A Catholic Leftism?

Last updated on: February 16, 2017 at 1:03 pm by Chase Padusniak

A Catholic Leftism? 2017-02-16T13:03:19-04:00 Chase Padusniak

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

(Painting on ceramic, representing the judgment of Solomon, 18th century, Castelli, Italy. Now in the Lille Museum of Fine Arts. Source: Wikimedia, Creative Commons License).

Lots of people seem to think the “Catholic Left” is a contradiction in terms. Surely some 19th-century bishops looked with suspicion upon socialists, social democrats, and the like who peopled their flocks. Today a portion of U.S. Catholics bandy about the word “Leftist” to the point of near total confusion. From Hillary Clinton to Bernie Sanders to Karl Marx (and how great the gaps are), Leftists are to be distrusted.

This is a position I feel I understand, in part, because it was once the way I thought. I was never quite so ideologically beholden to hatred of the enemy (my conservative dalliance looked something more like uneasy Red Toryism), but I certainly felt haunted by the specter of what was often called the Left, a sort of undifferentiated blob of heterodoxy, atheism, and general nuisance.

Today, I’m not sure I would self-describe as being on the Left (it simply doesn’t feel immediately important to me), but I think lots of others would say that’s where I belong. Taking their claim as a go ahead I feel called to ask myself: how did I go from being a “conservative” to a “Leftist” (all caveats included)?

The answer has been slow to dawn; in fact, I’m still working it out. But, after some conversations with friends who, even if they read people like Derrida, Rorty, Heidegger, and Foucault, are still essentially “conservative,” the beginnings of an answer began to emerge. For them, “conservatism” is often defined as a temperament; one pilfers the coffers of postmodernism only to return with some instrumental treasures. The real claim is that revolutions must be distrusted, human agency must be viewed skeptically, the democracy of the dead must be respected.

Again, I know this line of argument because it was once my own (the Red Tory philosopher, George Grant, was my first intellectual crush). And, to do it justice, there is still a sense in which I remain “conservative” by this definition. Prudence is integral to any practicable system; I acknowledge that.

But then it dawned on me, what they were ignoring: structures, institutions.

“Conservatism” in this attitudinal sense does not, primarily, concern itself with structures, but rather with cultures. Culture is often (though not always) treated as an abstract entity for investigation, embedded in things like economic forces, religion, political institutions, and the like, but, in the end, treated as the primary object of investigation. “Culture” becomes the catch-all for the incredibly-complex nexus of relationships that affects our behavior (this typically ends with a nod to human agency, which, even if lip service is paid to the power of institutions, is figured as the ultimate factor in determining behavior).

If one asks which came first: “the chicken or the egg?” one gets the answer: “culture.”

It is beyond the scope of this blog post, but suffice it to say that this emphasis allows (many) conservatives to adopt a twofold response: personal responsibility and lament. The former is key for all Christians, but elevated to a sort of impossible freedom (as if we aren’t born into communities, countries, a world); the answer, at bottom, is always “you don’t need to do what society tells you to.” The latter allows for issues to be decried with no real solution proffered. If one is proffered it is personal charity. QED.

As I’ve grown a bit older, this has struck me as insufficient. It is true that each of us must convert (“repent and submit to the pope,” etc.); each of us must have our own life transformed. But we are still historically-conditioned beings, living out our existences under highly-specific conditions that cannot merely be reduced to terms like “culture,” “society,” “nation,” “community,” or “economic system.” These exist in tension with one another and, if we wish to transform one, we must think in terms of the others; none can stand alone as objects of our analysis, except when being treated in a very limited way.

Other thinkers like guild socialists, Mutualists, Catholic socialists, Catholic Workers, and more show us a different way.

Previous Post

February 15, 2017

"Yes"

Next Post

February 16, 2017 The Sensuous Catholic Body

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Culture Politics Reviews Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 December 2020 November 2020 July 2020 May 2020 April 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 August 2019 July 2019 April 2019 March 2019 December 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "If I perish, I perish"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Deborah Ruth Esther Hannah