A lot of people don’t realize it, but Family and Church are discrete
societies of their own. They are
distinct from the civil order, the State, and are called "domestic
society" and "religious society," respectively.
While the family is the fundamental unit of civil society,
and is not a "perfect" society (i.e.,
complete unto itself), the family, in common with religious society, has its
own "rules" and ends which cannot be usurped or violated by civil or
religious society without disaster. (Education, BTW, comes under domestic
society, not civil; parents retain the right to educate their children.)
Combining all three societies under the civil ruler is, in essence, what Thomas Hobbes, the totalitarian philosopher, tried to do in Leviathan, following the lead of Sir Robert Filmer's "divine right theory” that was so ably countered by Saint Robert Cardinal Bellarmine. In so doing, Hobbes effectively abolished the natural law by making private property and liberty (freedom of association/contract) utterly dependent on the will of the sovereign.
By putting everything under the State and subject to its will, the concept of rights that each human being has absolutely by nature itself — and that are therefore inalienable — became confused with the State’s proper role (in concert with custom and tradition) in defining the necessarily limited exercise of those same rights within the common good — another concept that has suffered much abuse at the hands of people who redefine basic concepts to suit themselves.
Consequently the idea spreads that not only the exercise of rights must be limited (as is proper and necessary), but that no right could be held absolutely, that is, by nature — which destroys the whole idea of what it means for something to be a natural right in the first place, and thus who is a “person” — a “person” being that which has rights. (People can, of course, create "artificial persons" like a business corporation or the State itself, but these "persons" only have the rights that actual, "natural" persons give to them — and which the real persons can take back.)
This started us down the long road to the situation we have today, in which the State (a creation by natural persons) can withhold or grant personality at will, and the natural law based on God’s Nature, self-realized in His Intellect and therefore discernible by reason alone (albeit illuminated by faith) to all intents and purposes doesn’t exist. The creature has taken over and controls its own creator.
The only way to reverse this trend is to vest ordinary people with capital ownership — and without redistributing what belongs to others or relying on the State. The former abolishes property as a meaningful thing, while the latter makes you a “mere creature of the State” — a slave.
This can be done, and a proposal has been developed.
Combining all three societies under the civil ruler is, in essence, what Thomas Hobbes, the totalitarian philosopher, tried to do in Leviathan, following the lead of Sir Robert Filmer's "divine right theory” that was so ably countered by Saint Robert Cardinal Bellarmine. In so doing, Hobbes effectively abolished the natural law by making private property and liberty (freedom of association/contract) utterly dependent on the will of the sovereign.
By putting everything under the State and subject to its will, the concept of rights that each human being has absolutely by nature itself — and that are therefore inalienable — became confused with the State’s proper role (in concert with custom and tradition) in defining the necessarily limited exercise of those same rights within the common good — another concept that has suffered much abuse at the hands of people who redefine basic concepts to suit themselves.
Consequently the idea spreads that not only the exercise of rights must be limited (as is proper and necessary), but that no right could be held absolutely, that is, by nature — which destroys the whole idea of what it means for something to be a natural right in the first place, and thus who is a “person” — a “person” being that which has rights. (People can, of course, create "artificial persons" like a business corporation or the State itself, but these "persons" only have the rights that actual, "natural" persons give to them — and which the real persons can take back.)
This started us down the long road to the situation we have today, in which the State (a creation by natural persons) can withhold or grant personality at will, and the natural law based on God’s Nature, self-realized in His Intellect and therefore discernible by reason alone (albeit illuminated by faith) to all intents and purposes doesn’t exist. The creature has taken over and controls its own creator.
The only way to reverse this trend is to vest ordinary people with capital ownership — and without redistributing what belongs to others or relying on the State. The former abolishes property as a meaningful thing, while the latter makes you a “mere creature of the State” — a slave.
This can be done, and a proposal has been developed.
Slavery or freedom.
The choice is yours.
Own or be owned.
#30#