Sheerin, Never Look Back, 28. 18. William Kerby's reflection on the NCWC amplifies these points: William Kerby, The Social Mission of Charity (Washington, DC: NCWC, 1920),
165. 19. This view of the social program of the episcopal conference is
developed at length in Elizabeth McKeown, "The Seamless Garment: The Bishops' Letter
in the Light of the American Catholic Pastoral Tradition," in The Deeper Meaning
of the Economic Life: Critical Essays on the U.S. Catholic Bishops' Pastoral Letter on the
Economy, ed. Bruce Douglass (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1986). 20. "Report to His Holiness," 25. 21. "Report to His Holiness," 26-27. 22. John B. Cooper, "Memorandum on Prevalence of Contraception
among Catholics of the United States," and cover letter to George Leech, secretary to
the apostolic delegation, February 1, 1927, John B. Cooper Papers, Box #36, ACUA. 23. Joseph McShane has recently argued that the publication of John
A. Ryan's "Program of Social Reconstruction" in 1919 marked the beginning of a
new tradition of social liberalism on the part of the American bishops. The argument being
developed in this paper suggests that the letter was issued in some haste by the post-war
group of Washington leaders in an attempt to establish a social policy for the American
church, and that the ideology of the family that provided the foundation of NCWC practice
was not adequate to sustain a "progressive" social program in the NCWC. See
Joseph McShane, Sufficiently Radical: Catholicism, Progressivism, and the Bishops'
Program of 1919 (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 1986.) 24. John A. Ryan, "Remarks to the National Council of Catholic
Women," Proceedings of the National Council of Catholic Women, First Annual
Convention, September 1920, NCCW Papers, ACUA. 25. Bishop Schrembs made it clear to Anthony Matre, the national
secretary of the declining American Federation of Catholic Societies, that the new
national organization would change the role of the independent lay Catholic societies:
"It is true that the present arrangement has made quite a change in the status of lay
activities and societies, placing them absolutely under our present committee. . ."
Reported by Anthony Matre to C. Steeger of Belgium, October 10, 1919, NCWC Papers,
Overseas, Box 8, Folder 24, ACUA. 26. In 1956, C. Joseph Nuesse, then dean of the School of Social
Sciences at The Catholic University of America observed that: European visitors, after first visit to the N.C.W.C., have been heard to remark that
priests are over-represented on the staff. The organization is, of course, the instrument
of the bishops. Moreover, for fairly evident historical reasons, laymen have seldom been
appointed in the United States to certain types of positions in ecclesiastical structures
which are open to them in Europe. . . . It can only be said that, whatever view is taken
of an alleged tendency to "clericalism" in American Catholicism, the N.C.W.C.
can hardly be represented as a principle instrument of such a tendency. C. Joseph Nuesse, "N.C.W.C.," in Louis Putz, The Catholic Church in the
United States (Chicago: Fides Publishers, 1956). 27. See Marilyn Wenzke Nickels, Black Catholic Protest and the
Federated Colored Catholics, 1917-1933 (New York: Garland, 1988). NCWC organizers had
not been unaware of, nor free from, the racism of the American Catholic church. In his
first annual report, Archbishop Hanna noted that the bishops of the administrative
committee saw the NCWC as "one of the most effective means of settling racial
difficulties. . . . For example, we have planned for an auxiliary colored division of the
Men's and Women's Council that will both show our interest in and our solicitude for their
people, and encourage and help them to work among and for their own." Such
auxiliaries were never formed, and blacks were not invited into the lay councils until
after World War II. 28. See accounts of this episode in the O'Grady Papers (ACUA) and
in the following institutional records in ACUA: Meetings of the Faculty, School of Social
Work (CUA); Minutes of the Advisory Committee of the Diocesan Directors of Catholic
Charities to the School of Social Work, 1933-39 (CUA); and Papers of the National Catholic
School of Social Service. 29. "Report to His Holiness," 25. 30. Joseph Schrembs, "Remarks to the National Council of
Catholic Women," Proceedings of the National Council of Catholic Women,
First Annual Convention, September 1920, NCWC Papers, ACUA. The stenographer's report of
the convention proceedings carefully noted that women greeted Schrembs' remarks with
"laughter and applause." 31. Printed sources bearing on the history of the National Council
of Catholic Women include the National Catholic Welfare Conference Bulletin and
its successor Catholic Action, and Loretto Lawlor's history of the National
Catholic School of Social Service, Full Circle (Washington, DC: Catholic
University of America Press, 1951). There are two master's theses on the subject,
including Dorothea Doane Keplinger, "A Study of the Conventions of the National
Council of Catholic Women of the National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1920-1939"
(Washington, DC: Master's thesis, National Catholic School of Social Service, 1940) and
Mary Martinita Mackey, "The Formal Structure of the National Council of Catholic
Women: Patterns of Formal Organization in a Federated Group" (Master's thesis,
Catholic University of America, 1949). There is also quite a rich oral resource in the
women who were schooled by the NCSSS or who worked for the NCWC/NCCW. 32. For an extended account of O'Grady's activities in this regard
see Thomas W. Tifft, "Toward A More Humane Social Policy: The Work and Influence of
Msgr. John O'Grady," (Ph.D. dissertation, Catholic University of America, 1979).
By Elizabeth K. McKeown
Associate professor of church history, department of theology, Georgetown University
Copyright © 1989 Georgetown University Press
All rights reserved
The National Conference of Catholic Charities
The American Federation of Catholic Societies
The National Catholic War Council
From War to Welfare
Early Leadership
Defending Catholic Interests
The Role of the Family
The Response of Lay Catholics
The Women of the NCWC
Conclusion
Footnotes
Kerby's earlier articles in John Burke's Catholic World contained a careful
analysis of what he called the "social reinforcements of the bonds of faith." He
urged Catholic leaders to recognize the importance of social organization in the formation
of identity and in the reinforcement of institutional loyalties. Catholic World
74 (January 1907): 508-522; (February 1907): 591-606.
The same observation appeared in the many memorial essays that appeared after his death in
1936. The following recollection was offered by Mary G. Hawks, "the prudent, militant
and far-seeing president" of the National Council of Catholic Women: "Perhaps he
was happiest in the seclusion of an editor's sanctum. But there he dreamed dreams in the
manner of Hecker, of the extended organization and influence of the Church in America,
dreams that were, inevitably, to draw him out into the larger arena of work for the
Church." Mary G. Hawks, "Father Burke: Editor, Author, Critic," Catholic
Action 18 (December 15, 1936): 27.
I am indebted to Anglyn Dries, O.F.M., for the suggestions contained in her "To Build
Up the Body of Christ: Roman Catholic Ecclesiology in the United States: Baltimore II to
1918" (Berkeley, CA: Graduate Theological Union, 1987, Photocopy), in which she
traces the development of the language of the Mystical Body in American ecclesiology.
The present-day trend toward larger association, mutual discussion of methods and results,
understanding among agencies that deal with like conditions could not have attained its
present proportions without affecting the life and spirit of the Church. . . . [The NCWC]
means the correction of a certain degree of provincialism, and helpful coordination of all
of the geographical and institutional units of the Church's life. That this process holds
forth promise of great stimulation and increased efficiency in our charities is beyond
question.
See also: