The Social Formation of Msgr. John A Ryan
American Catholic Social Reformer
This post will focus on what we might call the social formation of Msgr. John A. Ryan (1869-1945). By this I mean the formation that enabled him to conduct a uniquely effective social apostolate. It was effective especially in helping Catholics to become key participants in the political process for social reform and the common good, which entailed effectively adopting the model of social Catholicism as exemplified by Bishop Wilhelm Emmanuel von Ketteler.
Overlapping with Ryan’s social formation, his participation in the political process merits a brief note regarding how it reflects a subordination of support for parties and candidates based on a judgment of how they serve the common good in each time and place. In Ryan’s case, he initially supported the People’s Party during the era of populist reform, casting his first vote for them in 1892. As that party waned and Republican President Theodore Roosevelt embraced progressive era reforms, Ryan supported them. He later supported the New Deal reforms of Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Such relative detachment from political parties and ideologies, and the ability to make sound judgments about them, however, depends on our intellectual, moral, and spiritual formation.
[Image: Catholic University of America]
In what follows, I will briefly introduce what I treat at greater length in my essay on “The Social Formation of Msgr. John A Ryan” which can be found as chapter 5 of Social Catholicism for the 21st Century? Volume 1 Historical Perspectives and Constitutional Democracy in Peril. That essay proceeds with an eye towards the social formation that can help contemporary Catholics—especially those in the United States—to live out the social doctrine of the Church in response to the signs of our times. This post, therefore, not only introduces the longer essay, but serves as preparation for my “Formation for a New Social Catholicism,” which is published as chapter 13 and will be introduced in a future post to this substack.1
This look back to John Ryan’s formation for the social apostolate can help contemporary American Catholics to understand what prepared him to respond fruitfully to the challenges of an earlier and far simpler era. It can also help us to determine the kind of formation we will need if we are to understand and respond effectively to the challenges of our day.
These unprecedented challenges have been influentially described by renowned Columbia University historian Adam Tooze as “the polycrisis.” This term refers to an interlocking set of crises—economic, sociological, environmental, technological, cultural, moral, political, geopolitical, psychological, sociopsychological, and informational—that are at risk of spinning out of control without effective governance to manage them. This dependence of the common good upon effective governance is why the contemporary alliance of authoritarians who employ populist means to achieve political power presents such a grave threat to the human family.
Describing the global situation in terms of the polycrisis has become widespread since Tooze’s 2023 keynote at the World Economic Forum, and was the subject of his 2024 Tanner Lectures at Princeton University. I draw upon Tooze in the introduction to Volume 1, Historical Perspectives and Constitutional Democracy in Peril, as a way to support Pope Francis’s discussion of the “dark clouds“ threatening the human family in chapter 1 of his 2020 social encyclical Fratelli Tutti: On Fraternity and Social Friendship. My conviction is that an understanding of Ryan’s formation (chapter 5), updated in light of the signs of our times (chapter 13) can help contemporary Catholics to see the importance of retrieving the tradition of social Catholicism—expressed by Pope Francis in terms of Fraternity, Social Friendship, and a better kind of politics—to address these grave challenges and build a future worthy of the human family.
Ryan’s Social Formation
In what follows, I will primarily enumerate several key aspects of Ryan’s formation that are treated at greater length in my corresponding chapter 5. My hope is that an understanding of Ryan’s formation can help us to identify gaps in our own so that we can strive to remedy them to better live out the fullness of the Catholic faith for the life of the world.
First, Ryan benefitted from the example of his pious and virtuous parents. His father, for example, insisted on working for years to repay a loan he had cosigned to help a neighbor in distress, who subsequently walked away from it, along with the other cosigners. Second, Ryan benefitted from identifying with the community of Irish Catholics, most of whom were then struggling as either industrial workers or farmers. The former endured oppressive working conditions—such as an average work week of 100 hours, plus hazardous working conditions—that followed from a social Darwinist ideology of survival of the fittest. The farmers were at the mercy of monopolistic railroads to transport their output. This identification helped Ryan to foster an authentically Christian identity in solidarity with the oppressed and not with the wealthy and powerful. In the generations after Ryan, however, this identification with the oppressed has become more difficult as American Catholics have successfully climbed the socioeconomic ladder.
Third, Ryan was exposed from his youth to literature—and serious discussion—about the social conditions, about proposals for reform, and about opposition to such reforms, usually from the wealthy who benefitted from the system as they had rigged it. This early and ongoing reading and discussion enabled Ryan to develop a deep knowledge of—and solicitude for—the key questions of justice at stake in his day. Fourth, Ryan had a fundamentally receptive stance toward the Social Doctrine of the Church and the discernment of the magisterium. Fifth, Ryan greatly admired his Archbishop, John Ireland, and became the most effective advocate of Ireland’s strategy for evangelization. That was to “make America Catholic” by putting the Church in the forefront of addressing the great challenges of the day. Sixth, Ryan credits Cardinal Gibbons as providing “one of the first and also one of the most enduring contributions to [his] social education,” through his brilliant letter in defense of the Knights of Labor union, which may have involved the collaboration of Archbishop Ireland.
Seventh, Ryan developed—through his graduate studies and beyond—a multidisciplinary openness to all sources of knowledge reflecting the Catholic harmony between faith and reason. Eighth, like Ketteler, Ryan sought to learn from and collaborate with others who were working for justice despite disagreement on deeply held convictions. Ninth, Ryan developed a deep awareness of how participation in market competition can be corrupted by ideologies and the temptation to “cut ethical corners” in search of profits. Tenth, Ryan learned to appreciate how work for justice and the common good must proceed based on a keen awareness of how the nexus between financial and political power manifests itself in each time and place.
In summary, Catholics wishing to understand how our social doctrine might help in addressing the contemporary polycrisis can learn much from the example of Msgr. John A. Ryan.
I will also include below a link to a somewhat dated but very valuable video that discusses John Ryan and his legacy.
My focus on formation follows from roughly two decades of work as a moral theologian in Catholic seminaries, striving to form future priests to exemplify the life of virtue informed by charity, and to inspire others to live it as disciples of Jesus. We all partake in intellectual formation not as tabulae rasae (“blank slates” for readers whose Latin is rusty), but as more deeply influenced by the surrounding culture than we might hope, and often underestimating the complexities—and unprecedented peril—of our moment in history.