When Dorothy Day was born, in 1897, no one could have imagined her eventual religious standing—least of all her parents, who rarely attended church. But a full century later, in cities throughout the world, Day was proposed for sainthood, and celebrated for her heroic work.
The Washington Post summed up that anniversary well:
She was a radical American Catholic born 100 years ago on Pineapple street in Brooklyn. . . . She wasn’t born into her faith—she converted, at 30, after questing for God in all the wrong places. . . . A lot of people wouldn’t know her name, but there are great numbers of other people who can’t seem to get her out of their minds. On the centennial of her birth, it’s as if Dorothy Day pricks at consciences all the harder to do battle, be better, feel more deeply, struggle more intensely for the few things that count.
Why this is so has many explanations, but surely among the best is her extraordinary capacity to love.
All throughout her life, Dorothy Day pursued love—and it wasn’t a restrained type, but a burning and limitless love. It was as combustible as it was unguided, and constantly led to trouble—including a string of broken relationships, and most tragically, an abortion. But it was that same love that remade her, when she ultimately converted and came to accept Christ.
Dorothy Day died in 1980, at the age of 83, and since then her legacy has only grown. She is best known as a youthful radical, Catholic convert, and pacifist, as well as the author of a classic autobiography, The Long Loneliness. She founded, with Peter Maurin, the Catholic Worker movement, including a paper of the same name, dedicated to serving the poor and oppressed, through nonviolence, and sponsoring “houses of hospitality” for that purpose. Today there are over 150 of them, in the United States, and abroad.
I spoke recently with Father Malcolm Kennedy, a New York priest whose mother, Jean, converted under Day’s influence, and eventually became Day’s godchild. Dorothy was in touch with the Kennedy family throughout her adult life, and Father Kennedy remembers her visits well. “She had a very powerful presence,” he recalls, and those who experienced it “could not help being affected by it.”
Fr. Kennedy spoke of Day’s purity of heart, and her unwavering commitments to her activism and goals: “She was utterly faithful to her vocation. There was nothing at all inauthentic about her.”
Often overlooked, he said, was her self-discipline. “If you study her diaries and letters, and meditations, what you find is an incredibly structured Catholic spiritual life, which to me, as a priest, is very impressive.”
It is something all Christians can learn from, and seek to emulate.
Because of her unusual love, Day always looked for the “better” in people, even when she knew they had flaws. Her daring political views—about war and economics—brought her into conflict with Cardinal Spellman, yet she always defended his honor. “If anyone spoke against him, she’d always stand up for him,” said friend and biographer, Jim Forest, to author Rosalie Troester:
And it wouldn’t be in generalities. She told me once that Spellman had priests who didn’t like to receive calls to go down to the Bowery to administer last rites. He told the person answering the phone, ‘If any of those calls come through give them to me personally.’ Dorothy knew things like that about people, and she would tell them to show their good side. She was quite different than most of us. If we decide we don’t like somebody, we make it a kind of hobby to collect reasons to not to like that person. We develop quite a number of reasons to justify our irritation. Dorothy had a lot of reasons to dislike Cardinal Spellman, but it was more her hobby to find out things to admire about him.
Dorothy’s goodness of heart and her “radical idealism,” as Father Kennedy calls it, achieved immense things, but also caused her to occasionally lose her footing. Though most of her social views were soundly rooted in the Gospel, the saints and papal encyclicals, she sometimes made imprudent political statements (particularly about Fidel Castro), which today make one wince. Some people accused her of being a tool of the Communists, or at least a naive fellow traveler. But it is important to remember, even as we acknowledge her mistakes, that her purpose in founding the Catholic Worker was to draw people away from Communism and into the arms of Christ. In this, she succeeded, as we know from converts she influenced. And Dorothy was the first to admit her errors and those of the circles in which she walked.
In an interview with Sojourners in 1976, Dorothy explained how she became enamored with revolutionary thinking, but also came to see where it led-to destructive and dystopian nightmares:
For me, I could never see the violence, the obliterating of a whole class. Unfortunately, in the 1940’s the whole liberal crowd were all so pro-Soviet that they wouldn’t believe any of the stories that came out about the transferral of the whole Ukrainian population to Siberia. Now we read the account in Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago. I mean, a liberal crowd will sort of go with the fashion.
Indeed.
But correcting herself, and not going with “the fashion,” whether Left or Right, was what Dorothy Day’s whole life was about.
When the guns were blazing during World War II, she pointed out, not just how it violated pacifist principles, but how the Allies were violating just war standards, which they claimed to espouse. When Christians began accepting birth control and even abortion she upheld the Church’s teachings on sex and human life, every bit as vigorously as she preached against war or on behalf of worker’s rights. On labor and politics, she once said, “I am inclined to be sympathetic to the Left, but when it comes to the Catholic Church, then I am far to the Right.”
That’s dynamic orthodoxy for you.
Perhaps the most perceptive comment ever made about Day came not from one of her supporters, but from a somewhat critical friend. In the early 1950’s, during the height of the McCarthy era, Theodore Maynard, a conservative Catholic journalist, saw the attacks against Dorothy and rose to her defense:
Not even the thousands of little McCarthy’s who, like the fabled old maid, look under the bed every night lest a man should be lurking there, have ever been able to bring any accusation against Dorothy Day that makes any sense, for wrongheaded as she may be on certain points, her goodness is too crystalline to be challenged. I myself disagree with her pacifism and have told her and [Catholic Worker] Robert Ludlow so very plainly, but it does not affect my admiration for the work they are doing. But though they know they will never alienate me, they must be well aware that they have alienated many people who would otherwise be their supporters. Their paper often strikes me as the most interesting and ‘alive’ thing in Catholic journalism. If this is the case, it is because the paper is produced by people who convey the impression of being dedicated souls. Whether or not one agrees with them, one suspects them of being saints.
A half a century later, Dorothy Day’s cause was officially introduced—and approved—by the Catholic Church. It has been enthusiastically endorsed by the last three Cardinals of New York, and her supporters hope to live to witness her canonization. Dorothy Day never considered herself worthy of the honor, and even joked about it. “Don’t call me a saint,” she famously said, “I don’t want to be dismissed so easily.”
Of course, one would expect nothing less from a true saint.
William Doino Jr. is a contributor to Inside the Vatican magazine, among many other publications, and writes often about religion, history and politics. He contributed an extensive bibliography of works on Pius XII to The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here. RESOURCES
The Long Loneliness by Dorothy Day
The Duty of Delight: The Diaries of Dorothy Day, edited by Robert Ellsberg
All the Way to Heaven: The Selected Letters of Dorothy Day, edited by Robert Ellsberg
Dorothy Day: A Biography by William D. Miller
The Catholic Worker Movement: Intellectual and Spiritual Origins by Mark and Louise Zwick
All is Grace: A Biography of Dorothy Day by Jim Forest
Voices from the Catholic Worker, complied and edited by Rosalie Riegle Troester
The Catholic Worker After Dorothy: Practicing the Works of Mercy in a New Generation by Dan McKanan
The Catholic Church and the American Idea by Theodore Maynard
“Dorothy Day: Exalting Those of Low Degree,” (An Interview with Day), Sojourners, December 1976
“The Enduring Dorothy Day” by Paul Hendrickson, The Washington Post, November 19, 1997
The Guild for Dorothy Day, Archdiocese of New York
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
Regards,
Mike Spengler
St. Thomas Aquinas, conversely, speaks of the observable universe and the order of nature, as his 5th proof of Gods existence. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.
I'm not sure how God, who has ordered the universe and established a hierarchical church, reconciles with a self describe anarchist in an orthodox way?
That says it all.
Many Catholics have been deceived by this subterfuge, and seem to be oblivious to the dangers of importing into the Christian community the revolutionary principles of Marx and Lenin. William Doino has caught a glimpse of this process in Day’s admiration for Fidel Castro, but unfortunately dismisses it as a “mistake” of little consequence.
This well researched book shows the enormity of this mistake and the supreme irony of attempts to canonize a pro-Soviet sympathizer who worked against the interests of her own Church and country.
@Mary: yes, Dorothy wrote often that as the Bride of Christ, the Church and her members had often been unfaithful to their vows of fidelity, adding that history shows the Church has often "shared her bed with the world as well as with Christ." She stated this to call Catholics--including herself--back to a greater fidelity and purity of heart.
@Mike: Dorothy herself had an abortion before her conversion, and she carried a life-long horror of abortion as a result, and often spoke out against it (and also stood with the Church against contraception). This was part of the reason that the eventual birth of her daughter Tamar propelled her to conversion--she had been told would never be able to conceive again after the abortion, and was overwhelmed with gratitude over this new life, this second chance.
Her stand on social justice issues, which ensued a rejection of government welfare, supporting rather a strong belief in the responsibility of individuals to collectively respond to poverty out of a requirement of Christian charity is where modern Catholics of all political leanings should be. Her disagreements with Cardinal Spellman over issues open to prudential judgment of the faithful, which non-the-less did not prevent her from showing him the support due his position as a shepherd, especially in matters of faith not open to prudential judgment, is also a model of well ordered faithfulness that many modern Catholics could do well to emulate.
Like all saints she will be a unique example for the faithful in how orthodoxy and faith must be lived out in a life of service and prayer. She may be just the saint that is needed to give the left an understanding of how caring for the poor can't be left to the government and the right how moral right doesn't alway translate into the right to use military force indiscriminately.
@Warren: Dorothy's anarchism was the anarchism of the prophet Samuel or of St. Thomas More -- to put no ruler before God. I don't think that offends St. Thomas's vision of the natural universe as ordered -- but I don't know St. Thomas's writings well. Will say that the Servant of God Dorothy Day's anarchism has quite a bit in common with St. Augustine's tragic view of the political order as described in Book XIX of the City of God. There's nothing heterodox with that.
Never mind what people say about Dorothy Day or even what she said about herself - look at the evidence provided in the book I mentioned which is irrefutable. No one has been able to contradict any statement in it because everything is backed by authentic documents and archival evidence, not mere opinion.
These to prove that Dorothy Day, after her conversion to Catholicism, did in fact become a member of several Socialist organizations and was actively involved in political groups whose founders and leaders where predominantly Communist Party members. In addition to collaborating with such groups, Dorothy also used her newspaper, the Catholic Worker, (of which she was Editor for almost 50 years) as an organ of propaganda in favour of Communism. They also prove that she supported the policies of hostile foreign powers operating from Moscow, Havana, Peking and Hanoi against her own country, the USA. She also wrote favourably about such Socialist dictators as Lenin, Castro, Mao and Ho Chi Minh, even though they had all violently persecuted the Church in their respective countries.
Why should you trust Dorothy's "piety" when she knowingly served the interests of Socialism while pretending to be also serving the interests of Christianity? Why not obtain the book and find the facts for yourself? Then you can debate the issue from an informed source.
This personalism --- plus a lively sense of subsidiarity --- distanced her decisively from he secular Left. She never called for government-funded programs which would take the obligation of charity away from the individual, the family, and the Church.
"We believe that Social Security legislation, now hailed as a great victory for the poor and for the worker, is a great defeat for Christianity. It is an acceptance of the idea of force and compulsion. It is an acceptance of Cai's statement, on the part of the employer, 'Am I my brother's keeper?'"
In that same 1945 article, she decried the "centralism" of state action, opposed birth control clinics, and repeated her conviction that the Catholic Church should never abandon the poor to "Holy Mother the State."
I'm one of the many who was drawn back to the Catholic Church by the luminous personalism of the Servant of God Dorothy Day.
Dorothy stated that she “greatly admired” Rosa Luxemburg (Catholic Worker November 1960) and echoed some of her radical ideas, including her anti-clerical diatribes against the Church’s temporal possessions. She also praised the work of the Russian anarchist, Mikhail Bakunin, as an example of the “radical thinking of the last century” (Catholic Worker Aril 1957).
Nor does Julianne Wiley realize that a major influence on Day’s radicalism came via another of Russia’s foremost anarchists, Peter Kropotkin, who candidly stated that he had “always been a Communist” and shared many of the tenets of Marxism – revolution by the workers and peasants leading to the abolition of private property, wage labour, class distinctions and inequality of wealth. On Day’s own admission, Kropotkin was a guiding spirit of the Catholic Worker movement. But where would it lead? The whole point of Kropotkin’s closeness with the masses was to act most effectively as a populist agitator and inculcate in them the spirit of revolt against the State and the Church – not a path for the faithful Catholic to follow.
Ms Wiley may call this Day’s Personalism, but Lenin had another name for it – the Communist Revolution.
Many people are now using their critical faculties to uncover the truth about Dorothy Day rather than accept at face value the ready-made image of her that the Catholic Left keeps churning out. Let us not forget that the Peace Abbey that gave her the posthumous award is mired in Left wing politics, which gives them a vested interest in her work. So look behind the labels to discover their meaning in the work of Dorothy Day.
I'm sure I would agree with Dorothy on many, perhaps most, but certainly not all issues, but I deeply respect her for many reasons, but none greater than a story told and witnessed by Jim Forest: a priest once said Mass at a CW house and used a coffee cup for the chalice. After Mass Dorothy took the cup into the backyard of the house, dug a hole, kissed the cup, and buried it...beacuse it had held the Precious Blood of Christ.
“During my first years in New York, we had a dining room Mass every Monday night. Right there on that metal table. And we were within ten minutes’ walk of probably thirty Masses with silver goblets. Some priests would use the missal, some wouldn’t. [Dan] Berrigan would come sometimes and he’d never wear vestments, but Dorothy wouldn’t be upset.” (Quoted in Rosalie Riegle Troester, Voices from the Catholic Worker, Temple University Press, 1993, pp. 80-81)
Jim H. in Pittsburgh gives the misleading impression that all you have to do is read Day’s autobiographical works to be convinced of the truth about her. In other words we are expected to accept as true everything she has written about herself, including all her personal views – but what manner of evidence would this be? The problem here is that most of what Day has written about herself is anecdotal and emotionally charged, designed to produce a particular effect on the reader and create the desired image which she wished to project. The danger is that by accepting what Day said simply because she said it, we would be falling into the trap of exercising unqualified credulity.
This approach can easily be shown to be a fallacy – the so-called ipse dixit (“he himself has spoken”) argument, otherwise known as an appeal to misleading authority. How Day, of course, saw herself is one thing, but it is not always what others might see. Hence obvious need to broaden the parameters of the discussion beyond the confines of Day’s autobiographies and biographies so as to allow for consideration of other factors that may affect the interpretation of information provided by and on Day.
As for her attribute as a “disturber”, this is not to be taken in a complimentary sense, still less as an imitation of Christ, as you irreverently suggest. There is one way of testing how Christ’s words “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matt. 7:16) can be applied to Dorothy Day. Read the Critical Analysis and see how Dorothy, with her relentless Communist propaganda, was a revolutionary agitator, a disturber of the peace that Christ sought to bring. In fact, as a previous article in “First Things” (May 1998) by Geoffrey Gneuhs shows, she lived to regret her role in the Peace Movement which had led (inevitably) to mayhem and bloodshed.
The conclusion is inescapable and massively documented in the Critical Analysis that Dorothy Day’s propaganda in favour of Pacifism proceeded not from the standpoint of regarding Communism as the enemy of mankind, but from that of persuading mankind to be the friend of Communism.


