The Authority Duet

 

 

 

Over the past several days a number of contributors have exchanged views on several issues involving Plan B and abortion and the views of those who identify themselves as Catholics. First of all I am grateful for these discussions and debates. Second, they have prompted some further thinking on my part regarding what distinguishes the authority of the state from the authority of the Church. Our web log dedicated to the development of Catholic Legal Theory has been no stranger to the topic of authority.

 

To begin, I think that the contrast and comparison of these two authorities requires book or treatise treatment rather than a brief posting of, at most, a few pages. One need only consider the work of those like Heinrich Rommen and his The State in Catholic Thought or Christopher Dawson to catch the implication of my point.

 

Nevertheless, even the briefest of treatments can provide catalysts for thought and discussion. The previous postings to which I refer pose some circumstance in which the individual or individuals are countered by the state or the Church. The individual has a measure of freedom and autonomy, both of which have been exaggerated, at least conceptually, by the famous “mystery of life” dicta of Casey. Nonetheless, the individual person surely enjoys a healthy and authentic measure of freedom and autonomy that are proper to the person vis-à-vis the state or the Church. However, the individual’s freedom and autonomy can be countered and challenged by the authority of either the state or the Church in particular circumstances.

 

It is essential, however, to consider how the state and the Church exercise their respective authority. For one thing, the state (regardless of whether it is right or wrong) has the ability to deny a person his or her freedom and autonomy in ways that can lead to imprisonment, economic ruin, denial of a livelihood, or even death. By contrast the Church has only the ability to remove a person—if he or she has not already done this—from the Body of Christ. Indeed, this may mean that a person may be removed from an academic post in a Catholic institution or from membership in a religious community; however, the individual may find gainful employment at another educational institution or become like most people and live somewhere other than a religious community.

 

In either case, what considerations does either the state or the Church take into account when exercising its respective authority? Yves Simon, in his assessment of “the bad name of authority” offered four factors for investigation: justice; life; truth; and order. In varying ways, the state’s and the Church’s actions intersect each of these considerations but in very different ways: the state’s authority is concentrated on the physical and has little or nothing to do with the metaphysical or interior spiritual component of the person; by contrast, the Church’s authority has very limited control over physical dimensions of a person’s life but proposes to those who claim membership what is proper and what is not in spiritual, moral, and metaphysical concerns. Ultimately, the person concludes whether he or she is subject to the Church’s authority and submits freely to it or not, but such is not the case with his or her exposure to the state’s authority. As one considers the elements of justice, life, truth, and order, the distinctions should become all the more clear.

 

RJA sj