What motivated me to write this piece is the strong reaction I received from Catholic republican supporters for some articles I have written of late regarding the recent US election. In particular the irrational way they utter the word, ‘socialist’ as if it were a dirty word. Living in Australia where democratic socialism is part of the landscape, this came as a shock. The attitude I got from some was so strong as to suggest that any pro-Democrat leaning was totally contrary to Christianity and Catholicism. I had always found socialist ideas to be much more compatible with the Gospel and the Church’s social teaching than Capitalism. So I decided to look into it.
First of all, I need to clarify that I am solely looking at the socialist economic/political philosophy, and not any other policies that Democrats or Republicans might stand for such as abortion, euthanasia, etc. I do this because it is the word ‘socialist’ that gets thrown in your face as if, if you are a Christian, you are meant to fall back in horror at the very thought of voting for a party that has such leanings.
Socialism is a social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
Many Christian socialists believe capitalism to be idolatrous and rooted in the sin of greed. Christian socialists identify the cause of social inequality to be the greed that they associate with capitalism. They usually point to the Acts of the Apostles 2:44-45, “The faithful all lived together and owned everything in common; they sold their goods and possessions and shared out the proceeds among themselves according to what each one needed,” and Acts 4:32, “The whole group of believers was united, heart and soul; no one claimed for his own use anything that he had, as everything they owned was held in common.” From these passages, they claim that Christian communities practiced the sharing of goods and labour, a simple form of socialism, subsequently followed in certain forms of monasticism, and practiced to this day by religious orders.
The counter argument is that there are three important things to see in these passages. First, there’s no doubt that these first Church-age believers really were generous. Secondly, however, they were generous towards each other, not to the state’s coffers or the tax man. Thirdly and most importantly, the giving and distribution seen in chapter 2 and 4 was voluntary.
Genuine Christian giving doesn’t tax people whereas socialist economies take from everyone whether they want to pay or not. They would argue that, because of this, socialism saps the will of many achievers and workers: why innovate and work hard if half of your reward will be taken away from you and given to someone who could work but won’t? Why work hard when your money is to be taken away without your say-so and given to individuals who are poor? Such a practice gives people no incentive or will or right to work for themselves?
An argument used by pro-republicans is that it’s up to people to use their heads in terms of how they use the money they earn. People should have a preference to use their money to buy their own private health coverage before spending on a car or house or anything else. Anyone who lives under such a Capitalist system is aware that they are responsible for their own welfare and not the State. This system, they would argue, leads to the formation of high achiever. Anyone can make it, but it requires a dedication to hard work. Whereas a socialist system robs people of incentive reducing people to the lowest common denominator.
The Catholic Church’s Social teaching does recognise that people do need incentive to bring out the best in them. Work is an expression of our dignity and a participation in God’s creation and therefore the Church recognises that, for people to thrive and realise their full potential, they have the right to economic initiative and the ownership of private property.
So the main concerns held by the right end of politics centre around these rights and a fear that the State will take what belongs to them away and that they will have no choice in the matter. Therefore a major fear is the loss of freedom and independence. They would cite that within the Christian Church there are many generous souls and churches who quietly make life better for those around them and in other lands. This is their choice and their right.
I cannot argue with the importance of choice and freedom, but this argument suggests that the relief and support of the poor should be solely based on charity. It relies on the good will, generosity and kind choice of those in society who have the means and wealth to help the poor and not the responsibility of the State. The scriptures, on the other hand, and the Catholic Church’s Social Teaching that is built on this foundation, suggests a different point of view.
While one part of the Jewish tradition held that poverty was a judgment of God upon the wicked while prosperity was a reward for the good (Proverbs 13:25), Leviticus 19:13, 18 states, “You shall not oppress your neighbour […] but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord.”
Deuteronomy 10:17-19 states: “For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes. He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing. And you are to love those who are foreigners, for you yourselves were foreigners in Egypt.”
Deuteronomy 24:19-22 states: “When you reap in your harvest in the field, and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it. […] When you beat your olive trees, you shall not go over the boughs again. […] When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not glean it afterward; it shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless and the widow. You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt; therefore I command you to do this.
Some of the Psalms include many references to social justice for the poor:
“Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.” (Psalms 82 (81): 3, 4)
“Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in his commandments! […] He has distributed freely, he has given to the poor; his righteousness endures forever; his horn is exalted in honour.” (Psalms 112 (111): 1, 9)
The prophet Amos emphasizes the need for “justice” and “righteousness” that is described as conduct that emphasizes love for those who are poor and to oppose oppression and injustice towards the poor. The prophet Isaiah, to whom is attributed the first thirty-nine chapters of the Book of Isaiah known as Proto-Isaiah, followed upon Amos’ themes of justice and righteousness involving the poor as necessary for followers of God, denouncing those who do not do these things, stating: “Even though you make many prayers, I will not listen; your hands are full of blood. Cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow. (Isaiah 1:15–17)
The Book of Sirach denounces the pursuit of wealth, stating: “He who loves gold will not be justified, and he who pursues money will be led astray by it. Many have come to ruin because of gold, and their destruction has met them face to face. It is a stumbling block to those who are devoted to it, and every fool will be taken captive by it. (Sirach 31: 5–7)
In the New Testament, in the final judgement in Matthews Gospel (Mt 25:31-46) Jesus identifies himself with the hungry, the poor, the sick, and the prisoners, condemning those who fail to care for him present in these least of his brothers and sisters. In Luke 10:25–37, following the statement, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself,” Jesus is asked, “And who is my neighbour?” Jesus replies with the Parable of the Good Samaritan, giving a revolutionary response that the neighbour includes anyone in need, even people we might be expected to shun (Samaritans were considered a heretical sect by Jews and neither would usually deal with the other).
Luke 6:20–21 shows Jesus narrating the Sermon on the plain, stating: “Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you that hunger now, for you shall be satisfied.”
In the Epistle of James, he states, “Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have rusted, and their rust will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up for treasure for the last days. Behold, the wages of the labourers who mowed your fields, which you have kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.” (James 5:1–6)
While none of these texts of scripture specifically advocate for the public ownership or control of property and resources, they do make it clear that, from God’s perspective, there is more than just a free option/choice being offered. God’s call is quite directive in terms of responsibility for the disenfranchised, to the point of threats of punishment for those who fail in this call to social justice.
The Catholic Church’s Social Teaching recognises the right to private property, but conversely it recognises that all people, in light of their dignity, made in the image and likeness of God, have the right to food, clothing, housing, healthcare, education, social services, employment and to have a share of sufficient earthly goods for oneself and one’s family. Indeed, according to the Church’s social teaching, a basic test of a society is how its most vulnerable members are faring. Our tradition calls us to put the needs of the poor and vulnerable first. We are called to respond to the needs of our sisters and brothers. We are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers.
The sticking point is the imposition of this expectation from the State against the will of the people, thereby robbing people of freedom. But what if it is agreed to by the people? Isn’t this what our democratic process is? People have a choice in a democratic system. If these values are held by the majority as the values they want to live by, then by electing such a government, the people are saying that they agree that, in order to ensure the most vulnerable are cared for, that the government should tax citizens justly, in accordance with their means, to ensure that all people in that society have access to sufficient earthly goods for themselves and their families.
So where the dishonesty lies is in a system where pro-capitalists use any legal trick in the book to limit those who can vote. In trying to control the vote, they are saying publically that they don’t believe in the democratic process and want to win at any cost. They do not want to live under a system, even though the majority of the people want it, where they have to share their wealth with those who have not. Charity is OK, but responsibility for one another is not! They are like spoilt children who just don’t want to share their toys or play well with others.
Thank God I live in Australia!