A Catholic sensibility at the micro-level works wonderfully. In other words, a business owner caring about his employees and thier families and arranging pay, work and benefits accordingly. At the macro level, with government transfer payments, government “charity” is not charity, it is redistribution with jail as the consequence if you want to keep your own money rather than have the politicians distribute it to their favored groups and friends.
There’s a word for what you describe: subsidiarity. It is at the foundation of Catholic social teaching.
At a macro level, authentic Catholic social teaching does just fine, as well.
Authentic Catholic social teaching is characterized, among other things, by the principles of subsidiarity and participation.
Subsidiarity means that we accomplish things at the most immediate level possible and that we don't let higher social orders subvert the responsibilities of intermediate social orders.
Participation means that it is each person's responsibility to "get his hands dirty." Merely taking care of a problem by paying one's taxes does not meet the obligation.
Taken together, this means that it is the responsibility of each of us to care for our families, our neighbors, and so on. And not just to throw money at the issue but to actually be involved.
It is that spirit which prompted people to erect parish schools for the education of the youth, rather than to depend upon the federal government for education. It is that spirit which prompted people to build charity hospitals and orphanages. It is that spirit which prompted people to form mutual aid societies like the Knights of Columbus. Dependence upon government, which, admittedly, is preached from far too many Catholic pulpits, is the antithesis of authentic Catholic social doctrine.
A couple of citations:
79. As history abundantly proves, it is true that on account of changed conditions many things which were done by small associations in former times cannot be done now save by large associations. Still, that most weighty principle, which cannot be set aside or changed, remains fixed and unshaken in social philosophy: Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the body social, and never destroy and absorb them.
80. The supreme authority of the State ought, therefore, to let subordinate groups handle matters and concerns of lesser importance, which would otherwise dissipate its efforts greatly. Thereby the State will more freely, powerfully, and effectively do all those things that belong to it alone because it alone can do them: directing, watching, urging, restraining, as occasion requires and necessity demands. Therefore, those in power should be sure that the more perfectly a graduated order is kept among the various associations, in observance of the principle of "subsidiary function," the stronger social authority and effectiveness will be the happier and more prosperous the condition of the State.
Pius XI, Quardagesimo Anno (1931)
In recent years the range of such intervention has vastly expanded, to the point of creating a new type of State, the so-called "Welfare State". This has happened in some countries in order to respond better to many needs and demands, by remedying forms of poverty and deprivation unworthy of the human person. However, excesses and abuses, especially in recent years, have provoked very harsh criticisms of the Welfare State, dubbed the "Social Assistance State". Malfunctions and defects in the Social Assistance State are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the State. Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.
By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending. In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbours to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need. One thinks of the condition of refugees, immigrants, the elderly, the sick, and all those in circumstances which call for assistance, such as drug abusers: all these people can be helped effectively only by those who offer them genuine fraternal support, in addition to the necessary care.
John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, 48 (1991)
It would be nice to hear talk about the above in pulpits far more universally than we currently do.