Family Ethics: Practices for Christians

Chapter Two: Between the Personal and the Political: Families as Agents of Social Change

C H A P T E R T W O Between the Personal and the Political Families as Agents of Social Change In chapter 1, I furthered my case that the moral dilemmas of ordinary family life deserve more sustained analysis in social ethics by arguing that, in scripture, the liturgy, and sacramental theology, marriage is viewed as socially significant and families are charged with social responsibilities. However , many readers may be skeptical that a concentrated approach to family life is a viable way to approach social justice. One might justifiably ask, “Why not focus on larger social forces that shape daily life? Are not these forces more worthy of rigorous ethical treatment than everyday choices? Does not the tradition of Catholic social teaching, in particular, focus its attention on political choices relating to justice, solidarity, and the option for the poor rather than on the daily lives of families?” Catholic social teaching (hereafter CST) is, in fact, often viewed as only tangentially related to families. Courses and books on CST usually include sections on the economy, war and peace, human rights, and perhaps the environment , racism, or sexism, but typically they do not devote much time to social ethics issues pertaining to families, and only rarely do they include principles designed to facilitate reflection on the kinds of actions families ought to take. In his recent book, Catholic Social Teaching, 1891–Present: A Historical, Theological, and Ethical Analysis, Charles Curran provides justification for this emphasis with his assertion that family issues “lie outside the scope of Catholic Social Teaching, which is primarily focused on changing institutions and structures” rather than changing hearts.1 Other authors may not be as explicit, but most seem to share Curran’s assumption about the marginal place of family in CST. In a recent book Thomas Massaro and Thomas Shannon contrast the countercultural model of radical Catholic thought, which though strong in “moral clarity” is weak in its reliance on “simplistic analysis and cultural disengagement” with the mainstream model they favor.2 The caution and humility of the mainstream model admired by the authors is accompanied by a focus on policies and social structures rather than community, individual, or familial practices. Others explicitly argue in favor of this approach, claiming that, while commitments to home and parish are fundamental, Catholic social teaching should move all Catholics to engage in politics at some level.3 While they acknowledge that striving to become better persons in private life is important , these authors insist that social reform is the more significant task for Catholics who take their social teaching seriously. Analysts of the Catholic social tradition who encourage Catholics to see the necessity of political reform are not misguided; in many cases, it is the best way to address social inequity. Moreover, it is difficult to dispute Curran ’s characterization of policy as the major concern of Catholic social encyclicals . Plainly, as Massaro and Shannon see it, there is much to recommend in the measured analysis that most social documents apply to political issues, and, as I pointed out in the introduction to this book, it is very difficult to apply the witness of radical Christians to the lives of ordinary people. The mainstream tradition of Catholic social ethics has applied most of its energy to issues pertaining to governments and businesses rather than families or individuals, for good reasons, and Catholic social ethicists do well to direct Catholics to pay more attention to this crucial dimension of public life. However, reflection on the ethical contributions that families make to communities and cultures is also a crucial piece of the Catholic tradition deserving of attention. Without minimizing the importance of political change, CST has always insisted on the moral and social significance of what people do in their private lives.4 This distinctive perspective is, I 38 Between the Personal and the Political would argue, both an unrecognized strength and an underdeveloped strain waiting to be brought to full potential. From the earliest of the social encyclicals , there is a recognition that social change cannot be brought about by laws and rulers alone. A society cannot be judged solely on its policies and structures. Rather, what families do is crucially important, and their health is an important indicator of a society’s success in encouraging human flourishing. A full analysis of the Catholic social tradition requires attention to family life, for one cannot make sense...