Should Catholics Follow The Utopian Vision of Modern Democracies? Part III-1 Some Reflections on the Founding Fathers of America

Last updated on: June 7, 2007 at 7:34 pm by voxnovablog

Should Catholics Follow The Utopian Vision of Modern Democracies? Part III-1 Some Reflections on the Founding Fathers of America 2007-06-07T19:34:00-05:00 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.

The average American individual is generally satisfied with the sense of freedom they possess by living in the United States. It is certainly a philanthropic desire which makes many Americans want to spread the democratic way of life around the world. Few of them have taken the time to observe the realities of freedom; they enjoy the freedoms they posses while they are blind to those restrictions society places upon them which limits the actuality of this freedom. Someone raised in a particular society will appreciate those freedoms they possess there, but if they move to another country, more often than not, they will become acutely aware of the different sense of freedom their new homeland has from the land of their birth. They will be specifically aware of regulations which restrict the freedoms they once possessed, while they might never be able to fully appreciate the freedoms they have gained. Certainly some of these freedoms will be perfectly clear to them (and will be among the reasons why the moved), but many others they will never be able to see. The famous explorer, Sir Richard Burton, had a profound awareness of this truth when he wrote, “Throughout the world the strictness of the Lex Scripta is in inverse ratio to that of custom: whenever the former is lax, the latter is stringent, and vice versa. Thus in England, where law leaves men comparatively free, they are slaves to a grinding despotism of conventionalities, unknown in the land of tyrannical rule. This explains why many men, accustomed to live under despotic governments, feel fettered and enslaved in the so-called free countries. Hence, also the reason why notably in a republic there is less private and practical liberty than under a despotism” Richard F. Burton, Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-madinah & Mecca: Volume Two (New York: Dover, 1964),87. When we look at another nation than our own, we are more profoundly aware of the restrictions that society places upon its citizens, if they are different from the ones in our land, than those freedoms they possess by the virtue of their own particular society. We are creatures of habit; we are socialized in such a way that we are accustomed to restrictions placed upon us, and we do not perceive them as being a limit to our liberty. On the other hand, those freedoms we proclaim as being the virtues of our society are the ones we look for in another, and they become the means by which we judge the freedom of those living in another society.

A sense of liberty is a necessity for the realization of human dignity. There must be some level of free association and creative interaction with one’s neighbors in order for one to develop the fullness of their personal worth. The question we must turn to, however, is whether this liberty is to be granted by a governmental institution alone? If it is, then the second question is this: if this institution were universal, and its liberty were granted to all, would it produce a genial, peace-loving society free from abuse; that is, could it produce a kind of utopia on earth?

We have already looked at some reservations people have had to the belief that a democratic institution could, by its nature, produce a free society. However, history shows us that these reservations were not possessed by the critics of democracy alone. Until the modern era, there was a general understanding that the democratic system did not possess within itself the ability to bring about a sustained, universal peace; it was, as with all governmental systems, a relative good, one which would have its time, and one which would end, as all systems do, in despotism. We find this sentiment, for example, in the reflections upon the developing Constitution of the United States by Benjamin Franklin, who said said, “In these Sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its Faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administered; and I believe farther that it is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other” Benjamin Franklin, “Speech in the Constitutional Convention” pages 349-51 in Autobiography and Other Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 350.

There was no agreement as to the means by which one could best secure liberty. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had two divergent views: Jefferson desired a more democratic form of government, believing that the more the general populace was involved, the better that government would be, while Adams believed that checks and balances were needed in a government to prevent democratic excesses. Adams was one of the leading proponents of a republican form of government where the representatives, chosen by the people, would possess a great amount of authority, putting to check the ambitions of the mob. Adams stated that “democracy is as restless, as ambitious, as warlike and bloody, as aristocracy or monarchy” John Adams, “Correspondence with Sherman and Taylor” in The Portable John Adams (New York: Penguin Classics, 2004), 431. The excesses of the French Revolution, he believed, more than anything else, was from the excesses of democracy and proved his point. “What can I say of the democracy of France? I dare not write what I think and what I know. […] What was the ambition of this democracy? Nothing less than to propagate itself, its principles, its system, through the world; to decapitate all the kings, destroy all the nobles and priests in Europe” (ibid, 430). The blood that was spilled throughout Europe, be it from the French Revolution or from the Napoleonic wars, was the result of the democratic spirit. “Democracy is chargeable with all the blood that has been spilled for five-and-twenty years” (ibid, 431).

Jefferson, with his more democratic spirit, believed in the general benevolence of humanity. However, this did not mean he was blind to human frailty. He certainly did not believe that democracies would produce perfect societies. He was rather pragmatic in his approach, and he wanted no one to hold onto the dictates of the past as providing absolute unreformable models. “Some men,” he wrote, “look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment” Thomas Jefferson, “Letter to Samuel Kercheval” pages 615-17 in The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson (New York: The Modern Library, 2004), 615-16. While he believed there was a need for stability, so that a government would not be constantly changed, there would be times when a government is no longer adequate and reformation is necessary. “But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times” (ibid., 616). Jefferson, while a man of the Enlightenment, nonetheless knew that human institutions could not be the foundation of a lasting utopia. And there is not any guarantee that, even when authority is granted to many in the name of the people, this would not end up as despotic. “All the powers of government, legislative, executive and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers wills be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single one. One hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one. Let those who doubt it turn their eyes on the republic of Venice. As little will it avail us that they are chosen by ourselves. An elective despotism was not the government we fought for…” Thomas Jefferson, Notes On Virginia pages 177-267 in The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson (New York: The Modern Library, 2004), 221-2.

It was understood that democracies, like all other systems, could rise and fall. Some democracies will more quickly devolve into tyranny than others, and in part, the weakness of democracy was its strength: it is founded upon the will of the people. When the people are well educated and virtuous, it was believed they would create a prosperous, benevolent land. But who is to say what virtue is, and how one is to be educated? This question is never easy to answer, but it is even more difficult when a government is based upon a pure secular humanism without some transcendent ideals in order to judge this virtue. The founding fathers of the United States held on high our rational nature, believing it was a gift of God which enables us to ascertain the moral needs of our community.

Yet beneath this exterior there is another story. The framers of the American democratic system were being torn in many directions, and the justifications they used for it were often self-contradictory. They relied upon traditional values to demand justice, but then they want on to question the cultural basis of these values. Thomas Paine, whose views Thomas Jefferson supported, represents the dark underbelly of this so-called Enlightenment. In his Age of Reason he brought forward a critical assault on Christianity. Its morals, he believed, had to be rejected: they were incapable of being followed, or if they were followed, they only helped to advance some great evil. He examined many of the moral teachings of the Christian faith, finding reasons to question and ridicule them. In one illuminating passage which demonstrates this, he says, “Loving of enemies is another dogma of feigned morality, and has besides no meaning. It is incumbent on man, as a moralist, that he does not revenge an injury; and it is equally as good in a political sense, for there is no end to retaliation, each retaliates on the other, and calls it justice; but to love in proportion to the injury, if it could be done, would be to offer a premium for crime” Thomas Paine, Age of Reason (New York: Citadel Press, 1995),184. Indeed, for this and for other reasons, Paine tells us, “Of all the systems of religion that were ever invented, there is none more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself, than this thing called Christianity” (ibid, 186). Paine believed that a government should not entertain gracious forgiveness, because it only justified evil, “it is not incumbent on man to reward a bad action with a good one, or return a good for evil; and wherever it is done, it is a voluntary act and not a duty” (ibid., 185). This is the limit of what a human can provide, when left to their own; but what kind of nation, what kind of state, can last without it turning into barbaric retaliation, one against another, if this principle of grace is left out? How can this provide for any lasting peace? Certainly, it can be said, Paine represented a minority position during the time of the founding of our nation; but has this spirit not been on the increase, showing it is at the heart of a humanistically-followed democratic frame of mind? And is this not the heart of the strengths and weaknesses behind the modern democratic system? It is perfectly human, capable of the greatness of humanity, but also the excesses of its passions and desires, including the desire for revenge?

The founding fathers of American democracy were, to be sure, geniuses who tried to aspire to greatness. They tried to give a flexibility to the system so that it can grow and develop, hoping this would prevent despotism. But they did not believe it can be put off indefinitely. Moreover, we now are capable of seeing the despotic activity they allowed, as for example, the institution of slavery and the gross mistreatment of Native Americans. But this is not the end of the story. We acknowledge the mistakes of the past. Does this not show the strength of the democratic spirit? Perhaps, but what guarantees do we have, even now, that we are not blind, as a nation, to other abuses, and do not allow other abhorrent behavior in the name of democracy? Does not the flow of innocent blood committed by abortionists, all in the name of freedom, show that utopia has not been reached?

Previous Post

June 7, 2007

Global Warming: Not a Partisan Issue (Part 1)

Next Post

June 8, 2007 On the Economics of Global Warming

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

How many books in the Bible are classified as poetry?

Select your answer to see how you score.

6 5 7 4