|
The
Church, the State, and the Degradation of the Human Person
by Ryan McMaken
by Ryan McMaken
As
Pope Benedict XVI begins his Papacy, he is being very much received
as one expected to hold closely to the theology and faith of John
Paul II. Much has been made of their close working relationship,
and even of their shared experience of the Second World War. To
be sure, we know that both of them were profoundly affected by the
war, for both of them have centered much of their efforts in critiquing
modern society around the violence of the twentieth century, and
especially around the quintessential institution of the twentieth
century, the modern State.
In
recent days, as pundits and scholars have begun taking a second
look at Benedict XVI’s earlier work on issues of government and
the State, we find, similar to John Paul II, that he is careful
to circumscribe the legitimate realm of government, and that the
State, as an institution that denies any sovereignty other than
itself, whether it be the individual, the Church, or even God, is
a fundamental component of the violence and the dehumanization of
our time. Benedict writes
of "the myth of the divine state" and of the state as
"a thing" that is "not the whole of human existence."
Such a modest appraisal of the legitimacy of the State has hardly
been the dominant theme of our time.
While
few Americans are aware of the rise of the State as a unique institution,
Europeans have long been preoccupied with it, and in the works of
scholars as Diverse as Martin
van Creveld, Charles
Tilly, and Hendrik
Spruyt, we find the repeated theme of the State, built on war,
and committed to a mission of positioning itself against all other
institutions that may provide a substitute for the State. Whether
family, Church, God, or the individual himself, in the modern era,
the State is always the ultimate sovereign. It is the State from
which families, Churches, and individuals are to receive their autonomy
(as a gift of the State), and the State, through its coercive power
is always free to revoke such autonomy.
The
State does not possess its coercive power by magic, but by the consent
and support of human beings who have given up on the individual
and on God, and have turned to the State for security and salvation.
In John Paul II and in Benedict XVI, however, we find critics of
an institution they view as profoundly opposed to the ancient institutions
of society which Christian civilization has long been founded upon.
But, while their critiques of the State are eloquent, we must also
know the objective measure of value in human society. If
not the State, what? The objective measure is the individual person.
In
1968, while Soviet tanks were crushing the Czech resistance in Prague,
Karol Wojtyla, the future Pope John Paul II was writing his own
thoughts on the disaster of the 20th century:
"I devote
my very rare free moments to a work that is close to my heart
and devoted to the metaphysical sense and mystery of the person.
It seems to me that the debate today is being played out on that
level. The evil of our times consists in the first place in a
kind of degradation, indeed in a pulverization, of the fundamental
uniqueness of each human person. This evil is even more of the
metaphysical order than of the moral order. To this disintegration
planned at times by atheistic ideologies we must oppose, rather
than sterile polemics, a kind of "recapitulation" of the inviolable
mystery of the person."
We
find in John Paul II’s "inviolable" human person, the
objective measure of justice, and finally, in the central problem
of the 20th century: the "pulverization" of
the dignity of each human person.
Certainly,
the 20th century was even more of a tragedy given the
recognition of the individual as the primary unit of society for
centuries. Since the decline of the profoundly anti-human Imperial
Rome, Christianity, scholasticism, and medieval civilization, through
their recognition of the objective nature of natural law, had recognized
the individual, as possessing "incomparable worth." In
John Paul’s encyclical letter, Evangelium
Vitae, we find a recapitulation of Christian theology on
this subject, and on its proper application in society. The individual
must be the fundamental unit of human society, for, as John Paul
II tells us "Man, as the living image of God, is willed by
his creator to be ruler and lord" and he goes on to quote Saint
Gregory of
Nyssa of the ancient Church:
"God
made man capable of carrying out his role as king of the earth…Man
was created in the image of the One who governs the universe.
Everything demonstrates that from the beginning man’s nature was
marked by royalty…Man is a king. Created to exercise dominion
over the world, he was given likeness to the king of the universe;
he is the living image who participates by his dignity in the
perfection of the divine archetype."
Centuries
later, men like Hegel, Marx, and all their ideological brethren
would conclude that it is not individual men, but States, nations,
and governments, that participate "in the perfection of the
divine archetype." In fact, Hegel more or less says exactly
this. And today, every time a government offers some kind of new
paradise, whether it be some workers’ paradise or some end to injustice
through democracy, the outcome will always be the same, the denial
of the fundamental lordship of the individual in the name of utopia.
In
the analysis of this lordship, it must also be recognized, that
all individuals share in this fundamentally. As numerous Christian
scholars have noted, when man is given dominion over the earth in
Genesis, he is not given dominion over other men. This is
because, as John Paul II continues, "man is a ruler and lord
not only over things but especially over himself." Thus, any
State, any man, and indeed any law, that seeks or grants dominion
over this divinely granted self-rule, is fundamentally opposed to
the natural law.
It
is certainly no coincidence, that in classical liberalism, the political
system most devoted to the protection of natural rights, we find
its most eloquent defenders declaring as Thomas Jefferson did, that
"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against
every form of tyranny over the mind of man." The human exercise
of free will is essential in the self-rule of which John Paul speaks,
and certainly this self-rule must be recognized by maintaining that
"life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are the
natural by-product of the just exercise of free will.
First
among these is life. Without life, there can be no property, no
pursuit of happiness, and certainly no liberty, for if one has been
robbed of his one means of exercising his will in the world, how
can he have liberty? This was not lost on the Christian theologians
who understood that if one is to pursue virtue, he must be free
to do so. Control over either mind or body becomes a grave violation,
and we find this reasserted in the writings of John Paul: "Whatever
is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide,
abortion, euthanasia, or willful self-destruction, whatever violates
the integrity of the human person such as mutilation, torments inflicted
on body or mind, [or] attempts to coerce the will itself…are infamies
indeed."
Looking
back to John Paul’s earlier comments on the "inviolable mystery
of the person," it is difficult to see how he could come to
any other conclusion. The physical human person, his body and his
mind, which Gregory of Nyssa tells us is created in a divine image,
is inviolable merely by virtue of being a human being, and cannot
be coerced, nor can it be treated in any way contrary to the natural
law, thus attempts to "coerce the will itself" are listed
as deeds worthy of the same condemnation as murder and torture.
Certainly,
human history has been an astonishingly long chronicle of violations
of the human person and human dignity. Yet perhaps what is more
astonishing are those many instances where human dignity has been
preserved, whether we look to the development of just war theory,
or of international law, or even of the gradual abolition of slavery
in Europe during the middle ages. Such efforts were not undertaken
by men because they glorified nations or empires, but because they
were centered on protecting the natural rights and dignity of human
beings.
By
the 20th century, though, the philosophy of Gregory of
Nyssa, the philosophy of the human being as one who "was given
likeness to the king of the universe," had long been dying.
John Paul II did not see this as merely a development of the 20th
century, but as a larger symptom of modernity. The modern world,
characterized primarily by the dominance of ideologies that deify
the State, had nevertheless been witness to many great acts of humanity
not because of its break with the medieval tradition, but because
of the deeply rooted tradition still lingering where men might still
be recognized in their participation in the "divine archetype."
The
20th century would see the virtual end of this lingering
tradition. We know from John Paul’s repeated questioning of the
tragedy of the 20th century, that to him, the central
threat to human dignity in our time has not been the ordinary human
weakness that has always afflicted men, but the faith and submission
given to the machinery of the State placed in opposition to God
as the true vehicle of salvation and justice. It has been States
and their myriad of eschatological ideologies, after all, that have
been the vanguard of creating what John Paul called "the culture
of death." It has been States that have employed on a larger
scale than ever before, forced abortions, euthanasia, mass murder,
total war, nuclear war, torture, executions, and a host of other
violations of the human person and human dignity too numerous to
name here.
Even
the casual observer can see this in the numerous socialist regimes
of the 20th century from Berlin to Moscow to Beijing,
but let’s not think that such things are merely the sins of a few
mad dictators now long dead. It was in America, let us remember,
where the ghastly practice of eugenics enjoyed its greatest following
at the close of the 19th century. It was in America where
the State forcibly
sterilized nearly 50,000 human beings, a particularly grotesque
way of being violated. Let’s not forget that it was the American
democratic State that holds the honor of being the only government
to have dropped nuclear weapons on human beings, not once, but twice.
And it was the American State that conducted tests like those endured
by the Tuskegee
sharecroppers. This is not to claim that Americans are in some
way more ghoulish than other peoples, but it most certainly serves
to illustrate that the State and its human defenders, apologists,
and functionaries can destroy human dignity on a grand scale on
any continent in any decade.
And
this is the century that the Statemongers among us tell us is the
century of progress and enlightenment and reason. Owing to the triumph
of messianic ideologies of social gospels and what Pope Benedict
XVI calls the "do-it-yourself paradise" ushered in by
the State, Americans have been taught to believe that society is
progressing toward some kind of ever-improving world of equality
and freedom. John Paul II found this idea dangerous at best and
totalitarian at worst. If human society is progressing so well,
why is it that we find nothing in the annals of ancient or medieval
history to compare with the atrocities of the 20th century?
The concentration camps, the gulags, the wars, the nuclear wastelands,
and the mountains of human corpses where is the enlightenment
and the reason? The truth for John Paul was that as the modern world
progressed toward the 20th century, Western civilization
was actually regressing toward a degradation of the value
of the human person. As he said in his letter of 1968, what is needed
is a "‘recapitulation’ of the inviolable mystery of the person."
No century has needed this more than the 20th, and we
can only hope that the 21st will be quite different.
In the end, if the 21st century is to be a century
that proffers the sanctity of the individual over the deification
of the State, it will be because men and women have rejected the
ideologies that made the 20th century a century of death.
This
is the mission of all human beings who value natural rights and
the free will of men. To hold up the dignity of the human individual
against the dehumanizing of the State, to embrace a culture of life
and indeed proceed against "every form of tyranny over the
mind of man." If we are going to succeed in the recapitulation
of the inviolable nature of the individual, it will require a true
rejection of the errors of our time, and we may find wisdom in the
words of Saint Augustine, speaking in similar circumstances 1600
years ago: "You say the times are troublesome, the times are
burdensome, the times are miserable. Live rightly and you will change
the times. The times have never hurt anyone. Those who are hurt
are human beings; those by whom they are hurt are also human beings.
So, change human beings and the times will be changed."
April
29, 2005
Ryan
McMaken [send him mail]
is a former lobbyist, an occasional college instructor, and a regular
columnist for LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Ryan
McMaken Archives
|