When Anti-Christianity Coops Social Justice

“No justice, no peace,” numerous waving signs declare.  For sixty years, such banners have flown with nary a word about the oxymoronic wording.  A more apt message would be “No peace, no justice.”  Moreover such “peace” would have to begin in the soul of each individual person, dependent on an authentic integration of objective truth and love.  Absent a well formed, catechized conscience, social justice becomes not only twisted but perverted.   

 
Unfortunately,  “social justice” is an umbrella reference in both Catholic and secular  entities.  So, any two persons can discuss “social justice” with antithetical understanding as to its definition and form; its criteria and optimum outcomes; and whether such is limited to a temporal world, bordering on utopian, unitarian visions, or as a merciful mission that meets needs, but also virtuously leads individuals, neighbors,, and societies to salvation.  

 
The Catholic Church best capsulizes a genuine understanding of “social justice” through numerous Church Fathers, Church Doctors, saints, and theologians, with many Popes amid these ranks.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church alludes to this concept most specifically in CCC 1928-1948, emphasizing the dignity of the human person.

 
However, not all within the Church may prescribe the idealist mission,  and increasingly, criticism has been launched against even the USCCB for cooping with groups that mix in unnatural family planning services and controversial distortions of male-female identity.  Furthermore, often appeals start with the proverbial parish basket for endeavors that sound wonderful but are not necessarily fiscally or logistically managed well.  

 
Regardless, “social justice” itself must be understood, and all contributions weighed against sound criteria drawn from the fundamental study of Justice as a cardinal virtue.

 
First, though, what is meant by “social”?  Social is secularly defined as “of or relating to human society and its modes of organization; or relating to rank and status or affecting welfare.  Seems straight forward until one considers that social could embrace the world.  International organizations trumpet “social justice” in ways that mask ulterior motives, including the toppling of orthodox religion and enthronement of secular autocrats. 

 
Popes through time have emphasized the non political nature of authentic social (justice, though some cooperation with governments is necessary.  Furthermore, the Church recognizes legitimate municipal authority that respects God’s authority.  In recent times, Pope Paul VI noted, “Social teaching is not a political program.”  St. Pope John Paul II, underscored the superior position of the Church as an “expert in humanity,” but it does not propose economic or political systems or programs.  “There is no preference (for any) provided that human dignity is properly respected and promoted.”

 
Justice, itself, is trickier to unpack, and literally reams of paper and countless hours of public discourse attest to its various interpretations and how persons define it.  Regardless, in the absence of theological insight, profoundly and foundationally presented by St. Augustine and St. Aquinas, justice will descend to transitory understanding of what is fair, always subject to redefinition by changing rulers, and, as we have witnessed in recent decades, with anti Christian filters. 

 
Contemporary activists tend to promote justice as those reparative operations that serve the poor, marginalized, scorned or abused via confiscation of possessions from the wealthy—individuals and corporations.  While a bit broadly overstated, such social justice warriors consider all disadvantaged as victims and anyone with material excesses as evil robber barons. Quite a few have resorted to violence in the name of “social justice” like BLM.   Rarely are those with the least held accountable for their situations or assaults on society.  Ironically community megaphones justify even criminal behavior if the perpetrator is “poor” or in a minority group.

 
Unfortunately, neither society nor the beneficiaries of this “generous” attitude truly experience justice in its purest meaning.  Worst of all, as sin is rarely if at all recognized, even poor people can skid to hell in the proverbial hand basket— filled with unearned goodies. 

 
The Catholic Church holds the key to what is social justice, and, equally critical, what opposes justice    However, Church leaders, from small town priests to the Popes in Rome, often find themselves entangled in the modernists mesh, as they wrestle with justice according to legal, distributive, vindictive and commutative meanings or applications.   

 
Thus, often they earnestly but clumsily tackle the balance between mercy and justice.  Some probe the rightful order of justice as it pertains to self (dominion over one’s appetites), other individuals and whole communities or society, the latter attending to subsidiarity and solidarity, while the world rears its ugly head to ward off objective truth and salvific love. 

 
Rarely though does anyone in the pew hear such discourse from the wisest.  St. Augustine (De Moribus Eccl. xv) said that justice is love serving God alone but also “rendering to each one his right.”   The conditions are that it is voluntary, stable, and firm; it is a habit whereby one renders to each one his due by a constant and perpetual will.  St. Thomas Aquinas noted that “mercy without justice is the mother of dissolution; justice without mercy is cruelty.”    

 
Ultimately, then in the distorted understanding of mercy, genuine justice evolves Ito “just deserts” for perceived enemies.  

In 2025, let us pray for growing consensus on three fundamental principles:  One, justice favors no one class, regardless of station in life, difficult circumstances, and even unfair practices.  Compulsory confiscation of property is unjust even for rationalized reasons.  

 
Two, certain vices oppose justice, including superstition (beliefs that falsify worship due God), fanaticism (distorted religion), usury (disproportionate and even punitive repayment), prodigality, (extravagant expenditure)  irreligion, disobedience, ingratitude, falsehood, and enmity (hostility and hatred). 

 
Three, the objectives of subsidiarity and solidarity serve as pillars.  Be aware and watchful because “Institutionalizing” justice opens the virtue to misinterpretation and manipulation, whereby “social justice” suffers from multiple and, in some cases, evil interpretations.  (When agnostics or atheists are involved, much of this is intentional.)

 
Correspondently, general actions include:  Advocating and assisting by a standard rubric that always includes spiritual and corporeal benefits for the giver and recipient.  Non negotiable is the absence of sin (i.e.  family planning programs must emphasize Holy Matrimony and natural planning vs. Planned Parenthood.)  Next weigh the consequences of what appears to be mercy (generosity).   Is the person benefitting helped only in a transitory and falsely empathetic way, or is he or she expected to respond to prompts for real inner and outer growth, accountability and responsibility?  Did the donor only give from excess and very little of that, or did he or she show true compassion (suffering with).  

 
Where evil platforms any policy or program,  refuse to cooperate with it in any way.  However calmly, but with fortitude,  cite Faith objections and—this is critical— also give to a worthwhile, similar endeavor.   Also be a conscientious citizen and inform representatives and government employees when they are erring to the detriment of individuals and society, as a whole.  

 
All of the foregoing must be under the umbrella of acknowledgment and submission to the one true God.  Neither the street justice fighter nor the boardroom billionaire should thwart one letter of the Law for special advantage.  Then, the ability to capitalize (literally) on profits does not excuse the recipient from his or duty to recognize all bounty as from the hand of God.