I began to study the thoughts of Don Sturzo. I refer in particular to the articles on the Partito Popolare published in A/Esse, a magazine that I receive in the mail probably due to my ACLI membership.
Don Sturzo's ideas are based on the presumption that Christianity is the foundation of democracy. His political thoughts also refer to social justice as a dynamic factor leading to the assertion of rights for the more humble classes. He also clearly disassociates himself from the idea of organising a catholic political party.
The Partito Popolare is a party of citizen's with particular aims and interests, which however includes people who recognise themselves in its political platform, though not necessarily identifying with the Catholic church nor indeed the Christian religion.
My interest for the Partito Popolare has been for some time been due to the fact that, given the corruption of certain members of the Christian Democrat Party, there has been a widespread call for a return to the origins, to a different, pure party, as some define the party proposed by Don Sturzo.
Well, I believe that placing Christianity at the basis of democracy is like using a symphony by Beethoven as the foundation of a column; there is no compatibility, because they are on different levels.
Not long ago I was reading the Gospel, about the mountain. Wear a sword and love your enemy, use the force of love instead of that of weapons: madness, everyone will think that you're crazy. That's not how the world works, and those who want to lead it cannot follow rules that run counter to the natural order of things. In short, the New Testament does not give any useful political information to those who want to govern. Jesus is addressing single persons or families, and when he speaks through the parables he has no intention of making political speeches, but rather wishes those present to reflect and to support his teachings.
Anyone truly following the Gospel of Jesus takes a road different from the one pointed out by the Old Testament, which talks of kings, peoples and wars. The New Testament goes beyond the Old, but does by no means erase it. Its rules can still be seen as valid if we look to the earth. If however we look towards the skies, if we follow the search for the soul taught by Christ, we will never become leaders or princes, but rather the last, the poorest, the most poorly dressed, the most humble, because theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
If a king, i.e. a political leader wishes to follow Jesus, he or she must take off their gowns, be undressed of their power, renounce command. This must be done if such is the will of God.
There are however men and woman who are called to govern and to look after material and earthly problems; and yet if they wish to govern, they must set the Gospel aside and follow other rules that are close to the will of God, that oversee good and fair government of peoples and nations. This is not the main nor even a secondary issue of Christ's teachings. This misunderstanding is bound up with the history of the Church itself, with its transformation from the Church of the persecuted and the poor of the catacombs to the Church of the powerful, of kings, of the nobility who will use it as a shield to cover their politics of power.
After all, what exactly is the unity of Catholics if not the desire to be strong, to be socially important, to avoid persecution and martyrdom? And is not the Partito Popolare, which does not act as a unifying force of the Catholic community, also in error when it tries to advance Christian values along a path that, it would seem, are extraneous to the teachings of Christ? The Church, through its institutions, has throughout the course of history often stood in to compensate the shortcomings of civil society, but has always paid a high price in return: the loss of its own identity, the tendency to look towards temporal problems that often move it away from its sacred places and heights, towards which, I believe, it should turn its attention.