In a recent statement to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences entitled Towards a Participatory Society, Pope Francis spoke critically of libertarianism by name.I cannot fail to speak of the grave risks associated with the invasion of the positions of libertarian individualism, warnedthe Holy Father. <\/p>\n
Throughout the memo, Pope Francis refers to libertarianism as a selfish ideology where only the individual matters, which minimizesand denies the validity of the common good. Heequates libertarianismwith anti-social terms whereonly the individual gives value to things and to interpersonal relations and therefore only the individual decides what is good and what is evil, concluding that the philosophy is radicalization of individualism. <\/p>\n
In fact, the opposite is true: individualism is a radical minority under the larger umbrella of libertarianism. <\/p>\n
As both a devout Catholic and a staunch libertarian, my Pontiffswords are indeed cringe-worthy, but also cause no distress to either my faith, nor to my political conclusions, for several reasons. <\/p>\n
First, as Tom Woodsaprominentlibertarian and traditional Catholicrecently pointed out in an email, there is likely a great deal being lost in translation here. In his homeland of Argentina, it is highly improbable that Francis as Jorge Bergoglioever encountered libertarianism as we understandit in the United States. Consider that even words such as conservative, liberal, republican, and democrat all mean vastly different things in South American and European contexts, let alone the minority descriptor libertarian. <\/p>\n
This consideration seems especially applicablewhen you read the rest of the Francis line I began quotingin the opening paragraph:I cannot fail to speak of the grave risks associated with the invasion of the positions of libertarian individualism at high strata of culture and in school and university education.That alone should cause any libertarian reading to give a moments pause, if not spray their drink. Does anyonelibertarian or otherwisefeel that libertarianismas we understand it is pervasively invading the culture and universities? If only that were the case! To me, this seems to be describing more of the selfish entitlement mentality which indeed has invaded our millennial culture and universities, andfits the rest of his expressed concerns. <\/p>\n
Now, Im not pretending for a moment that Pope Francis would endorse ourunderstanding of libertarianism. I am plenty aware of his political leanings, but I do always keep his statements in context of his Argentinian background, as well as the proper functions of his office. As I find myselfexplaining with increasing frequency, the Catholic teaching onpapal infallibility applies only to matters of faith and doctrine whichare specifically spoken ex cathedra. In other words, while Catholicscertainly owe it to the Petrine Office to respectfully consider and humbly reflect on thecounsel of the Successor of Peter, it is completely fine to ultimately hold differing opinionswith the Pope on non-doctrinal matters. <\/p>\n
With even a basicknowledgeof the 1,984 year history of the Catholic Church, one realizes that popes can be and have been wrongsometimes very wrongin their personal opinions and behavior. St. Catherine of Siena is famous for firmly, yetrespectfully, correctingPope Gregory XI during the Avignon Papacy, just as St. Paul corrected Christs first Vicar, St. Peternot for false doctrinal teaching, but for failing to practice as he preached. The Church has survived far FAR worse scandal and crisis than a few controversial opinions and remarks. Catholicseither trust Matthew 16:18, or you dont. <\/p>\n
In the event that the Holy Father is indeed addressingour libertarianism, which has been the immediate reaction, I assert that he is clearlyonly familiar with Ayn-Rand-style Virtue of Selfishness individualism, as he consistently equates the two. <\/p>\n
Just as it is said about the Church, libertarianism is also a house with many doors, meaning converts enter from any variety of origins following differentpaths in the face or adversity or in search of truth. Some arrive at libertarian conclusions through selfish individualistic philosophies such as Ayn Rand, while others arrive at libertarian conclusions through selfless anarcho-pacifist or anarcho-distributist philosophies, such as Servant of God Dorothy Day. The philosophies of Rand and Day are polar opposites, despite both ending up under the libertarian umbrella in terms of political applications. With this in mind, it is very common for those first introduced to one of the many libertarian philosophies to presume it is representative of the whole, which a mistake I once made as well. <\/p>\n
For me, the epiphany came when I realized that anyphilosophy or model of governancecan be squared with libertarianism, so as long as its voluntary, witheveryone participating of their own free will. Consider that convents and monasteries are very successful models of socialism, with no private property, communal ownership, each receiving only according to his need, etc. In fact, many of these religious housesare far older and more successful than any modern government! This only works, however, because it is purely voluntary on the part of the participants, who all share the same motive and goals. However, once socialism is forced upon others via the state, historically, it always gets rather ugly and fails miserably. Convents and monasteries are examples of free-market socialism, so to speak, because participants could freely walk away at any time or violate their rule without threat against their lives, liberty, or property; they persist, however, because of their voluntary vows. <\/p>\n
Libertarianism, therefore, is simply the doctrine of free will and speaks nothing of ones motive or intention. <\/p>\n
Ido stand with Pope Francis in decrying radical individualism as a worrisome selfish philosophy. Even where I agree with many of the practical applications of individualistconclusions, I believe themotive is misguided. At the same time, Ipromote voluntaryism as a peaceful libertarian philosophywhich seeks tomaximizethe common good and encourageacommunitarian frameworkpromoting a selfless ideal. My hope and prayer is that through this mistranslation or misunderstanding, the Holy Father may have an opportunity to at leastrecognize thisdistinction, if not fully promote voluntary governancelike that of Vatican Cityas a model for all societies. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Mark Cavaliere is a devout Catholic husband and father, an activist for life, and an advocate for liberty. As a voluntaryist libertarian, Mark asserts each individual's right to bodily autonomy from the moment one's body biologically comes into existence at conception through natural death. He is the Founder & Director of the Southwest Coalition for Life, spearheading a campaign that led to the closure of the abortion facility in Las Cruces, in spite of the fact that New Mexico is one of the most abortion-friendly states in the nation. He is now working to end the violence of abortion in Santa Teresa and El Paso, not through laws or politics, but by rallying the church community to help neighbors in need. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See the original post: In a recent statement to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences entitled Towards a Participatory Society, Pope Francis spoke critically of libertarianism by name.I cannot fail to speak of the grave risks associated with the invasion of the positions of libertarian individualism, warnedthe Holy Father. Continue reading
\nPope Francis Mistakes Libertarianism as Radical Individualism - NM Politico (blog)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"