The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
On Religion & Liberalism Print E-mail
By George Marlin   
Thursday, 02 April 2009

Alan Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College, has for years been peddling the notion that most middle-class Americans who believe in God want to lead a good life (which they alone will define) and are opposed to applying moral convictions to public policy. They also hold, he asserts, that religious structures – i.e., church, synagogue, and less tangible formal arrangements – are not a requirement for belief. The late Richard John Neuhaus used to say that Wolfe strangely shows little interest in or knowledge of American religion for a person in his position. Wolfe’s new book, The Future of Liberalism, confirms that judgment.

Wolfe has nothing new to say on the subject. He repeats the old liberal nostrum that one should be autonomous “to live your life on terms you establish,” not exactly, you might think, the central vision for a center on religion and public life at a Jesuit university. Wolfe contends that liberals have been on the lam for forty years because they were afraid to be liberal – they were intimidated by extremists on the left and right. But thanks to Barack Obama, they are now in vogue and should be out on the hustings converting the masses.

For Wolfe, welfare-state liberalism permits people to be independent and mobile. To promote individual autonomy, the state should not hesitate to be notoriously illiberal by intruding in the economy and the bedroom. Generous welfare benefits and abortion on demand will free people to live life to the fullest.

To justify this creed, Wolfe turns to Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who he claims “expresses ideas that every liberal ought to welcome.”

In one sense, this is quite odd, because Kant, although the champion of individual sovereignty, also believes in a strict sense of duty. But Kant has become a hero to some liberals because they like how he relocates the sources of morality from the objective world around us (which he believes our intellects cannot really reach) to principles within our own minds. In Kant, this turn was intended to preserve morality in a scientific age; but in others’ hands it degenerates into a denial of moral absolutes and a radical assertion of personal autonomy.

For Kant, a key word, repeated with heavy Germanic emphasis, is duty. And everyone who has studied philosophy has been taught the famous categorical imperative: “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”

But at the same time Kant makes man autonomous, a being who prescribes laws to himself in a sense, not a participant in the natural law. Kant is therefore useful to thinkers like Wolfe because he indirectly provides a rationale for their fundamental belief that there are no absolute truths, no unconditional principles or laws. All becomes relative. The basis of democracy is the very changing push and pull of diverse individual opinions and tastes. As John Paul II and Benedict XVI have pointed out, many of our fellow citizens have come to believe that skepticism is the precondition for democracy. Beliefs in transcendent order, metaphysics, common law, a fixed human nature, and other customs and prescriptions, must be replaced with concepts that make room for autonomous choices.

As for Wolfe’s view of society, he denies that we are endowed by God with an appetite and inclination for social life, or that we form society by the demands and impulses of our rational nature working through free will. Instead, he takes a Hobbesian approach that society is an artificial product of human agreement. Wolfe says society is not “natural” or “divinely ordained” and that for liberals, “constraints are not imposed by authorities over which people have no control or shaped by traditions they cannot influence, they are established instead by people themselves through some form of consent or social contract…. Once we have left the state of nature, we require the existence of society.”

By contrast, Catholic social doctrine regards the state as subject to a higher law, which compels judges and legislators to respect the inherent dignity of men by recognizing that government’s powers are limited. Authority in a natural society cannot come from the individuals composing the society, but must come from the author of the natural law from which natural societies derive their existence – God. The Founding Fathers of the United States had a strong sense of that as well. Even Jefferson, the least pious of our founders, once said that no society had ever been governed without God, or can be.

Personal autonomy and a society based on nothing but human will have become the default settings for a certain kind of contemporary liberalism. The few people likely to read and agree with Alan Wolfe’s The Future of Liberalism will find in it little new except a renewed hope in this empty vision, which is, by its very nature, destined to fall apart, sooner rather than later. But others might find at least one novelty here: is this the kind of leadership a major Catholic institution – Boston College – really intends to provide in an institute of religion and American public life?

George Marlin is the author of The American Catholic Voter: Two Hundred Years of Political Impact.

(c) 2009 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info at thecatholicthing dot org

The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (6)Add Comment
0
Freedom for Evil
written by William Dennis, April 03, 2009
This twisted Kantian philosophy in denial of natural law is a recipe for chaos. Total autonomy is a freedom to do evil. It proposes abortion and euthanasia, the liberal sacraments. Fear not! It will fail. Everybody can't be right or there is no rule of law. No absolutes. No society. Why would anyone go to college if there is no truth. Would you pay to dabble in unreality. This education is a fraud. I do not think BC is the only Catholic college feeding students this pablum. What is college?
0
...
written by William H. Phelan, April 03, 2009
Mr. Marlin: Great article, but I am confused why you refer to BC as a Catholic college. A few years ago, a pro-life man, deranged, entered an abortuary in Boston and shot and killed some female employees, one of whom was a student at BC. BC's response? It established an award in the dead abortuary worker's name! Every alumnus/a of BC I have ever spoken to insisted that Catholicism was treated there as a joke.
0
...
written by steven, April 03, 2009
YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT BOSTON COLLEGE IS ALSO FOLDING TO THE PRESSURE TO TAKE THE CROSS OFF THE WALL IN CLASSROOMS
0
...
written by bob mitchell, April 04, 2009
This belief has been taught in both public and Catholic institutions of learning for at least fifty years - our culture reflects the results of this "education" - this is one reason why one will not find anything "new" in Mr. Wolfe's book.
0
md
written by charles smith, April 06, 2009
If anyone wishes to read a brilliant book on " relativism and the turn to the subject"...get "The Unlearned Lessons of the Twentieth Century" by the French political philosopher, Chantol Delsol...It is a fantastic expose on what has gone wrong with Western Civilization(which includes Alan Wolfe and Boston College)...see Amazon.com.
0
...
written by jim morgan, April 08, 2009
"He repeats the old liberal nostrum that one should be autonomous 'to live your life on terms you establish,' not exactly, you might think, the central vision for a center on religion and public life at a Jesuit university."

Actually, that's EXACTLY the sort of thing one expects now from Jesuit universities and, given Notre Shame's invitation to Obama, from all "Catholic" universities. More's the pity.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US