My friend, Deacon Keith Fournier, argues at Catholic Online that what is needed in politics is not a conservative revolution, but a Christian one.
His argument is a response to the forthcoming “Conservative Manifesto” scheduled to be unveiled at the CPAC Convention beginning on Thursday.
Fournier’s insistence on leaving the terms “liberal” and “conservative” behind are laudable, if difficult to do in practice. Those terms, after all, describe real things and, in particular, a real divide in American politics, a divide that crosses over into religious political participation.
Orthodox. Faithful. Free.
Sign up to get Crisis articles delivered to your inbox daily
And it’s the participation of Christians in politics to which Fournier addresses his argument.
As a veteran of efforts to enlist faithful Christians into political, social, and cultural efforts to build a new culture of life I fear we are experiencing another effort to enlist us into a kind of resuscitated “religious right” which will continue false dichotomies such as “fiscal” and “social” conservatives. Only a moral people can ensure that a market economy remains free. The division between social thought and economic application is a false one. The market was made for man and not man for the market.
Fournier is absolutely correct in pointing the integration of economic and social issues — although I would have edited the line, “Only a moral people can ensure that a market economy remains free.” No one is thoroughly “moral,” except our Saviour, so by that term I assume the Deacon means “Only a people committed to the attainment of virtue can ensure a market economy thrives and remains free.”
The other small bone I would pick with Deacon Fournier is a hermeneutical one — all I mean by this long word is what is called “the conflict of interpretation.”
What Deacon Fournier means by a “Christian” revolution as opposed to a “conservative” revolution is not self-evident. No doubt some of the basic differences between the Christian and conservative viewpoints are obvious, but what needs unpacking by Fournier is to spell out what he means by a Christian revolution at the policy level.
The hermeneutical problem arises when we start with the “sacred deposit” of faith and attempt to apply that faith to a specific political tradition with its own history, vocabulary, and accepted paradigms. These factors are what make American politics, to the extent it is, understandable. Any Christian overlay to our politics must be able to converse with those who understand politics in its accepted terms. Two of those terms are “liberal” and “conservative.”
Deacon Keith will be glad to know that I am hosting a reception at CPAC on behalf of Catholic Advocate entitled, “Is It Time for a Catholic Tea Party?” (11 am on Thursday).
To read all of Deacon Fournier’s arguments go here.