The Alternative to GodFATHER JAMES V. SCHALL, S.J.
That the greatest enemy of the First Great Commandment is the Second Great Commandment seems paradoxical. Yet this divergence lies at the bottom of most civil controversy.
Neither one will long exist without the other. Power without love is tyrannical. Love without power or strength is wimpish and ineffectual. The "power of love" manifests itself most in the Cross, at that moment when civil power is absolute, untouched by its relation to the Godhead.
The following sentence of this 1968 book struck me: "Socialism is the love of neighbor without the love of God; it is the organization of society on a technical, scientific basis, rather than on charity. Love is not love unless it is directed to a person." Benedict said pretty much the same thing in Deus Caritas Est.
That the greatest enemy of the First Great Commandment is the Second Great Commandment seems paradoxical. Yet this divergence lies at the bottom of most civil controversy. The passionate opposition to God and His ways is almost always couched in the language of "love of neighbor," particularly of "helping" the neighbor.
The love of neighbor, often framed in terms of justice or social justice, sets itself against a love of God. The love of neighbor is independent of the commandments and ultimately of reason itself insofar as both originate in God.
Likewise, "the love of neighbor," as Sheen said, is framed in terms of science and technology. We have urgent schemes to control population, the environment, health, war, death, well-being, and education. This opposition between God and science is not exactly human reason vs. divine reason. Rather it is the functional reason that can "get things done" without concerning itself overly much with whether they ought to be done.
The central issue concerns the vast bureaucracy of "taking care" that now legitimizes governments. It gives glory to those who control their workings. The notion that "that government governs best governs least" is replaced. For the good of all, government ought to "take care" of everyone, particularly the poor.
This new "spiritual" power of the state does not want criticism of its plans for the good of the neighbor. It wants conformity and agreement. Divisiveness is caused by criticism of or disagreement with the accepted ways of life and principles of distribution now in place in the public order.
We live in a world of primarily distributive justice, not in a world of innovation and growth. This present world is mainly one in which envy is a primary motive of political action. Equality is its criterion. That such a view is based on bad economics is hardly relevant in light of the mission to "help" everyone.
If we really wanted to help everyone, no doubt, we would have a growth economics and theology. The world is made for man, not for future generations who become in effect limits to growth and hence the possibility of people caring for themselves.
What has always struck me, however, about this mentality is the "location" of God in it. Through a complex interrelationship of envy and honor politics, the politician and the elites that support him declare themselves free to "help the poor" or "care for everyone" without the "restrictions," as they are called, of the nature and purpose of what man is.
It is not possible to do evil without doing some good. The love of neighbor is a good. This is why the modern state wraps itself around the idea of "caring" for everyone. A certain exhilaration inheres in the effort to make everyone dependent on one's program to benefit everyone for his own good. Sheen remarked that love has to be of the person, not of a system. But by defining the evils and the way we are allowed to speak of them, the state that is not a god acquires the status of substitute divinity.
The subjects of this state generally do not object. They want to be "taken care" of, to have "rights" to everything, to praise those who see no opposition between what God has established and what the existing state decrees. In such a state, no real worship of God exists, only "care" for the neighbor, as it is decreed and accepted with grateful heart by citizens who, like their leaders, have no god but Caesar.
Father James V. Schall, S.J. "The Alternative to God." The Catholic Thing (February 5, 2013).
Reprinted with permission from The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Catholic thing — the concrete historical reality of Catholicism — is the richest cultural tradition in the world. That is the deep background to The Catholic Thing which bring you an original column every day that provides fresh and penetrating insight into the current situation along with other commentary, news, analysis, and — yes — even humor. Our writers include some of the most seasoned and insightful Catholic minds in America: Michael Novak, Ralph McInerny, Hadley Arkes, Michael Uhlmann, Mary Eberstadt, Austin Ruse, George Marlin, William Saunders, and many others.
Father James V. Schall, S.J., is emeritus Professor of Political Philosophy at Georgetown University and the author of many books in the areas of social issues, spirituality and literature including The Mind That Is Catholic: Philosophical & Political Essays, On the Unseriousness of Human Affairs: Teaching, Writing, Playing, Believing, Lecturing, Philosophizing, Singing, Dancing; Roman Catholic Political Philosophy; The Order of Things; The Regensburg Lecture; The Life of the Mind: On the Joys and Travails of Thinking; Schall on Chesterton: Timely Essays on Timeless Paradoxes; Another Sort of Learning, Sum Total Of Human Happiness, and A Student's Guide to Liberal Learning.
Copyright © 2013 The Catholic Thing
Not all articles published on CERC are the objects of official Church teaching, but these are supplied to provide supplementary information.