Posted on

Against Political Iconoclasm

By Nathaniel Gotcher

Introduction

There are many Catholics today who deny the necessity of promoting a Catholic political order. This denial is manifest in two strains of thought that sometimes coincide. The first is the idea that political order is amoral and pragmatic. It is primarily concerned with the material prosperity and security necessary for each person to pursue their goals. It may not legislate morality except insofar as it is clear that a given action harms another person, inhibiting their goals.  The teaching of moral virtue above and beyond this is properly in the scope of ecclesiastical structures and individual families—in other words, moral formation belongs to the Church and the Family, not the State. The second idea is that political order itself is immoral and corrupt. Even the pragmatic concerns for prosperity and security are tinged with the wickedness of men in power. Religious institutions or private philanthropy ought to be in charge of the distribution of material goods so that the practice of charity renders the State unnecessary and frees us from the bondage of worldly political order.

Continue reading “Against Political Iconoclasm”
Posted on

Urbanism and the Common Good

by Nathaniel Gotcher

Out of necessity, ancient cities were designed with a high regard for the everyday activities of the community. This included worship, exchange of goods, study, and recreation. All of these things had their time and place and were facilitated by appropriate proximities between buildings and areas of the city. Thus, the market, where the exchange of goods took place, was often centrally located so that it was available to all. The temple (and later the church) was given a prominent location near the center of the city, making the worship of the gods (and later the one God) central to the lives of the citizens, both symbolically and practically. Those buildings and areas used most often were given greater attention and those buildings which symbolized the community and its identity were given places of honor.

We live today in a world in which our interconnectedness means that cities very infrequently fail if we don’t want them to. Resources can be shared globally in a matter of days; funds can be allotted instantly through the internet. While this can and does lead to a very many good things (not least among them is the ease with which we can aid those starving or experiencing violence around the world), it also all but abolished the need for cities to function as they once did: for the common good of its citizens. Families (and even individuals) can function autonomously, as long as they have the funds to support their way of life. With enough personal wealth or property, we do not need the others in our community, at least not materially, as the ancients did. Or at least we think we don’t. Continue reading “Urbanism and the Common Good”