Will the Tea Parties turn against Catholics?

Catholic blogger Justin Aquila, an old acquaintance of mine from Ave Maria who currently contributes to the Catholic Vote Action blog with Thomas Peters, recently brought an interesting concept to my attention when he drew a comparison between the Tea Party movement and the Nativist movements of the 1840's. This led him to posit the possibility that, like the early Nativists, the Tea Parties might morph into an anti-Catholic movement. He stated it this way in response to a query I sent him on the matter:

My essential position is this: the Tea Party movement has strong strains of anti-institutional sentiment. Traditionally, anti-institutional movements eventually turn on the institution par excellance, the Catholic Church (i.e. the French Revolution). Additionally, some of the purist and anti-immigration rhetoric smacks of the Natvist and "Know-Nothing" ideas, which were usually geared against Catholicism...I think that the concerns about anti-Catholicism have been made real by Glen Beck's attacks on social justice. While there have certainly been perversions of Catholic Social justice by the Left, I don't think it is a good idea to throw the baby out with the bath water. Social Justice, as Pope Benedict has been arguing, is needed now more than ever.That is the essential summary of my critique of the Tea Party movement. I am glad to see people engaged in the affairs of government, but I just think you have to be wary of extremism.

This is a fascinating question.

First, my take on the Tea Parties: I have generally supported the Tea Parties and have attended two (the photos on this post were personally taken by me at the Tea Party in Brighton, MI on April 15th). I support the Tea Parties not so much because I think that they represent the best and brightest that America has to offer by way of resistance to government tyranny (one poster at a Tea Party read - "No Socialized Medicine - Hands off my Medicare!"); rather, I support them because I tend to support any group of pissed off Americans protesting the government for whatever reason as an exercise of subsidiarity. I love the Tea Parties because they give voice to the common sentiment running through America which says, "We are mad as hell and we aren't going to take it." Politically, I believe this attitude is always to be encouraged in our current situation. Is this supporting extremism? I don't think so; gathering together to protest the government is about the most American thing one can do, if we remember some of the things our Founding Fathers did to protest British rule. That's why I am always happy to see the yellow Gadsen Flags come out ("Don't Tread On Me"), regardless of the occasion.

So what danger is there in the Tea Parties for Catholics in particular? I think it is a long shot to say that the Tea Parties will adopt anti-Catholicism in such an overt manner as was done by the Nativists. For one thing, America is much more (statistically) Catholic now than it was in the 1840s. I'm willing to believe a good number of the Tea Partiers are Catholics - at both Tea Parties I attended I saw very a visible presence from the local KofC. The good percentage of the Tea Party movement is Catholic will form a natural barrier to any sort of anti-Catholic shift.

Another thing: anti-Catholicism was essential and central to the Nativist movement's message; that's pretty much what the whole thing was about - maintaining Protestant Anglo-Saxon hegemony. The Tea Parties, on the other hand, have been in existence for about a year now with not even the faintest hint of anti-Catholicism, let along racism or any of the other things falsely attributed to them. The central message of the Tea Party movement is limited government and fiscal responsibility. If anti-Catholicism has not popped up in a year, and if Catholics are actively participating in the Tea Parties (which they would never have done with, say, the Know-Nothings), I think it is safe to assume that anti-Catholicism is not destined to be a part of the Tea Party.

While Justin Aquila and I might disagree on this element of the Tea Party, I do, however, agree with him in that I see a possible anti-Catholic potentiality in the movement: their anti-institutional rhetoric. Even if the Tea Parties never become overtly anti-Catholic, I can see the potential for a philosophical conflict with Catholicism to emerge as an implicit undercurrent of the Tea Parties, having to do with the libertarianism of the movement. In their (righteous) protest against an overly oppressive government and authority, will they make the leap of protesting all authority, and thus condemn Catholicism on the same grounds that they condemn the actions of the federal government? Will it be the Lutheran peasant revolt in reverse? In the Peasant War of 1525, the peasants took the spiritual teaching of Luther on the freedom of the Christian and translated it into political terms; could the Tea Parties do the same in reverse, taking their political anti-authoritarianism and translate it into a rebellion against spiritual authority?

Perhaps the question can be boiled down to this: can one be a Catholic and a thoroughgoing libertarian at the same time?

I think Justin is right to be concerned to the degree that the Tea Parties adopt a strict, purist line of libertarian thought that elevates the freedom of the individual above all other concerns. Such purist libertarianism would leave abortion legal as a personal choice, exalt private freedom over all common good and resent any attempt of any outside authority whatsoever to impose (or propose) any limits to conduct, including things like homosexual so-called marriage and contraception. To the degree that the Tea Parties adopt this kind of libertarianism, I think there is an implicit danger to the Faith in them. Can one shout and protest against one oppressive institution all day and then maintain respect for another institution with even more sweeping claims to allegiance then the federal government?

I think the answer depends on why we are upset with the federal government. I for one do not go to Tea Parties because I am mad at the government because it is a bureaucracy or because it is a powerful institution; I go because it is an ineffective, top-heavy and wasteful bureaucracy and an oppressive, out of control institution. My opposition to the federal government as it currently exists is not based on any implicit anti-institutionalism or anti-authoritarianism; if it were, there would be no logical reason why I should not extend my thoughts about our government to the Catholic Church.

However, there is a difference between opposition to authority because it is authority and authority because it is oppressive. The Founding Fathers were certainly not opponents of authority per se, but they understood that legitimate authority crosses a line when it becomes oppressive to the common good and personal rights. Then we have not only the right but the responsibility to protest and resist it with such measures as are proportional to the government's offenses.

We also must ask, what is true libertarianism? I don't mean as defined by the Libertarian Party, but in the sense of what true liberty and freedom mean in Catholic tradition. Liberty/freedom means freedom to pursue one's good unhindered - it is a freedom to do, a freedom to excellence, not necessarily a freedom from restraint (going back to the old dispute between the Scholastics and the Nominalists). Freedom means being empowered to fulfill my teleological end. If I want true liberty, it is a liberty to pursue my own true good without interference, hindrance or undue burdens from an oppressive authority wielding its powers unjustly. I think to the degree that the Tea Parties promote this sort of "American" libertarianism - "get the government out of the way so we can get on with our lives" - then I see little opposition with Catholic teaching, because libertarianism interpreted in this manner is just the political working out of subsidiarity.

So, will the Tea Parties move towards a very strict, purist libertarianism that rejects all authority, even ecclesiastical authority? If so, will Catholics go along with it, prompting a new sort of "Americanism" that demands certain "Gallican liberties" for our domestic Church? Or, will their libertarianism be of a more mild bent, just a kind of "libertarian Republicanism" that emphasizes the time-honored American ideas of limited government, responsibility and freedom from burdensome taxation?

Provided the Tea Parties continue on in the latter vein (which is where they have been situated for the past year), I don't see any conflict between Catholicism and the Tea Parties. As I said above, the Tea Parties are not a homogenous group, and there are so many Catholics involved in them that it is unlikely that the movement as a whole will adopt an anti-Catholic stance. As of now, I think the Tea Parties would see the Church and other ecclesiastical bodies as bulwarks of support (or counterweights) against government influence rather than lump them in with the government as oppressive institutions.

But strange things have happened in American history, and I make no prophecies. I do know that right now, if we look at the federal government and the Tea Party, there is far greater danger to be feared from government oppression than from a potential future anti-Catholic shift in the Tea Party that has yet to materialize. So in the meantime, I say keep the Gadsen Flags waiving.