There is some buzz that the Pope calls for a “true world political authority” in his latest encyclical, CHARITY IN TRUTH. I've printed out that encyclical, but haven't had a chance to read it yet (It's about 50 pages). I think though, that the statement is being taken out of context. The pricipal of subsidiarity is, I think, well-established in the Catholic Church and can be found in Pope Leo XII's Rerum Novarum of which Charity in Truth is apparently an update (in the line of social encyclicals over the past century and a quarter). Subsidiarity holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization.
Any thoughts?
UPDATE:
Here is an article that is very much on point and I think clarifies things. Hat tip to JLW (Note this is a different piece from the Zmirak column he references below).
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Roll
Video Bar
Labels
- climate change (1)
- environment (1)
- History (1)
- Presidential Election (1)
- Worldviews (1)
US National Debt Counter
Google News
Followers
Contributors
8 comments:
I encourage anyone interested in this topic to read the following article from John Zmirak: http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6407&Itemid=100
You're right, Civis, in bringing up the long established Christian principle of subsidiarity. The Pope even uses it in context with his "one world government" paragraph. I fear that that section of CV will need some further clarification. In CV the Pope says "...there is an urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good, and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth."
Is the Pope envisioning something akin to our "compound government" as understood by the Federalists? I don't know. Also, he says it should be "regulated by law." How if it's the highest secular authority? Would nations be able to seceed (sp?) if this authority overstepped it legal bounds by violating those inviolable fundamental rights dictated by Natural Law? Further, much of the world doesn't have a concept of the rule of law (See Kirk's "Roots of American Order") if we think it would self regulate. Even under the rule of law our founders knew to divide power: ("Ambition counteracting ambition.") Is he just throwing this out, with the sharp prodding of the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace, to encourgage statemen and interested laymen to contribute to reforming a multi-national organization, like the UN, in ways more compatible with subsidiarity? Don't know. It does appear that big governments today, like the EU and the UN--and the US--, don't give a rats tail for the dignity of the person, the traditional family, and the small community.
What I do know is that the Pope gives us the principles, but we're in charge of determining the prudential technicalities of making the principles a reality.
The social encyclicals are great at starting political and economic discussions because the technical stuff is beyond the competence of the office.
JLW:
I figured you would have some insights on this!
Yes, papal declarations are usually taken out of context both by the left and (perhaps not as often) by the right. That an independent supranational entity should be able to arbiter international conflicts and affairs - without interfering with legitimate internal issues - is nothing new in Catholic thought. The papacy itself fulfilled that role several times in history. (Admittedly, not always in the most transparent way. What can I say?: we're flawed by Original Sin :-)
Much ado about nothing.
JLW:
BTW, did you know that Zmirak is an LSU grad? Brilliant fellow. I think it was Walker Percy (by that time long dead) that brought him to LSU.
I didn't know that. Now the list of LSU greats are: Voeglin, Stoner, Zmirak, Civis, and Baker. :)
A couple of those are great.
And Walker Percy taught there too.
Hey, how could to leave out James Carville? :)
Thank you for leaving out William T. Sherman.
I almost put Sherman in there just for you.
Of course, the list wasn't exhaustive.
"A Reuters report . . . conveys the impression that the encyclical calls for a centralized authority to govern the world economy. It is true that the Pope calls for reform of the UN to create 'a true world political authorityŠ with real teeth.' But he does not suggest central economic planning, and in fact he devotes considerable stress to the importance of the subsidiarity principle, which he says is 'the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state.'"
Read entire article at:
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=60337
I hope patriots, most of whom would not trust Reuters on any other topic, will read the encyclical itself; I know it's long but it will take less time to read Caritas in Veritate than to read all the screeds coming out of various "conservative" sites condemning the Pope and the Church, especially those websites which operate on the tacit assumption that the Catholic Church is the you-know-what of Babylon.
Short course on the Church's Principle of Subsidiarity:
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/what_you_need_to_know/index.cfm?id=84
In a humorous vein, "Diogenes" comments on the Washington Post's penetrating analysis of the reason for the encyclical's release date, to wit, it involved "some PR chops somewhere in the Vatican."
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otr.cfm?id=5021
Post a Comment