23 - A Radical Critique of Catholic Social Teaching

Summary

CST is impaired by (1) ambiguity about its scope or subject matter, (2) inattention to its dependence on judgments about empirical facts and likelihoods, and/or upon the other contingent factors and diverse but not unreasonable preferences inherent in any application of the Golden Rule, and (3) inappropriate assumptions that pastors have primary responsibility for making such judgments and assessments, and for deciding and choosing how the laity should act in line with them. Much (not all) of CST should be formulated hypothetically: if you judge that such and such facts obtain, or are likely, then (unless you judge that certain other facts do not obtain or are unlikely), true moral principles and norms, confirmed by divine revelation, direct that you should choose thus-and-thus. Popes and other bishops therefore should be little involved in it, beyond reminding everyone of those true principles and norms, in season and out. Their documents or preaching need not address CST more often than other matters of morality. Organs of the Holy See or bishops’ conferences dedicated to CST are unnecessary. The essay illustrates these theses (and seven related proposals) from the history of CST on sample topics such as the family wage, corporatism, usury, and nuclear deterrence.