Is there justice in social justice?

[goout]

I don’t recall the New Testament talking about justice. In fact, justice was something that was reserved for the final judgement.
There is lots about love, charity, protecting the poor and the widows, but it is not within the context of justice.
How did the Catholic sense of love and charity get mixed up with social justice? And to my original qustion, who is the arbiter of this social justice?

You are really climbing uphill there trying to evade the Gospel call to justice. The Gospel is chock full of the call to treat people justly. You have to resort to playing semantic games with the word justice to avoid it. And obviously, there are “flavors” of social justice that are not in step with Catholic thought, just like any other “flavor” in Catholicism.

Justice is simply to give another what is due them. The primary application is to God. “It is right and just” to worship God and to be in right relationship with God. Religion is the application of justice towards God.

It is also right and just to give our fellow human beings what is proper to their human dignity and flourishing, because we are made in the image of God and that must be revered. And we are social creatures by God’s design, not isolated individuals. So "social justice"describes structures than are designed to ensure the dignity and flourishing of our fellow human beings.

This requires prudential judgment and the priniciple of subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity means that a particular remedy should be taken at the most immediate, or local, or personal, level required to accomplish the task. It is better for me to take a homeless person in and feed them directly than for them to go on federal programs. Practically speaking, subsidiarity doesn’t happen very well. So programs are put in place. These things become messy because the programs that help many people also create dependency in others. If you are afraid of being taken advantage of, you may never venture out to help others. Charity and justice frequently hurt the giver of them.

The primary social justice issue of our day (in the US anyway) is the abolishing of abortion. There is a hierarchy of justice issues according to the degree they detract from human dignity. If social justice programs do not respect the right of a human being to live, those programs are a farce.

Because everyone: if you don’t have human beings, you can’t have social justice. Social justice is not for cats, or trees, or dead people. It’s for living human beings.
So the problem in our politics and our implementation of justice is not one of money, it’s one of hypocrisy.

 

[Aquinas11]

No such thing as “Social Justice”. Its just another 2-word phrase in a long list created by Left whose purpose is to grow government.

Social Justice
Climate Change
White Privilege
Toxic Masculinity
Evil Patriarchy

 

[Crocus]

Good question. We must always discern and strive toward a just society, but “just” has a million definitions. Trouble arises when justiice takes precedence over the Gospel.

http://blog.adw.org/2015/05/beware-the-strangest-idol-of-all-a-reflection-on-how-even-works-of-charity-cannot-eclipse-obedience-to-christ/

The first example says a needle exchange program is an evil, undertaken to obtain the good of receiving funds to directly serve the poor.

However, when recognized as disease prevention, the needle exchange program is in fact, a good, in preventing disease, extending life, placing the person in closer proximity to care workers able to offer additional resources.

 

[Crocus]

The primary social justice issue of our day (in the US anyway) is the abolishing of abortion.

This is absolutely the greatest evil of our day, with as many proposed solutions as there are people. We must find each our own way according to our particular talents, to tackle the problem.

Saint Mother Teresa called it a great poverty. It is a spiritual poverty that I think is best treated quietly, lovingly, in a non confrontational way that turns hearts.

 

[Crocus]

No such thing as “Social Justice”. Its just another 2-word phrase in a long list created by Left whose purpose is to grow government.

Social Justice
Climate Change
White Privilege
Toxic Masculinity
Evil Patriarchy

The bishops of Canada offer the following social justice concerns for our consideration in the coming election:

•respect for life
•concern for the weakest among us
•religious freedom and freedom of conscience
•solidarity with Indigenous Peoples
•support for families
•funding for education, healthcare, housing
•action on human trafficking
•care for the environment

 

[Aquinas11]

the fact that many of those “concerns” are diametrically opposed proves the point that there is no such thing as Social Justice

third item means tolerating other religions/beliefs who accept abortion, which contradicts first two items

fourth item means accepting cultures, some of which practice abortion, infanticide, etc, thus also contradicting first two items

 

[Crocus]

I disagree that they are so opposed as you say. Discernment is difficult, but that is what we are called to do. It is hard work to be so informed, but the Church offers guidance through the many documents, encyclicals, letters, homilies. We must be willing to see, then make our decisions.

(We can do “3” and “4” without tolerating or accepting abortion. The Church does not advocate such tolerating and accepting. )

 

[ontheway1]

Who is making a disctinction between justice and social justice? Are they opposed?

 

[Rozellelily]

Who

I think what people who make a distinction are saying it depends on who is defining Social justice-whether Christians or the government.
Personally I don’t see much,if any difference, at least not in the country where I live the social justice causes are usually things that would also be called social justice according to Catholic religion too.
Eg:helping to increase Indigenous people’s life’span,helping their communities to get out of poverty and off substance abuse etc…

There are government initiatives that Christians don’t agree with such as support for drug injecting houses but usually these initiatives arn’t referred under the title of Social Justice.

 

[ontheway1]

Not to put too fine a point on this, but it seems to me that the whole notion of “social” justice implies some deficiency in justice itself and the need to qualify it. Are we saying here that “justice” requires modification? Is “social” justice some kind of special justice? Is this special justice reserved for some special people, and not for others? If that’s the case, then, logically speaking, this “special” justice can’t be fair or be defined as justice. Does it not become “special treatment”?
I am not saying that some people don’t need this special treatment, but maybe it should be called something other the JUSTICE.

 

[Aquinas11]

Is this special justice reserved for some special people, and not for others?

Yes it a Collective/Marxist-based justice, which separates (1) oppressors as group from (2) oppressed as group.

So you have those two groups always whenever discussing Social Justice. Each person is assessed based on the group to which they belong, they are not judged on their individual merits. So all members of Group A are judged as “oppressors” and all members of Group B are judged as “oppressed”. It doesn’t matter if one member of Group A was actually oppressed - he/she is a member of the “oppressor” group thus they are an “oppressor” - individuality doesn’t matter. You don’t exist as an individual, only as a member of a group.

Regular Justice is Individualist-based, which is also what Catholicism is, where each person is judged based on their own individual merits/decisions/etc and is not assessed based on their membership in a group whose members may or may not do acts different than this person.

 

[PetraG]

Not to put too fine a point on this, but it seems to me that the whole notion of “social” justice implies some deficiency in justice itself and the need to qualify it. Are we saying here that “justice” requires modification? Is “social” justice some kind of special justice? Is this special justice reserved for some special people, and not for others? If that’s the case, then, logically speaking, this “special” justice can’t be fair or be defined as justice. Does it not become “special treatment”?
I am not saying that some people don’t need this special treatment, but maybe it should be called something other the JUSTICE.

I am not buying this objection.
Social justice is simply an area of the greater concern of justice generally.
Nobody raises the objection you are raising when they hear about the criminal justice system, for instance.

Yes it a Collective/Marxist-based justice, which separates (1) oppressors as group from (2) oppressed as group .

The efforts of some to use the concept of social justice to give legitimacy to unjust social systems such as that envisioned by Marx should not put tar and feathers on the idea of social justice.

I have no idea where you got the concept that “Regular” justice is “Individualist-based.” Would you like to elaborate? You surely cannot mean that those of us with the duty to guide how our government and society works have no duty to guide social policy in a way that is compatible with the demands of justice as understood by Christianity. We certainly cannot abandon the demands of justice simply because others are demanding that social justice be pursued in a wrong-headed or even a flatly unjust way. We still have the duty to encourage a just society, regardless of what they do.

 

[PetraG]

Personally I don’t see much,if any difference, at least not in the country where I live the social justice causes are usually things that would also be called social justice according to Catholic religion too.

I agree that we have an abundance of encyclicals and other direction from the Magesterium to sort out what is and is not true social justice. If we have the blessing of living in a democracy, we have a duty to understand what the Church teaches governmental leaders.

 

[ontheway1]

Social justice is simply an area of the greater concern of justice generally.

Justice used to mean equal treatment. Now it means special treatment, hence my objection to the use of the word “justice” when coupled with “social”.

 

[Aquinas11]

Justice used to mean equal treatment. Now it means special treatment,

Precisely. Lady Justice is blindfolided with the weighing scale. Lady Social Justice is unblindfolded and has thumb on scale depending on factors each party has no control over (race, gender, etc)

 

[Rozellelily]

Yes it a Collective/Marxist-based justice, which separates (1) oppressors as group from (2) oppressed as group .

Isn’t it a reality though that in life there sometimes are Opressors and Oppressed?
Eg:mega wealthy mining companies who encroach on Indigenous land and their feelings towards the land might be seen as oppressors.
I’m not against mining,but I mean more regarding companies that have an mindset that doesn’t give a darn towards others or pays them off to get rid of the obstacle.

which is also what Catholicism is, where each person is judged based on their own individual merits/decisions/etc and is not assessed based on their membership in a group whose members may or may not do acts different than this person.

Life isn’t necessarily just each person for themselves though.Thats a US type mentality because it’s an individualistic society but I come from a Slavic background and we function as a group/collective.

 

[Aquinas11]

Isn’t it a reality though that in life there sometimes are Opressors and Oppressed?

Yes, I never said that’s not sometimes true.

What I object to including people in the “oppressors” group that aren’t actual oppressors. That’s just plain dishonest.

Life isn’t necessarily just each person for themselves though.

Again, I never said life is each person for themselves.

I said in Catholicism, each person is judged on their own decisions/choices. When I go into confession booth, I don’t confess my neighbors sins. That’s all I meant.

 

[PetraG]

Justice used to mean equal treatment. Now it means special treatment, hence my objection to the use of the word “justice” when coupled with “social”.

What I’m saying is that it is better to take issue with what is being sold as “social justice” rather than conceding the concept and allowing it to become some kind of false concern. It is not. Social justice has been a concept from Christianity from the beginning, including Augustine and through until St. Pope John Paul II in the writings of the great saints.

Isn’t it a reality though that in life there sometimes are Opressors and Oppressed?
Eg:mega wealthy mining companies who encroach on Indigenous land and their feelings towards the land might be seen as oppressors.

There are of course victims and perpetrators whenever there is a violation of justice, even if the perpetrators are unaware and not culpable or the victims do not recognize they have rights that are being violated. It is a big mistake, however, to divide people into Us and Them categories that reduce persons to an identity of victimhood or as perpetrators of a wrong.

 

[Rozellelily]

Sorry, I misunderstood what you were meaning.
I agree that apart from real oppressors and victims there also exists some people who have a sense of victimhood where there is no “objective victimhood”.

I think with these people there needs to be a balance of personal responsibility and circumstance.

 

[Rozellelily]

is a big mistake, however, to divide people into Us and Them categories that reduce persons to an identity of victimhood or as perpetrators of a wrong.

Would you have any examples of where this sort of thing has happened such as you referring to people who use catchphrases like “white privilege” and what I have heard referring to as “identity politics” etc.
Is it this that you think is divisive or do you mean something else altogether?