The concept of the “common
good” is one that has fallen out of favour in recent years. Over the past two
decades, it has become increasingly common to dismiss the notion that we all
share an interest in the broader community, that society is more than simply a
collection of individuals all pursuing their own individual material
self-interest.[1]
In Socrates’ Apology,
he tells a story that illustrates the tension between corporatism and
commonweal.
Zeus, Socrates relates,
decided to help mankind create a human society. He sent Hermes to distribute
the necessary technical and managerial skill to certain people. The result was
a society based on self-interest and expertise. Such a society was centrifugal
and fragmented. As philosopher John Ralston-Saul observes, Zeus had created a
society based on the corporatist model.[2] The economic and social structures were based on
professional self-interest. People were defined by what they did. In more
contemporary terms, this would be the corporatism of consumer capitalism, also
based on self-interest and self-centeredness: defining people by what and how
much they consume.
Zeus sees the error and
decides to remedy it by having Hermes distribute social reverence (aidos)
and right-mindedness (diki) to every person. Social reverence signifies
a sense of “community,” a shared awareness, a shared knowledge of
self-constraint and belonging. Right-mindedness relates to a sense of social
justice, integrity, freedom, and social order: a shared sense of
responsibility. This is what we refer to as “commonweal.” It defines people
simply as “fellow human beings,” as members of a community that we call
“humanity.”
Corporatism, which is a
fundamental aspect of our modern consumerist economic system, is essentially
inimical to Christianity. It is also contrary to God’s Law, as anyone who has
studied the socio-economic decrees of the Bible’s Book of Deuteronomy is well
aware.
Corporatism reorganizes
society with the reduction of the individual to his status as a consumer. To
consume is patriotic; to consume in excess is to raise the level of one’s
social status. This new economic world order presents us with intense moral and
ethical contradictions, arguing that greed, self-gratification, and excess
consumption are simply aspects of human nature. This argument, taken from the
doctrines of Social Darwinism, is certainly questionable. As author Linda
McQuaig observes:
“The rapaciousness of certain
business leaders has been much in the spotlight recently. In the wake of the
ENRON scandal, even conservative pundits appear shaken by the astounding greed
and dishonesty at the heart of… corporate culture. Still, some shrug it off
as simple human nature, saying that we are inherently a competitive,
acquisitive species, naturally inclined to push our own self-interest as far as
we possibly can. But is this the whole picture? Is our society really nothing
more than a loose collection of shoppers, graspers and self-absorbed swindlers?
Perhaps we are in danger of becoming such a culture, but it is important to
remember that culture itself is a learned set of rules.”[3]
And yet, as Paolo Virno has
suggested:
“At the base of contemporary
cynicism is the fact that men and women learn by experiencing rules rather than
‘facts’… Learning the rules, however, also means recognizing their
unfoundedness and conventionality. We are no longer inserted into a single,
predefined ‘game’ in which we participate with true conviction. We now face
several different ‘games,’ each devoid of all obviousness and seriousness. Only
the site of an immediate self-affirmation—an affirmation that is much more
brutal and arrogant, much more cynical, the more we employ, with no illusions
but with perfect momentary adherence, those very rules whose conventionality
and mutability we have perceived.”[4]
At this point we may examine
the corporatization of morality and, to some extent, of the Christian Church.
The concept of commonweal—the
common good—is fundamental to any authentic Christianity. A clear and profound
doctrine of commonweal permeates the Old Testament. It is made law in the book
of Deuteronomy and constantly enjoined by the Holy Prophets. Jesus Christ
reaffirms this “law of commonweal” with his great moral imperative, “love your
neighbour as yourself.” Elevating it above its original statement in the book
of Leviticus, Christ makes this moral imperative (together with unconditional
love of God) the very foundation and essence of the Law and the Prophets. The
fulfillment of such a moral imperative certainly requires a direct encounter
and interaction with culture and society. Unfortunately, this is an encounter
that has been either abandoned, corporatized or reduced to outbursts of
moralism by many Christian bodies.
Contrary to this trend, the
Christian community must address society and interact in the shaping of our
culture. However, this interaction must consist of something more than merely
scolding politicians and demanding the law enforce on all citizens the sort of
behaviour we consider to be correct. We must avoid the inner contradictions of
moralism and address the whole scope of true morality.
Morality or Moralism?
How can Christians consider
it to be an authentic expression of morality to oppose the killing of unborn
children while ignoring the killing of children who are already born? Is it
truly moral to protect the lives of unborn children but ignore or trivialize
the fact that they will have to grow up in a world where, because of our own
excess, they may not have sufficient food and many of the necessary natural
resources will have been squandered and climate change will have made their
lives precarious and uncertain? Is it actually moral to demand that governments
enforce the sort of correct personal behaviour that our own ideologies demand
while turning consumer capitalism into a religious doctrine that cannot be
subjected to critique and criticism?
One fatal flaw in the
preaching of Christianity, which has had especially negative effects in North
America, is the failure to distinguish between morality and moralism. From an
authentic Christian point of view, true morality has to do not only with
salvation but with every aspect of our inter-human relations; it is not simply
a system of correct behaviour.
True morality is not a system
of law which, if obeyed, makes one a moral person. It is necessary to have such
laws for the sake of society, but that has little to do with the change of a
person’s heart and an inner transformation into the image of Christ’s love.
Morality is not a form of bondage but a path of liberation. When we speak of
“the law of God,” we are not speaking of an ordinary, worldly notion of “law.”
God’s law is not given to repress us but to protect us. If we are driving along
a dangerous highway and the signs warn us to slow down because there is a
dangerous curve in the road, that is a “law.” The speed limit is set by law. If
we disregard that law and crash over a cliff because we are driving too fast,
we do not claim that the government punished us by making us crash. On the
contrary, the government tried to save us from serious injury or death by
making that law. This is precisely the meaning of the “law of God,” of our
system of morality. God has revealed to us a manner of life that can keep us
from much pain and suffering and from many disasters. He has called upon us to
realize that his law is a law of love, and that we should obey it out of love
and trust in him, not from fear of punishment. Moreover, such true morality
constrains us to imitate God’s love in our dealings with the world. This is the
essence of true morality.
We cannot equate morality
with behaviour that is acceptable to a given society, because often a society
accepts behaviour that we know is contrary not only to our salvation but is
also inimical with the concept of commonweal. If we preach only a legal
morality that does not encompass the two moral imperatives of Jesus Christ,[5]
then we are mere moralists. Moralism is cold, unforgiving, full of hatred, and
spiritually destructive. It is self-centred, and it deforms the idea of
morality for the advantage of one or another class in society to the detriment
of others.
When we speak of true
morality, we are not referring to simple obedience to a system of law but a
free accord with a system of spiritual healing. The authentic Christian
spiritual life really does provide us with the means for moral healing, but
even among our own people, we see so many who never experience such healing.
This is because they encounter only moralism: “Obey this law or God will do
something bad to you.” Moralism does not take into account what is necessary to
actually heal a person and deliver them from the bondage of their inner
suffering so they can lead a moral life; it thinks only about condemnation and
punishment. But let us indicate how these ideas have a direct bearing on our
subject. Our modern consumerism inclines a society not only to excess but also
to self-centeredness and indifference. One can opt to blame such attitudes on
Satan, but when one does, let him remember that the power of Satan in our lives
can be defeated only by means of unselfish love, by adopting a sincere sense of
commonweal—to love your neighbour as yourself—in place of a desensitized
self-interest. There is no such thing as Christian morality without an inner
struggle toward unselfish love, self-constraint, and a sincere concern for the
welfare not only of those around us but even for future generations.
Moralism condemns, usually
with arrogant self-righteousness, while a spirit of true Christian morality
seeks one’s own moral healing and the moral healing of those around us so they
might be liberated from bondage. This is the concept of morality that can keep
us alive spiritually in our consumerist and secular culture; this is the image
of morality that will attract others to Christ and to authentic faith, a
concept that can help form in us a truly Christian sense of commonweal.
The Corporatization of Morality
The corporatization of
morality may be a product of radical individualism. It arises almost
automatically when Christianity is transformed from a living faith into an
ideology informed by such categories as “liberal,” “conservative,” “leftist,”
“right wing,” and so forth. Morality then becomes corporatized into various
categories of correct behaviour, defined by an essentially political mindset of
one or another religio-political ideology. This narrows the concepts so clearly
stated in the Old Testament down to “horror at those things condemned” with
little regard for those things enjoined: social justice, non-condescending care
for the poor and all those in need, and a powerful sense of mutual
responsibility for the common good of the nation, of all the inhabitants of
that nation.[6] In the Old Testament law, there are clearly ecological
provisions for the care and nurturing of the land: a Sabbath for the
agricultural land is just as much a part of the Law as a Sabbath for man
(Leviticus 25:4-6). This care of the land, which must be cherished and
nurtured, is surely as much a moral law as any in the Old Testament. Just as
surely, it shows a deep concern for the common good of the whole population
which must be fed from that land. This concern so obviously extends to future
generations.[7]
Organizing and spending large
sums of money to protest and lobby against certain forms of personal behaviour
may be useful, but there is an inner contradiction that is inexcusable when the
same organizers refuse to condemn corporate immorality or organize and finance
lobbying about environmental issues that relate to the very survival of whole
populations and the health, welfare, and survival of future generations. The
destruction of the environment is every bit as immoral and kills just as many
children as abortion. Any truly Christian concept of morality will encompass
corporate and environmental immorality with the same fervour that it addresses
personal morality.
We may have a “fallen human
nature,” but it is clear that humankind is essentially good and, as the image
and likeness of God, has an innate inclination toward virtue. We will all live
in the new world order of consumer capitalism and secularism. We will all
partake of the benefits of consumer capitalism and enjoy its positive aspect.
But as Christians, we will also have to face the moral challenges of its
negative side. It is urgent for us, as moral human beings, to recognize that
future generations will pay a terrible price for the excess and overindulgence
of our era. We cannot separate spirituality from moral responsibility and here,
consumerism poses yet another challenge. Since consumerism thrives on
over-consumption, not only must products not be durable, as we mentioned
before, but they should not be reasonably “upgradable” either. Computers, for
example, are discarded and replaced regularly. People are shocked to learn
that, in our monastery print shop, we are still using a computer that we
purchased in 1988, yet it is perfectly adequate for our typesetting needs. Let
us look at the moral tragedy of this problem.
In Canada alone, 140,000
tonnes of computer equipment, cell phones, and other types of electronic
equipment. are discarded into waste disposal yards every year. That is the
weight of about 28,000 fully-grown adult African elephants. This results in
4,750 tonnes of lead, 4.5 tonnes of cadmium, and 1.1 tonnes of mercury being
leached into the water system and food chain every year.[8]
These toxic heavy metals are already creating havoc on people’s health and
causing a loss of drinking water reserves. Future generations will pay a
devastating price for all this. Whether we care enough to do something about it
or to resist this aspect of consumerism is a moral issue. It is also a
barometer of our spirituality.
Yet we need not succumb to
what Habermas calls “personality systems without any aspiration to subjective
truth nor secure processes for communal interpretation.”[9]
This is why it is so important for us to consider the role authentic Christian
morality can play in this unfolding drama of our present era. We cannot have
such a role if we opt out of the political dialogue and refuse to engage
culture and interact with the society around us in a creative and healing way.
[1]. Linda McQuaig
in All You Can Eat: Greed, Lust and the New Capitalism, (Penguin Books,
2000)
[2]. In Queen’s
Quarterly, Spring, 2002, p. 38.
[3]. Lost in
the Global Shopping Mall, Queen’s Quarterly, Spring 2002, p.43.
[4]. “The
Ambivalence of Disenchantment,” in Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential
Politics, eds. Paolo Virno and Michael Hardt (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1966), pp. 17-18.
[5]. The second is
“do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
[6]. See
Deut.24:19-21, for example.
[7]. See
Deut.20:19, for example where destruction of trees that produce food is
forbidden even in time of war, for the sake of future generations.
[8]. Source: The
Globe and Mail newspaper’s financial magazine, Report on Business,
Vol.20, Nr.8, February, 2004, p.13.
[9]. Jürgen
Habermas, Legitimation Crisis (Boston: Beacon Press, 1975). This not a
direct quote, but given as nearly as I remember it from the text of the book.