What has participation in "movement conservatism" yielded for traditional conservatives on the national level? How can one appeal to natural law, or "naturally known" moral truths on a wide scale (through the mass media, no less) to facilitate moral conversion? Has that ever happened in history? The freedom to participate in an extremely degraded version of democracy gives the illusion that Christians have the power to bring about positive change through the National Government; this is coupled with a misunderstanding of the obligations of citizenship, namely, that one has the "duty" to choose the "lesser of two evils" when voting for a candidate for office (which is a consequentialist understanding of voting and not one rooted in distributive justice) if no one meets the "ideal" based on his platform (as opposed to his character). When the national candidates are committed to perpetuating the status quo and not facilitating communal renewal by curbing the forces that threaten community (whether it be the oligarchs and their economic power or their servants in the National Government who seek greater power for themselves), then what exactly do Christians expect to accomplish? Imposing a moral agenda through the Federal Government not only violates the federal character of the U.S. Constitution but is impossible - the electoral power of Christians is too weak and diffuse.
Mr. Pahman writes:
While I am sensitive to Storck’s insistence that evangelism deserves renewed zeal for the sake of moral progress in society, I feel his opposition of evangelism rather than political action (or, more accurately, evangelism then political action) is ultimately harmful. In particular, there would seem to be no vocation for the Christian as citizen or civil servant today, no vital service that he/she has to offer to the kingdom of God now in his/her civic capacity before such a widespread evangelization has taken place. Whether or not one or the other is “a more hopeful project” is, furthermore, no reason to discourage the theological virtue of hope or the working of divine grace in either evangelization or political activism, especially in a country like the United States where the average citizen has a far greater civic role to play than citizens of an ancient or medieval monarchy. Both are possible duties and essential contributions to the kingdom of heaven and the common good.And so we see that Mr. Pahman has been beguiled into thinking that the average American has a great "civic role" to play than his ancient or medieval counterparts. This may have been true after independence from Great Britain was obtained, but it has not been true for quite some time.
Civil servant or bureaucrat? If a bureaucrat is enforcing bad laws that destroy freedom (and subsidarity and community), can one continue in good conscience? The lay vocation of the Christian is to build community, starting with his family and church community, then expanding outwards to his non-Christian neighbors and those around him. This has been constant, but we have been blinded because we have been inculturated in radical atomization and an exaggerated notion of the nation-state (which has either knowingly or unknowingly done what it can to destroy any "intermediate" associations or communities) - hence we identify political participation solely with voting and holding political office. (Performing jury duty is an important component, but how many of us would prefer not to do it because it is deemed inconvenient?) Secondly, the theological virtue pertains to God and our salvation, not to the political community as such. The act of building community is a truly political act - it is not "withdrawal" (just as refraining from interventionism is not isolationism). Ruling may be a more noble political political act, but Christians do not exercise it at the national "level" and in many states they do not do so at the state level. If movement conservatism is to have an impact, it should direct its attention to those states which are still Christian in character and seek to educate their citizens about federalism, states' rights, communitarianism, and so on, rather than promoting "free-market capitalism" which hollows out communities. Do you think movement conservates is capable of turning away the money from donors in the oligarchy and putting themselves out of a job?
Mr. Storck has an excellent response to the article. I think he and Dr. Fleming would be in agreement on the proper strategy for American Catholics and other genuine Christians.
No comments:
Post a Comment