Cinco Fuerzas Competitivas

view of politico.

Damant firmly rejects all **aoclal contract" theories.

"Gbriatlan %eology haa nothing to do with any theory that

pr

"*

uppo

$ man to be by nature an aggreaive Individualist

aocl

to be gmâmlly evolving

social

is seen

e

of

(xeâ&p end. not as

after-

There are, aseœâing to Dsmaot, at least two sets of observers who have mlsimderstood the nature of aooietjf. Tha first is the "iRtelleefcualist's fallacy," It is best eharact©ï>l?.ea by the sotteopologlet who tries to explain tlio social life of primitive psopi© toy rogardlng; them a© "pur©

lodlviduaHets”

oomiunlsts."

iiaplication is that ooiBmiaitf develops from the forraes» ami individuality emerges from the latter. Demant's observation Is timfe in p:*lmitiV0 soaleties the individual and group life

2

101

S3?® io a oonoret© relationsMp snd the ''oooespts of

luaivMual and group do not ©xist. ®ils dlvlsloo bstweeu IndivMuaX and group is the result, of eoBfllets la ©oetety, not the e®us@ of them,"'

The seooGfi rslsuaderstaMlag is tli© "morallmt*# fallaoy,” Beeaus© ©f the mœal demanda made upon as to hold, eooiety t%@ther, tee morsllat assutass that society

is brought into ©xistene© throu# tee mom! activity of men. "Eeeaus© be ss®s that moral effort Is required to eomtet tee foroes wiiish tend to break up society, tee fflomllst teerefoi# eonoludes that sooiety is the creation of moral ©iYort on the part of mo."*'* Bat, according to

Demant,

xm

lh@ primary social unit i© tbs family. It is bare

that man finds his issrsons], and iveclal life la their

intended unity. "The truth test the family is tee eleemntal and the normative, social unit, is tee sosioleglcsl expression of the faot that man finda his life more cots-

pletely fulfilled In tea eharlag of a Qoimon total life

with others ... but if tee fam.lly Is m&lmed in tee interests of any eeonomlo, political, or cultural good, the natural

«3 las Is violated.. '

Ibid.

% b M ,. p. 51.

102 »

Dement also reminds im that even oat* family relation- ship! awist tatc© tljslr p»o^r place in the natuj?»! oMer, Because of teelr lofty elmrsoter, as Jesus m m B û » our family ties are most likely to replece our super-temporal loyalty to God.

As xm have already seen, iteaant. divides man’s social life beyond the family into tïiœa general areas: culture, économies, and polities, fo uriâeï*stand them in their proper perspective 1® to clarify the implications of the natural oM @ 3? f w OUλ social relatione. We ahsll ©ventually deal at some length wlte these three major areas of social life. At this stage of our âlsousglon, it be helpful to define these segmenta of the seelal oMer and see how they relate to each otbei* «

W

Seffisnt MferB to oultur© as the Inner aid© of 3

eivillaa.tlon.'*" It Includes the arts, knowledge and ceremonies— "all that qualifies life end does not merely preserve it,"* Gultor© 1ms a aistaphysteal priority end not a physical or* moral ppeoedenoe over politics and ©ooaomlc activity.

Caltttml aetlvitles have e metaphysical jarlorlty in that l« them th® spirit of man operates momt centrally from within outwards, less eoaâltlcxjeâ by the determlolmms which of necessity belong to political and economic activittes. Cultural goods grow by eîmrlng them, whereas polities Is larpsly te© cheeking of power

'Sf. A. Damant, .Sc.ot.ij m û

Present Crisis. (London* Society for Promoting Cliristlsn Knowledge, 1#7), p, 2.

103

by pow©3? and eeoHoiBios Is ümmmmû. with the staking

and distribution of things and the oomparlson of eff0J?t put t œ m v à with the safcisfaetleas gained.

Culturel bonds Bm mom essentially spiritual

unlv©3?s®.l tl'ian politic®! or ©oenemie ones ,3.

Politics iQoludee govermmnt, military power and the

establishment of Im, _{"PoUtlos repreasnts the collestiv©}

©tTort of the spirit of ®&n to proteofc Ilf© f r m the threat Hhloli resMes In the egois® of men and groupa and to co-

oi’dlnate oa the basis of certain oommon values the aofelvlties of or^olmed soelety."^

Bernant goea on to say that politics is ooailtlensd more by the determinisms of natm.«e and history than the cultural. It does, however, have » spiritual mastery of them. "It ha® therefor© its own moral responsibility.

®,ils is not that of forming the ©teleal end eulfcuml purposes for B0R, tout of ©nablitig men with divers© non-polltleal

purposes to live with twt degree of oolMarllw wMoh a eoffiffloa clti»nshtp requires.

EesBoiBie activity 1$ related most to tto physical side of @xist©B€s©. It Is primarily eoneeraed tilth the production and distribution of goods. We must not ancte-estlumt©, in this process, the Impression which the hatmn spirit makes upon these physiesl realities and vice-versa. Bernant is convlaeed that the worst violation of the natural order

Ibid.

p. 87 Ibid.

— 104 —

oaours In the field of ©coneanlos. Sîis uïKloabtedly

aoeounts for te© p?©do«lnsnee of his writing in febis field.

®j0 major ppohlews te the ©eonomio area are osused by

either those who rejeet any spiritual oontool or those who exert unlimited spteitual control.* By "spiritual control" Bernant does not mem# a purely religious control, H® refers rather to the purposes fox» which économie activity way b© used without reference to ©oonowlo ends. Me shall later

disouss the ootjfllots and abuses which aris® out of tmn’ a

attempt to a.ecept or avoid spiritual control of economic affairs.

Our iTOSent purpose is to se® how Dsissnt relates his

view of B. natural crder to an understaMlng of social

relations. îliese categories of his are so related to each other that they must fa© kept la teelr proper place. In addition, there is a proper order within each oategoxtf

which cannot to© ohan#*! iilthout eventually having its effect OB the others. *’Wî®re the natural order Is seriously

ooBtravesed in any set of relatloHS the disorder Infects all the others. Particularly, each activity which is out of its proper place or disordered within •bends to prey upon the activity above It in the natural sesl©.'*'^

Bernant has already referred to the œaeeslty of

hoMlng all of these ao'fcivl'fcies In a state of tension ■with

^iMât

- 105

m,ùh other and above all with the divine reality ahieh transoeads them. The paradox emerges when we see that he wsats us to apïa?©elat® the sense in whioh ©aoh sphere oan function with an autîieotioity all its own. "To seour©

and uphold the r>©eul®r autonomy of every valid human aofclvtty Is therefore a. task ef theological and religious reaponsl-

1

bllity.""" Autonomy, tension and spiritual ©ooteol are apparently Irreaonallsble tex*ms tout Qesaat insists that It Is man's devotion to God vjhteh alone <atj assure the autonomy of each fuBOtioa. It Is ©od who has given tbem

their spécial sathca?lfcf, "Where tliore is no transeerifleat

point of m f e m n m , teere is no datum for the natural order in the Immanent sphere ; this beeomes the field of bv unguidecl

’’S scramble fos? power among the ot>gmimû funetioœ theraselvee. "*■ That is, without God, there 1b no ppomleo from wbleb our

Infei’eno©® about the Bosisi order osn be drawn, "Only a theological oonoeptlGO of & natm’aX order can identify the

esntrsl permanent data, for these Inhere in the relation of the human eplrlt to the tranaoendent source of all e%l$teoce$"

p. 91. g

•‘Ibid.. pp, 90-91. p. 91.

106