On July 5, 1852, famed abolitionist Frederick Douglass delivered a speech in Rochester, New York, titled “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” In his address, Douglass praised the political philosophy at the heart of American assertions of individual liberty and possessive rights. He called these political theories “saving principles,” which Americans should celebrate as “the great first fact” in American history. As such, he admonished Americans to “stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost.” The men who signed the Declaration of Independence “were statesmen, patriots and heroes,” he continued. “[A]nd for the good they did, and the principles they contended for, I will unite with you to honor their memory.”
And yet, for all this praise for the principles of the founding, the purpose of Douglass’ speech was to criticize — in harsh and brutal terms — the failure of America to apply those principles to all people. Specifically, of course, Douglass condemned the institution of chattel slavery and even the treatment of free black persons. In a land dedicated to the “self-evident” truths that “all men are created equal” and “endowed … with certain unalienable Rights,” including “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” Douglass observed, “I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary.” The “Fourth of July is yours, not mine,” he lamented. “You may rejoice, I must mourn.”
Like Douglass, I think the annual commemoration of the Fourth of July is a time for Catholics to reflect upon the moral and political implications of the philosophy at the heart of the Declaration of Independence. In other words, we should adapt the title of Douglass’ address and ask, “What to the Catholic is the Fourth of July?” But this question yields a diametrically different answer from Douglass’. Douglass wanted the political theory informing the declaration to be applied to all people. He wanted that theory to permeate all of American political, legal and cultural institutions. This is not a goal that Catholics should advocate.
Not only are the principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence not “self-evident,” they were not even conceived in the mind of any person before about the 16th century. And their conception was, in large part, a revolt against the Catholic Christian understanding of the human person, justice and political life. Douglass thought consistent application of the political theory of the declaration would be a good thing. I think it is, if not a wholly bad thing, something we Catholics should be more suspiciously circumspect in observing. And we certainly should not celebrate political theories whose provenance is rooted in a rejection of Catholic moral principles.
The declaration’s suspect political theories
Two caveats are immediately required. First, by no means am I equating the plight of Black Americans, whether in 1852 or 2025, with that of Catholic Christians. That would be obscene. Second, I am not suggesting that Catholic Christians cannot be loyal American citizens, nor that we cannot acknowledge some positive aspects of the American founding. Having said that, however, we Catholics must sustain a hermeneutic of suspicion both about the political theory of the Declaration of Independence and its inevitable, consistent application. To celebrate either uncritically is to embrace both theory and practice that erode authentic Catholic witness.
An example from Douglass’ speech illustrates my point. “Would you have me argue that man is … the rightful owner of his body?” he asked. “You have already declared it.” In other words, Douglass implies that the answer to the question is settled. He does not need to argue for it in 1852 because it was definitively declared in 1776 that we do own ourselves. This assertion is one of those “self-evident” truths upon which the U.S. is founded, and which Douglass uncritically embraces. His argument, rather, is that the practical implication of the answer has been denied to an entire race of people in the U.S. Thus, concludes Douglass, “scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed.”
This is where Catholics must object. And the objection must be not merely to the assertion that we “own” ourselves, but also to the deeper political theory in which such a notion is rooted. I will leave aside the philosophical problem of the very idea of “self-evident” truth. But self-evident or not, no person was created with individual, possessive rights of the kind envisioned in the Declaration of Independence and instituted in American law and politics. Indeed, such a notion of rights was posited precisely to contradict and replace the Catholic Christian understanding of the human person. Philosophical individualism is a false doctrine. But it is the doctrine at the heart of the Declaration of Independence.
The theory of possessive rights is rooted in a moral anthropology of radical individualism. In this theory, we not only “own” ourselves, but we also have claims against anyone who might believe otherwise. The only limiting principle is our fictional contract to leave one another alone. Individualism is atomizing in both theory and practice. When we tell ourselves the story that we are endowed with unalienable rights, we become a society of atomistic individuals asserting an ever-broadening scope of those “rights.” The inevitable result is the disintegration of natural human relationships and the dissolution of any sense of mutual obligations.
Solidarity rather than self-ownership
This theory of “self-ownership” also feeds the myth of self-creation, in which we “are” whatever we identify as. The long arc of possessive individualism leads directly to men declaring they are women and demanding that everyone else bow to their identity. How, after all, can we deny this unalienable right to one’s version of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”? We Catholics cannot consistently decry a culture of abortion, contraception, transgender ideology and the normalization of sexual fetishes, and yet celebrate the very moral and political theories that lead to such cultural maladies. “We hold these rights” leads inevitably to “I am the gender I say I am.”
This theory is a deliberate rejection of the Christian truth that we are naturally social creatures, endowed not with claims against, but rather obligations toward one another. We no more own ourselves than we have created ourselves. And the proper orientation to others is not assertions of rights but acknowledgments of obligations. Solidarity and common good are the social principles of Catholic theology. But these are mutually exclusive of the individualism and the pursuit of individual goods asserted in the Declaration of Independence and instituted in American policy and law. Downstream of that policy is a dysfunctional and chaotic social “situation.” (One cannot call it social “order.”)
America in 1852 was brutally oppressive for Black Americans. America in 2025 is certainly not oppressive for Catholic Christians — yet. In fact, we Catholics have largely made ourselves at home here. But the cost of doing so has been to compromise our witness to Catholic theology of the person, law, politics and community. Douglass wanted the theories behind the Declaration of Independence consistently applied. We Catholics must consistently resist them. We can live in America. But we should not underwrite its philosophical assumptions.
What to the Catholic is the Fourth of July? A time to renew our own commitment to dignity, solidarity, subsidiarity and common good. A time, that is, to declare ourselves independent of the Declaration of Independence.
