He is almost forgotten today, but at one time Orestes A. Brownson (1803-1876) was a force to be reckoned with. John A. Hardon described him as "one of the most admired — and most controversial — figures of the nineteenth century." A giant intellect, he was renowned as one of the "Big Three" American Transcendentalists, ranking with Thoreau and Emerson. In some ways he surpassed them. He, of course, lost his ranking when he converted to Catholicism, and almost immediately began to annoy both Catholics and Protestants by espousing unpopular ideas that, contrary to the spirit of those times and ours, happened to be true.
Chief among the unpopular ideas Brownson championed was that neither individualism (capitalism) nor collectivism (socialism) had the truth, but of the two, socialism was by far the worst. As far as Brownson was concerned, socialism is "as artful as it is bold," establishing and maintaining itself by lies and deceit. As he characterized this insidious evil,
"[Socialism] wears a pious aspect, it has divine words on its lips, and almost unction in its speech. It is not easy for the unlearned to detect its fallacy, and the great body of the people are prepared to receive it as Christian truth. We cannot deny it without seeming to them to be warring against the true interests of society, and also against the Gospel of our Lord. Never was heresy more subtle, more adroit, better fitted for success. How skillfully it flatters the people! It is said, the saints shall judge the world. By the change of a word, the people are transformed into saints, and invested with the saintly character and office. How adroitly, too, it appeals to the people's envy and hatred of their superiors, and to their love of the world, without shocking their orthodoxy or wounding their piety! Surely Satan has here, in Socialism, done his best, almost outdone himself, and would, if it were possible, deceive the very elect, so that no flesh should be saved." (Orestes Brownson, Essays and Reviews Chiefly on Theology, Politics, and Socialism, 1852.)
Reading this, we can understand why, unlike capitalism, the Catholic Church explicitly condemns socialism in all its forms. Capitalism may be bad, but socialism is deadly. Capitalism distorts nature, where socialism would destroy it. As Pius XI declared in words often cited and even more often ignored or misunderstood, "If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist." (Pius XI Quadragesimo Anno ("On the Restructuring of the Social Order"), 1931, § 120.)
Why, however, in a country that seemed to take inordinate pride in its individualism and adherence to capitalism, would Brownson be so concerned with the dangers of collectivism and socialism? It would make more sense (at least to the modern mind) if he had joined with Karl Marx and the other giants of 19th century socialism, and condemned the growing evils of industrial and commercial — to say nothing of financial — capitalism.
The problem was that, just as today, no one but a few misguided ideologues was under the illusion that capitalism was anything but bad. Even many of today's apologists for capitalism frequently agree that, with the past savings paradigm (paraphrasing Churchill on democracy), capitalism is the worst possible system . . . except for all the others.
Socialism, however, has always managed to hide its evil, usually disguising itself as "an angel of light," seeming — as Brownson put it — so fair as to "deceive the very elect." No, there was little danger that anyone would mistake capitalism for anything other than what it is. There was — and remains — every danger that multitudes will welcome socialism as the savior of the world. It feeds on pride, arrogance, and envy, a veritable cornucopia of deadly sins, custom-made to destroy the soul of an individual or a country.
#30#
Monday, November 28, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
"EXCELLENT"
"Nothing is more common than the unqualified condemnation of the whole system of banking, as it exists in our country."
Orestes Augustus Brownson, 1840
Capitalism is the worst possible system, except for all the others- I disagree wholeheartedly. The *best* possible system is the nuclear family- *everything* higher than that is a perversion of justice. Guarantee each father the ability, through work and ownership, to provide for wife and raise children- and THAT is the best possible system. Capitalism distorts that by allowing a man to own more than he needs to provide for his family; socialism distorts that by not even giving him enough to provide for his family.
"[T]he multiplication of wants which can be satisfied only with material or sensible goods, is not a good but an evil."
Orestes Augustus Brownson
Ted — don't make the mistake of confusing religious, domestic, and civil society, a distinction the Catholic Church carefully makes. With respect to justice in distribution, within the family — "domestic society" — it is based on status. In civil society, distribution is based on contract, that is, money. The family is the basic unit of civil society, but it also is a discrete society of its own. The State may not interfere with the exercise of the parents' legitimate rights, any more than parents can demand that the State, for other than expedience, exercise their rights as in, e.g., education.
There have been numerous attempts in history to combine the different forms of society. One of the most harmful was Sir Robert Filmer's version of divine right, detailed in "Patriarcha," which opens with a condemnation of Catholic political philosophy. According to Filmer, the king is the father of all the people, a right derived from the domestic right of Adam. Because Adam was also the high priest (this is Filmer's argument, not mine), the king is also head of the Church. Since the nation is, in Filmer's opinion, only an extended family, the king is also necessarily the head of State.
All of this directly contradicts not only the Gospels, but the teachings of the Doctors of the Church, notably Aquinas and Bellarmine. Pius XI's "Quas Primas" was not advocating a divine right monarchy as many suppose, but democracy and rule of the world by adherence to the natural law.
That being said, I'm uncertain why you disagree with my condemnation of both capitalism and socialism, and then advocate, albeit on an unsupportable premise, widespread ownership of capital and free exercise of labor to make a living. I would only disagree with your use of the word "guarantee" with respect to results. The only thing we can even try to guarantee is equality of opportunity, and that imperfectly, not equality of results, which is socialism.
Let us raise a standard!
"If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God." -- George Washington
The standard must be interpreted authoritatively by some body fitted for that function: the Church is required. Simple popular opinion never can maintain justice:
"But we are told, once more, that practically it can make no difference whether we say the will of God is sovereign, or the will of the people; for the will of the people is the will of God,... We deny it. The will of God is eternal and immutable justice, which the will of the people is not. The people may do and often actually do wrong. We have no more confidence in the assertion, 'The people can do no wrong'... For very shame's sake, after denying, as most of you do, the possibility of an infallible church immediately constituted and assisted by infinite wisdom, do not stultify yourselves by coming forward now to assert the infallibility of the people. " -- Orestes Augustus Brownson, 'Legitimism and Revolution'; 1848
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams. October 2, 1798.
Every Citizen a Justice-Based Leader !
Here
Brownson's Quest for Social Justice - The Evils of Socialism;
"The three great enemies to worldly happiness were held to be religion, marriage or family, and private property. Once get rid of those three institutions, and we may hope soon to realize our earthly paradise. For religion we were to substitute science, that is, science of the world of the five senses only; for private property, a community of goods; and for private families, a community of wives. No, not a community of wives, for in our new moral world there were to be no wives or husbands ; there were to be only men and women, who would be free to cohabit together, according to their mutual likings, and for as long a time as they found it mutually agreeable, and no longer."
-- The Works of Orestes A. Brownson: Controversy; Chapter VII- The Working Man, 1884 (127 years ago)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How's that paradise working out for you WORLD -2012?
Post a Comment