"Charity vs. Justice"

[Socrates]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Nov 30 2005, 07:15 PM']Real simply, since I am in a hurry, Francis Bacon says the same idea giving it the name "humanity" in place of "charity."
[right][snapback]806135[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
This really hasn't explained anything.

[journeyman]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 30 2005, 07:01 PM']

One must remember that Charity is one of the three capital virtues, and is up to the individual, not to a "structure."
It does not preclude doing things to help the poor and unfortunate have a way out of poverty.


[right][snapback]806114[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I may be taking your idea out of context . . . but I think the "individual" / "structural" ("societal" ?) distinction you raise may be the dividing line between "charity" and "justice." When you help an individual . . . whether it be food, shelter, clothing, teaching them skills . . . it is (appears to me, for purposes of this thought) charity. When you help a society . . . whether it be through education, laws, commentary . . . it is (appears to me, for purposes of this thought) justice.

this could probably be said better, but I've tried to keep using the words already in use in the thread, rather than introducing potentially different concepts that I failed to use in a way that they were recognized as synonymous.

[Socrates]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Nov 30 2005, 07:21 PM']I may be taking your idea out of context . . . but I think the "individual" / "structural" ("societal" ?) distinction you raise may be the dividing line between "charity" and "justice."  When you help an individual . . . whether it be food, shelter, clothing, teaching them skills . . . it is (appears to me, for purposes of this thought) charity.  When you help a society . . . whether it be through education, laws, commentary . . . it is (appears to me, for purposes of this thought) justice.

this could probably be said better, but I've tried to keep using the words already in use in the thread, rather than introducing potentially different concepts that I failed to use in a way that they were recognized as synonymous.
[right][snapback]806144[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Charity is love for one's neighbor and doing good for them (out of brotherly love, not because the person "deserves" it, or to get something in return).

Justice is "giving each man his due."

For instance, giving food to the hungry in a soup kitchen is an act of charity.
Catching and punishing a thief, and making sure stolen goods are restored to the owner is justice.

[journeyman]

so do we disagree . . . or are we just using different words?

[benedictaj]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Dec 1 2005, 12:51 PM']I heard once that justice is what we deserve . . . and mercy is what we hope to receive
[right][snapback]806108[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Sounds about right....

[Socrates]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Nov 30 2005, 08:05 PM']so do we disagree . . . or are we just using different words?
[right][snapback]806196[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I'd say that the distinction is more between selfless giving out of love and giving people what they deserve, rather than between public and private.

Both charity and justice can be both public and private.

[morostheos]

Thanks everyone for your replies! I think it's starting to come together in my head. Socrates, what you said about the "liberation theology" folks is precisely what I'm referring to, I was just trying to keep a neutral tone in my initial post.

Ok, so here's my beef with this dichotomy. I have seen two distinct meanings used for the word charity.

1. As socrates and Jeff said, one meaning of charity is love which is the greatest of all the virtues and technically includes justice. Since justice is a part of this definition of charity, there is no dichotomy, end of story.

2. Another meaning is the one that refers to helping individual people or groups to do a specific work or fill a specific need. This is the meaning where the dichotomy comes into play, comparing working on an individual basis and working to change "unjust structures." I would say this comparison of individual/structural still does a horrible injustice to the concept of charity (pun intended ).

I will start with a closer look at what is meant by justice in this dichotomy. Justice in this sense generally means changing the structures of the "powers that be" (generally goverments) through political advocacy and action. Grassroots groups are started to support this political advocacy in the name of "x" injustice occurring in the world. Jesus is often used as a role model in these situations, citing advocacy for social change found in the Gospels.

Here is the problem with this idea. How did Jesus advocate social change? Did he tell the disciples to organize a protest in front of the Jewish temple, with picket signs? Did he enourage signing petitions to present to the Pharisees or the chief priests about the injustices of his society? No, Jesus didn't do any of that. How did Jesus advocate social change? Through the preaching of the Good news, person-to-person contact and conversion of heart.

As Catholics, I believe we are called to follow Christ's example for enacting social change and fixing the "unjust structures" of society. Christ knew what He was doing! What is more effective, forcing a politician to listen to your views and agree to support one specific cause you feel strongly about, or the conversion of that same politician's heart to the Truth of Christ and the Gospel?

The best way to change society is through the conversion of hearts. That is accomplished through charity, through individual action of preaching the Gospel.

Coming back to the give a man a fish/teach a man to fish comparison, I don't think that correctly refers to this "charity vs. justice" dichotomy. Teaching a man to fish is still an individual action, it is not changing a social structure. A more accurate metaphor for that would be give a man a fish/get the government to either promise him a lifetime supply of fish or start a fishing school.

whew!....thoughts?

[Socrates]

[quote name='morostheos' date='Nov 30 2005, 08:31 PM']  A more accurate metaphor for that would be give a man a fish/get the government to either promise him a lifetime supply of fish or start a fishing school.

whew!....thoughts?
[right][snapback]806234[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
It would be much better to teach the man to do his own fishing, rather than petition the government to promise him a lifetime supply of fish!

[morostheos]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 30 2005, 09:43 PM']It would be much better to teach the man to do his own fishing, rather than petition the government to promise him a lifetime supply of fish!
[right][snapback]806250[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]



My point exactly!

[journeyman]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 30 2005, 08:13 PM']I'd say that the distinction is more between selfless giving out of love and giving people what they deserve, rather than between public and private.

Both charity and justice can be both public and private.
[right][snapback]806207[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I can agree with "selfless giving out of love" as a synonym for charity . . . and I can see that giving being directed to both an individual and to a society as a whole

We give a person a fish because they are hungry.
We open a fish soup kitchen because many are hungry.

in both cases, when we run out of fish, the problem returns

justice in my mind is related to judgment

We can be both just and charitable, if we make sure everyone in line obtains the same amount of fish, regardless of any exterior criteria

Would we be charitable or just if we refused to give fish because some weren't "hungry enough" . . . and how would we determine that?

Would we be just if we adjusted the portions based on proportional weight (some scale relating height to weight?) or if we gave double portions to children?

I don't think of justice as being the "selfless giving out of love" but as a process or procedure governing action . . . Evil as well as good can be administered in a "just" manner

If we apply justice with partiality, it ceases to be perceived as just

Where justice is applied differently, does it have to be tempered with mercy (another aspect of charity - love?) in all cases? all deviations in favor of a holier (?) result?

Is justice the "inner vision" and charity the "outward action"?

[journeyman]

Is it clear I don't have answers . . . only questions?

[morostheos]

Ok, I decided I would post the explanation I read for charity vs. justice, here it is:

[quote]As ______s we strive to do justice, understanding that justice is distinct from but not superior to charity. The word charity (caritas) means love of God, which manifests itself in love for other people.  Some distinctions of the two are listed below:

Charity                                                                      Justice
1. In response to accidental event                        1. In response to human act
2. Person-to-person                                                  2. Structural
3. Spontaneous reaction                                          3. Requires reflection
4. Non-controversial                                                  4. Controversial
5. Relieves symptoms                                              5. Addresses causes

Follwoing an earthquake or hurricane, there is often a tremendous outpouring of relief assistance to those victims of the tragedy.  The is something random about the event, a feeling on th epart of the benefactors that "something like that could happen to me." Through the television, the crying child or the displaced family , becomes a very personal  image- one that sticks in my mind. The spontaneous compasion, which moves me, is directed towards that person.  Not even the cruelest heart could argue against rendering assistance, the response is non-controversial. LIke relief work, charity deals more with symptoms than causes.

Unlike charity, justice is in response to human acts. It is not an accidental event that much of the world is poor and getting poorer.  Justice analyzes structures (political, economic, social, military, educational, media...) that fragment community and foster inequality and suffering.  Of course such relection and action for justice will be met with resistance, as there are those who benefit from existing arrangements.  Brazilian bishop and poet Dom Helder Camara oberves, "When I feed the poor they call me a saint, when I ask why they are poor they call me a Communist." Camara's insight reflects the tension between charity and justice, and also illustrates that justice addresses the deeper underlying causal issues which perpetuate suffering.[/quote]

[Paphnutius]

The only thing that I would change is that Justice can also be person to person if we are speaking about the virtue...There are essentially three types of justice

1)General (legal)-person to society/gov't
2)Distributive- gov't to person
3)Commutative- person to person/object

[Socrates]

[quote name='morostheos' date='Nov 30 2005, 09:50 PM']As ______s we strive to do justice, understanding that justice is distinct from but not superior to charity. The word charity (caritas) means love of God, which manifests itself in love for other people.  Some distinctions of the two are listed below:

Charity                                                                      Justice
1. In response to accidental event                        1. In response to human act
2. Person-to-person                                                  2. Structural
3. Spontaneous reaction                                          3. Requires reflection
4. Non-controversial                                                  4. Controversial
5. Relieves symptoms                                              5. Addresses causes

Follwoing an earthquake or hurricane, there is often a tremendous outpouring of relief assistance to those victims of the tragedy.  The is something random about the event, a feeling on th epart of the benefactors that "something like that could happen to me." Through the television, the crying child or the displaced family , becomes a very personal  image- one that sticks in my mind. The spontaneous compasion, which moves me, is directed towards that person.  Not even the cruelest heart could argue against rendering assistance, the response is non-controversial. LIke relief work, charity deals more with symptoms than causes.

Unlike charity, justice is in response to human acts. It is not an accidental event that much of the world is poor and getting poorer.  Justice analyzes structures (political, economic, social, military, educational, media...) that fragment community and foster inequality and suffering.  Of course such relection and action for justice will be met with resistance, as there are those who benefit from existing arrangements.  Brazilian bishop and poet Dom Helder Camara oberves, "When I feed the poor they call me a saint, when I ask why they are poor they call me a Communist." Camara's insight reflects the tension between charity and justice, and also illustrates that justice addresses the deeper underlying causal issues which perpetuate suffering.[right][snapback]806357[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
This indeed sounds like socialist "liberation theology" drivel.
It basically creates its own definitions of "charity" and "justice" to promote an agenda, and in the process degrades both true charity and true justice.

It degrades and redefines Charity, traditionally considered the greatest of virtues, claiming it to be based on mere emotion, and not requiring any strong virtue or heroism. ( "Not even the cruelest heart could argue against rendering assistance, the response is non-controversial.")
It ignores such heroic acts of charity such as those performed by Mother Teresa and the Sisters of Charity, which can hardly be considered easy responses to human emotion.

It then contrasts this with the supposedly superior "justice" which is redefined to mean changing political and economic structures (probably in a "revolutionary," neo-Marxist sense.) After all "charity deals more with symptoms than causes," unlike "justice" which supposedly deals with the cause (i.e. "Capitalism").

This is not sound Catholic theology, but rather political agit-prop.

[MichaelFilo]

Yes, as I began learning about the liberal modernism in the Church, I got a nice dose of this trash. Somehow, I fear, St.Francis was charitable but not woring for justice. I suppose he should have worked to overthrow the social structures of medieval Europe.

It sounds liberal, it sounds disgusting, and it came form "Catholic social teaching gurus" who, as I had the pleasure of finding out in mid-discussion among teens on a retreat, are complete heretics. They happened to reject that anyone went to hell, because they had hope that God saved everyone. All I can say is, this same trash is part of their false-love teachings in which God's main ends are temporal betterment for all humanity and in which "everything is gonna be alright in the end" is the main theme.

Justice is that which is right and fair. God is truely Just. God is not truely set on fixing the structures that create unjustness. In fact, God, in his all loving nature, has allowed such places and things to exist that those who must endure them maybe rewarded for their patience. Charity is the helping of the poor, and this may mean structural or on the actual interaction part. All I know is this, my work with the poor shows that the structure is too kind, and helps all the wrong people. Most of the poor don't care for much more than the food for the day.

God bless,
Mikey