Does the Catholic Church condemn fascism and/or very authoritarian governments?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JGuns
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JGuns

Guest
I did a quick Google search, and pretty much all I found was some random person claiming that fascism comes from the ideas of liberal theory (I don’t know how this would work, since they seem like opposites) and that the Catholic Church is against liberal theory.

Anyways, does anyone know of any documents where the Church condemns fascism or authoritarian governments?

Also, is it true that fascism came from liberal theory, and if so, how?
Code: 
             Thanks.
Also, I don’t know if there is a better forum category for this topic or not.
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church

1901 If authority belongs to the order established by God, “the choice of the political regime and the appointment of rulers are left to the free decision of the citizens.”

The diversity of political regimes is morally acceptable, provided they serve the legitimate good of the communities that adopt them. Regimes whose nature is contrary to the natural law, to the public order, and to the fundamental rights of persons cannot achieve the common good of the nations on which they have been imposed.

1902 Authority does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself. It must not behave in a despotic manner, but must act for the common good as a “moral force based on freedom and a sense of responsibility”:

A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence.

1903 Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case, “authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse.”

1904 “It is preferable that each power be balanced by other powers and by other spheres of responsibility which keep it within proper bounds. This is the principle of the ‘rule of law,’ in which the law is sovereign and not the arbitrary will of men.”
 
Also:
Mit Brennender Sorge
On the Church and the German Reich
Pope Pius XI - March 14, 1937


Especially…
  1. Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State, or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any other fundamental value of the human community — however necessary and honorable be their function in worldly things — whoever raises these notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of life which that faith upholds.
Click to expand...
Divini Redemptoris
On Atheistic Communism
Pope Pius XI - March 19, 1937


Especially…
  1. Communism, moreover, strips man of his liberty, robs human personality of all its dignity, and removes all the moral restraints that check the eruptions of blind impulse. There is no recognition of any right of the individual in his relations to the collectivity; no natural right is accorded to human personality, which is a mere cog-wheel in the Communist system. In man’s relations with other individuals, besides, Communists hold the principle of absolute equality, rejecting all hierarchy and divinely-constituted authority, including the authority of parents. What men call authority and subordination is derived from the community as its first and only font. Nor is the individual granted any property rights over material goods or the means of production, for inasmuch as these are the source of further wealth, their possession would give one man power over another. Precisely on this score, all forms of private property must be eradicated, for they are at the origin of all economic enslavement .
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I do appreciate this post and the detailed Catechism instruction. Thank you.
 
JG

Yes fascism comes from liberal theory. It is a form of socialism and it is dependent on the idea that the govt should be all powerful and in control over many forms of private businesses.
A conservative and a libertarian wants to keep govt as far away from private enterprise as humanly possible while the liberal wants the govt to RUN the private sector.
As a form of socialism, fascism is NOT the opposite of liberalism. at all. The liberal is the one who wants the all powerful govt “for the good of the people” and believes that govt is best suited to run private businesses and not the people.
 
HarryStotle,
Code: 
 Thanks for the Catechism info. I'm not really sure I totally understand what it's trying to say, though.

 What I'm really trying to figure out is this: Catholics aren't supposed to vote in a way that would promote any intrinsic evils. If you follow this out to it's logical conclusion, it would seem that all intrinsic evils should be illegal. However, there are "small" things that are intrinsically evil, such as lying. 

So... I feel like ideally, any government would have to legislate against any and every intrinsic evil, which would not only take forever and be a lot of work that could take away time from making legislation that could actually protect people, but would also be extremely authoritarian.
Also, I don’t see how it’s ok for any Catholic politician to swear to uphold the constitution, because then they would have to uphold free speech, which would be supporting the intrinsic evil of lying.

Of course in real life the situation where someone writes a bill against lying would almost certainly never happen. This is all just hypothetical… kind of like a thought experiment.
 
Last edited:
kcooper,
When I looked up the definition of liberal theory, it was different from the liberalism we see nowadays. Basically liberal theory (I think it's the same as classical liberalism) is an enlightenment idea from thinkers such as Locke. It is actually what most conservatives and libertarians follow today---which is why I said it seemed like the opposite of authoritarianism.
 
JGuns said:
Also, I don’t see how it’s ok for any Catholic politician to swear to uphold the constitution, because then they would have to uphold free speech, which would be supporting the intrinsic evil of lying.
Click to expand...
Why is free speech intrinsically an act of lying? If you speak freely, why would you think that entails or supports lying, necessarily?

Sorry, your logic here is completely incomprehensible.

If free speech necessarily “supports the intrinsic evil of lying,” then does compelled speech necessarily prevent lying?

I think you need to rethink your position.
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle,

I don’t mean that exercising free speech is lying…I’m saying that making a law against lying would violate the first amendment.

Basically they would be in a position of having to break their oath by voting against the first amendment or to disobey the Church by voting against the law against lying.

Also, this isn’t exactly my position… It’s my confusion. I’m not here to argue; I’m here for help.
 
Last edited:
JGuns said:
HarryStotle,

I don’t mean that exercising free speech is lying…I’m saying that making a law against lying would violate the first amendment.
Click to expand...
Why would you think a Catholic politician would be compelled to make a law against lying?

It would be literally impossible to enforce that law so what would be the point of enacting it or even trying to?

You need to rethink this.

The best way to counteract lying is to educate each generation with respect to the importance of telling the truth so that they are responsible enough to hold themselves to the standard of not telling lies.

The first and greatest commandment, for Catholics, is “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind and with all your self.” Would a Catholic politician be compelled to enact that one most important commandment into the law of the land, as if merely enacting the law is sufficient to make it come true?
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle,
Code: 
 I'm not saying they would be compelled to make a law against lying. I'm saying that if someone else made the law, they would have to vote for it, not against it. If they did vote against it, they would be voting in favor of an intrinsic evil, and Catholics are not supposed to do that.
I AM rethinking this… that’s why I’m asking you. I’m not just trying to be a troll or anything. I am sincerely disturbed by this.

It may or may not be impossible to enforce the law, but even if it is impossible to enforce, what about other intrinsic evils that are not impossible to enforce?
 
JG

What gets preached in the academic world and what gets practiced in the real world can often be 2 different things. In THEORY socialism and communism don;t sound too bad but when put into practice have proven to be total disasters.
The only way to get people and businesses to give up freedom and power is by force.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top