THE COMMON GOOD IN A TIME OF GLOBAL CRISIS

Prayers for a seriously ill Pope seem to have been answered.  But will we hear his voice again, speaking from the heart, truth to power, at this critical time?  It is so badly needed.  For his words have often broken through the political gaslighting to illuminate truths that give hope, and could do so again.  It says something when a Guardian editorial (17 March) describes Francis’ pontificate as making the Catholic Church “one of the west’s most combative defenders of the liberal democratic values”.

We are in a global crisis with the moral, the military, the economic and the political intertwined.   We have moved from low key realpolitik to different forms of strident proclamation, echoing across continents, that might is right.  Or to use Francis’ more pointed words in his 10 February letter to the US bishops: the imposition of “an ideological criterion that distorts the life of society and imposes the will of the strongest”.   We have moved from an America imagined by President Kennedy, recalling the words of the first Governor of Massachusetts Bay colony, John Winthrop in his 1630 ‘city on a hill’ sermon , to an America looked on in shock, dismay and apprehension by other democratic countries.  To the modern forms of tyranny found in Russia and China is added the bizarre political dynamics of the present USA ruling clique at full throttle.

Kennedy, as a political not a religious leader, did not repeat Winthrop’s appeal “to follow the counsel of [prophet] Micah: to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with God.  For this end”, Winthrop continued, “we must hold each other in brotherly affection; we must be willing to rid ourself of our excesses to supply others' necessities; we must uphold a familiar commerce together in all meekness, gentleness, patience, and liberality”.   This inspiring vision of the Pilgrim Fathers stands in stark contrast to the current reality, a great country torn asunder, beggaring its neighbours.

Social division within the USA has increased the gulf between the values projected by political and religious discourses.  Think of what Pope Francis has said about, Ukraine, Gaza and particularly about immigration:  “The true common good is promoted when society and government, with creativity and strict respect for the rights of all — as I have affirmed on numerous occasions —welcomes, protects, promotes and integrates the most fragile, unprotected and vulnerable”.  You will not find such vision in any Party political broadcasts.

Some of the US evangelical Churches, and indeed many Catholics,  demonstrate that there is an overlap between values claimed by Trump  and some aspects of the Christian faith.  Some Christian teachings, notably condemnation of the death penalty, solidarity with the poor, feeding and clothing the hungry, welcoming the stranger are rejected whilst those on abortion and gender are embraced.  But there can be  little doubt that, as far of the Trump presidency is concerned, this overlap is consciously fostered and, to a large degree - perhaps less cynically after his near-assassination -  manipulated.  On the President’s passion for peace the jury is out.

Using religion to fool the masses, as Marx pointed out, works.  A large part of Christian America is willing to overlook Trump’s sense of entitlement to millions of dollars, unlimited power and sex, if he waves a bible, bows his head in prayer but expresses what they are feeling, makes them laugh, and promises to raise their standard of living.  Some also seem to believe in a theology in which God, to preserve the nation’s saviour, deflects a bullet.

As Europe’s politicians are increasingly  discovering, it is difficult to deal with the Trump Presidency.  And a no less intractable problem is how should people of goodwill  approach his followers.  Or more pointedly what kind of theology might bring about a hang-on-a-bit moment, the beginning of a Christian prise de conscience amongst the MAGA millions, or indeed amongst populists in Europe.  These are all people who have a right to the truth, and to a theology which speaks to their condition in a language they can understand.   As Massimo Faggioli recently wrote in La Croix - and in correspondence with me - the problem is not just Trump’s supporters , who mainly have missed out on college education, but also the many, particularly theologians, who seem  unable to see that they have to turn from speaking to people who agree with them and talk to people who, for a variety of reasons, voted for Trump.  As Faggioli wrote: “It’s not just a moral problem but also practical, that is, how to save this country.” 
 
Pope Francis has been more than willing to take the lead in changing thinking.  But if the UK is typical, very little of the Pope’s teachings reaches mass-going Catholics.  The “option for the poor” is a formative principle of Francis’  pastoral concern as Pope .  But talking recently with three committed, active, educated Catholics, I realized they were only vaguely aware of the term.  Living in my own bubble, I thought for Catholics the phrase was common knowledge.  But why should they have heard of it if expounding of the liturgy of the Word takes up all the sermon time and there is never any mention of papal guidance and seldom the contemporary relevance of the biblical texts?  The persistent fear of being political isn’t an adequate excuse.  What could be more political than the Samaritan narratives, the Magnificat, the Beatitudes and the behaviour of the biblical Jesus, His incarnational identification with the Poor.
 
It is difficult to find the right language to engage with Christian Nationalism, its search for white dominance and exclusion, or exploitation, of other faiths and ethnicities.  Although it could be called a heresy that wouldn’t be a good start to the conversation.  Without a shared respect for the  moral teaching of the Gospels, it is difficult to engage with fascist-leaning populism.  But here lies the rub.  Trump has a powerful appeal.  The practical politics of foreign policy requires treating him cautiously, sometimes obsequiously.  In domestic politics, it means persuading the reluctant to go through the appropriate lobby whilst giving attention to “Border Controls”, “Fiscal Rules” “Stop and Search”, “Shrinking the costly State”, “Defense Expenditure”. 

Amongst our residual political values, defending  national security needs much wider thinking.  What greater security threat than the consequences of climate change?  But  Gospel values, genuine stewardship of creation, loving your enemy as well as your neighbour, defending human dignity and all that entails, and yes, “pulling down the mighty from their thrones”,  aren’t often practical politics.

So how to make the moral practical?    The question needs asking.  But  the answer to that dilemma is a matter of pure faith: Gospel values will never be practical politics until Christians all around the world try, with great courage and in great numbers, to put them into practice, what  theologians call building the kingdom of God.  One of Francis’ achievements to date is to have built the foundations by drawing on the spirituality and practice of Catholic Social Teaching for our troubled times.   May he continue.