First, here was Tim's comment:
It seems to me that arguments similar to the one you give, are a problem for most ethical systems. For example:My reply:
Robin Hood robs the oppressive rich to give to the poor. Can you give an argument, based on, say, Catholic doctrine, that will allow you to say unambiguously whether he's a hero or a villain? And would you be reasonably comfortable in assuming that pretty much all other Catholics would reach the same conclusion?
Christian morality is all about personal salvation. You do what is right in your life because God said so. Robbing from anyone is wrong so helping Robin Hood ends then and there. Exceptions have to come from truly extreme cases. Lying to Nazis to save Jews, a la Anne Frank, for example.My next thought was to examine Liberation Theology. I spent some time reading about it yesterday morning, but couldn't come up with a coherent post. I'm still noodling it around in my head, but here's a quick synopsis.
Atheist morality derives from trying to develop a model that provides the best future for all Mankind. This is an oversimplification, but I think it holds. Utilitarianism, Marxism, National Socialism, all do the same thing. They posit a model for human behavior and from that they derive a perfect future. Getting to that perfect future is then the goal of all people and since there is no God, there are no rules and getting there as fast as possible is just fine, no matter how many PR guys from BP you rob.
Lenin is a great example of this as he allowed Russian peasants to starve to death. The aggregate good of future generations achieving a Marxist utopia sooner rather than later outweighed the mass slaughter of the peasants at the time.
In answer to your question, no, Catholic doctrine would not support Robin Hood. Concrete example: the priests who preached Liberation Theology were not supported by the Pope.
In a crude nutshell, Liberation Theology says that God tells us to liberate the oppressed poor. It's adherents range from priests living in the slums of Central America to Reverend Wright retiring to a 3-story mansion on a golf course. And therein lies the issue. What works in one place and time may not work in another with at least one exception that I deal with later.
What is true in Mexico's slums is not true in the US. The piece on Oakland I keep linking to proves that conclusively. Through moral decay, the family structure of Oakland has broken down completely and there is only the atomic elements of society to rebuild upon - individuals pursuing survival and pleasure. Trillions of dollars have been poured into social programs in the US, more than enough money per person to have turned the slum in that video above into passable housing, schools and subsistence support. In the US, our efforts have been a broad failure - prison and education statistics prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Atheist moral systems that are based on models of humanity fail because there is no universal model of human behavior. The good cheer of the yacht club would lead you to one model while the violent narcissism of Oakland would lead you to another and the struggle for survival in the slums of Mexico would lead you to yet another. I would argue that the reason Christianity has not only survived, but flourished, growing from 11 scared, leaderless dudes in a Roman backwater 2,000 years ago to more than a billion adherents today is that its application is universal. Humans are flawed creatures that can achieve grace through personal behavior, behavior that has been set forth by God. It works in the slums, in Oakland and at the yacht club. It doesn't fall apart when incomes rise or fall. It doesn't presume a level of civilization in order to function. It just works.
More later, it's now time to give gushifud to our Maximum Leader.
* - Yes, I slept in today, but I've been wanting to explore this topic anyway.
3 comments:
For a long time, I have been rather struck by how remarkably difficult it was to get a straight answer out of priests as to just what Catholic doctrine defined as sins. In fact, it was so difficult that I'd kind of come to the conclusion that all the priests I knew were actually into situational ethics, and didn't really want to take a chance on making any absolute statements.
But now, with the Internet, one can actually find lists with a simple Google search.
Robin Hood is wrong. Compassion at another's expense is not compassion. There is no such thing as love without sacrifice. The government can't make anyone love anyone else. When the government takes over a job properly done by the church, the church suffers. I could (and have) write many pages on this topic. The marriage between leftist govt policies and Christianity is a disaster for both.
BTW, there is a Protestant version of Liberation Theology. The main expositor in the U.S. is a guy named Jim Wallis. It's not quite as sweaty or violent as the Catholic version. It's main tenet is "vote for politicians who will build up the welfare state".
Thanks for this article, really worthwhile material.
Post a Comment