Catholic social
teaching is less "political" in the sense of being related to a
particular political system or party, and more a matter of asserting
and reasoning from
certain basic principles, foremost among these being: 1) that we are
made with a rational, unchanging human nature, in the image of God, and
2) that we are made for a purpose, which is to know, love, and serve
God in this world so we can be happy with Him in the next.
These consequences of these principles include the following:
1. Human life has an
inherent dignity
Every single human being, regardless of age, race, sex, religion, or
ethnicity,
was
made in the image of God (our likeness
to God, though, has been marred
through original sin, and we regain our likeness to Him through
Baptism). Because of our being made in the image of God, each human
life
has an inherent dignity, and it has this dignity from the moment of
conception. Abortion, then, has been taught against by the Church since
the beginning, as attested to by the Didache, the first "catechism" of
the Church which dates to A.D. 96 and reads, "you shall not murder a
child by abortion nor kill that which is begotten." Abortion includes
contraceptive procedures which disallow a fertilized ovum from
implanting, and also in vitro
fertilization procedures which involve fertilizing numerous ova and
allowing some to die or be frozen.
By the same token, euthanasia and suicide are grave evils. It is licit
to withdraw extraordinary means to keep a sick person alive (e.g.,
artifical respiration), and, per the principle of double effect,
it is licit to administer painkillers to alleviate suffering even if
they might shorten the patient's life as long as death is not intended,
but no one should ever be deprived of ordinary care, such as food and
water (medical nutrition, hydration, and ordinary means of alleviating
suffering).
Because of the inherent dignity of human life, it is licit to use
self-defense as necessary to protect it against those who would murder,
and the
State may implement the death penalty in order to protect against those
who'd harm the innocent. The 5th Commandment, which is typically read
as "thou shalt not kill" means, in fact, that "thou shalt not unjustly
take innocent life," or "thou shalt not murder." Defending innocent
life by taking the life of one who murders is not "murder"; it's
defense.
Because of original sin, humanity is prone to concupiscence and evil.
Because of this proneness to concupiscence and evil, utopia is not an
option, and systems of political thought which propose such (e.g.,
socialism, communism, the idea that the market solves all problems,
etc.) are wrong and not to be followed.
2. The family is the
core unit of society
The family, which consists of a man married to a woman, and any
children they may have, is the
core unit of society. The Catholic Encyclopedia describes the family
this way:
According to the
Christian conception, the family, rather than the individual, is the
social unit and the basis of civil society. To say that the family is
the social unit is not to imply that it is the end to which the
individual is a means; for the welfare of the individual is the end
both of the family and of the State, as well as of every other social
organization. The meaning is that the State is formally concerned with
the family as such, and not merely with the individual. This
distinction is of great practical importance; for where the State
ignores or neglects the family, keeping in view only the welfare of the
individual, the result is a strong tendency towards the disintegration
of the former. The family is the basis of civil society, inasmuch as
the greater majority of persons ought to spend practically all their
lives in its circle, either as subjects or as heads. Only in the family
can the individual be properly reared, educated, and given that
formation of character which will make him a good man and a good
citizen.
The family begins in marriage, which, in the Church, is a sacrament. Marriage can only take
place between a biological man and a biological woman. A true and
actual marriage is an indissoluble union which must be "open to life"
-- that is, artificial contraception cannot licitly be used.
A wife is subject to her husband and should love him, respect him, and
obey him in all sensible, lawful things; a husband is to love his wife
as Christ loves the Church, nourishing and cherishing her as he would
himself, and being willing to sacrifice his life for her (Ephesians 5). From Pope Pius
XI's Casti Connubii:
26. Domestic
society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, there should
flourish in it that "order of love," as St. Augustine calls it. This
order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife
and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing
obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: "Let women be
subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the
head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church."
27. This subjection, however, does not deny or take away the liberty
which fully belongs to the woman both in view of her dignity as a human
person, and in view of her most noble office as wife and mother and
companion; nor does it bid her obey her husband's every request if not
in harmony with right reason or with the dignity due to wife; nor, in
fine, does it imply that the wife should be put on a level with those
persons who in law are called minors, to whom it is customary to allow
free exercise of their rights on account of their lack of mature
judgment, or of their ignorance of human affairs. But it forbids that
exaggerated liberty which cares not for the good of the family; it
forbids that in this body which is the family, the heart be separated
from the head to the great detriment of the whole body and the
proximate danger of ruin. For if the man is the head, the woman is the
heart, and as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may and
ought to claim for herself the chief place in love.
28. Again, this subjection of wife to husband in its degree and manner
may vary according to the different conditions of persons, place and
time. In fact, if the husband neglect his duty, it falls to the wife to
take his place in directing the family. But the structure of the family
and its fundamental law, established and confirmed by God, must always
and everywhere be maintained intact .
Read Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii on marriage.
3.
The State is a
natural society
Hierarchy is natural. From Pope Leo's Rerum Novarum:
There naturally
exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind;
people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune
is a necessary result of unequal condition. Such unequality is far from
being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community. Social
and public life can only be maintained by means of various kinds of
capacity for business and the playing of many parts; and each man, as a
rule, chooses the part which suits his own peculiar domestic condition.
The State, then, arises from nature, and while the Church exists for
the
salvation of souls, the State exists for the temporal happiness of man.
The Catholic Encyclopedia continues from above:
Secondly, the
natural object pursued by man in his ultimate social activity is
perfect temporal happiness, the satisfaction, to wit, of his natural
faculties to the full power of their development within his capacity,
on his way, of course, to eternal felicity beyond earth. Man's
happiness cannot be handed over to him, or thrust upon him by another
here on earth; for his nature supposes that his possession of it, and
so too in large measure his achievement of it, shall be by the exercise
of his native faculties. Hence, civil society is destined by the
natural law to give him his opportunity, i.e. to give it to all who
share its citizenship. This shows the proximate natural purpose of the
State to be: first, to establish and preserve social order, a
condition, namely, wherein every man, as far as may be, is secured in
the possession and free exercise of all his rights, natural and legal,
and is held up to the fulfilment of his duties as far as they bear upon
the common weal; secondly, to put within reasonable reach of all
citizens a fair allowance of the means of temporal happiness.
Civil authority should be treated as a service, and those subject to
that authority should be enlivened by a similar spirit of service to
the common Good, a service manifest in citizens by their voting, paying
taxes, defending their country when necessary, praying for those in
authority, and practicing charity toward the poor, widowed, and orphaned.
The State can't disallow a citizen leaving it; citizens have a right to
migrate. As to entering a different State, the catechism says, my
emphasis:
2241 The more
prosperous nations are obliged, to
the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of
the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his
country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural
right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those
who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for
which they are responsible, may make
the exercise of the right to
immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially
with
regard to the immigrants' duties
toward their country of adoption.
Immigrants are obliged to respect
with gratitude the material and
spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey
its laws
and to assist in carrying civic burdens.
The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910) includes this in its entry on
"Migration":
The legal
control of migration began when it ceased to be collective and began to
be individual. Laws have been passed preventing people from leaving
their native land, and also, by the country of destination, forbidding
or regulating entrance thereto. Extensive regulation has been found
necessary applying to transportation companies and their agents, the
means of transportation, treatment en route and at terminal points. The
justification of public interference is to be found in the right of a
nation to control the variations of its own population. The highest
necessity is that arising from war: on this ground nations almost
universally regulate very closely the movements of population,
forbidding emigration, that they may not lose their soldiers, and
guarding immigration as a military precaution. Restrictive measures are
also justified on grounds of health and morals, and on the general
ground that a national family has a right to say who shall join it...
...The attitude of the United States at the present time
(1910) towards foreign immigration is one of caution. Actual and
projected legislation aims, not at exclusion, but at selection. It is
recognized that the assimilative power, even of America, has its
limits. Legislation must, by the application of rational principles,
eliminate those incapable of assimilation to the general culture of the
country. Great care is, of course, necessary in determining and
applying these principles of selection: an educational test, for
instance, while it would exclude much ignorance, would also exclude
much honesty, frugality, industry, and solid worth. It is probable that
a more vigorous system of inspection of immigrants at ports of entry
will be put in force, while a stricter control will be exercised over
the steamship companies. At the same time, the co-operation of foreign
governments is needed, if the exclusive measures designed for the
protection of the United States against undesirable immigration are to
be made thoroughly effective.
See also St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica on the
matter of immigration wherein he describes three types of
foreigners who come to one's land: 1) those who are just traveling
through one's land, 2)
those who live in one's land but aren't citizens, and 3) those wish to
become citizens. Those who wish to become citizens need to wait three
generations because, Thomas says, "if foreigners were allowed to meddle
with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst,
many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the
common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the
people."
He also speaks of those who should never be allowed to become citizens
at all: "Hence it was that the Law prescribed in respect of certain
nations that had close relations with the Jews (viz., the Egyptians
among whom they were born and educated, and the Idumeans, the children
of Esau, Jacob's brother), that they should be admitted to the
fellowship of the people after the third generation; whereas others
(with whom their relations had been hostile, such as the Ammonites and
Moabites) were never to be admitted to citizenship; while the
Amalekites, who were yet more hostile to them, and had no fellowship of
kindred with them, were to be held as foes in perpetuity: for it is
written (Exodus 17:16): "The war of the Lord shall be against Amalec
from generation to generation."
4. Subsidiarity
Nothing should be done by a larger, more complex organization that can
be done as well by a smaller, simpler organization. Thus, if a family
can handle a problem, then the family should. If the family can't, then
the extended family should. If the extended family can't, then
neighborhood should. If the neighborhood can't, then the town should.
If the town can't, then the county should. If the county can't, then
the state should. If the state can't, then the federal government
should. And so on. The larger, more complex entities should leave the
smaller alone to their own self-governance as much as is prudent.
Decentralization makes for more effective, more responsive, more
humane, and less wasteful governance of a natural institution. Pope
John Paul II wrote of this in Centesimus
Annus, 1991:
Another task of
the State is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human
rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this
area belongs not to the State but to individuals and to the various
groups and associations which make up society. The State could not
directly ensure the right to work for all its citizens unless it
controlled every aspect of economic life and restricted the free
initiative of individuals. This does not mean, however, that the State
has no competence in this domain, as was claimed by those who argued
against any rules in the economic sphere. Rather, the State has a duty
to sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure
job opportunities, by stimulating those activities where they are
lacking or by supporting them in moments of crisis.
The State has the further right to intervene when particular monopolies
create delays or obstacles to development. In addition to the tasks of
harmonizing and guiding development, in exceptional circumstances the
State can also exercise a substitute function, when social sectors or
business systems are too weak or are just getting under way, and are
not equal to the task at hand. Such supplementary interventions, which
are justified by urgent reasons touching the common good, must be as
brief as possible, so as to avoid removing permanently from society and
business systems the functions which are properly theirs, and so as to
avoid enlarging excessively the sphere of State intervention to the
detriment of both economic and civil freedom.
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.
The principle of subsidiarity is an ancient one, encapsulated first in
the Book of Genesis, with the story of the Tower of Babel, when the
people tried to reach to Heaven by their own power. It shows the folly
of the incessant attempts at great consolidations of power:
Genesis 11:1-9
And the earth was of one tongue, and of the same speech. And
when they removed from the east, they found a plain in the land of
Sennaar, and dwelt in it. And each one said to his neighbour: Come, let
us make brick, and bake them with fire. And they had brick instead of
stones, and slime instead of mortar. And they said: Come, let us make a
city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven: and let us make
our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.
And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which
the children of Adam were building. And He said: Behold, it is one
people, and all have one tongue: and they have begun to do this,
neither will they leave off from their designs, till they accomplish
them in deed. Come ye, therefore, let Us go down, and there confound
their tongue, that they may not understand one another's speech.
And so the Lord scattered them from that place into all
lands, and they ceased to build the city. And therefore the name
thereof was called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth
was confounded: and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the
face of all countries.
5. Economics
God gave the earth to all men, but men, as individuals, have the right
to own property, goods, and the means of productions, whether acquired
through work, by gift, or through inheritance. Pope Leo XII's Quadragesimo
Anno:
The natural
right itself both of owning goods privately and of passing them on by
inheritance ought always to remain intact and inviolate, since this
indeed is a right that the State cannot take away: "For man is older
than the State," and also "domestic living together is prior both in
thought and in fact to uniting into a polity." Wherefore the wise
Pontiff declared that it is grossly unjust for a State to exhaust
private wealth through the weight of imposts and taxes. "For since the
right of possessing goods privately has been conferred not by man's
law, but by nature, public authority cannot abolish it, but can only
control its exercise and bring it into conformity with the common weal."
The State has the duty to enforce the respect due to others as owners
of goods through laws against theft and other forms of unjust taking.
The economy exists to serve man, not the other way around, and its
purpose isn't simply to increase wealth, but to serve the entire man. The materialist idea
that if a political action causes certain numbers (for ex., the Gross
Domestic Product, a business's profits, tax revenue, etc.) to go up,
then it is automatically good is not a Catholic idea. As Patrick
Buchanan put it,
An economy is
not a country. A nation’s economic system should reinforce the bonds of
national unity, but the nation is of a higher order than any imaginary
construct of an economist. A nation is organic, alive, it has a beating
heart. The people of a nation are a moral community who must share
values higher than economic interest, or their nation will not endure.
As scholar Christian Kopff asks, “What doth it profit a man if he gain
the whole world, and suffer the loss of his country?”...
...Neither the national economy nor the free market is an end in
itself. They are means to an end. A national economy is not some wild
roaring river that must be allowed to find any course it will, to be
admired for its raw power and beauty. It is to be tamed for the benefit
of the nation.
The same holds true for the market. While an unfettered free
market is the most efficient mechanism to distribute the goods of a
nation, there are higher values than efficiency. To worship the market
is a form of idolatry no less than worshipping the state. The market
should be made to work for man, not the other way around.
Catechism 2425:
"The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic
ideologies associated in modem times with 'communism' or 'socialism.'
She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of 'capitalism,'
individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace
over human labor."
Pope Pius XI's Divini Redemptoris makes more
clear the Church's stance against Communism:
It is a system
full of errors and sophisms. It is in opposition both to reason and to
Divine Revelation. It subverts the social order, because it means the
destruction of its foundations; because it ignores the true origin and
purpose of the State; because it denies the rights, dignity and liberty
of human personality...
See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow
themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one
who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any
undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into
lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own
country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. 2
Work is the
means to
provide for family and the community, and whenever possible, given the
profitability of a business, employers must pay their workers a living
wage. Workers can organize to protect their interests and, when
unavoidable, strike without violence as long as their goals are
concordant with the common Good.
Usury is a form of unjust taking and is against Church teaching.1
From Pope Benedict XIV's Vix Pervenit:
The nature of
the sin called usury has its proper place and origin in a loan
contract. This financial contract between consenting parties demands,
by its very nature, that one return to another only as much as he has
received. The sin rests on the fact that sometimes the creditor desires
more than he has given. Therefore he contends some gain is owed him
beyond that which he loaned, but any gain which exceeds the amount he
gave is illicit and usurious.
One cannot condone the sin of usury by arguing that the gain
is not great or excessive, but rather moderate or small; neither can it
be condoned by arguing that the borrower is rich; nor even by arguing
that the money borrowed is not left idle, but is spent usefully, either
to increase one's fortune, to purchase new estates, or to engage in
business transactions. The law governing loans consists necessarily in
the equality of what is given and returned; once the equality has been
established, whoever demands more than that violates the terms of the
loan. Therefore if one receives interest, he must make restitution
according to the commutative bond of justice; its function in human
contracts is to assure equality for each one. This law is to be
observed in a holy manner. If not observed exactly, reparation must be
made.
Investing in
a venture and receiving dividends
from profits is an entirely different matter as the lender assumes the
same risk the business venturer does. Usurers, though, produce no
value, assume no risk, and demand not just the money lent, but more
than what was lent. Compound
interest only exacerbates the usurer's sin.
See:
6. Church and State,
and the Kingship of Christ
The Church has man's eternal happiness as its goal; the State is
focused on man's temporal happiness. They are two different spheres,
one the City of God, the other the City of Man. But it's from the
Church that man derives the definition and meaning of the True, Good,
and the Beautiful, and laws that don't have the True, Good, and
Beautiful, properly understood, at their center lead to injustice and
disorder.
Jesus Christ is King of all creatures. From Pope Pius XI's Quas Primas:
If, therefore,
the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and
increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the
public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ...
When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that
Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of
real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony...
If princes and magistrates duly elected are filled with the persuasion
that they rule, not by their own right, but by the mandate and in the
place of the Divine King, they will exercise their authority piously
and wisely, and they will make laws and administer them, having in view
the common good and also the human dignity of their subjects. The
result will be a stable peace and tranquillity, for there will be no
longer any cause of discontent. Men will see in their king or in their
rulers men like themselves, perhaps unworthy or open to criticism, but
they will not on that account refuse obedience if they see reflected in
them the authority of Christ God and Man. Peace and harmony, too, will
result; for with the spread and the universal extent of the kingdom of
Christ men will become more and more conscious of the link that binds
them together, and thus many conflicts will be either prevented
entirely or at least their bitterness will be diminished.
Pope Leo XIII states very clearly in Annam
Sacrum,
The empire of
Christ the King includes not only Catholic nations, not only baptized
persons, but also all those who are outside the Christian faith: so
that truly the whole of mankind is subject to the power of Christ the
King.
The more just the social order, the more it will reflect the deep
reality of the Kingship of Christ. The more a social order reflects the
reality of the Kingship of Christ, the more the Good abounds, and the
more man prospers.
Civil authority should be obeyed, but not when what it demands is
immoral, or contrary to the Gospel or to man's fundamental, God-given
rights to live virtuously. Armed resistance to unjust social orders can
be undertaken, but only when when 1) there is certain,
grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other
means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not
provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and
5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.
See Pope Pius XI's Quas Primas on the Kingship of
Christ.
7. War
Sometimes war is necessary, as St. Augustine, in his "City of God,"
makes clear, "They who have waged war in obedience to
the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in
their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in
this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no
means violated the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill.'"
In order for a war to be just, it must meet the following conditions:
- It must be
instituted by properly instituted authority which represents the common
Good.
- It must be
defensive and have a good and just purpose, not mere self-gain. The
aggression being defended against must be lasting, grave, and certain,
and all other means of ending that aggression have been ineffective or
impractical
- It must be
winnable
- When fighting
against aggression, greater evils than those being defended against
must not be brought about
- Peace must be
its ultimate goal
8. Solidarity, race,
racism,
ethnicity, etc.
All human beings are made in the image of God and are due charity and
respect for their humanity. All who are properly baptized are one in
the Church,
are true brothers and sisters in Christ. Their being one in the Church
on a supernatural level does not necessarily mean they should be one on
a natural level, in terms of nations. The diversity of peoples and
nations is a good to be protected. From Pope Pius XII's Summi Pontificatus:
38 A marvelous
vision, which makes us see the human race in the unity of one common
origin in God "one God and Father of all, Who is above all, and through
all, and in us all" (Ephesians iv. 6); in the unity of nature which in
every man is equally composed of material body and spiritual, immortal
soul; in the unity of the immediate end and mission in the world; in
the unity of dwelling place, the earth, of whose resources all men can
by natural right avail themselves, to sustain and develop life; in the
unity of the supernatural end, God Himself, to Whom all should tend; in
the unity of means to secure that end.
39. It is the same Apostle who portrays for us mankind in the
unity of its relations with the Son of God, image of the invisible God,
in Whom all things have been created: "In Him were all things created"
(Colossians i. 16); in the unity of its ransom, effected for all by
Christ, Who, through His Holy and most bitter passion, restored the
original friendship with God which had been broken, making Himself the
Mediator between God and men: "For there is one God, and one Mediator
of God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (I Timothy ii. 5).
40. And to render such friendship between God and mankind
more intimate, this same Divine and universal Mediator of salvation and
of peace, in the sacred silence of the Supper Room, before He
consummated the Supreme Sacrifice, let fall from His divine Lips the
words which reverberate mightily down the centuries, inspiring heroic
charity in a world devoidof love and torn by hate: "This is my
commandment that you love one another, as I have loved you" (Saint John
xv. 12).
41. These are supernatural truths which form a solid basis
and the strongest possible bond of a union, that is reinforced by the
love of God and of our Divine Redeemer, from Whom all receive salvation
"for the edifying of the Body of Christ: until we all meet into the
unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect
man, unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ" (Ephesians
iv. 12, 13).
42. In the light of this unity of all mankind, which exists
in law and in fact, individuals do not feel themselves isolated units,
like grains of sand, but united by the very force of their nature and
by their internal destiny, into an organic, harmonious mutual
relationship which varies with the changing of times.
43. And the nations, despite a difference of development due
to diverse conditions of life and of culture, are not destined to break
the unity of the human race, but rather to enrich and embellish it by
the sharing of their own peculiar gifts and by that reciprocal
interchange of goods which can be possible and efficacious only when a
mutual love and a lively sense of charity unite all the sons of the
same Father and all those redeemed by the same Divine Blood.
44. The Church of Christ, the faithful depository of the
teaching of Divine Wisdom, cannot and does not think of deprecating or
disdaining the particular characteristics which each people, with
jealous and intelligible pride, cherishes and retains as a precious
heritage. Her aim is a supernatural union in all-embracing love, deeply
felt and practiced, and not the unity which is exclusively external and
superficial and by that very fact weak.
45. The Church hails with joy and follows with her maternal
blessing every method of guidance and care which aims at a wise and
orderly evolution of particular forces and tendencies having their
origin in the individual character of each race, provided that they are
not opposed to the duties incumbent on men from their unity of origin
and common destiny.
Piety -- which includes the preferential love of one's family and
nation -- is a virtue. It is natural
and right to put
concern for the people of one's own nation (those with whom you share
language,
cultural traditions, a system of law, history, etc.) above concern for
those outside
one's nation, just as it is natural and right to care more for one's
own children than the children of strangers. Piety shouldn't be
exaggerated and go to any ideas of supremacism, "state worship," or
imperialism: just as
it's natural and right for you
to care for your children and
people first, it's natural and right for others to care for their children and people first.
Neither should piety exclude charity for all. Paragraph 49 from the
encyclical above:
Nor is there any
fear lest the consciousness of universal brotherhood aroused by the
teaching of Christianity, and the spirit which it inspires, be in
contrast with love of traditions or the glories of one's fatherland, or
impede the progress of prosperity or legitimate interests. For that
same Christianity teaches that in the exercise of charity we must
follow a God-given order, yielding the place of honor in our affections
and good works to those who are bound to us by special ties. Nay, the
Divine Master Himself gave an example of this preference for His Own
country and fatherland, as He wept over the coming destruction of the
Holy City. But legitimate and well-ordered love of our native country
should not make us close our eyes to the all-embracing nature of
Christian Charity, which calls for consideration of others and of their
interests in the pacifying light of love.
Whatever natural differences there may be between groups of men, and no
matter how those differences might lead to disparate outcomes in
various ways, no
race or ethnic group is ontologically superior or inferior to another.
No race is more
or less beloved by God than another. No race is owed more or less
charity than another. All are called to become children of God, and
brothers and sisters in Christ, through Baptism. Living in accordance
with this knowledge is the
essence of solidarity, or "social charity."
Read:
9. Liberty and Tolerance
Modern man tends to think of political liberty as the ability to do
anything one wants, any time one wants. But "true liberty of human
society does not consist in every man doing what he pleases, for this
would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow
of the State; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the
civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the
eternal law" (Pope Leo XIII, Libertas,
1888). In other words, true freedom is being unencumbered such that you
are able to do what you ought
to do. When we are able to do what allows us to reach the end to which
God calls us -- when we are able to do what we need to do to get to
Heaven -- only then we are
truly free. There is no freedom in libertinism and being enslaved by
our addictions and to our passions.
Modern man also tends to think in terms of ideologies, with a few words
sufficing to shape all political decisions. For ex., "liberty" is key
to the libertarian, and the "non-aggression principle" is the sole
solution to every political question, from legally defining marriage,
to whether there should be police forces and armies.
"Capitalism" is key to another political sort, and anything that
maximizes profits is the thing that should be done or allowed, no
matter the costs to the family or society. For a certain kind of
Leftist, equity, and intolerance of anything that might cause hurt
feelings among
groups deemed to be "marginalized" seem to be the guiding principles.
Catholic thinking, on the other hand, sees Christ's Kingship as its
first principle, and is shaped by the
transcendentals -- the Good,
True, and Beautiful. God -- the Essence and Source of the True,
Good, and Beautiful -- made us (and all things) with an end, a purpose,
in Mind. That purpose for which He made us isn't pleasure or earthly
happiness, but union with Him, and a just social order honors this
truth and the reality of human nature. In other words, it honors "the
natural law," and it's natural law and not ideology on which a Catholic
social order is based.
For ex., when considering whether certain drugs that are now illegal
should be
legal, rather than focusing solely on the the idea of the free market
("if there's a buyer, it should be able to be sold"), as
a libertarian might,
or on the sentiment that "no one can tell me what to do," as a leftist
might, the Catholic looks to what is most likely to bring about the
most Good.
It may be that keeping those drugs illegal would bring about more evil
than not -- that the fight against those drugs brings about more
violence and evil than it prevents -- or it may be that keeping
them illegal would bring about the most Good. Much is situational, and
the virtue of prudence is called for in making these sorts of
determinations as to questions of fact. What may be politically
prudent for one group of
people, might not be the best solution for a different group of people
(which is
one reason why the principle of subsidiarity is so important).
What may be prudent and serve the common good at one time for one
nation might not make sense at a different time in that same nation.
Catholics
can disagree as to the particulars of such things.
But underlying all this is one important idea: while error and sin have
no positive rights, it is often so -- maybe even more often the case
than not -- that tolerance of
error and sin serves the greater Good. St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of
this in his Summa, II-II-10-11, when writing about tolerating
non-Christian rites:
Human government
is derived from the Divine government, and should imitate it. Now
although God is all-powerful and supremely good, nevertheless He allows
certain evils to take place in the universe, which He might prevent,
lest, without them, greater goods might be forfeited, or greater evils
ensue. Accordingly in human government also, those who are in
authority, rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost,
or certain greater evils be incurred: thus Augustine says (De Ordine ii, 4): "If you do away
with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust." Hence, though
unbelievers sin in their rites, they may be tolerated, either on
account of some good that ensues therefrom, or because of some evil
avoided.
I feel the need to stress this point because, in my work, I've seen
many new converts, especially younger ones, adopt a rather overly
zealous, "gung-ho" attitude politically speaking. They come to learn
that, for ex., X, Y, and Z are sins, so they want to bring the
power of government down on them. But the weighing of the goods and
evils that come from such actions is crucial, as are considering other,
possibly more Good-producing actions (e.g., zoning or regulating
instead of banning), and reckoning with things such as the human
tendency to rebel and to see the forbidden as desirable, the
tendency toward corruption and overreach on the part of those with
governmental power (especially problematic in a secular democracy that
doesn't recognize God, Truth, Goodness, or Beauty) -- i.e., the problem
of giving corrupt functionaries an inch and their taking a mile, etc.
As always, prudence -- the emperor
of the virtues -- is key.
And with that, I leave you with two quotes about tolerance:
Archbishop
Fulton Sheen: "Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to
principles. Intolerance applies only to principles, but never to
persons. We must be tolerant to persons because they are human; we must
be intolerant about principles because they are divine."
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange: "It has been
said: 'The Church is intolerant in principle because she believes; she
is tolerant in practice because she loves. The enemies of the Church
are tolerant in principle, because they do not believe, and intolerant
in practice, because they do not love.' On the one hand, theory is
opposed to practice; on the other, it penetrates and arranges all
things with firmness and gentleness."
Footnotes:
1 Catholics need to get very clear about
the evils of usury, the nature of banking and money systems, etc. We're
living in a very dangerous time in which an entire generation has been
turned into indentured servants through usurious student loans -- loans
they're both unable to discharge and unable to pay because jobs have
been outsourced and wages undermined through the importing of cheap
labor. This severe injustice has left many of of our young very
understandably angry, and clamoring
for socialism and communism which would only exacerbate their
suffering, something they don't realize because they've been
miseducated. The solution is not collectivism -- but nor is it any form
of capitalism which involves usury, fiat currencies, cronyism, ruthless
"vulturism" that
disregards human needs, etc. -- things which too many on the
Right (and Left) tend to be ignorant or blasé about. Some on the Right
also tend
to see
"the free market" as the sole solution to all problems -- no matter the
needs of a given nation's individual economy (which might, for ex.,
benefit from tariffs or various protections in light of other nations'
economies that might involve such things as veritable slave labor), and
no matter the Good of a nation's families,
which consist of human beings with spiritual and social needs in
addition
to financial ones. Like socialism and communism, this, too, is an
un-Catholic view of things. Please see these pages:
In my opinion, we
should alleviate interest due
on student loans,
and then get the government out of the
student loan business altogether, get government functionaries out of
collegiate life as much as possible, revamp the accreditation process,
end race-based and other diversity-oriented quotas, outlaw usury,
emphasize the trades, get government bureaucracy out of the way of
small businesses, restore our manufacturing, punish outsourcing, stop
importing cheap labor that undermines our workers, institute protective
tariffs against slave labor economies like China and India, and stop
shoving all
of our young people toward universities -- reserving it for the
naturally scholarly types.
While I'm dreaming, we then illegalize abortion, end no-fault divorce,
stop expecting men to support children born outside of wedlock (sounds
radical and "unfair," but it's right, and here's why), restore men's custody
rights in cases of civil divorce, deal with obscenity the way we did
before the sexual revolution, and start re-building
Catholic
communities so that women will be more willing to stay home and
raise
children -- something they're more likely to choose if they weren't
alone, without adult company, all day, every day. We need to restore
the extended family and high-trust, culturally homogeneous,
parish-based
communities that provided women with other women to be with, talk to,
share work with, trust their children with, etc. These communities were
purposefully destroyed; listen to E. Michael Jones: The
Slaughter of Cities (mp3) and read his similarly titled book on the
topic.
2
Communism and socialism simply do not work as economic systems.
If you're (understandably) enraged about the housing situation, the
fact that 1% owns 80% of the wealth, student loan debt, healthcare
costs, etc., do not rush headfirst into pushing for a
communist/socialist system as a solution: it will fail, as it has every
time and in every place tried. You can point toward mixed systems that
are Capitalist with socialized aspects (such as, for ex., socialized
medicine) that
might work in culturally homogeneous places (e.g., Scandinavian
countries), but removing production, pricing, and wage setting from
market forces is
always bound to fail. If you're inclined toward socialist thinking, you
need to study the matter, looking at what's happened to Venezuela as a
typical example.
The solutions to the problems listed above include the eradication of
usury, eliminating the Federal Reserve, allowing banks and corporations
to fail instead
of having government bail them out, breaking up monopolies, getting
government out of the housing and student loan business, stopping the
import of cheap labor and of those who receive more in services than
they pay in taxes, clamping down
hard on Medicare/Medicaid abuse, restoring our manufacturing base,
stopping pushing kids into going to university, restoring homemaking as
a
"career" and thereby decreasing the size of the labor market (feminism
was, in large part, a top-down push on the part of the powers that be
to halve wages by doubling the workforce; doubling the number of people
who could be taxed; and assuming control over family life and the
education of children, taking that power away from mothers), etc.
If the concept of equity plays any role in your thinking, you need to
re-evaluate. Equality of opportunity and before the law is one thing,
a good thing, but expecting
equality of outcome can only lead to injustice and the
stifling of excellence. We are born at different times, in different
places, into different families, with different talents and different
challenges; some are more virtuous, some are less so. As a result,
hierarchies happen, and they are natural. Disparate outcomes aren't at
all necessarily indications of injustice, and in a Catholic world,
charity serves those in need -- charity that is offered at a much more
personal and humane level, per the principle of subsidiarity. The push
for equity only results in misery. For a
devastating short story on the matter, see Kurt
Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" (pdf).
|
