Demonstrate the
relationship between the dynamic of virtue, character formation, and Christian
life. The convergence of religious virtues and civic virtues presents a
balanced way of relating religion and politics in the public sphere. Demonstrate
this assertion by making reference to Thomas Aquinas’ treatise in Summa Theologiae and Richard John
Neuhaus’ treatise on religion and politics in The Naked Public Square.[Reference
to Thomas and Neuhaus]
a) Virtue, character formation and Christian life
Virtue refers to the habits of the heart and mind and play a key role in
the formation of our disposition and world-view. Character is the aggregate of features and
traits that form the individual nature of some person or thing. The catholic
tradition has generally seen virtue as a part of human flourishing and the call
of God to strive for perfection in response to God’s gift. The realities of
historical consciousness, social location, diversity, pluralism, and individual
vocations must also influence our interpretation of the virtues. The unique
individual has a particular character depending on the way different virtues
are configured. Everyone creates his/her own personal synthesis. Much
individual diversity exists, but there remains a minimal understanding of those
virtues that inform every Christian life.
With the help of Stanley Hauerwas
and J. W. Crossing, the relationship between the dynamic virtues, character
formation and Christian life. Basically, character is associated with “trait”
and most appropriately is used in contexts suggesting individuality. But when
applied to persons, character denotes what is in some measure deliberate, what
a person can decide to be as opposed to what he or she is naturally. And so
character understood in this way implies that a person is more than that which
simply happens to him; for he or she has to determine himself or herself beyond
momentary excitations in the acts.
These three terms: character, virtue
and Christian life are linked. In fact, when we think of a person’s character,
a distinguished trait such as honesty or kindness we denote more the common
meaning of virtue. And these are aspects of Christian life.
To emphasize the idea of character
is to recognize that our actions are also acts of self-determination; in them
we reaffirm not only what we have been but also determine what we will be in
the future. And so we engage our whole person. To acquire this dynamicity is
not automatic, this must be cultivated.
Stanley
Haverwas in stressing character emphasizes personal self-determination. A
person’s actions help determine who he/she is and who he/she will be. People
are not merely formed by environment of psychological factors, but form
themselves. Character, for Haverwas, affects what a person does more than
rules. Character can and should grow progressively into conformity with Christ.
Human
action is intentional and historical and, thus, a person needs stories in order
to catch the connections between particular, contingent events. What is
required for our moral behaviour to contribute to a coherent sense of the self
is neither a single moral principle nor a harmony of the virtues, but the
formation of character by a narrative that provides a sufficiently truthful
account of our existence.
In conclusion, we can see that it is
not possible to establish abstract criteria that can accurately indicate how
much our character is determined and how much we determine ourselves. Character
is tremendously important for our moral behavior; for what we do morally is not
in itself determined by the rule we adhere to, but by what we have become
through our past history which form our character. And the idea of character
provides a way of explicating the normative nature of Christian life. This
Christian life is not simply a matter of assuming a vague loving attitude, but
rather a concrete determination of our being developed through our history. This
determination is a progressive growth of the self into a fuller reality.
It is true that the convergence of religious
virtues and civic virtues presents a balanced way of relating religion and
politics in the public sphere. As John Paul II puts it in his Post Synodal
Exhortation Chistifideles Laici,
those with political responsibilities must not forget or underestimate the
moral dimension of political representation, which consists in the commitment
to share fully in the destiny of the people and to seek solutions to social
problems. In this perspective, responsible authority also means authority
exercised with those virtues that make it possible to put power into practice
as service, (patience, modesty, moderation, charity, efforts to share), an
authority exercised by persons who are able to accept the common good, and not
prestige or the gaining of personal advantages, as the true goal of their work.
Although the Church and the
political community both manifest themselves in visible organizational structures,
they are by nature different because of their configuration and because of the
ends they pursue. The Second Vatican Council solemnly reaffirmed that, “in
their proper spheres, the political community and the Church are mutually
independent and self-governing.” The Church is organized in ways that are
suitable to meet the spiritual needs of the faithful, while the political
communities give rise to relationships and institutions that are at the service
of everything that is part of the temporal common good. The autonomy and
independence of these two realities is particularly evident with regards to
their ends.
The mutual autonomy of the Church
and the political community does not entail a separation that excludes
cooperation. Both of them, although different titles, serve the personal and
social vocation of the same human beings. The Church and the political
community, in fact, express themselves in organized structures that are not
ends in themselves but are intended for the service of man and woman, to help
him to exercise his right fully, those inherent in his reality as a citizen and
a Christian, and to fulfill correctly his corresponding duties. The Church and
the political community can more effectively render this service “for the good
of all if each works better for wholesome mutual cooperation in a way suitable
to the circumstances of time and place”.
b)
Convergence of religious virtues and civic virtues
Religious
virtues are presented putting an accent of the personal commitment more
especially in close relation to the person of Christ. A relation is put between
God and human beings. They are supposed to inform the civic virtues. They are
the content of the civic virtues. If religion refuses this role then it does
not have any importance in the society. They give self transcendence power to a
person. They help people to penetrate themselves.
Civic
virtues are the good behaviours that are executed in public life like a young
man giving a seat to an old person in a matatu. They help the character formation,
revealing who you are and your way of acting. It forms the identity of an
individual.
Civic virtues are formed by the religious virtues hence we can say
that the religious virtues are internal to civic virtues. They are the content
of civic virtues. Aquiline Tarimo[1]
holds that religious virtues and civic virtues are intrinsically
interconnected. There is a substantial overlap between the basic moral
obligations such as those that prohibit murder, theft and dishonesty. The
integration of religious and civic virtues is evident in Mother Theresa’s works
of compassion, because her practice of the religious virtue of compassion
manifests civic virtue. Such observation confirms that Mother Theresa exercised
both religious virtues and civic virtues in her works of compassion. We can
also argue that the religious requirement to love one’s neighbour as oneself
brings together two categories of virtues. The convergence of various
categories of virtues is a political process since it provides space for sharing
various conceptions of the good in the process of decision-making.
Central to Neuhaus's work was his thesis
regarding the implications of a completely secular public square in which
particularist religion was excluded explicitly from public affairs- "the
naked public square." Neuhaus believed that a naked public square could
not be maintained either in theory - given the essential connection between
religion and politics - or in practice - because the vacuum created by the
absence of traditional religion would be filled by an ersatz religion which
ultimately was a recipe for totalitarianism in which the state became
all-in-all. In such a condition, the very tenets of democracy such as freedom,
civility, and tolerance lacked any substantive foundation.
Neuhaus's solution to the naked public square
entailed a first-principle re-examination of the role of religion in American
public life. What was needed was the re-instantiation of a theonomous civil
public square inclusive of a substantive religious voice that was (1)
transcendently-based, (2) ecumenical in nature, and (3) grounded in natural
moral law. Only this kind of voice could reassert itself as the value-bearing
aspect of culture
Books
Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church
[1] Aquiline Tarimo, Ethnicity, Citizenship & State in
Eastern Africa (Cameroon: Langaa RPCIG, 2011), 132ff.
No comments:
Post a Comment