THE TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC DOCTRINE
CONCERNING RACE AND RACISM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Introduction
- Patriotism and the Love of One’s Country
- Nations and Divine Providence
- Differences among Civilizations
- Racism and Its Rejection by Catholic Doctrine
- Conclusion
List of Sources
- Introduction
The traditional doctrine of the Catholic Church concerning race rests on principles constant throughout the centuries. Divine Revelation teaches that the entire human race descends from Adam and Eve and, after the Flood, from Noah and his family. This common origin establishes the unity of mankind. St. Thomas Aquinas shows that every human being belongs to one and the same species because every human being possesses the same rational soul. The soul, not the body, constitutes the essence of man and grounds his dignity as a creature made in the image of God. These truths are certain according to Sacred Scripture and the philosophy of St. Thomas.
Observable differences among individuals and peoples belong to the accidental order. Variations in appearance, health, aptitude, culture, language or historical development do not alter the essential equality of human nature.
- Patriotism and the Love of One’s Country
Patriotism and racism are fundamentally different. Patriotism concerns the moral duties owed to one’s country. Racism attributes unequal human dignity to persons because of race or ethnic origin.
The Catholic tradition regards love of one’s country as a virtue. St. Thomas Aquinas places it under the virtue of piety. After God, every man owes gratitude first to his parents and then to his country, from which he has received life, education, language, culture and membership in civil society. He writes: “Man becomes debtor chiefly to his parents and his country, after God” (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 101, a. 1, Leonine Edition, Rome, 1888-1906, Latin). This citation is certain.
Patriotism is therefore a moral duty founded on justice. To love one’s country, to serve its common good, to defend it when justice requires and to preserve its lawful traditions are fully compatible with Catholic doctrine. Catholics have always done so without condemnation from the Church.
Yet every virtue admits of excess. Love of country becomes disordered when it turns into contempt for other nations or when national interests are placed above the law of God. The nation then becomes an absolute, which the Church rejects. No earthly community may occupy the place that belongs to God alone. Pope Pius XI therefore warned against making race or nation the supreme principle of human life (Mit Brennender Sorge, 14 March 1937). A nation deserves love and service, but never worship.
Catholic doctrine holds the balance: patriotism is legitimate; national idolatry is not.
- Nations and Divine Providence
Distinct nations form part of God’s providential government of the world. After the Flood the descendants of Noah spread over the earth. After Babel mankind was divided into distinct linguistic communities. These events are presented in Sacred Scripture not as evils in themselves but as part of the historical order established by Divine Providence (Latin Vulgate, Clementine Edition, Rome, 1592).
The Old Testament treats nations as real communities with their own rulers, territories and missions. Israel existed among other nations. Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome appear as distinct entities. The prophets address whole nations, praising justice or condemning pride, idolatry and cruelty. Their judgments are moral, never biological. Nowhere do they suggest that one nation possesses a different human nature from another.
The New Testament continues the same view. At Pentecost men of many nations heard the Gospel in their own languages. The miracle did not abolish diversity; it sanctified every language for the proclamation of the one faith.
The Church has never sought to erase legitimate national traditions. She has adopted many liturgical languages, encouraged local sacred art, respected lawful customs and permitted diversity of discipline, provided the unity of faith and morals remained intact. She is universal because she embraces all peoples without destroying their legitimate identities.
The preservation of a nation’s language, memory, customs or cultural heritage is therefore not contrary to Catholic doctrine, provided it remains within justice and charity.
- Differences among Civilizations
The differences that appear among civilizations are real and belong to the order of historical fact. Traditional Catholic doctrine explains them without any appeal to unequal human natures.
St. Thomas teaches that action follows being: “agere sequitur esse.” The Latin phrase means that the operations of a being flow from what it is. Men are known by their works because the acts of a people reveal the dispositions that shape their life together. Those dispositions—habits of mind and will, education, language, customs, climate, geographic setting, and the free moral choices of successive generations—are accidental. They do not alter the common human nature which every man possesses by reason of the same rational soul.
Divine Providence governs the nations. After Babel the human race was divided into distinct linguistic and territorial communities. Scripture presents this division as part of the historical order established by God, not as a ranking of different human essences. Civilizational differences therefore arise from secondary causes under Providence: the acceptance or rejection of the true religion, the cultivation or neglect of the natural virtues, the stability or instability of institutions, and the cumulative effect of free human acts over centuries. These factors explain why one people at a given time develops advanced political forms, sciences or arts while another does not. They do not create different kinds of humanity.
The Church has always proclaimed the same Gospel to every nation and has recognized saints from every people. Essential human nature and dignity remain equal in every race. Accidental differences among peoples are real and may be studied according to the order of secondary causes. Any claim that attributes superior or inferior human nature to persons solely because of race or ethnic origin contradicts both Sacred Scripture and the philosophy of St. Thomas.
- Racism and Its Rejection by Catholic Doctrine
Racism, understood as the claim that certain races possess a superior or inferior human nature, is rejected without hesitation by traditional Catholic doctrine.
It contradicts Sacred Scripture, which teaches the common descent of all men. It contradicts St. Thomas, who demonstrates that all men form one species through the same rational soul. It contradicts the Church’s missionary activity, which has always proclaimed the Gospel to every nation without distinction. It contradicts the constant teaching of the Roman Pontiffs on the unity of the human family. These contradictions are certain from the sources listed below.
The history of the Church confirms the same truth. Saints have come from every continent and every people: St. Moses the Black (the fourth-century Ethiopian desert father, also called Moses the Ethiopian or Abba Moses, distinct from the biblical Moses the lawgiver), St. Maurice, St. Martin de Porres, St. Charles Lwanga, the Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese martyrs, and countless others. Holiness has never been the privilege of any race.
Catholic doctrine does not deny real differences among peoples. Nations differ in history, culture, institutions, achievements and development. Individuals differ in strength, health, intelligence, talent and ability. These inequalities belong to the natural order established by Divine Providence. They appear within every nation and every race. They do not create different kinds of humanity.
The decisive distinction is between accidental differences and essential dignity. Accidental differences are real. Essential human dignity is equal. Confusing the two has been the source of racial theories. The Church avoids both extremes: she neither denies observable differences nor elevates them into differences of nature.
The biblical account of Noah provides no support for theories of unequal human natures among races. After the Flood Noah became drunk and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father’s nakedness and told his brothers. Shem and Japheth covered their father with reverence, walking backwards so as not to look upon him. When Noah awoke he said: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” The curse fell upon Canaan, not upon Ham himself.
The sin of Ham was one of grave irreverence and lack of filial piety. In the patriarchal order the father represents divine authority within the family. To see the father’s shame and to publicise it instead of covering it with respect is a serious violation of the fourth commandment. Traditional Catholic sources describe this as great irreverence. St. Augustine notes that Ham did not cover his father but betrayed his nakedness. Vincent of Lerins observes that Ham told the matter so that others might laugh, thereby offending grievously against filial piety.
Why was Canaan cursed rather than Ham? The precise connection is not fully detailed in the text, yet traditional Catholic explanation holds that the curse is prophetic. It announces the future character of the Canaanite peoples who would imitate and amplify the wickedness of their ancestor. The Canaanites later practised the most abominable vices: idolatry, incest, adultery, sodomy, bestiality and the sacrifice of children to Molech. Leviticus 18 explicitly lists these sins as the reason the land of Canaan “vomited out” its inhabitants. The curse was therefore just. God is not unjust. He foresaw the free and obstinate choice of extreme moral corruption by that line and announced its historical consequences: subjection and eventual disappearance as distinct peoples under the descendants of Shem and Japheth. This judgment preserves both the justice of God and the moral order of the family and of society.
The account therefore teaches the gravity of disrespect toward parental authority and the providential consequences of vice. It does not establish different human natures or racial hierarchies of dignity.
- Conclusion
The Catholic position may be stated in four propositions.
First, all men possess the same human nature and the same rational soul.
Second, all men possess equal human dignity because they are created in the image of God and are called to eternal salvation.
Third, legitimate differences among nations and peoples, including the differences that appear in the historical development of civilizations, belong to the providential order and must not be confused with differences of human nature.
Fourth, every doctrine that attributes superior or inferior human dignity to persons solely because of race or ethnic origin is incompatible with the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church.
The greatest distinction among men is not race, nationality, wealth, intelligence or bodily perfection. It is the state of the soul before God. At the Last Judgment all accidental differences disappear before the sole reality that determines destiny: whether a man has died in the grace and friendship of God. In the light of eternity, holiness—not race—remains the true measure of human greatness.
List of Sources
- Holy Bible. Latin Vulgate. Clementine Edition. Rome. 1592. Latin.
- St. Augustine. De Civitate Dei. In: Patrologia Latina, Vol. 41. Edited by J.-P. Migne. Paris. 1845. Latin.
- St. Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae. Leonine Edition. Rome. 1888-1906. Latin.
- Cornelius a Lapide. Commentaria in Scripturam Sacram. Antwerp. 1616-1642. Latin.
- Haydock, George Leo. The Catholic Bible Commentary. Various nineteenth-century editions. English.
- Pius XI. Mit Brennender Sorge. Vatican City. 14 March 1937. German; official Latin version.
- Pius XII. Summi Pontificatus. Vatican City. 20 October 1939. Latin.
- The Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company. New York. 1907-1914. English.