Ever Wonder what Joseph Cardijn and Louis Putz would say about Christian Nationalism?
I have often wondered what Joseph Cardijn or Louis Putz CSC would say today as we see the rise of Christian Nationalism in the US and other Western Nations. The version of Christian Nationalism they would have been most familiar with was in the 1930s, and the "flavor" was fascism of a German style.
Both men strongly advocated Catholic Social Teaching, which is becoming increasingly the best-kept secret in the Church.
Despite some superficial similarities, Catholic Social Teaching and Christian Nationalism represent fundamentally different approaches to the relationship between Christianity and the state.
Catholic Social Teaching
Catholic Social Teaching emphasizes:
Human dignity and rights are based on all humans being made in God's image.
Subordination of our lives to the Gospel, not the state.
Concern for the common good beyond national interests.
Robust patriotism that supports national flourishing while upholding the seperation of Church and state.
Christian Nationalism
In contrast, Christian Nationalism typically advocates for:
Subordination of the Church to the state's authority.
Directing people to a specific version of Christianity through civil government.
Nationalism as a source of solidarity, potentially leading to fascism or ethnocentrism.
Restricting religious freedoms for non-Christians.
Promoting an exclusive Christian national identity.
Key Differences
Church-State Relationship: Catholic teaching subordinates our lives to the gospel, while Christian Nationalism often does the opposite.
Universality: Catholicism emphasizes the Church's universal nature, whereas Christian Nationalism focuses on national particularities.
Religious Freedom: Catholic teaching supports religious freedom for all, while Christian Nationalism may restrict it for non-Christians.
National Identity: Catholicism promotes patriotism within a universal framework, whereas Christian Nationalism seeks to make national identity synonymous with Christianity.
Common Good: Catholic Social Teaching emphasizes concern for the global common good, while Christian Nationalism prioritizes national interests.
Catholic leaders, including Pope Francis, Bishop Stowe, and Bishop Michael F. Burbidge, as examples, have emphasized that Christian nationalism is incompatible with Catholic teaching. They advocate for Catholics to engage in politics for the common good without elevating the nation above other devotions, including faith.
In conclusion, while Catholic Social Teaching and Christian Nationalism involve the intersection of Christianity and politics, they represent fundamentally different and often opposing approaches to this relationship.
Spend some time reading about the difference. It is essential in the current environment, especially for those in the US, where we have elected police leaders declaring themselves as Christian Nationalists.
I think that both Joseph Cardijn and Louis Putz would focus today on People, Planet, Purpose in life, and Prosperity for all.
Think about our next steps in taking a stand against the threat of Christian nationalism.
How can the local parishes in our church "reclaim the Jesus that disturbs the status quo?” Reclaim the Sermon on the Mount?
How would a parish intent on this type of reclamation begin to think or act differently?
How could your parish begin to stand against Christian nationalism?
Think of Pope Francis’ concept of “church”
Catholic Social Teachings is the Antithesis of Christian Nationalism.
In conclusion, reflect on this statement, understanding Thomas Merton:
“Merton's understanding of himself as an American is illuminating as a window into Merton's life and work because it sheds light on his sense of self and of his political allegiances. But it is also edifying because it sheds light for us, his readers, on what it means to be American - and, more generally, what it means to be a citizen and member of any political community. Merton resisted the narrative simplification of the American identity. He called attention to particularly American sins and rejected the ideology of American exceptionalism. Instead, Merton understood himself as an American in a way that transcended the particular political boundaries of the United States and instead extended to the whole of the Americas.”
The Merton Journal EASTERTIDE 2020: VOLUME 27 NUMBER 1 David Golemboski
