Catholics , Partisanship , and the Public Square

I think perhaps Civics Geeks has one of the Catholic political post of the day at On the honesty of partisanship . I think he hits a lot of things right on the head. Read the whole thing but I wanted to interact with these parts

In the attempt to be fair and intellectually open-minded, they will consider and critique both political parties. This, by itself, is a good thing. Their misstep comes when they pretend they do not prefer one party over the other, or that they are somehow above such a pedestrian preference. By avoiding making such a commitment to one set of ideas over another, they are able to avoid difficult and embarrassing conversations, like actually admitting they prefer the Democratic plan for society over the Republican one. This often takes the form of an argument that says neither political party is satisfactory, and therefore the correct position is one that rejects the whole "system.".

Amen to that. Perhaps it is me but I tire of all the party and govt bashing. I think this has little to do with religious conviction, political conviction, etc but is often just the good ole American tradition of complaining about govt, politics, and politicians. We enjoy it. It is entertainment. I make a huge prediction. There will never be a election when we don't hear on a vast scale "Can I vote for none of the above", "how come no good people run for office" ,"no one inspires me", "they are all alike" My favorite lately has been "this is not what the founding fathers intended" I find that the most amusing because most people's Universe of Founding Fathers is limited to the 3 or 4 biggies. For instance outside Maryland how many Catholics in the United States know the name of a very important Catholic Founding Father? How many could name him. Perhaps if we were lucky 3 or 4 percent.

Also if they were alive back then no doubt they would be throwing mud at Thomas Jefferson, or talking about how Adams was going to be destroying the Young Republic, or how Alexandria Hamilton was immoral. Pleaseee

My other fun quote I hear is "I wish we had more than two parties!!!" Guess what we do!!! We have a ton of them go sign up and convince your neighbors of your new third party vision!!! I think though this is often more " I wish we had a party where all the politicians and their supporters agreed with my vision of the Universe on all things" I see this in the Republican party all the time. There are about 4 or 5 strains of conservatism that are convinced that they are majority of not only the Party but the United States!!! That if these rinos or cinos(which are all the other strains) just got out of the way we could usher in the n Conservative age of Aquarius. I can't help but note that people that talk about third parties are often not coalition types or compromise types. Which is one reason I suppose these things do not get off the ground.

Really, the rejection of political commitment is a rejection of what is human. Human affairs are imperfect and always will be. And it's true, from the point of view of Catholic Social Thought or the Platonic realm of true forms, that no political party or set of ideas will be satisfactory. From a certain point of view, nothing political is satisfactory. True justice is not possible in this world. This preference for the ideal is an easy trap for academics to fall into. Nothing human satisfies the academic, because academics are free from the constraints of reality, able to work out the perfect world in their minds.

So true!!! Also contrary to what people might say there has been no Vatican Declaration declaring that parties are themselves bad or there is some perfect blueprint to apply Catholic Social thought in a one size fits all point of view

I hasten to add that we would do well to remember that perfectly faithful Catholics can have totally legitimate and totally different political opinions. If Michael Iafrate wants to live in a world without the nation-state, he is free to argue for that world. If Policraticus thinks it best if a democratic government takes control over the economy and redistributes wealth, he is welcome to think that. And if someone else thinks limited mixed governments are the way to go, more power to them. Catholicism allows for that diversity of political opinion

Amen to that

I think, shameful to criticize and question the faith of someone whose politics you disagree with. Unless, of course, that person advocates for something that is in direct contradiction to basic Catholic moral teaching. Which is why we need to draw a clear line between binding Catholic moral teaching and politics. It seems that Catholic Social Thought has made this more difficult, not less. I wish the opposite was the case.

I think this is the big point. Even though as one can tell I am pretty big Republican I try my best to talk about what BINDING CATHOLIC TEACHING IS and what is more negotiable. I hope I make that distinction when I am talking about faith and politics. There are about 4 or 5 things (depending how you number them) that are non negotiable items that must be confronted.

After that it of course gets murky. That is not to say anything goes in that category. For instance one of my issues is immigration reform. I admit I have to be careful on this issue and it is one that I might be took quick to judge other's peoples Catholic Faith on. I still think that some solutions to lets say the illegal alien crisis are off the table no if's no and's no but's. But there is a lot of gray elsewhere and I have to remind myself not do what Civic Geeks is talking about. People have other issues of course

His thoughts on Catholic Social thought are right on. Still Catholic Social Thought is not some optional thing and we must keep on plugging away. That involves believe it or not partisanship and vocal disagreement.