Evangelicals and Catholics Thinking Through Politics Together

Fourth Quarter 1998

This past June 11-14, sixteen scholars, mostly Christians from the Reformed and Catholic traditions, gathered in Colorado Springs to discuss "Christian Social Theory and the Plural Structure of Society." The conference was organized and co-directed by the authors under the auspices of The Liberty Fund, an Indianapolis-based non-profit organization that sponsors numerous conferences on the themes of liberty and responsibility in a free society.

 Christian social theory has much to contribute to current discussions about the importance of civil society. Moreover, there are important similarities between the Catholic teaching of subsidiarity and the Reformed understanding of sphere sovereignty. Despite these similarities, differences between the two require closer examination by scholars familiar with each tradition. We need to gain greater clarity on their historical and theoretical differences, and their relevance for contemporary politics.

This was the reason for the Colorado Springs conference, which we organized around key historical and contemporary texts. Discussion centered on (1) What are the essential elements of Christian social and political theory? and (2) Is pluralism essential to such thinking?

Participants generally agreed that Christian social thought holds a unique view of the dignity of human beings based on their creation in the image of God. This is the foundation for grasping both the responsibilities and the limits of political authority. Moreover, a Christian view of political authority is related to the kingship of Christ in a fundamental way. The rev-elation of Christ as lord of the whole earth established a tension between his authority and that of emperors who claimed all-encompassing authority over earthly realms. Christianity radically undermined all monistic views of human jurisdiction and gradually led to the recognition of diverse spheres of human authority and hence of the plural structure of society.

Much of the subsequent discussion focused on the nature of the state. Neo-Calvinists tend toward a more Augustinian view of the origin of political authority, seeing its arrival as a response to sin. Catholic political thought, on the other hand, seems more closely tied to Thomas Aquinas' views, which stress the "naturalness" of political life. The key question then is: How does this familiar difference play out in the way the state should relate to non-governmental institutions?

This is where the doctrines of subsidiarity and sphere sovereignty become important. Subsidiarity teaches that "it is a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do." Sphere sovereignty teaches that various institutions possess a distinct and divinely given authority of their own which the state must recognize to preserve a healthy society.

Both teachings stress the importance of the institutions of civil society, but in different ways. The principle of subsidiarity is closely tied in Catholic social thought to the notion of the common good. Historically, the primary question has tended to be: How can government effectively advance the common good of society without usurping non-governmental authorities? Sphere sovereignty, on the other hand, first asks what role the state has in preserving and aiding the unique tasks of non-governmental institutions and then subsequently asks how the pursuit of public justice will serve the public interest.

Hence, Catholic social thought has tended to stress the connection between the state and other social communities first, and the distinction between them second. The advocates of sphere sovereignty have emphasized the distinction first and then the connection. However, the trends may be converging. In recent decades Catholic social thought has tended to emphasize more strongly the limited role of the state in the economy and social life, while contemporary neo-Calvinist political theorists are finding a more developed notion of public interest and the common good.

Both traditions offer a principled basis for political and legal thinking that can guide practical reforms in public policy ranging from school choice to welfare reform.

[Dr. Pavlischek is a fellow of the Center for Public Justice and director of the new Civitas Program in Faith and Public Affairs. Dr. Grasso teaches political science at Southwest Texas State University.]