Inside Catholic has been kind enough to publish a reworked and hopefully more coherent account of my thoughts on Locke and Catholic political thought. For those who didn’t want to wade through my verbose musings, this ought to be more readable.
Comments Off on Locke & CST | Uncategorized | Tagged: Catholic Social Teaching, Immortale Dei, John Locke, Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, Second treatise of civil government | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
Some questions have been raised in the discussion on my posts on Locke & Catholic political thought about the extent to which Locke’s political theory conforms to or detracts from natural law. This follow-up post, which will be relatively brief, should serve to answer such questions at least in part.
57 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: Aristotle, community of goods, First Treatise, John Locke, Natural Law, Pope Leo XIII, Private Property, Rerum Novarum, Second Treatise, St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, the politics | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
In the previous part of this series, I gave a detailed comparison of the views of John Locke and Pope Leo XIII on the state of nature, the origin of private property, and the proper use of private property. In this final part, I want to make a few more points regarding what I think can be called “Lockean” thought, at least as it exists in contemporary America, explore the relationship between the Catholic Church and the United States, and explain why I think all that has been considered thus far is relevant for our political situation today.
13 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: Austrian Economics, Austrian School, Catholic Encyclopedia, Catholic Social Teaching, Charity, Christian charity, Declaration of Independence, Immortale Dei, In Amplissimo, John Locke, Libertas, Pope Leo XIII, Private Property, Rerum Novarum, Ron Paul, Second treatise of civil government, Separation of Church and State, Tea Party, Tea Party Movement, Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Jefferson | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
by Joe Hargrave
In the previous part I showed how Locke’s argument for government by consent was similar to, and may have even been influenced by, that of St. Robert Bellarmine. I also showed how some of the more well-known early-modern political theorists who dreamed of powerful authoritarian regimes also dreamed of obliterating the Church as an obstacle to their fruition. Now I will argue that there is a clear overlap between the political theory of John Locke, and that of Pope Leo XIII, the pope who is responsible for Catholic social teaching as we know it today. In the final part of this series I will address why these overlaps are important, and what they mean in our contemporary political situation.
3 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: Catholic Social Teaching, First Treatise, First Treatise of Civil Government, God Locke & Equality, Immortale Dei, Jeremy Waldron, John Locke, Karl Marx, Natural Law, Natural Rights, Peter Laslett, Pope Leo XIII, Private Property, Rerum Novarum, Robert Filmer, Second Treatise, Second treatise of civil government, state of nature, Theories of Surplus Value, Thomas Aquinas | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
We here at The American Catholic, along with conservative Catholics in general, have been accused many times of “Calvinism” by certain writers at Vox Nova. I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that this accusation is nothing more than a massive projection made by people who harbor Calvinist theological assumptions themselves, of which they may or may not be fully aware. Particularly, I think in their constant shilling for big government programs, for slavishness before all forms of authority, for the unlimited extension of “rights” (i.e. entitlements), and the rest of the statist agenda, the leftists at Vox Nova and throughout American political landscape have absorbed a perverse Calvinist doctrine of their own, namely that of the total depravity of man.
I have actually written about this before: the process by which radical leftism transformed from a project rooted in optimism, in a fanatical belief in man’s goodness and reason (apart from God of course), to one of utter pessimism and misanthropy. The first communists, and particularly Marx – for all of their deep flaws, errors, and hatreds – retained a belief in man’s goodness that they had mistakenly come to believe Christianity had rejected through the heresies of the Protestant rebellion.
57 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: Animal Farm, Calvinism, Catholic Left, Catholic leftism, Catholic Social Teaching, Council of Trent, Fredrich Engles, George Orwell, John Calvin, Karl Marx, Marxism, personal responsibility, Political Philosophy, Political Theory, Pope Leo XIII, Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, Rerum Novarum, rights of the poor, rights of workers, Thomas Hobbes, total depravity, Vox Nova | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
I’ll begin by stating that part of the blame or praise for this post ought to go to Christopher Blosser and David Jones for their excellent overview and commentary on the ongoing political/economic dispute between Catholic Distributists and Catholic libertarians.
I wish I could easily come up with a logical, smooth flow to all of these points. But really I just want to get them out there, no matter how disjointed in appearance.
Finally, I really mean it this time: we will have a respectful discussion on this topic, or none at all. That means certain people and their comments will likely be banned from the discussion. It will not be possible to avoid charges of “being afraid” to debate with such indestructible champions of the one true political philosophy, given their amazing ability to rule out all other possible reasons, including their coarse and offensive personal behavior, as to why no one wishes to engage in discussions with them. C’est la vie.
The best way to contribute here, though, is to ask questions that I can answer for this FAQ!
Where does the word “Distributarian” come from?
The word “Distributarian” was pejoratively applied to me and a few others who have attempted to blend libertarian and Distributist ideas by those not so enamored with the project. Since I see it as a good thing, I don’t mind wearing the label as a badge of honor.
What is a Distributarian?
It is one who does not see a necessary conflict between the basic propositions of Distributism and libertarianism, and insofar as possible, seeks to incorporate both of them into their social vision.
What are these propositions?
The following propositions are both necessary and sufficient for each ideology:
Of Distributism: property should be as widely distributed as possible.
Of libertarianism: social relationships should be as voluntary as possible.
Naturally some doctrinaires will dislike the wording “as ___ as possible”; why should we care about what is possible when great ideas are at stake? Either they exist full-fledged without imperfection in the world or they may as well not exist at all! If we move past this childish expectation and begin with the possible, I think we will find that there is no contradiction between these propositions.
Distributism and libertarianism challenge each other in a good way. Distributism challenges libertarianism to move beyond individual autonomy and articulate a vision of the common good; libertarianism challenges Distributism to clearly articulate how property distribution ought to come about – through force, or through consent?
Not only do they challenge each other; they compliment each other. Property owners will thrive in an environment of economic freedom; genuine liberty will thrive as it is rooted in solid social institutions based upon private property. As property ownership will increase the self-sufficiency of individuals, families, and communities, it will decrease dependency upon the state.
And please note that this is a work in progress!
Comments Off on Catholic Distributarianism: A Preemptive FAQ | Uncategorized | Tagged: Anarchism, Catholic Social Teaching, Distributism, Edward Feser, John Locke, Joseph Schumpeter, Libertarianism, Murray Rothbard, Natural Rights, Political Philosophy, Political Theory, Pope Leo XIII, Pope Pius XI, property, Property Rights, Quadragesimo Anno, Redistribution of wealth, Rerum Novarum, Scott McDermott, Second treatise of civil government, theory of property, wealth redistribution | Permalink
Posted by Bonchamps
This article originally appeared on The New Theological Movement written by Reginaldus on July 29, 2010 Anno Domini. Re-posted with permission.
18th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Luke 12:13-21
The rich man of this Sunday’s Gospel is blessed with a bountiful harvest. Rather than thanking God for this gift, he hoards the grain in his barns – his heart is possessed by his possessions. At the moment of death, the Lord calls him a fool, for he was not rich in what matters to God.
The Fathers of the Church, and St. Thomas Aquinas following them, see in this parable a strong teaching of social justice. Their teachings have in turn been integrated into the Social Doctrine of the Church. Here we will consider St. Thomas’ exposition of the doctrine as well as several important quotations from the Church Fathers.
The common destination of all goods and right to private property
We must first affirm that man has a right to own private property. All men have a natural right to make use of material goods. According to positive human law, men also have a right to private property – this is necessary for the good order of society and the proper care of the goods themselves, it also serves as a means of restraining greed and inciting toward generosity (a man can give alms only if he has some property of his own).
However, it is equally clear in the Church’s Tradition, as expressed by the Fathers of the Church and magisterial teachings, that the right to private property is subordinate to the universal destination of all goods. That is, the right to private property cannot be extended to the point of depriving others of the basic material necessities of life. Every man has the right to the material necessities of life – when he is deprived of these, while another has excess wealth, a grave injustice has occurred.
7 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: Catechism of the Catholic Church, Catena Aurea, Catholic Social Doctrine, Centesimus Annus, Church Fathers, Common Good, De Nabuthe, Gaudium et Spes, Good Order of Sociey, Greed, Holy Bible, Holy Gospel of Saint Luke, Magisterium, Natural Rights, Poor and Vulnerable, Pope John Paul II, Pope Leo XIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope Pius XI, Pope Saint Gregory the Great, Populorum Progressio, Positive Human Law, Poverty, Private Property, Quadragesimo Anno, Regula Pastoralis, Rerum Novarum, Sacred Tradition, Saint Ambrose, Saint Basil the Great, Saint Bede, Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, The Decretals, The New Theological Movement, Vatican II, Wealth | Permalink
Posted by Tito Edwards