Reclaiming Catholic Social Teaching: Post 3

[Details of image: here]

For previous post, see here.

Chapter 2: Human Liberty

We complete the first week's work by looking at the chapter on liberty.

Key points:

• Liberty without order based on a true sense of what is fulfilling for human beings is self-destructive.
• An obsession with replacing tradition involves the wilful destruction of the accumulated wisdom of humanity. 

My summary:

Esolen adduces three main arguments against an undue emphasis on liberty(ie liberalism) in this chapter. First, liberalism is an 'innovation' and such innovations, changes to the established wisdom of humankind, carry a heavy burden of proof before they should be accepted. Secondly, liberalism leads to tyranny. Thirdly, submission to divine law and authority provides protection against both the tyranny of individuals and of the State.

Democracy is not always and everywhere the best form of government: although it can allow an appropriate liberty, it can also set the conditions for excessive liberty and tyranny.

My critical commentary:

Esolen begins this chapter with the image of Satan from Dante's Inferno, trapped in ice, gnawing on three traitors. (This is from Inferno, Canto 34. The English text may be found here.) For Esolen, this is the image of modern, empty freedom: the licence to do everything become the emptiness of nothingness. (As an aside, it's worth thinking about Esolen's methodology here, in his constant reference to great works of art, visual and literary. Are these merely educational aids to make understanding of complex arguments easier? Or does art reveal something that the conceptual thinking of philosophy cannot? If a society has abandoned its great art, has it also abandoned a privileged access point to reality?)

An obvious objection here is that Satan (eg by being trapped in ice) is not at liberty at all. But the charge that liberty and democracy produces a sort of desperate and futile search for meaning and eventual tyranny is an old one. (The decline from democracy to tyranny is, for example, described by Plato in the Republic.)  The key thought here is that lack of an order based on human nature (and of the nature of the universe) leads to personal disorder (the triumph of tyrannical whims over reason) and social disorder (the triumph of a tyrant). 

Questions:

• Isn't the promotion of maximum liberty the best form of government?
• Given that we have no agreed idea of what a 'natural order' might be, isn't the best thing simply to allow people to do what they like?
• We know that the past is shot through with patriarchy and other unfortunate tendencies. Doesn't this alone give as reason to prefer 'innovation'?

This is the end of the first week's work. Do feel free to keep commenting! The next post (week 2) will be on Monday 31 August.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Works of Leo XIII referred to in chapter (in order of reference; page number in book cited):

Libertas praestantissimum here. (p.40) 

Praeclara grationis publicae here. (p.43)

Inscrutabili here. (p.43-4)

Quod Apostolici muneris  here. (p. 44)

Immortale Dei here. (p.44)

Humanum genus here. (p.44)

Rerum Novarum here. (p.44-5)

Inscrutabili here. (p.46)

Quod Apostolici muneris  here. (p. 46)

Immortale Dei here. (p.46)

Libertas praestantissimum here. (p.46)

Pervenuti all'anno (Italian version here.) (p.47) 

Immortale Dei here. (p.47)

Libertas praestantissimum here. (p.47)

Sapientiae Christianae here. (p.47)

Testem Benevolentiae here. (p. 48)