So far we’ve
stated the problem and summarized both the liberal and the conservative
positions on the issue. Today we look at
what we’ve identified as the fundamental error of both the liberal and the
conservative positions, and then give our opinion as to what we think is the
correct or “orthodox” position.
This is why the
insistence of the popes that the Catholic Church’s social teaching is based not
on faith, but on reason is so important to us, and why we’re even bothering
with it at all. If the Catholic Church’s
social teachings were based on faith, as both conservative Catholics and
liberal Catholics tend to insist, they would apply only to Catholics. They would be irrelevant to most of the
world, and would certainly have no interest for CESJ.
So much for the
commercial. Now back to our subject.
The errors should
be obvious. Both liberals and
conservatives merge the natural law and the supernatural law, to the detriment
of both. They mix faith and reason,
confuse objective knowledge and subjective opinion, and replace the Intellect
with the Will.
These “attack[s] on all sides”
on “the principles of
Christian culture” (Humani Generis, §
1) spread dissent and massive confusion throughout both religious and
civil society, from whence it has spread to domestic society, the Family. As Pius XI pointed out, “[C]ertain doubts have arisen concerning either the correct
meaning of some parts of Leo's Encyclical [i.e.,
Rerum Novarum] or conclusions to be deduced therefrom, which doubts in turn
have even among Catholics given rise to controversies that are not always
peaceful.” (Quadragesimo Anno, § 40.)
This is why the Fathers
of the First Vatican Council, and every pope since Pius IX except for John Paul
I (who didn’t have time, at least as pope), have condemned without
qualification the belief that faith is required (essential) to come to
knowledge of God’s existence and of the natural law. As Canon 2.1 clearly states, “If anyone says
that the one, true God, our creator and lord, cannot be known with certainty from
the things that have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him
be anathema.”
The orthodox
view, that of the Catholic Church, is a bit more subtle than that of either the
liberals or the conservatives. The
orthodox position puts the human person, made in the image and likeness of God,
at the center, not the Church or the State.
Respect for the dignity of the human person is paramount.
Nor is “respect
for the dignity of the human person” a meaningless catch phrase. It has a specific meaning: recognition and
protection of the natural rights that are inherent in human nature, and the
supernatural rights that are infused into (granted to) every human being.
The orthodox
position is that every single human being who exists, has existed, or will ever
exist from the moment of conception has the full spectrum of inherent natural
rights and infused supernatural rights.
Natural rights
exist in order that the human person can realize his or her inherent capacity
to acquire and develop natural virtue through the exercise thereof, thereby
becoming more fully human. The job of
the State is to maintain and protect, sometimes provide, the institutional
environment (the common good, or “the system”) within which humanity can optimize
the inherent capacity to become more fully human by the exercise of natural
rights, however human positive law defines that exercise within a particular
social context.
Supernatural
rights exist in order that the human person can realize his or her infused
capacity to acquire and develop supernatural virtue through the exercise
thereof, thereby becoming more fully adopted children of God. The job of the Church is to maintain,
protect, and (in most cases) provide the environment (religious society) within
which individual human beings can become more fully adopted children of God by
the exercise of supernatural rights, however human tradition defines that
exercise within a particular social context.
