Just how should we understand our lives, our purpose and the path to human flourishing?
CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - Relying on reason and guided by Revelation, the Church has her own political philosophy, or perhaps better, principles of political philosophy. The Church rejects the political visions of many upon whom the modern State is founded: of Machiavelli, of Hobbes, of Locke, of Hume, of Kant, of Rousseau, of Marx, of Rawls, and of a large list of others. These have led us to a dead end, and it is time to recover our classical and Christian heritage, for it is the most human of all others out there.
To recover our classical and Christian heritage, which is ever ancient ever new, we should turn to the Catholic social doctrine. And I do not mean the Catholic social doctrine as filtered by left-wing (or right-wing) ideologues, dissenting theologians, or others who are wolves in sheep's clothing. I mean the Catholic social doctrine as proposed by the Church's Magisterium. The real thing. Get it from the source: Read the Bible, then read the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Most of what you need to get started is within the covers of those two books.
Standing far above the thinkers of modernity and seeing much further and clearer than them, in the Compendium, the Church offers a personalist vision of politics and a personalist theory of authority. The Church's personalist political philosophy is based upon the nature of man, i.e., the fact that he is a person and that he operates under a natural law. She therefore holds to a theory that good has priority over right, and not that right has priority over the good. For the Church, it is the good that defines right. It is not the right that defines the good.
The progressivist blogger Jeremy C. Young hit the nail on the head when he said, "If you want to understand President Obama's soul, read his books. But if you want to understand his beliefs, read John Rawls."
John Rawls--the political philosopher of secular liberalism par excellence--somehow thought that giving right the priority over good would end the interminable squabbles over what was good. Personally, Rawls was driven to this because he despaired of man's ability to know the good, whether through reason or revelation. Raised an Episcopalian, as a young man Rawls--overcome by the horrors and accidents of war which ruins some but brings the best in others such as St. Maximilian Kolbe--rejected the God of his fathers, the Christian God. He despaired of knowing the truth and ended up hating the God of his fathers and the God of his countrymen.
Rawls hated our God. Catholics ought to know that before they read him.
Read Rawls's early book A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith and his much later and posthumously published "On my Religion," and you will be saddened by the descent of a soul which looks like Michelangelo despairing, condemned man in the Sistine Chapel slowly being drawn into Hell. The Liberal guru Rawls's last thoughts on the subject were that he saw Christian moral teachings as "morally wrong in some cases even repugnant." Taking Christianity seriously, the chief theoretician of liberalism opined, "could have a deleterious effect on one's character."
Christianity's ethics repugnant? Christianity ruinous on one's character? Really?
Moved by this anti-Christian animus, the brilliant but misguided Rawls--who epitomizes the modern American political philosopher--created a political theory based upon indifferentism to truth and moral relativism (and one, though draped in the words of neutrality, was really biased in favor of liberalism and against natural law, which means against Christianity).
In one way Rawls was certainly right. His theory kept us from arguing about the good, but in consequence, all that happened was that we are interminably squabbling over rights.
The ethical and so also the political worlds are divided into two: those who give priority to the good over the right, and those who give priority to the right over the good. Classical ethics and political philosophy emphasizes good over right. Modern ethics and political philosophy emphasize right over good.
The classical view is virtue-based. It relies on such luminaries as Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Hooker, Suarez, Vittoria, Bellarmine, and the American Founding Fathers . . . oh . . . and also the Popes.
Since the modern view is not based upon the good, it has to find a substitute for it. Therefore, the modern view--where just not simply Epicurean and built around self-pleasure or self-fulfillment--is either duty based (e.g., Kant), utilitarian-driven (e.g., Mills and Bentham), contractrarian (e.g., Locke, Rousseau), value-based (Scheler), or based on emotivism (e.g., Hume, Moore, Ayer).
The Church's social and political doctrine is classical, not modern. It is therefore timeless. The Church teaches the timeless truth that the modern penchant of holding the priority of right over good is wrong. It is bad for man. It is bad for his societies. It is bad for his political institutions.
Here's the thing: in order to hold that good takes precedence over right, one has to have a conception of what is good for man. That means one has to know what is man's purpose, what is his end (in Greek, his telos). This means before we can speak about justice (right), we have to know what's good for man, what is due him. It's silly to talk about rights when we don't even know what is good for man, for there is no right if there is no good to support it. We cannot talk of justice if we do not know what is due man, what is his good, for justice is giving a man his due.
Someone who believes in the classical view of things--that the good precedes the right--will find all this talk about rights without having knowledge of the good as silly. Modern politics is silliness, silliness handled as if it were serious, but silliness all the same. And will always be silliness, until we get down to talking about the good.
The classical construct fell apart for a variety of reasons, including the religious divisions caused by the Reformation, the efforts of the thinkers of the Enlightenment, the Darwinian materialistic pseudo-philosophy that so effectively captured our intellectuals in the 19th century, the rise of Pragmatism, and the influence of Liberalism which viewed society as a group of individuals, each of whom had interests, ends, and conceptions of the good that were equally valid, and among which visions government had no business of choosing. The abandonment of the notion that man had an end (telos), that man's good was defined by his nature and its inclinations, and that we could discover it, led to a prioritization of the right over the good and this required a re-definition of justice.
Since moderns have abandoned any good for man and rely only on rights without any basis in the good, what this means is that justice in the modern liberal order is essentially procedural. Justice has no substance, since if justice is to have any substance there must be an understanding of the good. Without a substantive basis in an objective good, justice becomes conventional--a matter of agreement or a matter of the positive law of the State alone. In jurisprudence, we call this positivism. This means rights are given to us (posited for us) by the majority or by the government, since they are not based upon our good, our nature, but on our wants or the wants of others. Ultimately, this leads to what Pope Benedict XVI has called the tyranny of moral relativism.
In the final analysis, the notion of the priority of the right over the good is self-defeating. It is a slogan intended to avoid the hard thinking that is required to know the good. Either that or a cover for libertinism. In either event, it is a cowardly retreat into skepticism, into moral agnosticism. As Charles Taylor put it in his Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity, "the good is always primary to the right" if for no other reason because "the good is what, in its articulation, gives the point of the rules which define the right."
The modern refusal to face the good, to ask those tough questions--what man is made for, what is his end, and what inclinations and order are built within the nature that is given to him by his Creator--is what is at the heart of its reversal of the classical and Christian principle that the good has priority over the right, and not that the right has priority over the good.
In short, put away Rawls's A Theory of Justice, Political Liberalism, and Justice as Fairness. Instead, open up your Bible, the Compendium and, if you really want to feel like a counter-cultural radical, break open the Papal social encyclicals and let them inform your thinking.
It may be one of the most patriotic and freeing thing you do.
Andrew M. Greenwell is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas, practicing in Corpus Christi, Texas. He is married with three children. He maintains a blog entirely devoted to the natural law called Lex Christianorum. You can contact Andrew at firstname.lastname@example.org.
By Ann Scneible (CNA/EWTN News)
The feast of the Holy Trinity is an invitation for us to commit to enriching our everyday relationships by promoting communion, consolation, and mercy, Pope Francis said during his weekly Sunday Angelus address. Vatican City, Rome (CNA/EWTN News) - "Our being created ... continue reading
By Deacon Keith Fournier
What we choose determines who we become. Choosing what is good changes the chooser, empowering him or her to proceed along the pathways of virtue and develop the habitus - or habits- which promote Christian character. The Catechism of the Catholic Church ... continue reading
By Marshall Connolly (CALIFORNIA NETWORK)
Ever since the reveal of the Third Secret of Fatima in 2000, several people have insisted there's more to the secret than what the public was told. These rumors have taken a life of their own, prompting the Holy See to speak out against them. LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic ... continue reading
By Tony Magliano
The best way to remember those who have been killed in battle is to work for the day when others will no longer be sent to take their place. Prayerfully reflecting on how to move away from war and war preparation should be central to every Memorial Day.Why do ... continue reading
By (CNA/EWTN News)
Recognizing the difference between a person who's possessed and a person struggling with a mental illness or other infirmity is a vital part of the ministry of exorcism, according to a long-time exorcist and priest. Rome, Italy (CNA/EWTN News) - Father Cipriano de Meo, ... continue reading
By (CNA/EWTN News)
It's a major miracle that you've probably never heard of. Lima, Peru (CNA/EWTN News) - On Sunday, Oct. 3, 1847, more than 2,000 people in Ocotlán, Mexico saw a perfect image of Jesus Christ crucified that appeared in the sky for more than 30 minutes.Approved by the ... continue reading
By (CNA/EWTN News)
During his Mass on Thursday, Pope Francis preached a warning to the rich who oppress the poor, focusing on employers who accumulate wealth by misusing those who work for them. Vatican City, Rome (CNA/EWTN News) - "We consider this drama of today: the exploitation of ... continue reading
By Kenya Sinclair (CALIFORNIA NETWORK)
William Friedkin, the director of famous horror film "The Exorcist," described a time he was invited to document a real exorcism at the Vatican. LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - According to AFP, Friedkin shared his experience at the Cannes film festival Thursday ... continue reading
By Kenya Sinclair (CALIFORNIA NETWORK)
We all have bad days - but did you know the devil preys on you when you are the most vulnerable? LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Life is never easy for long. Children, work, school and illness often interfere with the plans we've made for ourselves, and it is ... continue reading
By Adelaide Mena (CNA/EWTN News)
Speaking in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, Cardinal Robert Sarah enjoined Catholics to resist "ideological colonization" and the removal of God from society, in order to help the Church resist threats to the family and religious freedom around the world. Washington D.C., ... continue reading