Should Catholics Follow the Utopian Vision of Modern Democracies? Part II-1 St Thomas Aquinas

Last updated on: April 19, 2017 at 10:40 pm by voxnovablog

Should Catholics Follow the Utopian Vision of Modern Democracies? Part II-1 St Thomas Aquinas 2017-04-19T22:40:55-05:00 voxnovablog

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.

Of the three thinkers represented here, it is likely that most readers will have more familiarity with St Thomas Aquinas than Joseph de Maistre or Konstantin Pobedonostsev. While his comments do not directly respond to later political developments, his ideas have had a tremendous influence on that history, and what he says cannot be easily dismissed. Moreover, because later, modern critics of democratic societies such as de Maistre and Pobedonostsev elaborate upon ideas found within Thomas, it is best to begin with him to establish the basis of their thought. We must recognize that, for the sake of space, what is to be offered here can only be a cursory glance of Thomas’ thought. It will focus primarily upon his concise On Kingship trans. Gerald B. Phelan (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1949; repr. 1967) to make this a tight presentation of his thought.

There are two major strains of influence upon Thomas’ political thought: Christian Scripture and Hellenistic political theory. The first, with its historical insight, provides many examples which St Thomas can use to demonstrate the veracity of his political theory. It is correct to say that for the latter Aristotle is primary for St Thomas, but we must also recognize an influence from the neo-Platonic heritage which developed after Aristotle, because this helped form a hermeneutic by which the medievals read Aristotle.

What is government for St Thomas? Somewhat following Aristotle’s Politics, St Thomas says that we are social animals. We cannot obtain for ourselves all that we need on our own, and so we must rely upon the cooperation of our community to get them. “Wherefore, if man were intended to live alone, as many animals do, he would require no other guide to his end. Each man would be a king unto himself, under God, the highest King, inasmuch as he would direct himself in his acts by the light of reason given to him from on high. Yet it is natural for man, more than any other animal, to be a social and political animal, to live in a group” (St Thomas, On Kingship, 3-4). To him, a community is better when it is guided by some common principles through some sort of authority, because it then can better organize itself for the sake of a common good, specifically, peace. “Now the welfare and safety of a multitude formed into society lies in the preservation of its unity, which is called peace” (ibid., 11). St Thomas believes that it is the natural inclination of humanity to form social networks, and with it, to develop a system by which that social network can best work together to achieve its common end, that is, it is natural for us to form governments.

How does one discern which system or method of governing is best? What is the best way to keep that communal unity? “Now it is manifest that what is itself one can more efficaciously bring about unity than several…” (ibid., 12). St Thomas brings to the table the neo-Platonic notion that “the one” is more efficacious, more powerful, more capable of producing unity and therefore bringing out what is needed for the common good. This is because, “Several are said to be united according as they come closer to being one. So one man rules better than several who come near being one” (ibid., 12).

With these two ideas guiding his thought, St Thomas discusses three different methods of government: one where a society is ruled by a multitude (polyarchy), one where a society is ruled by a virtuous few, and one where a society is ruled by a single person (monarchy). He then divides these into those governments which are ruled justly or unjustly, ranking them according to the potential good or evil that these forms of governments can produce. He puts them down in the following scale, from best to worst: a king, an aristocracy, a polity, a democracy, an oligarchy, and a tyrant. He ranks them in this fashion because as he believes, from the oneness of authority, a king has more innate authority and power than an aristocracy, but an aristocracy has more power and ability than a democracy because, with fewer rulers, it is more united than what can occur in a polity. He then creates a symmetrical reversal of this order to discuss unjust governments: a democracy, because it inherently has less unity, has less power to do evil than an oligarchy, and similarly an oligarchy has less power to do that evil than a tyrant (cf. ibid, 7-8).

Obviously, St Thomas Aquinas is not following our definition of democracy when he describes it as the worst form of polyarchy. Thus, we cannot simply take this order without further observation. We must see what St Thomas does with his classification. It is not as simple as to say “because a tyrant has more potential to do evil, a tyrant is a greater evil than an unjust polyarchy.” Indeed, he believes this is not the case. He does not only considers the potential good or evil within an individual system of government, but also the potential for that system to turn from a just form of itself into an unjust form, and also the potential, if it is unjust, for it to follow through to the greatest kind of injustice available for that system.

In his reflection on this problem, St Thomas makes the observation that a monarchial form of government is less likely to develop into tyranny, and if it does, less likely to achieve the fullness of its potential evil than any other system. Indeed, if not looking to potential but to what he thinks happens in reality, the cruelty of an unjust monarch is more limited in scope than the cruelty of an unjust polyarchy. To explain this, he writes that a polyarchy of any sort has more potential for this devolution from the very fact that it is less united in itself and less capable of producing those goods which prevent a devolution to tyranny. “Now, considerable dangers to the multitude follow more frequently from polyarchy than from monarchy. There is a greater chance that, where there are many rulers, one of them will abandon the intention of the common good than that it will be abandoned when there is but one ruler. When any one among several rulers turns aside from the pursuit of the common good, danger of internal strife threatens the group, because, when the chiefs quarrel, dissension will follow in the people” (ibid., 21-2). Moreover, a tyrant will be less interested in the full extent of his powers, and will manifest his cruelty in a limited scope. “A tyrant, on the other hand, does not destroy this good [the social good], rather he obstructs one or the other individual interests of his subjects – unless, of course, there is an excess of tyranny and the tyrant rages against the whole community” (ibid. 21, note in the bracket mine).

St Thomas believes that in its nature, a polyarchy has less restrictions in place to prevent it from turning to tyranny than a monarchy. History, he says, proves this is so: “The best illustration of this fact is the history of the Roman Republic. It was for a long time administered by the magistrates but then animosities, dissensions and civil wars arose and it fell into the power of the most cruel tyrants” (ibid., 22). Danger, St Thomas tells us, is found within any system, but ones run by many people just multiply the risk for injustice, and therefore are best to be avoided. And, though he does not state it this manner, one cay say it is implied, that the more people are put in charge of a state, the more interests they can desire to obstruct, and thus the great amount of injustice can be found in the actual activity of an unjust polyarchy than in the similar activity of an unjust monarchy.

We can see that in modern democratic systems, because they have a representational form of leadership, they try to deal with some of the concerns of St Thomas Aquinas and those like him. There is one elected leader, and yet, he or she is seen to be ruling by the will of the people. Usually this leader does not have the full the authority of the nation or state invested upon his or her person: there others are who are given particular powers which he or she does not have. Thus, while there is the nominal idea that the people are in charge, in reality, the reality is that only a specific number of people in a given state possess real governing authority. Because this power is given to a specific group of people, and not to one individual, St Thomas would suggest that this group, instead of forming the basis of a check for power, forms the basis by which a government is most likely to devolve into tyranny.

Two more points need to be made before we end this discussion. St Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, develops what he said in On Kingship a bit further. While he continues to point out that a king is the best ruler for a state, this king clearly cannot do everything himself. The authority must be his, but it must also be divested in others. And these others should be the best from the people, chosen in part by the people “For this is the best form of polity, being partly kingdom, since there is one head of all; partly aristocracy, in so far as a number of persons are set in authority; partly democracy, i.e., government by the people, in so far as the rulers can be chosen from the people, and the people have the right to choose their leaders” (St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1948) I-II:105.1. Secondly, St Thomas Aquinas continues, in Christian fashion, to point out that all good, and the preservation of that good, comes from God. When we separate God from the equation, when we try to make it a perfectly human enterprise, corruption is to ensue; this is as true in a state as it is in an individual. It is not by arms or might, but in and through the grace of God we must work. Then, when God is brought into that equation, God can by grace perfect what is lacking in nature. “Indeed, everything that is variable in itself needs the help of an immovable mover so that it may be fixed on one objective. But man is subject to variation, both from evil to good and from good to evil. So, in order that he may immovably continue in the good, which is to persevere, he needs divine help” (St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles: Book Three, Providence. Trans.Vernon J Bourke (New York: Hanover House, 1956), Part II.151.2.

Previous Post

June 1, 2007

Should Catholics Follow the Utopian Vision of Modern Democracies? Part I

Next Post

June 2, 2007 More on Brownback and Evolution

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 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 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did the Israelites do when Moses was gone too long on the mountain?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Hid in fear Left Egypt again Built a city Made a golden calf