Reading for Monday -- Responses to Industrialization: CST

Students: as mentioned in class, please read the introductions and follow instructions for selecting several quotes which you feel shed light on the topic of the impacts of and responses to industrialization. Have a nice weekend. PA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Introduction to the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur

Part II – Catholic Social Teaching

Catholic Social Teaching, commonly abbreviated CST, is the name given to a body of teachings of the Catholic Church relating to how humans interact with one another in society and with human social institutions such as governments, groups, companies, political systems and economies. These teachings are primarily contained in encyclicals, formal statements written and circulated by popes on topics of concern. Some teachings also arise from formal statements made by groups of bishops. The social teachings reflect the official Catholic response to worldly conditions and social issues. For Catholics and non-Catholics alike, they provide a thought-provoking starting point for reasoning through a wide range of social problems and challenges. As John Paul II writes, “The church, in fact, has something to say about specific human situations, both individual and communal, national and international. She formulates a genuine doctrine for these situations, a corpus which enables her to analyze social realities, to make judgments about them and to indicate directions to be taken for the just resolution of the problems involved.” (CA 5, O’Brien 443).

Individual Catholics relate to CST in a variety of ways – for some, it reflects a way of conducting one’s inward and personal life; for others, it is profoundly political and outwardly engaged. Either way, it seeks to be  “a source of unity and peace in dealing with the conflicts which inevitably arise in social and economic life. Thus it is possible to meet these new situations without degrading the human person’s transcendent dignity, either in oneself or in one’s adversaries, and to direct those situations toward just solutions.” (CA 5, O’Brien 443).

CST is a relatively new development in papal communication. The line of popes (Bishops of Rome) goes back to the Apostle Peter, who became the first leader of the Christian Church after the death of its founder, Jesus of Nazareth in the first century AD. During this early period of the Church’s history, most formal writings revolved around clarifications of doctrine. What were the correct beliefs? Which documents belonged in the Bible? How does one know when to celebrate Easter? What should a Christian group do about people who disagree with them? At this time, Christianity was a subaltern religion and less hierarchical than it later became.

In the fourth century, institutional development became a focus when Christianity was legalized and the Church began to develop its partnership with the Roman Empire under Constantine. Later that century, Emperor Theodocius designated Christianity as the official religion of the Empire. The emphasis of formal written statements during this period is on such matters as clarifying doctrine, condemning heresies, approving the rules of new monastic orders, and other mostly internal matters. Although one could argue that Jesus himself was the first practitioner of Catholic Social Teaching, the Catholic Church rarely considered it within its scope to formally address worldly issues of social justice during its first 1,000 years. By then, the Roman Empire had long met its demise and the Church was well established in new partnerships with Medieval political elites.

During this period, about mid-way through its institutional history, the popes made occasional formal pronouncements on social issues such as slavery and anti-Semitism. Gregory X, for example, wrote his 1272 “Papal Protection of the Jews” in response to injustices of physical violence, forced baptism and false testimony in legal matters suffered by Jews in Medieval Christendom (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Greg10/g10jprot.htm). Likewise, Eugene IV made a strong statement against slavery in his 1435 encyclical giving holders of Canary Island slaves 15 days to “restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands […] and who have been made subject to slavery” (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Eugene04/eugene04sicut.htm).

New opportunities for the Church to respond to rapidly changing and socially challenging  issues arose with the voyages of Spanish and Portuguese sponsored adventurers to the Americas. The formal pronouncements coming from the popes during this period time voiced strong condemnation of the practice of enslaving indigenous peoples of the Americas, as well as the practice of forced conversion of those same peoples (Paul III 5/29/1537), which it argued went against free will. In all of these cases, the arguments revolved around what CST practitioners today would call the innate dignity and sacredness of each and every human person. But these promulgations, while prefatory to CST, are not part of the body of teachings referred to as CST.

Neither were these popes’ decisions always ethically consistent from a 21^st-century point of view. At the same time as they condemned slavery and forced baptism of indigenous peoples, for example, they bolstered Iberian colonial domination in the Americas through pronouncements in favor of Spanish and Portuguese territorial claims. Alexander VI’s assignment of rights to the New World to Portugal and Spain in 1493 validated vicious acts of conquest and virtually deprived the peoples of the Americas their autonomous right to exist. Additionally, at lower echelons of decision-making, policies were circulated that decimated indigenous cultures, such as a February 1795 circular by Fra Junipero Serra’s successor to the California Mission system, Fra Fermin Lasuen. Lasuen’s letter directed the leadership of each California mission to teach Coastal Indians the Castillian language (the predominent form of Spanish in the Americas), “y que los Indios aprendan a leerle, escribirle, y hablarle, prohibiendoles su lengua nativa.” That the Indians learn to read, write and speak Castillian, prohibiting their native language (Santa Barbara Mission Archives). Other documents circulated during the California Mission period forbade native peoples to set fires, such as Jose de Arrillaga’s request on 5/31/1793 (Santa Barbara Mission Archives), which was subsequently approved. While concern that fires could burn out of control might have been legitimate, the prohibition limited the native Chumash people’s ability to practice the form of agricultural land management to which they had been accustomed – since the Spaniards did not recognize Chumash practices as “agriculture,” this did not concern them. Deliberate eradication of language, oral history, and land and food management practices was approved through these types of policies, while religious conversion and political control ranked highly in the order of local priorities. These kinds of decisions were decidedly not consistent with what the Church today considers to be justice-oriented social teachings.

It was not until the effects of the Industrial Revolution led European societies into new and uncharted social crises that the Church began the process of articulating what came to be a coherent set of teachings on justice in human societies as a whole. Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 Rerum Novarum (On Capital and Labor) was written during this time and is commonly agreed by scholars of CST to be the first social encyclical. By this time, the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur were operating schools in the United States as well as Belgium and were providing free education to girls from struggling families in both countries. They knew first hand and on a daily basis how the traumatic changes brought by the Industrial Revolution affected poor families. The same social realities that caused the Sisters to act, also caused the popes to speak. One could argue that the Sisters and CST grew up together within the evolving embrace of the Catholic Church.

The selections in Part II were chosen to shed light on the relevance of CST within the framework of the thought and spirituality of the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur. This is not a comprehensive review of all themes of CST. Other important themes focus on personal and family experience, for example; because these are not strongly reflected in the charism of the SND de Namur, they are not included here.

In preparing these chapters, I felt that the best way to communicate the popes’ thoughts on social issues was to do so in their own words. Hence this section comprises a large number of quotes from the various popes who have contributed to the tradition of CST. Some context is provided, especially when relevant to the charism of the Sisters, but I leave interpretation up to teachers, students and other readers of this book. Suggestions for incorporating this section into classroom activities appear at the end of each chapter. The quotes are organized by themes designed to be recognized by students and faculty of the various academic disciplines. In this way, I hope to help users of this book quickly find the material most relevant to a given course, topic or major area of study.

Chapter 6 begins with the first landmark forays of papal intellect into the world of social teaching: the dignity of labor; rights of workers; rights and limitations relating to wealth and property; the purpose and critique of economic systems; and the purpose and critique of civil authority. These represent the major themes introduced during the first 50 years or so of the development of Catholic social thought.

As CST matured, it took on a broader range of social issues and some would say a more radical stance, culminating in the phenomenon of Vatican II and its immediate aftermath. In Chapter 7, the reader will find explorations of themes introduced during this period: migration and refugees; genocide and the treatment of ethnic minorities; peace and solidarity; youth; civil disobedience; education for justice; unequal relations between states; subsidiarity and the proper role of government; the dignity and sacredness of each human person; human rights; and a special emphasis on the poor and vulnerable.

Chapter 8 introduces the themes undergoing the most change and challenge in the 21^st century: technological development; the human experience; and human stewardship of the earth. This chapter especially explores the early statements of Pope Francis, who himself has brought an ever-strengthened and thoroughly lived commitment to social justice into the heart of the Vatican.

Finally, the emphasis in the chapters that follow is on themes rather than popes. For those readers who are interested, however, the referenced documents are indexed below using both Latin and English names. All quotes cite both the paragraph number within the encyclical (e.g. RN 27) as well as the print or online text from which the quote was taken.

RN =   Rerum Novarum / On Capital and Labor, Leo XIII, 1891

QA =   Quadragesimo Anno / After Forty Years, Pius XI, 1931

MM =  Mater et Magistra / Christianity and Social Progress, John XXIII, 1961

PT =    Pacem in Terris / Peace on Earth, John XXIII, 1963

GS =   Gaudium et Spes / The Church in the Modern World, Second Vatican Council, 1965

PP =    Populorum Progressio / On the Development of Peoples, Paul VI, 1967

OA =   Octogesima Adveniens / A Call to Action on the Eightieth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum, Paul VI, 1971

JM =   Justitia in Mundo / Justice in the World, Synod of Bishops, 1971

LE =    Laborem Exercens / On Human Work, John Paul II, 1981

SS =    Sollicitudo Rei Socialis / On Social Concern, John Paul II, 1987

CA =   Centesimus Annus / On the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum, John Paul II, 1991

CP =   The Challenge of Peace, US Catholic Bishops, 1983

EJ =    Economic Justice for All, US Catholic Bishops, 1986

CV =   Caritas in Veritate / Charity in Truth, Benedict XVI, 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Introduction to the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur

Chapter 6. The Industrial Revolution and Early Development of Catholic Social Teaching

Some historians argue that there have been only three major eras of human society: the paleolithic (old stone age), the agricultural, and the industrial (Strayer ref). And, these scholars argue, just as the agricultural revolution ushered in major changes to human relations, including the very concepts of inequality, social hierarchy, slavery and private property, so did the industrial revolution introduce new social classes based on control of productive resources, widespread movements of people from rural to urban areas, an unabashed glorification of ownership, and the reification of human labor as a mere element of the process of production. It was the extreme human suffering occasioned by these new industrial relationships that prompted Leo XIII to address an entire encyclical to a key social issue head on and in unprecedented detail. Indeed, he begins his landmark encyclical, Rerum Novarum, widely considered to be the first social teaching encyclical, by outlining the church’s right to address such matters. His analysis of “the relative rights and the mutual duties of the wealthy and the poor, of capital and labor” (RN 1, p.15) are in many ways just as relevent to our national discussion today as they were in 1891.

This chapter presents statements by Leo and subsequent popes on the dignity of labor, rights of workers, rights and limitations relating to wealth and property, purpose and critique of economic systems, and the purpose and critique of civil authority. It is especially relevant to courses in the areas of History, Political Science, Economics and Business. As a reader in one of these courses, you might begin by scanning the single-line descriptions before each quote… which papal statements most directly relate to the content area of the course? Then choose two or three statements that bring up ethical questions which you would like to discuss in class. Do you agree with the statements? Why or why not? In what way do they shed light on the subject under discussion in your class? Can they be used to help guide decision making in the world we live in today? …in the world you will live and work in in the future?

The Dignity of Labor

Work enhances man’s humanity

“[Work] is a good thing for man. It is not only good in the sense that it is useful or something to enjoy; it is also good as being something worthy, that is to say, something that corresponds to man’s dignity, that expresses this dignity and increases it. If one wishes to define more clearly the ethical meaning of work, it is this truth that one must particularly keep in mind. Work is a good thing for man – a good thing for his humanity – because through work man not only transforms nature, adapting it to his own needs, but he also achieves fulfillment as a human being and indeed in a sense becomes “more a human being.”” (LE 9, p.364).

Productive activity as an effort toward individual human perfection

   “82. Justice is to be observed not merely in the distribution of wealth, but also in regard to the conditions under which men engaged in productive activity have an opportunity to assume responsibility and to perfect themselves by their efforts.

   “83. Consequently, if the organization and structure of economic life be such that the human dignity of workers is compromised, or their sense of responsibility is weakened, or their freedom of action is removed, then we judge such an economic order to be unjust, even though it produces a vast amount of goods whose distribution  conforms to the norms of justice and equity.” (MM 82-83, pp. 97-98).

Work as an expression of the human self

“Work thus belongs to the vocation of every person; indeed, man expresses and fulfills himself by working.” (CA 6, p. 443 ).

Sacredness of work

“For, while providing the substance of life for themselves and their families, men and women are performing their activities in a way which appropriately benefits society. They can justly consider that by their labor they are unfolding the Creator’s work, consulting the advantages of their brothers and sisters, and contributing by their personal industry to the realization in history of the divine plan.”³⁷ (___ in LE 25, p. 386 ).

Humans as co-creators through work

“[W]hether he be artist or craftsman, engaged in management, industry or agriculture, everyone who works is a creator. Bent over a material that resists his efforts, a man by his work gives his imprint to it, acquiring, as he does so, perseverance, skill, and a spirit of invention. Further, when work is done in common, when hope, hardship, ambition, and joy are shared, it brings together and firmly unites the wills, minds, and hearts of men; in its accomplishment, men find themselves to be brothers.

   “28. Work of course can have contrary effects, for it promises money, pleasure, and power, invites some to selfishness, others to revolt; it also develops professional awareness, sense of duty and charity to one’s neighbor. When it is more scientific and better organized, there is a risk of its dehumanizing those who perform it, by making them its servants, for work is human only if it remains intelligent and free.” (PP 26-7, p.246).

Humans as co-creators in the universe

   “The church finds in the very first pages of the book of Genesis the source of her conviction that work is a fundamental dimension of human existence on earth. An analysis of these texts makes us aware that they express – sometimes in an archaic way of manifesting thought – the fundamental truths about man, in the context of the mystery of creation itself. […] Man is the image of God partly through the mandate received from his creator to subdue, to dominate, the earth. In carrying out this mandate, man, every human being, reflects the very action of the creator of the universe.” (LE 4, p. 356).

Dignity of work for the disabled as well as the abled

“It would be radically unworthy of man, and a denial of our common humanity, to admit to the life of the community, and thus admit to work, only those who are fully functional. To do so would be to practice a serious form of discrimination, that of the strong and healthy against the weak and sick. Work in the objective sense should be subordinated, in this circumstance too, to the dignity of man, to the subject of work and not to economic advantage.” (LE 22, p. 383 ).

The disabled as fully respected subjects of work

   “Careful attention must be devoted to the physical and psychological working conditions of disabled people – as for all workers – to their just remuneration, to the possibility of their promotion, and to the elimination of various obstacles. Without hiding the fact that this is a complex and difficult task, it is to be hoped that a correct concept of labor in the subjective sense will produce a situation which will make it possible for disabled people to feel that they are not cut off from the working world or dependent upon society, but that they are full-scale subjects of work, useful, respected for their human dignity and called to contribute to the progress and welfare of their families and of the community according to their particular capacities.” (LE 22, p. 383 ).

Gifts of nature undergird man’s work

   “The same principle applies in the successive phases of this process, in which the first phase always remains the relationship of man with the resources and riches of nature. The whole of the effort to acquire knowledge with the aim of discovering these riches and specifying the various ways in which they can be used by man and for man teaches us that everything that comes from man throughout the whole process of economic production, whether labor or the whole collection of means of production and the technology connected with these means (meaning the capability to use them in work), presupposes these riches and resources of the visible world, riches and resources that man finds and does not create. In a sense man finds them already prepared, ready for him to discover them and to use them correctly in the productive process. In every phase of the development of his work, man comes up against the leading role of the gift made by “nature,” that is to say, in the final analysis, by the Creator. At the beginning of man’s work is the mystery of creation.” (LE 12, pp. 367-8).

The Rights of Workers

The right to work

   “The obligation to earn one’s bread by the sweat of one’s brow also presumes the right to do so. A society in which this right is systematically denied, in which economic policies do not allow workers to reach satisfactory levels of employment, cannot be justified from an ethical point of view, nor can that society attain social peace. Just as the person fully realizes himself in the free gift of self, so too ownership morally justifies itself in the creation, at the proper time and in the proper way, of opportunities for work and human growth for all.” (CA 43, p. 472 ).

The right to medical care

   “19. After outlining the important role that concern for providing employment for all workers plays in safeguarding respect for the inalienable rights of man in view of his work, it is worthwhile to take a closer look at these rights, which in the final analysis are formed within the relationship between worker and direct employer. […]

   “Besides wages, various social benefits intended to ensure the life and health of workers and their families play a part here. The expenses involved in health care, especially in the case of accidents at work, demand that medical assistance should be easily available for workers and that as far as possible it should be cheap or even free of charge.” (LE 19, pp. 378-9). (delete first paragraph?)

Right to procure work grounded in the gift of creation

“[T]he whole of creation is for man, […] it is his responsibility to develop it by intelligent effort and by means of his labor to perfect it, so to speak, for his use. If the world is made to furnish each individual with the means of livelihood and the instruments for his growth and progress, each man has therefore the right to find in the world what is necessary for himself. […] All other rights whatsoever, including those of property and of free commerce, are to be subordinated to this principle.” (PP 22, p.245).

The right to subsistance implies duty to seek full employment

   “18. When we consider the rights of workers in relation to the “indirect employer,” that is to say, all the agents at the national and international level that are responsible for the whole orientation of labor policy, we must first direct our attention to a fundamental issue: the question of finding work or, in other words, the issue of suitable employment for all who are capable of it. The opposite of a just and right situation in this field is unemployment, that is to say, the lack of work for those who are capable of it. It can be a question of general unemployment or of unemployment in certain sectors of work. The role of the agents included under the title of indirect employer is to act against unemployment, which in all cases is an evil and which, when it reaches a certain level, can become a real social disaster. It is particularly painful when it especially affects young people, who after appropriate cultural, technical and professional preparation fail to find work and see their sincere wish to work and their readiness to take on their own responsibility for the economic and social development of the community sadly frustrated. The obligation to provide unemployment benefits, that is to say, the duty to make suitable grants indispensable for the subsistence of unemployed workers and their families, is a duty springing from the fundamental principle of the moral order in this sphere, namely the principle of the common use of goods or, to put it in another and still simpler way, the right to life and subsistence.” (LE 18, pp. 376-7).

The right to employment and to assistance for the unemployable

“Among the purposes of a society should be an effort to arrange for a continuous supply of work at all times and seasons; and to create a fund from which the members may be helped in their necessities, not only in case of accident, but also in sickness, old age, and misfortune.” (RN 43, p.36).

The right to rest

“[T]he first concern of all is to save the poor workers from the cruelty of grasping speculators, who use human beings as mere instruments for making money. It is neither justice nor humanity so to grind men down with excessive labor as to stupefy their minds and wear out their bodies. Man’s powers, like his general nature, are limited, and beyond these limits he cannot go. His strength is developed and increased by use and exercise, but only on condition of due intermission and proper rest. Daily labor, therefore, must be so regulated that it may not be protracted during longer hours than strength admits. How many and how long the intervals of rest should be will depend upon the nature of the work, on circumstances of time and place, and on the health and strength of the workman.” (RN 33, p.30).

The right to just wages

“[A]s a rule, workman and employer should make free agreements, and in particular should freely agree as to wages; nevertheless, there is a dictate of nature more imperious and more ancient than any bargain between man and man, that the remuneration must be enough to support the wage earner in reasonable and frugal comfort. If through necessity or fear or a worse evil, the workman accepts harder conditions because an employer or contractor will give him no better, he is the victim of force and injustice.” (RN 34, p.31).

What constitutes a sufficient wage

   “A workman’s wages should be sufficient to enable him to support himself, his wife and his children.” (CA 8, p. 445 ).

Factors determining what constitutes a fair wage

     “[I]n the economically developed countries, it frequently happens that great, or sometimes very great, remuneration is had for the performance of some task of lesser importance or doubtful utility. Meanwhile, the diligent and profitable work that whole classes of decent and hard-working citizens perform, receives too low a payment and one insufficient for the necessities of life, or else, one that does not correspond to the contribution made to the community, or to the revenues of the undertakings in which they are engaged, or to the national income.

   “71. Wherefore, we judge it to be our duty to reaffirm once again that just as remuneration for work cannot be left entirely to unregulated competition, neither may it be decided arbitrarily at the will of the more powerful. Rather, in this matter, the norms of justice and equity should be strictly observed. This requires that workers receive a wage sufficient to lead a life worthy of man and to fulfill family responsibilities properly. But in determining what constitutes an appropriate wage, the following must necessarily be taken into account: first of all, the contribution of individuals to the economic effort; the economic state of the enterprise within which they work; the requirements of each community, especially as regards overall employment; finally, what concerns the common good of all peoples, namely, of the various States associated among themselves, but differing in character and extent.” (MM 70-71, pp. 95-96).

The right to labor unions

   “Among the basic rights of the human person must be counted the right of freely founding labor unions. These unions should be truly able to represent the workers and to contribute to the proper arrangement of economic life. Another such right is that of taking part freely in the activity of these unions without risk of reprisal.” (GS 68, p. 212).

Limitations on exercising the rights of labor unions

   “Although for the defense of these rights democratic societies today accept the principle of labor union rights, they are not always open to their exercise. The important role of union organizations must be admitted: their object is the representation of the various categories of workers, their lawful collaboration in the economic advance of society, and the development of the sense of their responsibility for the realization of the common good. Their activity, however, is not without its difficulties. Here and there the temptation can arise of profiting from a position of force to impose, particularly by strikes – the right to which as a final means of defense remains certainly recognized – conditions which are too burdensome for the overall economy and for the social body, or to desire to obtain in this way demands of a directly political nature. When it is a question of public services, required for the life of an entire nation, it is necessary to be able to assess the limit beyond which the harm caused to society becomes inadmissible.” (OA 14, p.270).

Rights and Limitations Relating to Wealth & Property

Like others who have dedicated their lives to religious service, the SND have a special relationship with wealth and property – they give it up when they enter the sisterhood. And for those sisters whose service involves paid work, they sign their paychecks over to the sisterhood as well. The sisterhood, in turn, provides for each SND’s living expenses. It might seem like such an arrangement would provide a disinclination to work, but the Sisters of Notre Dame don’t seem to have a problem getting things done. Whether it’s administration of the order, teaching in one of their many school and colleges, or running projects and programs, the Sisters keep busy. Even retirement seems to mean something different to them. Their work is their vocation. They don’t do it because they want to buy things. And they don’t stop doing it just because they reach a certain age. They do understand about the rest of us, however. Most of us work because we have to buy stuff. With some effort at discernment, and perhaps a little luck, we might do work that we really enjoy, work that doesn’t feel like work even though we get paid for it. But getting paid is important. Amassing property is important. How we use our property is also important. The popes have had much to say on this subject.

Origin of private property

“The earth, by reason of its fruitfulness and its capacity to satisfy human needs, is God’s first gift for the sustenance of human life. But the earth does not yield its fruits without a particular human response to God’s gift, that is to say, without work. It is through work that man, using his intelligence and exercising his freedom, succeeds in dominating the earth and making it a fitting home. In this way, he makes part of the earth his own, precisely the part which he has acquired through work; this is the origin of individual property.” (CA 31, p. 462 ).

Grounds for human ownership of the riches of nature

“12. “When we read in the first chapter of the Bible that man is to subdue the earth, we know that these words refer to all the resources contained in the visible world and placed at man’s disposal. However, these resources can serve man only through work. From the beginning there is also linked with work the question of ownership, for the only means that man has for causing the resources hidden in nature to serve himself and others is his work. And to be able through his work to make these resources bear fruit, man takes over ownership of small parts of the various riches of nature: those beneath the ground, those in the sea, on land or in space. He takes over all these things by making them his workbench. He takes them over through work and for work.” (LE 12, pp. 367-8).

Universal destination of the earth’s goods

   “God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favoring anyone. This is the foundation of the universal destination of the earth’s goods.” (CA 31, p. 462 ).

On the role of private property in stabilizing social relations

   “112. While recent developments in economic life progress rapidly in a number of countries, as we have noted, and produce goods ever more efficiently, justice and equity require that remuneration for work also be increased within limits allowed by the common good. This enables workers to save more readily and hence to achieve some property status of their own. Wherefore, it is indeed surprising that some reject the natural role of private ownership. For it is a right which continually draws its force and vigor from the fruitfulness of labor, and which, accordingly, is an effective aid in safeguarding the dignity of the human person and the free exercise of responsibility in all fields of endeavor. Finally, it strengthens the stability and tranquillity of family life, thus contributing to the peace and prosperity of the commonwealth.” (MM 112, p.102).

On effective distribution of private property

   “113. It is not enough, then to assert that man has from nature the right of privately possessing goods as his own, including those of productive character, unless, at the same time, a continuing effort is made to spread the use of this right through all ranks of the citizenry.” (MM 113, p.102).

On property ownership broadly distributed

“The law […] should favor ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many people as possible to become owners.

     Many excellent results will follow from this; and first of all, property will certainly become more equitably divided. For the effect of civil change and revolution has been to divide society into two widely different castes. On the one side there is the party which holds the power because it holds the wealth; which has in its grasp all labor and all trade; which manipulates for its own benefit and its own purposes all the sources of supply; and which is powerfully represented in the councils of the State itself. On the other side there is the needy and powerless multitude, sore and suffering, always ready for disturbance. If working people can be encouraged to look forward to obtaining a share in the land, the result will be that the gulf between vast wealth and deep poverty will be bridged over, and the two orders will be brought nearer together. Another consequence will be the great abundance of the fruits of the earth. Men always work harder and more readily when they work on that which is their own; nay, they learn to love the very soil which yields in response to the labor of their hands, not only food to eat, but an abundance of the good things for themselves and those that are dear to them. It is evident how such a spirit of willing labor would add to the produce of the earth and to the wealth of the community.” (RN 35, p.32).

On taxation of property

“The right to possess private property is from nature, not from man; and the State has only the right to regulate its use in the interests of the public good, but by no means to abolish it altogether. The State is, therefore, unjust and cruel, if, in the name of taxation, it deprives the private owner of more than is just.” (RN 35, p.32).

Kinds of things to be possessed

“[B]y prudent use of various devices already proven effective, it will not be difficult for the body politic to modify economic and social life so that the way is made easier for widespread private possession of such things as durable goods, homes, gardens, tools requisite for artisan enterprises and family-type farms, investments in enterprises of medium or large size. All of this has occurred satisfactorily in some nations with developed social and economic systems.” (MM 115, pp. 102-103).

Ownership of property as an expression of the human self

   “71. Ownership and other forms of private control over material goods contribute to the expression of personality. Moreover, they furnish men with an occasion for exerting their role in society and in the economy. Hence it is very important to facilitate the access of both individuals and communities to some control over material goods.

   “Private ownership or some other kind of dominion over material goods provides everyone with a wholly necessary area of independence, and should be regarded as an extension of human freedom. Finally since it adds incentives for carrying on one’s function and duty, it constitutes a kind of prerequisite for civil liberties.” (GS 71, p.214).

Entrepreneurial ability an important source of wealth

“It is precisely the ability to foresee both the needs of others and the combinations of productive factors most adapted to satisfying those needs that constitutes another important source of wealth in modern society. Besides, many goods cannot be adequately produced through the world of an isolated individual; they require the cooperation of many people in working toward a common goal. Organizing such a productive effort, planning its duration in time, making sure that it corresponds in a positive way to the demands which it must satisfy, and taking the necessary risks – all this too is a source of wealth in today’s society. In this way, the role of disciplined and creative human work and, as an essential part of that work, initiative and entrepreneurial ability becomes increasingly evident and decisive.” (CA 32, p. 462 ).

Property ownership not an absolute right

“[P]rivate property does not constitute for anyone an absolute and unconditional right. No one is justified in keeping for his exclusive use what he does not need, when others lack necessities.” (PP 23, p.245).

Social responsibility of property ownership

“[I]n the right of private property there is rooted a social responsibility. Indeed, in the wisdom of God the Creator, the overall supply of goods is assigned, first of all, that all men may lead a decent life.” (MM 119, p.103).

“Social mortgage” on property ownership

   “[T]he goods of this world are originally meant for all. The right to private property is valid and necessary, but it does not nullify the value of this principle. Private property, in fact, is under a “social mortgage,” which means that it has an intrinsically social function, based upon and justified precisely by the principle of the universal destination of goods.” (SS 42, p. 426 ).

On “superfluous income”

“[A] man’s superfluous income is not left entirely to his own discretion. We speak of that portion of his income which he does not need in order to live as becomes his station. […] the investment of superfluous income in developing favorable opportunities for employment […] is to be considered […] an act of real liberality particularly appropriate to the needs of our time.” (QA 50,51, p. 53).

Everyone has the right to a share of earthly goods

   “69. [T]he right to have a share of earthly goods sufficient for oneself and one’s family belongs to everyone. The Fathers and Doctors of the Church held this view, teaching that men are obliged to come to the relief of the poor, and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods. If a person is in extreme necessity, he has the right to take from the riches of others what he himself needs.” (GS 69, p.213).

Private property and the common good

   “The right of private control […] is not opposed to the right inherent in various forms of public ownership. Still, goods can be transferred to the public domain only by the competent authority, according to the demands and within the limits of the common good, and with fair compensation. It is a further right of public authority to guard against any misuse of private property which injures the common good.” (GS 71, p.214).

Argument for expropriation of property

   “In many underdeveloped countries there are large or even gigantic rural estates which are only moderately cultivated or lie completely idle for the sake of profit. At the same time the majority of the people are either without land or have only very small holdings, and there is evident and urgent need to increase land productivity.

   “It is not rare for those who are hired to work for the landowners, or who till a portion of the land as tenants, to receive a wage or income unworthy of human beings, to lack decent housing, and to be exploited by middlemen. Deprived of all security, they live under such personal servitude that almost every opportunity for acting on their own intiative and responsibility is denied to them, and all advancement in human culture and all sharing in social and political life are ruled out.

   “Depending on circumstances, therefore, reforms must be instituted if income is to grow, working conditions improve, job security increase, and an incentive to working on one’s own initiative be provided. Indeed, insufficiently cultivated estates should be distributed to those who can make these lands fruitful. In this case, the necessary ways and means, especially educational aids and the right facilities for cooperative organization, must be supplied. Still, whenever the common good requires expropriation, compensation must be reckoned in equity after all the circumstances have been weighed.” (GS 71, pp. 214-15).

Common good sometimes demands expropriation of private property

   “24. If certain landed estates impede the general prosperity because they are extensive, unused, or poorly used, or because they bring hardship to peoples or are detrimental to the interests of the country, the common good sometimes demands their expropriation.” (PP 24, p.245)

Hoarding of wealth overseas

“[I]t is unacceptable that citizens with abundant incomes from the resources and activity of their country should transfer a considerable part of this income abroad purely for their own advantage, without care for the manifest wrong they inflict on their country by doing this.” (PP 24, p.245).

Means of production must serve labor

“[I]n the church’s teaching, ownership has never been understood in a way that could constitute grounds for social conflict in labor. As mentioned above property is acquired first of all through work in order that it may serve work. This concerns in a special way ownership of the means of production. Isolating these means as a separate property in order to set it up in the form of “capital” in opposition to “labor” – and even to practice exploitation of labor – is contrary to the very nature of these means and their possession. They cannot be possessed against labor, they cannot even be possessed for possession’s sake, because the only legitimate title to their possession – whether in the form of private ownership or in the form of public or collective ownership – is that they should serve labor and thus by serving labor that they should make possible the achievement of the first principle of this order, namely the universal destination of goods and the right to common use of them. From this point of view, therefore, in consideration of human labor and of common access to the goods meant for man, one cannot exclude the socialization, in suitable conditions, of certain means of production.” (LE 14, p.371).

Priority of labor over capital

   “15. [T]he principle of the priority of labor over capital is a postulate of the order of social responsibility.” (LE 15, p.373).

Capital is the product of the work of generations

“[T]he position of “rigid” capitalism continues to remain unacceptable, namely the position that defends the exclusive right to private ownership of the means of production as an untouchable “dogma” of economic life. The principle of respect for work demands that this right should undergo a constructive revision both in theory and in practice. If it is true that capital, as the whole of the means of production, is at the same time the product of the work of generations, it is equally true that capital is being unceasingly created through the work done with the help of all these means of production, and these means can be seen as a great workbench at which the present generation of workers is working day after day. Obviously we are dealing here with different kinds of work, not only so-called manual labor, but also the many forms of intellectual work, including white-collar work and management.” (LE 14, p.372).

Purpose & Critique of Socioeconomic Systems

Purpose of socioeconomic systems

   “[M]an is the source, the center, and the purpose of all socioeconomic life.” (GS 63, p.208).

Both state and market serve human life

“People lose sight of the fact that life in society has neither the market nor the state as its final purpose, since life itself has a unique value which the state and the market must serve. Man remains above all a being who seeks the truth and strives to live in that truth, deepening his understanding of it through a dialogue which involves past and future generations.” (CA 49, p. 477 ).

Economy in the service of man

   “The fundamental purpose of […] productivity must not be the mere multiplication of products. It must not be profit or domination. Rather, it must be the service of man, and indeed of the whole man, viewed in terms of his material needs and the demands of his intellectual, moral, spiritual, and religious life. And when we say man, we mean every man whatsoever and every group of men, of whatever race and from whatever part of the world. Consequently, economic activity is to be carried out according to its own methods and laws but within the limits of morality” (GS 64, pp. 209-10).

All men must have control of economic development

   “65. Economic development must be kept under the control of mankind. It must not be left to the sole judgment of a few men or groups possessing excessive economic power, or of the political community alone, or of certain especially powerful nations.” (GS 65, p.210).

Employment and income

   “70. The distribution of goods should be directed toward providing employment and sufficient income for the people of today and of the future.” (GS 70, p.213).

Labor’s contribution to the national wealth.

“[I]t is only by the labor of the workingman that States grow rich. Justice, therefore, demands that the interests of the poorer population be carefully watched over by the administration, so that they who contribute so largely to the advantage of the community may themselves share in the benefits they create – that being housed, clothed, and enabled to support life, they may find their existence less hard and more endurable. It follows that whatever shall appear conducive to the well-being of those who work should receive favorable consideration. Let it not be feared that solicitude of this kind will injure any interest; on the contrary it will be to the advantage of all; for it cannot but be good for the commonwealth to secure from misery those on whom it so largely depends.” (RN 27, p.27).

Nature of the national wealth

“[A]  strict demand of social justice  […] explicitly requires that, with the growth of the economy, there occur a corresponding social development. Thus, all classes of citizens will benefit equitably from an increase in national wealth. Toward this end vigilance should be exercised and effective steps taken that class differences arising from disparity of wealth not be increased, but lessened so far as possible.

   “74. “National wealth” – as our predecessor of happy memory, Pius XII, rightfully observed – “inasmuch as it is produced by the common efforts of the citizenry, has no other purpose than to secure without interruption those material conditions in which individuals are enabled to lead a full and perfect life.” ” (MM 73-74, p.96).

Just wages as a test of a just socioeconomic system

   “It should also be noted that the justice of a socioeconomic system and, in each case, its just functioning, deserve in the final analysis to be evaluated by the way in which man’s work is properly remunerated in the system. Here we return once more to the first principle of the whole ethical and social order, namely the principle of the common use of goods. In every system, regardless of the fundamental relationships within it between capital and labor, wages, that is to say remuneration for work, are still a practice means whereby the vast majority of people can have access to those goods which are intended for common use; both the goods of nature and manufactured goods. Both kinds of goods become accessible to the worker through the wage which he receives as remuneration for his work. Hence in every case a just wage is the concrete means of verifying the justice of the whole socioeconomic system and, in any case, of checking that it is functioning justly. It is not the only means of checking, but it is a particularly important one and in a sense the key means.

   “This means of checking concerns above all the family. Just remuneration for the work of an adult who is responsible for a family means remuneration which will suffice for establishing and properly maintaining a family and for providing security for its future. Such remunertion can be given either through what is called a family wage – that is, a single salary given to the head of the family for his work, sufficient for the needs of the family without the spouse having to take up gainful employment outside the home – or through other social measures” (LE 19, pp. 378-79 ).

Dictatorship of money

“[I]t is unfortunate that […] a system has been construted which considers profit as the key motive for economic progress, competition as the supreme law of economics, and private ownership of the means of production as an absolute right that has no limits and carries no corresponding social obligation. This unchecked liberalism leads to dictatorship rightly denounced by Pius XI as producing “the international imperialism of money.”²⁶ One cannot condemn such abuses too strongly by solemnly recalling once again that the economy is at the service of man.” (PP 26, p.246).

Economic system should conform to the norms of social justice

   “Free competition, and especially economic domination, must be kept within definite and proper bounds, and must be brought under effective control of the public authority, in matters pertaining to the latter’s competence. The public institutions of the nations should be such as to make all human society conform to the requirements of the common good, that is, the norm of social justice. If this is done, that very important part of social life, the economic system, will of necessity be restored to sanity and right order.” (QA 109-110, pp. 65-66).

Duty of society to develop employment opportunities

“Whether it is engaged in independently or paid for by someone else, […] labor comes immediately from the person. In a sense, the person stamps the things of nature with his seal and subdues them to his will. It is ordinarily by his labor that a man supports himself and his family, is joined to his fellow men and serves them, and is enabled to exercise genuine charity and be a partner in the work of bringing God’s creation to perfection. Indeed, we hold that by offering his labor to God a man becomes associated with the redemptive work itself of Jesus Christ, who conferred an eminent dignity on labor when at Nazareth he worked with his own hands.

   “From all these considerations there arise every man’s duty to labor fruitfully and also his right to work. It is the duty of society, moreover, according to the circumstances prevailing in it, and in keeping with its proper role, to help its citizens find opportunities for adequate employment. Finally, payment for labor must be such as to furnish a man with the means to cultivate his own material, social, cultural, and spiritual life worthily and that of his dependents. What this payment should be will vary according to each man’s assignment and productivity, the conditions of his place of employment, and the common good.” (GS 67, p.211).

Workers and managers united in work community

“It is characteristic of work that it first and foremost unites people. In this consists its social power: the power to build a community. In the final analysis, both those who work and those who manage the means of production or who own them must in some way be united in this community” (LE 20, pp. 380-81).

On women in the workplace

“The true advancement of women requires that labor should be structured in such a way that women do not have to pay for their advancement by abandoning what is specific to them and at the expense of the family, in which women as mothers have an irreplaceable role. (LE 19, p.379 ).

Profit

   “The church acknowledges the legitimate role of profit as an indication that a business is functioning well. When a firm makes a profit, this means that productive factors have been properly employed and corresponding human needs have been duly satisfied. But profitability is not the only indicator of a firm’s condition. It is possible for the financial accounts to be in order, and yet for the people – who make up the firm’s most valuable asset – to be humiliated and their dignity offended. Besides being morally inadmissible, this will eventually have negative repercussions on the firm’s economic efficiency. In fact, the purpose of a business firm is not simply to make a profit, but is to be found in its very existence as a community of persons who in various ways are endeavoring to satisfy their basic needs, and who form a particular group at the service of the whole of society. Profit is a regulator of the life of a business, but it is not the only one; other human and moral factors must also be considered which, in the long term, are at least equally important for the life of a business.” (CA 35, p. 465 ).

On consumerism & investment

   “It is not wrong to want to live better; what is wrong is a style of life which is presumed to be better when it is directed toward “having” rather than “being,” and which wants to have more, not in order to be more but in order to spend life in enjoyment as an end in itself. It is therefore necessary to create lifestyles in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments. In this regard, it is not a matter of the duty of charity alone, that is, the duty to give from one’s “abundance,” and sometimes even out of one’s needs, in order to provide what is essential for the life of a poor person. I am referring to the fact that even the decision to invest in one place rather than another, in one productive sector rather than another, is always a moral and cultural choice. Given the utter necessity of certain economic conditions and of political stability, the decision to invest, that is, to offer people an opportunity to make good use of their own labor, is also determined by an attitude of human sympathy and trust in Providence, which reveal the human quality of the person making such decisions.” (CA 36, p. 467 ).

Economic freedom an element of human freedom

“[E]conomic freedom is only one element of human freedom. When it becomes autonomous, when man is seen more as a producer or consumer of goods than as a subject who produces and consumes in order to live, then economic freedom loses its necessary relationship to the human person and ends up by alienating and oppressing him.” (CA 39, p. 469 ).

Priority of labor over capital

“[W]e must first of all recall a principle that has always been taught by the church: the principle of the priority of labor over capital. This principle directly concerns the process of production: In this process labor is always a primary efficient cause, while capital, the whole collection of means of production, remains a mere instrument or instrumental cause. This principle is an evident truth that emerges from the whole of man’s historical experience.” (LE 12, pp. 367-8)

Purpose and Critique of Civil Authority

Human basis of social institutions

“219. The cardinal point of this teaching is that individual men are necessarily the foundation, cause, and end of all social institutions. We are referring to human beings, insofar as they are social by nature, and raised to an order of existence that transcends and subdues nature.

   “220. Beginning with this very basic principle whereby the dignity of the human person is affirmed and defended, Holy Church – especially during the last century and with the assistance of learned priests and laymen, specialists in the field – has arrived at clear social teachings whereby the mutual relationships of men are ordered.” (MM 218-219, pp. 119-20).

Civil authority cannot effectively work through fear

“[A] civil authority which uses as its only or its chief means either threats and fear of punishment or promises of rewards cannot effectively move men to promote the common good of all.” (PT 48, p. 139).

Obligation of individuals to participate in realizing the common good

   “53. Individual citizens and intermediate groups are obliged to make their specific contributions to the common welfare. One of the chief consequences of this is that they must bring their own interests into harmony with the needs of the community, and must contribute their goods and their services as civil authorities have prescribed, in accord with the norms of justice and within the limits of their competence. […]

   “54. Indeed since the whole reason for the existence of civil authorities is the realization of the common good, it is clearly necessary that, in pursuing this objective, they should respect its essential elements, and at the same time conform their laws to the circumstances of they day.³⁷” (PT 53-54, pp. 140-41).

Adjustment of ownership for the public good

 “[W]hen civil authority adjusts ownership to meet the needs of the public good it acts not as an enemy, but as the friend of private owners; for thus it effectively prevents the possession of private property, intended by nature’s Author in his wisdom for the sustaining of human life, from creating intolerable burden and so rushing to its own destruction. It does not therefore abolish, but protects private ownership, and far from weakening the right of private property, it gives it new strength.” (QA 49, p.53).

All classes of people must share in profits

“[T]he good of the whole community must be safeguarded. By these principles of social justice one class is forbidden to exclude the other from a share in the profits. This law is violated by an irresponsible wealthy class who, in their good fortune, deem it a just state of things that they should receive everything and the laborer nothing. It is violated also by the propertyless class, when, strongly aroused because justice is ignored and too prone to vindicate improperly the one right well known to them, they demand for themselve all the fruits of production. They are wrong in thus attacking and seeking the abolition of ownership and all profits deriving from sources other than labor, whatever be their nature or significance in human society, for the sole reason that they were not obtained by toil.” (QA 57, p.55).

Vast income disparity a “grave evil”

“58. Each class, then, must receive its due share, and the distribution of created goods must be brought into conformity with the demands of the common good and social justice. For every sincere observer realizes that the vast differences between the few who hold excessive wealth and the many who live in destitution constitute a grave evil in modern society.” (QA 58, p. 56).

Public Property

“117. It seems characteristic of our times to vest more and more ownership of goods in the State and in other public bodies. This is partially explained by the fact that the common good requires public authorities to exercise ever greater responsibilities. However, in this matter, the principle of subsidiarity, already mentioned above, is to be strictly observed. For it is lawful for States and public corporations to expand their domain of ownership only when manifest and genuine requirements of the common good so require, and then with safeguards, lest the possession of private citizens be diminished beyond measure, or, what is worse, destroyed.” (MM 117, p.103).

The common good on the national level

“79. Considering the common good on the national level, the following points are relevant and should not be overlooked: to provide employment for as many workers as possible; to take care lest privileged groups arise even among the workers themselves; to maintain a balance between wages and prices; to make accessible the goods and services for a better life to as many persons as possible; either to eliminate or to keep within bounds the inequalities that exist between different sectors of the economy – that is, between agriculture, industry and services; to balance properly any increases in output with advances in services provided to citizens, especially by public authority; to adjust, as far as possible, the means of production to the progress of science and technology; finally, to ensure the advantages of a more human way of existence not merely subserve the present generation but have regard for future generations as well.” (MM 79, p. 97).

Improved social conditions must accompany advancement

   “168. Prudent foresight and common need demand that not only more goods be produced, but that this be done more efficiently. Likewise, necessity and justice require that wealth produced be distributed equitably among all citizens of the commonwealth. Accordingly, efforts should be made to ensure that improved social conditions accompany economic advancement. And it is very important that such advances occur simultaneously in the agricultural, industrial, and various service sectors.” (MM 168, p. 112).

Role of civil authority in ensuring social progress of citizens

   “63. It is also demanded by the common good that civil authorities should make earnest efforts to bring about a situation in which individual citizens can easily exercise their rights and fulfill their duties as well. For experience has shown us that, unless these authorities take suitable action with regard to economic, political and cultural matters, inequalities between the citizens tend to become more and more widespread, especially in the modern world, and as a result human rights are rendered totally ineffective and the fulfillment of duties is compromised.

   “64. It is therefore necessary that the administration give wholehearted and careful attention to the social as well as to the economic progress of the citizens, and to the development, in keeping with the development of the productive system, of such essential services as the building of roads, transportation, communications, water supply, housing, public health, education, facilitation of the practice of religion, and recreational facilities. It is necessary also that governments make efforts to see that insurance systems are made available to the citizens, so that, in case of misfortune or increased family responsibilities, no person will be without the necessary means to maintain a decent standard of living. The government should make similarly effective efforts to see that those who are able to work can find employment in keeping with their aptitudes, and that each worker receives a wage in keeping with the laws of justice and equity. It should be equally the concern of civil authorities to ensure that workers be allowed their proper responsibility in the work undertaken in industrial organization, and to facilitate the establishment of intermediate groups which will make social life richer and more effective. Finally, it should be possible for all the citizens to share as far as they are able in their country’s cultural advantages.” (PT 63-64, p.141).

Enough government, but not too much

   “65. The common good requires that civil authorities maintain a careful balance between coordinating and protecting the rights of the citizens, on the one hand, and promoting them, on the other. It should not happen that certain individuals or social groups derive special advantage from the fact that their rights have received preferential protection. Nor should it happen that governments, in seeking to protect these rights, become obstacles to their full expression and free use.” (PT 65 p.142).

Worldwide public authority

   “137. Today the universal common good poses problems of worldwide dimensions, which cannot be adequately tackled or solved except by the efforts of public authority endowed with a wideness of powers, structure and means of the same proportions: that is, of public authority which is in a position to operate in an effective manner on a worldwide basis. The moral order itself, therefore, demands that such a form of public authority be established.”

Man’s need for social life

   “25. Man’s social nature makes it evident that the progress of the human person and the advance of society itself hinge on each other. For the beginning, the subject, and the goal of all social institutions is and must be the human person, which for its part and by its very nature stands completely in need of social life.⁴⁴” (GS 25, p.180)

Provision of social services

“[I]n highly developed nations a body of social institutions dealing with insurance and security can, for its part, make the common purpose of earthly goods effective. Family and social services, especially those which provide for culture and education, should be further promoted. Still, care must be taken lest, as a result of all these provisions, the citizenry fall into a kind of sluggishness toward society, and reject the burdens of office and of public service.” (GS 69, p.213).

Common good above politics

“Political parties should foster whatever they judge necessary for the common good. But they should never prefer their own advantage over this same common good.” (GS 75, p.218).

Human right to association

“[T]he right of association is a natural right of the human being, which therefore precedes his or her incorporation into political society.” (CA 7, p. 444 ).

Error of socialism

“[T]he fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature. Socialism considers the individual person simply as an element, a molecule within the social organism, so that the good of the individual, is completely subordinated to the functioning of the socioeconomic mechanism. Socialism likewise maintains that the good of the individual can be realized without reference to his free choice, to the unique and exclusive responsibility which he exercises in the face of good or evil. Man is thus reduced to a series of social relationships, and the concept of the person as the autonomous subject of moral decision disappears, the very subject whose decisions build the social order. From this mistaken conception of the person there arise both a distortion of law, which defines the sphere of the exercise of freedom, and an opposition to private property. A person who is deprived of something he can call his own and of the possibility of earning a living through his own initiative, comes to depend on the social machine and on those who control it. This makes it much more difficult for him to recognize his dignity as a person” (CA 13, pp. 448-49 ).

Role of the state in economy

“There is certainly a legitimate sphere of autonomy in economic life which the state should not enter. The state, however, has the task of determining the juridical framework within which economic affairs are to be conducted, and thus of safeguarding the prerequisites of a free economy, which presumes a certain equality between the parties, such that one party would not be so powerful as practically to reduce the other to subservience.” (CA 15, p. 450 ).

Government’s role in supporting business

“[T]he state has a duty to sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure job opportunities, by stimulating those activities where they are lacking or by supporting them in moments of crisis.” (CA 48, p. 475 ).

Subsidiarity and social assistance

“Malfunctions and defects in the social assistance state are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the state. Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.

   “By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the social assistance state leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending. In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbors to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need. One thinks of the condition of refugees, immigrants, the elderly, the sick, and all those in circumstances which call for assistance, such as drug abusers: all these people can be helped effectively only by those who offer them genuine fraternal support, in addition to the necessary care.” (CA 48, p. 476 ).

Effectiveness of RN in promoting government intervention

   “26. We do not, of course, deny that even before the encyclical of Leo, some rulers had provided for the more urgent needs of the working classes, and had checked the more flagrant acts of injustice perpetrated against them. But after the apostolic voice had sounded from the Chair of Peter throughout the world, the leaders of nations, at last more conscious of their obligations, set their hearts and minds to the promotion of a broader social policy.

   “27. In fact, the encyclical Rerum Novarum completely overthrew those tottering tenets of liberalism which had long hampered effective intervention by the government. It prevailed upon the peoples themselves to develop their social policy more intensely and on truer lines, and also encouraged outstanding Catholics to give such efficacious help and assistance to rulers of the State that in legislative assemblies they were not infrequently the foremost advocates of the new policy. Furthermore, not a few recent laws dealing with social questions were originally proposed to the suffrages of the people’s representatives by ecclesiastics thoroughly imbued with Leo’s teaching, who afterward with watchful care promoted and fostered their execution.

   “28. As a result of these steady and tireless efforts, there has arisen a new branch of jurisprudence unknown to earlier times, whose aim is the energetic defense of those sacred rights of the workingman which proceed from his dignity as a man and as a Christian. These laws concern the soul, the health, the strength, the housing workshops, wages, dangerous employments, in a word all that concerns the wage earners, with particular regard to women and children. Even though these regulations do not agree always and in every detail with the recommendations of Pope Leo, it is none the less certain that much which they contain is strongly suggestive of Rerum Novarum, to which in large measure must be attributed the improved condition of the workingmen.”

Primacy of man over things

“This truth, which is part of the abiding heritage of the church’s teaching, must always be emphasized with reference to the question of the labor system and with regard to the whole socioeconomic system. We must emphasize and give prominence to the primacy of man in the production process, the primacy of man over things. Everything contained in the concept of capital in the strict sense is only a collection of things. Man, as the subject of work and independent of the work he does – man alone is a person. This truth has important and decisive consequences.” (LE 12, p.368).

Error of economism

   “This consistent image, in which the principle of the primacy of person over things is strictly preserved, was broken up in human thought, sometimes after a long period of incubation in practical living. The break occurred in such a way that labor was separated from capital and set in opposition to it, and capital was set in opposition to labor, as though they were two impersonal forces, two production factors juxtaposed in the same “economistic” perspective. This way of stating the issue contained a fundamental error, what we can call the error of economism, that of considering human labor solely according to its economic purpose. This fundamental error of thought can and must be called an error of materialism, in that economism directly or indirectly includes a conviction of the primacy and superiority of the material and directly or indirectly places the spiritual and the personal (man’s activity, moral values and such matters) in a position of subordination to material reality.” (LE 13, p.369).

Bureaucratic organization of work

“[T]he person who works desires not only due remuneration for his work; he also wishes that within the production process provision be made for him to be able to know that in his work, even on something that is owned in common, he is working “for himself.” This awareness is extinguished within him in a system of excessive bureaucratic centralization, which makes the worker feel that he is just a cog in a huge machine moved from above.” (LE 15, p.373).

Organization of work and employment

   “As we view the whole human family throughout the world, we cannot fail to be struck by a disconcerting fact of immense proportions: the fact that while conspicuous natural resources remain unused there are huge numbers of people who are unemployed or underemployed and countless multitudes of people suffering from hunger. This is a fact that without any doubt demonstrates that both within the individual political communities and in their relationships on the continental and world levels there is something wrong with the organization of work and employment, precisely at the most critical and socially most important points.” (LE 18, p. 378 ).

Critique of unrestrained capitalism (1931 Depression era)

“105. [I]t is patent that in our days not alone is wealth accumulated, but immense power and despotic economic domination is concentrated in the hands of a few, and that those few are frequently not the owners, but only the trustees and directors of invested funds, who administer them at their good pleasure.

   “106. This power becomes particularly irresistible when exercised by those who, because they hold and control money, are able also to govern credit and determine its allotment, for that reason supplying, so to speak, the life-blood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of the economy, so that no one dare breathe against their will.

   “107. This accumulation of power, a characteristic note of the modern economic order, is a natural result of unrestrained free competition which permits the survival of those only who are the strongest. This often means those who fight most relentlessly, who pay least heed to the dictates of conscience.

   “108. This concentration of power has led to a threefold struggle for domination. First, there is the struggle for dictatorship in the economic sphere itself; then, the fierce battle to acquire control of the State, so that its resources and authority may be abused in the economic struggles. Finally, the clash between States themselves.

   “This latter arises from two causes: Because the nations apply their power and political influence, regardless of circumstances, to promote the economic advantages of their citizens; and because, vice versa, economic forces and economic domination are used to decide political controversies between peoples.” (QA 105-108, p 65).

Economic dictatorship

“109. You assuredly know, venerable brethren and beloved children, and you lament the ultimate consequences of this individualistic spirit in economic affairs. Free competition has committed suicide; economic dictatorship has replaced a free market.

   “Unbridled ambition for domination has succeeded the desire for gain; the whole economic life has become hard, cruel and relentless in a ghastly measure. Furthermore, the intermingling and scandalous confusing of the duties and offices of civil authority and of the economy has produced grade evils, not the least of which has been a downgrading of the majesty of the State. The State which should be the supreme arbiter, ruling in queenly fashion far above all party contention, intent only upon justice and the common good, has become instead a slave, bound over to the service of human passion and greed. As regards the relations of nations among themselves, a double stream has issued forth from this one fountainhead; on the one hand, economic “nationalism” or even economic “imperialism”; on the other, a no less noxious and detestable “internationalism” or “international imperialism” in financial affairs, which holds that where a man’s fortune is, there is his country.

Causes of the economic crash of 1929

“For the uncertainty of economic life and especially of current conditions demands the keenest and most unceasing straining of energy on the part of those engaged therein; and as a result, some have become so hardened against the stings of conscience as to hold all means good which enable them to increase their profits, and to safeguard against sudden changes of fortune the wealth amassed by unremitting toil. Easy returns, which an open market offers to any one, lead many to interest themselves in trade and exchange, their one aim being to make clear profits with the least labor. By their unchecked speculation prices are raised and lowered out of mere greed for gain, making void all the most prudent calculations of producers.

   “The regulations legally enacted for corporations, with their divided responsibility and limited liability, have given occasion to abomindable abuses. The greatly weakened accountability makes little impression, as is evident, upon the conscience. The worse injustices and frauds take place beneath the obscurity of the common name of a corporative firm. Boards of directors proceed in their unconscionable methods even to the violation of their trust in regard to those whose savings they administer. In the last place must still be mentioned the unscrupulous but well-calculated speculation of men who, without seeking to answer real needs, appeal to the lowest human passions. These are aroused in order to turn their satisfaction into gain.

   “133. A stern insistence on the moral law, enforced with vigor by civil authority, could have dispelled or perhaps abetted these enormous evils. This, however, was too often lamentably wanting. For at the time when the new social order was beginning, the doctrines of rationalism had already taken firm hold of large nuymbers, and an economic teaching alien to the true moral law had soon arisen, whence it followed that free rein was given to human avarice.

   “134. As a result, a much greater number than ever before, solely concerned with adding to their wealth by any means whatsoever, sought their own selfish interests above all things; they had no scruple in committing the gravest injustices against others.

   “Those who first entered upon this broad way which leads to destruction easily found many imitators of their inquity because of their manifest success, their extravagant display of wealth, their derision of the scruples of more delicate consciences and the crushing of more cautious competitors.”  (QA 132,133,134 p.72).

Prelude to the concept of a “social mortgage”

“Especially in underdeveloped areas, where all resources must be put to urgent use, those men gravely endanger the public good who allow their resources to remain unproductive or who deprive their community of the material and spiritual aid it needs.” (GS 65, p.210).

Role of “indirect employer” in determining ethical labor policy

“The indirect employer [i.e. “the agents at the national and international level that are responsible for the whole orientation of labor policy” (LE 18, p.376)] substantially determines one or other facet of the labor relationship, thus conditioning the conduct of the direct employer when the latter determines in concrete terms the actual work contract and labor relations. This is not to absolve the direct employer from his own responsibility, but only to draw attention to the whole network of influences that condition his conduct. When it is a question of establishing an ethically correct labor policy, all these influences must be kept in mind. A policy is correct when the objective rights of the worker are fully respected.” (LE 17, p.375).

Authentic democracy and the human person

   “Authentic democracy is possible only in a state ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person. It requires that the necessary conditions be present for the advancement both of the individual through education and formation in true ideals, and of the “subjectivity” of society through the creation of structures of participation and shared responsibility. Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and skeptical relativism are the philosophy and the basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority, or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends. It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism.” (CA 46, pp. 473-74 ).

Freedom, flexibility and fundamentalism

   “Nor does the church close her eyes to the danger of fanaticism or fundamentalism among those who, in the name of an ideology which purports to be scientific or religious, claim the right to impose on others their own concept of what is true and good. Christian truth is not of this kind. Since it is not an ideology, the Christian faith does not presume to imprison changing sociopolitical realities in a rigid schema, and it recognizes that human life is realized in history in conditions that are diverse and imperfect. Furthermore, in constantly reaffirming the transcendent dignity of the person, the church’s method is always that of respect for freedom.” (CA 46, p. 474 ).