The problem with Catholic social teaching
By Mark Vernon on Tuesday, December 15 2009, 10:21 - Moral matters - Permalink
The piece yesterday, Just how serious is the economic crisis?, included the thoughts of John Milbank. He is a rare, because genuinely challenging, voice in public debate right now. What I didn't get in yesterday, though, is that he finds much support in Catholic social teaching - and that's where I start to feel nervous.
For example, Milbank rightly critiques the firm, that operational unit in capitalism that by way of contractual, defensive and self-interested relationships, undermines trust - the quality that is so necessary for a flourishing economy. But doesn't the Catholic Church act quite like a firm too, with its strict clarity on who's in, and who's out; with its defense mechanisms against the infidels? Is not target culture a bit like confession culture? Is not computer-says-no a bit like catechism-says-no?
Then, for liberals who might want to take on board some of the critique of liberalism - that it places too much emphasis on arbitrary choice and solipsistic individualism - the problem with the Catholic church is that it is just so retrogressive. Catholic social teaching really needs to get its act sorted out when it comes to women, gays and sex, though that ain't going to happen any time soon, which means its insights will remain marginal.
And then, there's that air of arrogance, coming from an institution that essentially believes it has the answer, that its task is no more or less than presenting the Truth afresh in every generation. What happened to the conversation that was Christianity, when no-one believed they had a mainline to absolute good, because only God is good? We need a discussion about the common good, an effort to discern a variety of responses that are emergent, not a monopoly that Opec-like is imposed.
Comments
The problem with the Catholic Church from my perspective is that in its yearn to fulfil it's remit as the Universal Church it wants to subsume all particulars under its own rules. But the Papacy has managed to get topsy-turvy the role of a universal religion to my eyes, which should surely be to merely recognise the many particulars under the universal, not to enforce one view therein. A Catholicism that learned from the Sufi would be a very different animal! I am mindful, however, of Taylor's retort that "What Vatican rule-makers and secularist ideologies unite in not being able to see, is that there are more ways of being a Catholic Christian than either have yet imagined."
Best wishes!
Our problem with Catholic social teaching is not in the documents but with those who use the texts to prove that an invasion and occupation of a country like Iraq is "just" and with those who spot quote modern popes in order to promote liberal capitalism or political agendas.
Catholic Social Teaching, like the Catholic Bible (Septuagint), needs an interpreter - a teacher. The Catholic Church must needs be the living teacher of its social tradition and the scriptures themselves of which it claims to be the custodian and protector. This claim of authority goes along with the Church's other social doctrines.
The credibility of the Catholic Church wanes on these matters, I think, because the lynch pin of its social doctrines is no longer applied. The lynch pin is none other than the controversial Social Reign or Kingship of Christ as articulated in Quas Primas by Pius XI. If the words of the Church are ever to be consulted or heeded nowadays, she will need to hold nothing back; her relevance and ecumenical bearing notwithstanding.