John XXIII AUTHORITY AND POWER
1. Concept and necessity of authority
2. Source authority
3. Sovereignty
4 . Obedience to authority
5. Legitimacy power
6. Resistance to unjust power
7. Policy and moral
1. Concept and need for authority
Authority is something on behalf of which the power may be exercised fairly . Author, who gives something, because it has control over what you give. Authority is a person's ability to lead others toward a particular purpose, and the pastor leads the flock to the meadow. For example, the pilot of a ship is who has the ability to govern, because therein lies the knowledge to determine the course. It does not appear on the authority of others, the power is no effect because of the authority.
The authority assumes the role of an efficient cause of political society. This implies that the authority should coordinate and organize the actions of individuals and intermediary groups, each other, and with reference to the social order has to procure. Marxist thought, coinciding with liberalism and anarchism, holds the necessary demise of the state, once reached the communist era. However, such utopias contradict the ancient historical experience of mankind, which shows that whenever there is social life, there is also authority.
Aristotle explained that in all reality complex, composed of parts, there must be an element capable of ensuring the unity and cohesion among them. The existence of a principle of unity of all, it is verifiable at all levels of the material universe, but its application is more profound in the case of human groups and, particularly, in political society.
In these, as opposed to natural organisms, each part is itself independent of all, because each person is a being in and of itself, while parts of an organism does not have their own life if the completely separated. Thus human societies accidental or constitute a whole order, then your unit only based on the common goal to which the members attend, this purpose is none other than the common good.
What makes the authority a key element of political society is the essential distinction that mediates between the individual good and common good. Being a specific difference, the specific requirements of the common good can not be satisfied by the mere play of individual actions, which are ordered him to satisfy the individual needs of each member.
Every citizen is able, under normal conditions, to provide for their conservation requirements of his job, the constitution of your home, etc. But it is clear that not every citizen or parent, can perform effectively as finance minister or legislator.
Such functions require a detailed knowledge of the specific requirements of the national common good, and a more cautious since the stakes are more important. From above, it is still the need for any political society is to assign a group of people the exercise of public power. It is the nature of the common good as the absolute obligation imposed by the existence of a social authority, able to assume the task itself.
2. Source authority
In light of what has been said, we can summarize the Christian doctrine of political power, with the words of St. Paul: "There is no authority except under God" (Rom 13.1). Since God is the author of the natural order, by virtue of which every human being tends toward social harmony as a necessary means for its perfection. Consequently, God has arranged things in such a way that the authority is an essential part of his providential plan, to that extent, it said that God is the source of all human authority.
Another different thing is to determine the most appropriate way to describe men who are to exercise la autoridad. En la doctrina hay unanimidad con respecto a que la autoridad política tiene su origen en Dios. Pero con respecto a la cuestión de la forma en que se atribuye el poder estatal al que lo ejerce, se han dividido las opiniones.
Recordemos, primero, la teoría del derecho divino de los re yes, de raíz protestante, defendida por Jacobo I, rey de Inglaterra (1603/1625). Sostiene esta tesis que la autoridad del gobernante viene directa e inmediatamente de Dios, tal como sucede con el Romano Pontífice.
Los teólogos católicos sostuvieron dos tesis diferentes.
► La Teoría de la traslación : supported by the P. Suarez, who said, against the thesis of James I, that the authority came directly from God to the community or village, so this was the primeval natural subject of authority, in turn, as the whole community can not exercise authority shall determine the persons to whom you transferred. This translation is done by the people's consent, express or implied. Do not confuse the theory of translation with that of Rousseau, that the people or general will is the subject of a contract authority and the delegated representatives. ►
theory immediate collation : supported by the P. Vitoria says that the community means a person only has to exercise state power, while the power of God himself immediately goes to the person who has to exercise. That is, according to this view, God communicates the attributes of power to that designated by the community, which fulfills the function of appointment and determination, but not the community that previously received these attributes, possessing as its own, and then transferred to the rulers. Analysis
topic: Fr Meinvielle delineated that the people can not perform complex functions involving the exercise of authority. So it makes no sense to allocate the role of intermediary in the transfer of authority, and you can not transfer what has not and does not have what he can not exercise. Indeed, the criterion for natural rights is the need to use or exercise has. But if the community or people can never exercise authority, transfer it is not justified, even if temporarily.
The Magisterium of the Church has never explicitly ruled on this issue, because you just lay down the principle of the divine origin of authority, leaving the faithful free to support either position. However, there is a passage that gives us guidance, in the Encyclical "Diuturnum illud" of Leo XIII:
" is important to note at this point that those who govern the States are eligible, under certain circumstances, by the will and opinion of the multitude, without the Catholic doctrine oppose or contradict this choice. With this election means the ruling, but did not confer the rights of power. Power supply or as a mandate, but is established the person must exercise . "(4)
3. Sovereignty
Linked to the previous point, we consider now one of the most confusing concepts of the political vocabulary: sovereignty. As a concept of political theory, is found in Bodin which formulates a theory of sovereignty. To justify the absolutist monarchical power of his time, Bodin uses this concept, assigning first Christ as absolute master, hence it follows the monarch as the representative of Christ. The author adds that sovereignty involves three notes: it is absolute, inalienable and indivisible.
then Althusius German and, later, Rousseau, replaced the "sovereignty of the prince" by "popular sovereignty", a formula that remains to this day, with the same content Rousseau will be assigned basic.
liberal theory: on the basis of such historical sources, was established liberal theory of popular sovereignty. Rousseau links this concept with another of his creation: general will, which is the will of the people of the majority. According to him, the town becomes the source and root of all political power, all authority, once established, the social pact , irrevocable, by which society is political.
covenant clauses essentially involve "the total alienation of each associate, with all its rights, the whole community because, first, by giving each a whole, the condition is the same for everyone, no one is interested in making it burdensome to others "(The Social Contract .) On the basis of egalitarianism, as well established, the town stands, through the myth of the general will, the supreme legislature. The government is merely the representative or agent for implementing the decisions of that court. As such, the people are the source of all law and all moral rule, and consequently may be revoked at any time the delegation of authority to the government of the day.
Review: conception liberal utopian sovereignty is contradictory and harmful . It utopian, since it is based on a chimera of original pact, historically non-existent. Contradictory , as it assumes that individuals freely associate, but after that time can not revoke the approval. It dire consequences by: a) because it dissolves the foundation of authority, b) because it flows into the unlimited despotism of the state and most c) because it eliminates all references to God and the natural order as the origin of authority; d) because it puts the crowd amorphous base all right and morality; e) it favors the demagoguery of those who seek to perpetuate themselves in power.
Natural Order: social doctrine of the Church gives us a very different orientation for political sovereignty, in full accordance with historical experience. Sovereignty is an attribute of authority. A quality of state power that makes it irresistible and ultimate in a given jurisdiction; can not be subordinated to any other power. It is the faculty by which the public authority imposed by law, certain obligations to citizens.
The sovereign power is exercised over members of the same State, does not apply correctly the relations between states. In the second case, we must talk about independence.
sovereignty does not imply in any way the idea of \u200b\u200babsolute autonomy, as claimed by Bodin.
The sovereignty of the people , or self-government of the people is a false argument, scientifically, in three cases:
a) the people can not govern : Governance therefore requires taking decisions that can not be made multitudinously, nor, run, what can only be done by whoever is prepared especially for this purpose. Even in Athens, where they would gather in the public square 5 or 6 thousand citizens to discuss and pass laws. That amount represented twenty percent of all citizens, excluding women and slaves, who were not citizens. However, such participation was limited with respect to one of the classic functions of the authority, as the legislative Aristotle, "but not in the other two, executive and judicial, which was in the hands of fewer officials usually chosen at random. Empirically, the town has never ruled on any part, or any time. The people can not govern themselves, the power functions do not support the massive exercise by all the people.
b) the people are not sovereign : So according to what has already been explained, sovereignty is nothing but an attribute of state power. No one lives in, is an inherent attribute of State. Therefore lies not in one, not the ruler, much less in the whole village.
c) the government does not represent all the people : because for a subject can be represented, it is essential to a certain unit in the same subject represented. It can represent a man, a family, an institution. To a multitude of men can be represented, provided they have a particular and common interest in which the plurality is unified, for example, savers let down by a bank. But can not represent a heterogeneous conglomerate with different and even conflicting interests, as is the people. Village is a collective name designating the whole of people who form the population of a State, it is not moral or legal person, certainly not capable of being represented.
A scientific criticism, we must add the papal teaching, Pope Leo XIII in the Encyclical "Immortals Dei says: " The sovereignty of the people ... without foundation solid and substantial performance to ensure public safety and maintain order in society . "
4. Obedience authority
If the authority comes from God, nothing more obvious than the obligation to obey legitimate authorities, provided that legislates and order within the scope of their powers. Obedience does not preclude that these powers are unaware that prevail under the authority God gives them, nor the morally unworthy to be their owners, while they are made legitimately in power and do not prescribe anything unfair or evil, obedience is obligatory even in the forum of conscience.
When in Rome echoed the words of St. Paul, explaining that there is no power not emanating from God and whoever resists the power, resists God, because the ruler is the minister of God (Rom 13, 1), reigned the tyrant Nero.
5. Legitimacy power
who exercises power in a political society does not like a mere brute force but as a function legally framed. Then, the public is justified in exercising store when the purpose for which it exists. This is called legitimacy exercise: attempting to legitimize the common good or make legitimate power in its exercise, although the governor has agreed to office via a coup, or as a result of war. Normally, prolonged social consensus in a climate of relative public peace, reveals tacitly legitimisation of a ruler. Exercising power
unfairly, in violation of the law, against the good of the community, etc., Decay makes this legitimacy. If such illegitimacy becomes permanent, severe and damaging to the community, it has the right to defend itself, resisting the ruling that has deviated the exercise of power, and eventually depose him.
There is another form of legitimacy of power, which is called legitimacy source: refers to the title of the ruler who exercises power, ie the regular and legal way as it has come to power, and not to as exercises. There legitimacy of origin, when the ruler derives his title of existing law in a State (Constitution and laws), or when it has come to power in accordance with the procedure laid down in regulations.
As noted above, a ruler who come to power by means not sanctioned by law, illegitimate origin, "can be legitimized by its performance since the power-based legitimacy. Conversely, a ruler who came to power as the procedure, you may lose the legitimacy of exercise.
6. Resistance to unjust power
The resistance to power is the distinction between right and wrong, as the natural order and as positive law. The problem then is to determine to what extent a citizen must obey an unjust law and respect for the public authority that has enacted. In this respect, St. Thomas teaches that unjust law is a violence that the law itself, as it has but the appearance thereof.
The doctrine identifies four types or levels of resistance, which can qualify the application of the principles according to circumstances and the reasonable opinion:
passive resistance, is to refuse to obey unjust laws, to be such, where they depart from or contradict the requirements of the common good or unaware of a fundamental human right.
There are laws that are bad in themselves, such as permitting abortion or euthanasia. It is also lawful passive resistance against economic measures that involve a clear detriment to the national interest (privatization), or injury to private property (freezing of bank deposits).
Passive resistance is not only a right but a duty.
Active resistance: is divided into two types, namely:
a) legal resistance, is to use all means that the law agrees, to prevent the implementation of a measure of government, or achieve its amendment or repeal, as appropriate. Examples: the right to petition the authorities, managing the declaration of unconstitutionality, the judges, organization of awareness campaigns and signing petitions, strikes, etc.
b) Active resistance fact, involves the use of physical media. Examples: rejection, by force, occupation of property; crossover vehicles on the roads or streets, strikes with termination of employment or occupation of public buildings, etc.
Rebellion: the situation which is reached when there have been frequent abuses of political power, there will inevitably try to depose him by force. Rebellion or revolution, may be legitimate in extreme cases, because it is an extension or analogy of the individual right of self-defense , if unjust and serious assault. Also, when he abuses power incurs a double illegitimacy-of-origin and exercise, can those who rebel-if unavoidable, to depose him, killing him, because it is a usurper. What the doctrine is always excluded tyrannicide privately, or when a particular eliminates the tyrant, without representation genuine community interest. Whether
rebellion to active resistance in fact, must take into account the requirements in the doctrine, as summarized in the Catechism:
"The resistance to the oppression of those who govern can not legitimately use weapons but when they meet the following conditions: 1) for certain violations, serious and protracted fundamental rights, 2) after exhausting all other resources, 3) without causing worse disorders, 4) there is reasonable expectation of success; 5) if it is impossible to predict reasonably better solutions. "(No. 2243)
Doctrinal indications are accurate, and should serve to prevent insurrection or civil war, where there are no minimum requirements for ensuring the common good. In the words of Paul VI: " can not fight real bad for the price of a greater evil " (PP, 31) And as before we quote St. Paul's exhortation to obedience, we must remember the clarification of the theologian Bellarmine about the conduct of the early Christians in Rome who suffered abuse. If not depose Nero, Julian the Apostate, the Arian Valens and the like, not because they had no right to do so, but because they lacked strength for this . "
7. Policy and moral
Politics is human activity that carried men to participate in civic life and to obtain power or influence the public. In this regard, we analyze two erroneous theories about politics. ►
Motion "French Action", which had a certain gravity in the twentieth century, conceived politics as a physical science , checking natural phenomena and laws organized the same way that, eg botany. The company would not be a free realization the man who updates the social virtues deposited in their being, but the necessary outcome of necessary instincts. It is, therefore, eliminated from the foundation and structure of society under the item because it does not involve any self-determination. Excluding virtue, is that political life is alien to justice. Its specific purpose is not the common good time, and teaches Christian ethics, but the national interest.
Although inspired by other philosophical, Machiavellianism and fascism, hold great affinity with the ideology maurrasiana (for Maurras, founder of Action Française.) Machiavelli, deprived of all religious and imbued intelligence Greco-Roman conceptions of life at home is the only spiritual greatness, able to inspire and engender the glory, heroism, work and creation.
The country is a deity whose altar is to immolate everything. As it is done by it is justified, and actions in private life would be bad if done for the country are magnanimous. The reason state, contains within itself fully justified.
For Fascism, in turn, the state is the true reality of the individual, for the fascist's all within the State, and nothing human or spiritual is out of state. So it is totalitarian. ► At
physicalism French Action is diametrically opposed individualism of Rousseau, for him, politics is a mere art , derived entirely from the free will of man. For Rousseau, man is born free, with freedom of the wild in a forest, and so must remain essentially. As all men are free, it is inconceivable and unjust less subordination. But as a political society is inevitable to improve the standard of living, Rousseau seeks to build in a way that nobody is broken in its essential freedom and equality. To do this, pretend a social pact, by which men consent to be free to live in society, conceived as an artificial product, only applies where the general will, or computed numerically the crowd.
Catholic Doctrine policy: to determine the essence of politics is necessary to distinguish two types of human actions:
a) The feasible : refers to the making of men, with actions exerted over external nature (building a table, lift a building). Is governed by the intellectual virtue of art.
b) The agible : refers to human actions, actions brought in the man (think, decide). Is governed by the intellectual and moral virtue of prudence you get from the moral, practical conclusions applicable to each case.
The policy seeks the common good, which is not physical goods, and the main political activity is to send or leading others, no doubt belongs to the field of human action, not doing. Therefore, if agible activity should be governed by prudence, not art, as generally understood, since Machiavelli. It is, therefore, "the art of the possible."
can not be no doubt about the moral nature of politics, which we define as "reasonable activity, which is to make possible what is necessary for common good. "
Sources:
Sacheri, Carlos. "The Church and the social", Bahia Blanca, La Nueva Provincia, 1972.
Ramos, Fulvio. "The Church and democracy", Buenos Aires, Cruz and Fierro, 1984.
Palumbo, Carmelo. "Guide to a systematic study of the Social Doctrine of the Church", Buenos Aires, EDUCA, T. III, 1987.
Palacios, Leopoldo, Eulogio. "The political wisdom", Madrid, Gredos, 1978.
Meinvielle, P. July. "Catholic conception of politics", Buenos Aires, Dictio, 1974.
Bidart Campos, Germain. "Lessons basic policy ", Buenos Aires, Ediar, 1973.
0 comments:
Post a Comment