The Rehabilitation of Adam Smith for Catholic Social Teaching

Abstract

Catholic Social Teaching (CST) takes a rather cautious view toward the value of the ideas of Adam Smith, due to his emphasis on negative political and economic liberty. Detractors of Smith within CST point to what they consider to be deficiencies within his works: an impoverished moral anthropology, a lack of concern for the common good, and markets untethered to human needs. Defenders of Smith within CST tend to emphasize the material benefits that derive from Smithian institutions, such as economic growth, improvements in standards of living, and the new opportunities that arise from cultures focused on innovation. This paper argues that Smith's ideas have real value for CST. However, this value primarily lies in his moral psychology. While not denying the dangers of business activity for our moral lives, Smith also helps us to understand the possibility of the moral corruption of those who wield political power, thus providing an indirect defense of political and economic liberty that coheres with important Christian ethical notions found in CST. This is the case even though CST does not consistently recognize concerns surrounding the dangers of wielding political power-and thus Smith's arguments offer real challenges to CST as well. This paper further suggests that these basic insights are relevant regardless of one's favored institutional arrangements.

Is Relationality Always Other-Oriented? Adam Smith, Catholic Social Teaching, and Civil Economy

“…149) and that humans' social nature is expressed through relational subjectivity, "that is, in the manner of a free and responsible being who recognizes the necessity of integrating himself with his fellow human beings, and who is capable of communion with them on the level of knowledge and love" (ibid.). I anticipate my conclusion: what Smith described as fellow-feeling could be compared to this definition, as Martins (2019) and Wolcott (2018) believed, except, in my view, for the last word-"love." If I am right, this would not be an insignificant problem, because of the status love has in CST: "Love, often restricted to relationships of physical closeness or limited to merely subjective aspects of action on behalf of others, must be reconsidered in its authentic value as the highest and universal criterion of the whole of social ethics" (CSDC, p. 204).…”

“…This reference to social mediations is of the utmost importance in the discourse on subsidiarity-the idea of leaving people and intermediate associations space for their own initiative and supporting them in their industry. Wolcott (2018) saw a common ground here between Smith and CST. The idea of subsidiarity is primarily and mostly positive; it encompasses the positive circularity between people, associations, and state in the active promotion of the common good.…”

“…This is missed in Smith's economic analysis, which is related to a very different notion of relationality. Moreover, I show that the lack of disjunction between relationality and another-oriented perspective prevented Martins (2019) and Wolcott (2018) from noticing that the principle of subsidiarity cannot be placed within Smith's framework. Smith, in fact, was highly critical of the role of associations in society.…”

“…If the identification between relationality and an other-oriented perspective is valid for CST, where the relational nature of humans is imbued in the equally basic dimensions of love and gift, expressed by the principle of fraternity (Baggio 2013;Pabst 2013;Zamagni 2009Zamagni , 2020, the same cannot be argued for Smith's sympathy, which is indeed a relational concept but is not necessarily intentionally oriented to the good of the other. This will bring me to challenge not only Martins' (2019) and Wolcott's (2018) analyses but also some of those of AS scholars (Hühn 2015(Hühn , 2018(Hühn , 2019Hühn and Dierksmeier 2016;Werhane 1989Werhane , 2000Bevan and Werhane 2015). Its proponents, in my opinion, rightly tried to interpret Smith's economic theses through sympathy, but un-rightly associated sympathy with the other-oriented perspective I have just mentioned.…”

“…For instance, humans' ability to enjoy the fruits of their labor could be supported by legislation against monopolies (Smith and CST) or minimum redistribution (CST more than Smith). Quoting Wolcott (2018), Martins (2019) acknowledges a problem in this reconstruction:…”