Abstract

Jacques Maritain claimed a moral superiority for democracy as a type of government because democracy has a symbiotic relationship with Christianity. Maritain's claim is investigated to see what justification, if any, there is for the claim. ;The investigation starts with Maritain's ontology, which is the ground for his political philosophy. Maritain's being has a spiritual nature imbued with Christian charity and friendship, which require a democratic political and social order. The investigation shows that the Christian social gospel and the Christian concept of the person, the actualization of man's spiritual nature, emphasized the two defining characteristics of democracy--equality and freedom--while acting as a restraint on unbridled self interest. Through its social gospel and doctrines, Christianity provided the ground for the emergence of the democratic principle as a historical force. ;Maritain's contention is tested practically--by comparing his claim of Christianity's link to democracy with the observations about democracy of Alexis deTocqueville. The conclusion is that Maritain and Tocqueville saw that democracy has a natural tendency toward materiality manifested in unbridled self interest and excessive individualism. Maritain saw this tendency as leading inevitably to what for him was the beta noire of Western civilization, the bourgeois liberal type of democracy which he described as "empty headed," a democracy which lacks a moral charter. Bourgeois liberal democracy impugns the Christian social gospel resulting in a watered down, impotent type of Christianity and also leads to an atomistic, materialistic, autocratic bureaucratic or technological regime. For Maritain, and Tocquevillle, it is the Christianity's restraint of self interest that vivifies a democracy and inhibits the tendency to excessive individualism and materiality. Maritain showed that there is an intellectual foundation for democracy grounded in Christian charity and friendship. ;The sources of Maritain's political thought are explored. He is shown to be outside the tradition of classical Christian and Thomist political thought. His political theory is in the neo-Thomist democratic tradition of William of Ockham, Marsilius of Padua, and Francisco Suarez augmented by the political theories of Lammenais and Henri Bergson