ds

ocumentation

Introduction

e r v i c e

VOL. XXIII, NO. 7

PUTTING SOCIAL DOCTRINE IN THE LIMELIGHT

A Summary of the Social Doctrine of the Church
1
THE COMMON GOOD IS THE END THAT GIVES MEANING TO PROGRESS
by Pope Benedict XVI
PAPAL MESSAGE

10
ON SOCIETY
SUMMARY 3

16
MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY
SUMMARY 4

4
WHAT IS THE SOCIAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH?
by Prof. Javier Hervada
SUMMARY 1

21
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER
SUMMARY 5

7
THE HUMAN PERSON: THE CORE OF THE SDC
SUMMARY 2

28
OF THE

ECOLOGY IN THE LIGHT SOCIAL DOCTRINE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

REFLECTION

by Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino

THE COMMON GOOD IP THE END THATsGIVES MEANING S apal Me sage

TO

PROGRESS

The Common Good Is the End That Gives Meaning to Progress*

by Pope Benedict XVI On Saturday morning, 22 May, the Holy Father received participants in a study Conference promoted by the Centesimus AnnusPro Pontifice Foundation in the Clementine Hall. The following is a translation of his Discourse, which was delivered in Italian. was glad to see that the central focus of your meeting is reflection on the relationship between development, progress, common good. Indeed, today more than ever, the human family may develop as a free society of free peoples if globalization is guided by solidarity and by the common good, and also by a relative social justice, which find a precious source in the message of Christ and in the Church. In reality, the crisis and difficulties which are now afflicting international relations, the States, society and the economy, are largely due to the lack of trust and inadequate supportive and creative inspiration, as well as a lack of dynamism oriented to the common good, which lead to authentic human relationships of friendship, solidarity and reciprocity even within eco(185) 1

nomic activities. The common good is the goal that gives meaning to progress and to development, which would otherwise be limited solely to the production of material goods. These are necessary, but unless they are oriented to the common good, consumerism, waste, poverty and imbalances will ultimately prevail factors impeding progress and development. As I highlighted in my Encyclical Caritas in Veritate, one of the greatest risks in the world today is that the de facto interdependence of people and nations is not matched by ethical interaction of consciences and minds that would give rise to truly human development (n. 9). For example, such interaction ap* Taken from LOsservatore Romano, Weekly English Edition, 2 June 2010, p. 4.

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE pears to be too weak in those governments which, in the face of renewed episodes of irresponsible speculation with regard to the weakest nations, fail to react by introducing adequate measures for financial regulation. Politics must take priority over finance and ethics should direct every activity. mon good is made up of many goods: material, cognitive and institutional goods, and moral and spiritual goods. The latter are superior to the former. The commitment to the common good of the family of nations, as for every society, thus involves tending and making available a complex of institutions which give legal, civil, political and cultural structure to social life globally in such a way that they become a form of a polis, a human city (cf. ibid., 7). In this way, it may be ensured that the economic-productive order is socially responsible and at the service of humanity, with combined and united action on more fronts, also internationally (cf. ibid., nn. 57, 67). Likewise, the consolidation of constitutional, legal and administrative systems needs to be supported in nations which do not yet fully enjoy them. Therefore, besides economic assistance, there must be aid intended to reinforce the real guarantees of a State of law, a system of true and efficient public order, in full respect of human rights, along with truly democratic and participative institutions (cf. ibid., n. 41). However, what is fundamental and a priorityin view to the development of the entire family of nationsis to make every effort to recognize the true scale of values and goods. Only with a correct hierarchy of human goods will it be possible to understand which type of growth should be supported. The
2 (186)

The common good is the goal that gives meaning to progress and to development, which would otherwise be limited solely to the production of material goods. These are necessary, but unless they are oriented to the common good, consumerism, waste, poverty and imbalances will ultimately prevail factors impeding progress and development.
Without the common good as a universal reference point, one cannot say that a true global ethos exists and that there is a corresponding will to enact it through appropriate institutions. The identification of those goods to which all peoples must have access for their human fulfilment is thus crucial. And this should not be undertaken casually, but in an orderly and harmonious manner. Indeed, the com-

THE COMMON GOOD IS

THE

END THAT GIVES MEANING

TO

PROGRESS

integral development of nations, which is the main objective of the universal common good, cannot be achieved by the diffusion of entrepreneurship alone (cf. ibid.), material and cognitive goods such as housing and education, from the choices available.

The Christian vision of development, progress and the common goodthe way it emerges from the Social Doctrine of the Church responds to mans deepest expectations and your commitment to delve into it and to disseminate it is a valid contribution towards the edification of the civilization of love.
This is provided especially by the increasing number of good decisions that are possible when a notion of integral human good exists, when there is a telos, an end, in the light of which growth is considered and desired. The notion of integral human growth presumes precise coordinates, such as subsidiarity and solidarity, in addition to an inter-

dependence between State, society and the market. In a global society, composed of many peoples and of various religions, the common good and integral development are only achieved with the input of all. In this, religions are crucial, particularly when they teach brotherhood and peace, because they teach people to make room for God and to be open to the Transcendent, especially in our society marked by secularization. The exclusion of religions from the public sphere, just as, in another way, religious fundamentalism, impedes the encounter of peoples and their collaboration for the progress of humanity. The life of society is drained of its motivation and politics assumes oppressive and aggressive features (cf. ibid. n. 56). Dear friends, the Christian vision of development, progress and the common goodthe way it emerges from the Social Doctrine of the Churchresponds to mans deepest expectations and your commitment to delve into it and to disseminate it is a valid contribution towards the edification of the civilization of love. For this I express my gratitude and best wishes, and I impart my heartfelt Blessing to you ! all.

THE COMMON GOOD comprises the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily. (Gaudium et spes, 26, 1)
(187) 3

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE Summary 1

What is the Social Doctrine of the Church?

by Prof. Javier Hervada* The five summaries in this issue originally appeared in Vol. XXV of the International Features Service publication SIDEC in consecutive numbers (427 and 428) of January and February 1983 as Principios de Doctrina Social de la Iglesia. The article was translated by Rev. John C. Kubeck and Dr. John A. Gueguen. Definition The entire teaching of the ecclesiastical Magisterium which applies revealed truth and Christian moral principles to the social order is called the social doctrine of the Church. It applies the Gospel message to social reality. The purpose of the Churchs social teaching is to present to men Gods plan for secular reality. It enlightens mens minds with truth and guides them in building up the earthly city according to the divine plan. We can distinguish two levels in the development of temporal activities. Sacred Scripture tells us that God created man and left him in the hands of his own counsel. He gave him, besides, his commandments and precepts (Ecclus. 15:1416). On the one hand, God has given intelligence and freedom to man, thus opening the whole range of earthly realities to human opinions
4

and options. This aspect of Gods plan is what Vatican II called the autonomy of earthly realities (GS 36), or the autonomy of temporal affairs. This expression does not imply a gap in the divine plan; rather, this plan is to be fulfilled in

* Prof. Javier Hervada holds a chair in Canon Law and the title of Professor of the Philosophy of Law and of Natural Law in the University of Navarre (Pamplona, Spain). He is also editor of the journal, Persona y Derecho (Person and Law) and of the Human Rights division of CERSIP. He is a member of the International Association of Legal and Social Philosophy. Legend: GS=Gaudium et Spes; LG=Lumen Gentium; QA= Quadragessimo Anno; MM= Mater et Magistra; RA= Rerum Novarum; LE= Laborem Exercens; PT= Pacem in Terris; ID= Immortale Dei; UA= Ubi Arcano; SP= Summi Pontificatus; DH= Dignitatis Humanae; DI= Diuturnum Illud; L= Libertas Praestantissimum; OA=Octogessima Adveniens; MBS= Mit brennender Sorge; CC= Casti Connubii; FC=Familiaris Consortio; DIM= Divini illius Magistri; GE= Gravissimum Educationis

(188)

WHAT

IS THE

SOCIAL DOCTRINE

OF THE

CHURCH?

the temporal sphere precisely by human initiativethe free play of opinions and options. On the other hand, God has given to man his commandments and precepts; that is, the natural law. This moral law, which man must fulfill, accompanies the autonomous sphere of temporal affairsthe ensemble of all those matters which fall outside the field of morality. These matters occupy a very wide area. The social doctrine of the Church shows man the moral foundations of all these temporal realities. By divine vocation, the Christian faithful have the mission of sanctifying temporal realities (LG 30). By fulfilling the plan of God they are led to infuse truth and morality into civil society and to defend its just autonomy, thus avoiding clericalism, on the one hand, and laicism or secularism on the other. The Mission of the Ecclesiastical Magisterium The Churchs mission belongs to the supernatural order (QA 41; MM 15)it does not interfere with legitimate temporal options nor support specific political programs (QA 41, 96). Nevertheless, the Church has a strict rightalso a dutyto teach the moral aspects of the secular order, whether this be in politics, economics or social matters (RA 12; QA 11, 41-43; MM 42). Likewise, she pronounces moral judgments upon temporal questions (MM 42; GS 76)
(189) 5

and forms consciences in regard to temporal activities (MM 195).

This moral law, which man must fulfill, accompanies the autonomous sphere of temporal affairsthe ensemble of all those matters which fall outside the field of morality. These matters occupy a very wide area. The social doctrine of the Church shows man the moral foundations of all these temporal realities.
The Churchs social doctrine is an integral part of the Christian conception of life (MM 222); it is founded upon revelation and the natural law (RN 12; QA 11, 17; MM 219). Its contents are to be found mainly in the teachings of the popes and in other documents of the Church Magisterium. Among these, the pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes of Vatican II merits special mention. Since it applies Christian truth and morality to various historical situations in the secular world, the social doctrine commands the assent of the faithful as much as any other pronouncements of the Magisterium. Still, in order to interpret and apply that doctrine correctly, it is necessary to know the actual historical situation which a given document is evaluating. Its conclusions

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE cannot be applied indiscriminately to different historical situations. Similar situations and facts warrant corresponding evaluations; somewhat different situations require appropriate modifications, even if they are described in the same terms. (The term money, for example, used to mean exchange value; later it came to include capital, so that it is now licit to charge interest on money loaned.) The Churchs social doctrine ought to be known and taught by all the faithful (MM 224), who must also strive to address social problems in conformity with it (MM 225). This doctrine should be part of the education of young people, who must also form themselves in accord with its principles (MM 227). Since the Magisteriums teaching does not exhaust all possible moral questions which could arise in a civil society rightly oriented to Christian principles, the faithful need not wait to act until the Magisterium provides them with a specific moral solution. So long as there is no official teaching on a particular matter, it belongs to the well-formed consciences of the faithful to determine what is and what is not in accord with Christian morality (GS 43). Therefore, the faithful have an obligation to study and become duly formed according to each ones ability and social position.

Introduction to Social Encyclicals

Rerum Novarum
Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on the Condition of Labor, 15 May 1891 The Modern era of Catholic social teaching begins with Rerum Novarum. With varying success, Catholic clergy and laity had attempted to apply the teaching of the Church to problems of poverty and justice in the nineteenth century world of industry and labor. When he was a papal diplomat in Belgium, the future Pope Leo XIII had seen the abject condition of working people, so often caught between exploitation by unbridled capitalism and the temptation to submit to the rising power of socialism, or revolutionary Marxism or anarchism. On a natural law foundation, Pope Leo XIII defends the rights of workers, the need for justice and solidarity, but at the same time he affirms the natural right to private propertya balance that will carry Catholic social teaching through the economic and social crises of the twentieth century and the rise and fall of communism.
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

(190)

THE HUMAN PERSONm a rCORE S u m : THE y 2

OF THE

SDC

The Human Person: The Core of the SDC

The Personal Being of Man The core of the Churchs social doctrine is mans condition as a person. This means that he is an intelligent and free being made in Gods image. That is, his being reflects the characteristically divine attributes of intellectual knowledge and love. Though composed of body and soul, it is mans soul that makes him specifically human. Thus man acts and perfects himself as a person through knowledge and love. As the intellect is ordained to truth, the will moves toward the good; the human person is perfected in right actions by seeking truth and doing good. This signifies a fundamental law of human action that we call natural law. It is elevated by the law of grace. The Dignity of the Human Person The condition of being a person causes man to occupy a special place in the created universe. He is not a mere part of creation, indistinguishable from the rest; he controls it and takes care of it (LE 4, 5). At the same time, man is a being who is master of himself; before God he is a steward who must render an account of his work. Before other men he is an equal, a person, and he establishes with them relations of
(191) 7

mutual understanding and love. This singular position and mans value as an image of God is what we mean when we speak of the dignity of the human person. Creation by God is what gives man this dignity (RN 18; MM 214, 249). He is made in Gods image. Rooted in his own nature, which is physical and spiritual (RN 4, 5; MM 208); he is responsible for his acts (MM 55), and has a capacity for self-mastery (MM 55). Man is intrinsically ordained by God to certain natural ends, and called to a further supernatural end. Thus the dignity of the human person ultimately resides in his ends or purposes. By nature, man has as an intermediate end the cultivation, development, and perfection of all his faculties (QA 118), and as an ultimate end the knowledge and love of God (RN 15, 18, 30; QA 118; MM 214). This is the greatest perfection of his mind and willhis greatest perfection as a person. Because he is a spiritual being, man is open not just to limited goods, but to the absolute Good. Elevation to the supernatural order brings to the human person his highest dignity (RN 18). Redeemed by Jesus Christ (RN 18),

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE raised to the status of an adopted child of God (RN 18; MM 219), and made a member of the Mystical Body of Christ (MM 258), each person is called to a supernatural final end (RN 15, 18, 30; QA 18; MM 214, 219), which is the loving vision of God. The Principles of Equality and of Functional Diversity Because all men have the same nature, an essential or fundamental equality exists among them (RN 30; GS 29). This means that all men have equal worth and dignity, since each one is an image of God and, by grace, His child. The Church has always upheld this essential equality (MM 219, 220); the solidarity and brotherhood of all men and of all peoples is based upon it (RN 14, 30; MM 158). And by virtue of it, all men have the same basic rights (GS 29). This essential equality does not keep accidental differences from occurring at the same time. While they do not affect human nature or its essential equality, Gods providence makes use of them (RN 13) to bring about a diversity of functions in relation to the common good (RN 25). There are some things, certainly, which pertain to everyone, but many other things require a distribution of functions, a diversity of missions and of activities. In this way, human solidarity and the manifold richness of human nature are more evident. This diversity must not lead to discrimination with respect to fundamental rights, for these proceed from an essential equality (GS 29).
8

The Natural Rights of the Human Person One characteristic of the human person is self-mastery. This dominion has two aspects. First, control by reason and will over the other faculties makes a persons acts free and responsible; second, his being and the natural ends proper to it entitle the person to rights and liberties, as well as to duties, in his relations with others. These rights (and duties) are called natural rights (or fundamental rightsan expression much used by John XXIII) or inalienable rights of the human person (as John Paul II often calls them). Usually these rights are stated in general terms; it then belongs to the interpreter to explain them more precisely. The main fundamental rights are as follows (MM 11-27; UNAddress of John Paul II to the 36th General Assembly of the United Nations, Oct. 2. 1979): 1) the right to life, liberty, and security of person; 2) the right to physical and moral integrity; 3) the right to sufficient and necessary means to live in a becoming manner (food, clothing, housing, rest, health care, social services); 4) the right to security in case of sickness, disability, widowhood, old age, unemployment, and any involuntary loss of the means of subsistence; 5) the right to due respect for ones person and good name; 6) the right to religious freedom and to freedom of conscience and of thought; 7) the right to declare and de(192)

THE HUMAN PERSON: THE CORE fend ones own ideas (freedom of expression); the right to culture and access to objective information about public events; 8) the right to education and, in relation to it, freedom to teach; 9) the right to free choice of a state in life and the right to establish a family (marriage); 10) the right to work, to free choice of a position or profession, and to a just wage; 11) the right to private property, including ownership of the means of production (MM 96); 12) the right of assembly and of association; 13) the right to form unions and to strike (MM 14); 14) the right to choose ones residence, to travel, and to emigrate;

OF THE

SDC

15) the right to participate actively in public life; 16) the right to personal participation in attaining the common good; 17) the right to the legal protection of ones rights; 18) the right to citizenship. The rights given above are fundamental and inalienable in a general way, but they are not absolute. They must be seen in the context of the common good. They can cease to apply in specific cases when the common good is at stake, for example: freedom of expression ceases to be a right if it is used to express in public something contrary to the welfare of otherscalumny, inciting to crime, justification of crime, etc.

Introduction to Social Encyclicals

Quadragesimo Anno
Encyclical of Pope Pius XI on the Reconstruction of the Social Order, 15 May 1931 In the midst of the great depression, in the age of dictators and ruthless totalitarian systems of the right and the left, Pope Pius XI celebrates the fortieth anniversary of Rerum Novarum. He reaffirms the principles set out by Leo XIII and applies them to the current situation. His teaching shows how Catholic social doctrine develops and becomes more specific, even as it maintains its great principles: peace and justice, solidarity, the common good, subsidiarity, the right to property, the right to associate and the fundamental role of the family in society. But by affirming human rights, Quadragesimo Anno paved the way this courageous Popes attacks on Nazism (Mit brennender sorge, 1937) on Soviet communism (Divini Redemptoris, 1937), Italian fascism (Non abbiamo bisogno, 1938) and masonic anticlericalism in Mexico (Nos es muy concida, 1938).
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

(193)

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE Summary 3

On Society
The Origin of Society Toward the end of the 18th century, a thesis which certain medieval jurists had expressed was more fully developed in the social contract theory. It became widespread in Europe and spread to areas of European influence. According to this theory, men are not social by nature, but began to exist as isolated individuals, each with a fullness of rights in himself. According to this theory, society arose later through a pact (a social contract), by which men agreed to come together in a political community. Through this pact, men are said to have yielded up to society some part of their original rights; together, these would constitute the power of society. As a consequence, this social pact would be the origin of social authority. It follows immediately from this theory that social authority did not have a divine origin, that it did not proceed from God, and that in principle the whole ordering of society was merely human. The social doctrine of the Church teaches, on the contrary, that God created man to live in society (RN 35; QA 83; MM 63; PT 78), and that consequently God is the foundation of society itself. As mans Creator, God gave him the law of solidarity, which requires a social union that
10

is both harmonious and organic (RN 13, 18; QA 90; MM 158, 159). Man is ordained by this law of nature to live in society; only thus can he attain the full development of his personality (RN 35; QA 118; MM 60). Man naturally belongs to other men and is linked to them by a duty of love and solidarity. Even though historical forms of society also respond to cultural impulses of a human origin, their originating impulse is from nature and hence from God. Civil Authority Since the human community has a divine origin (in natural law), and since any society implicitly requires authority, it follows that civil authority also takes its origin from the natural law, which is to say, from God (RN 251; ID 10; PT 51). Therefore, the theory that the people are the ultimate source of power in civil society is incorrect (PT 78; UA 22). The divine origin of civil power is revealed in several passages of Sacred Scripture, among them Rom. 13:1-4 Let everyone be subject to the higher authorities, for there exists no authority except from God, and those who exist have been appointed by God. Therefore he who resists the authority resists the ordinance of God.... This does not mean that those
(194)

O N SOCIETY who exercise this office receive their powers and faculties immediately from God (the so-called divine right theory). It does mean that the very existence of authority derives from Gods disposition of things; that is, from natural right. Thus the divine origin of authority is compatible with the thesis that those who exercise power receive their authority immediately from the political community, whose office it is to determine forms of government, the manner of transmitting power, and the persons who shall exercise authority (PT 52, 74; GS 74). Obedience and respect is due to civil authorities by virtue of the natural law (SP 71; UA 32; DH 11). This precept engenders a serious obligation in conscience (DI 9, 14; SP 71; UA 32). Obedience to civil authorities has as its basis the responsibility of each person, and because it is part of the order intended by God, it is an act of reverence and homage to the Creator (PT 50). The duty of obedience to civil authority is not, however, unlimited, for authority itself is limited. These limits are determined by: a) the moral order and natural right; b) the common good; and c) the legitimately constituted legal order (GS 74). We must especially bear in mind that when human power commands something clearly opposed to the divine willthat is, to divine right, both natural and positive that command is void (DI 11). In such a case, the just thing to do is not to obey it (L 2l), for it is an evident abuse of power. The ultimate reason for authority is the common good (RN 26; PT
(195) 11

98), on which rests the legitimacy of its exercise (ID 2). Hence, if they deviate from the common good, the commands of those who exercise authority lose their obligatory force and constitute an abuse of power as well (SP 43; PT 47). This ultimate reason for authority further implies a duty to guarantee and protect the rights of all, especially of those who are least able to defend themselves (RN 27, 55). When public authority exceeds its competence and oppresses the citizens, they must not turn away from the objective requirements of the common good, which may require them to put up with some evils. Nevertheless, they are permitted to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against such abuses of authority, always within the bounds established by the natural law and the Gospel (GS 74). The Common Good Civil society or the political community is not a mere collection of men, but is a true society, an organic unity. Like every society, the political community has as the fundamental principle of its existence the end toward which all must work together. This common end requires from everyoneauthorities and citizens alikean attitude of active cooperation toward the end proper to the political community. Since this end is common to all, it is called the common good. The common good embraces the sum of those conditions of social life by which men are able to achieve the perfection proper to them with

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE greater fullness and facility (DH 6). This means the totality of those conditions through which individuals, families, and associations are able to achieve their perfection more completely and more readily (GS 74). Above all, but not exclusively, the common good consists in respect for the rights and duties of the human person (DH 6). In our times, the common good is considered to rest principally upon the defense of those rights and duties (PT 60). It is important to note that while the common good includes the production of goods and their protection, what is of principal concern to the common good is the just distribution of those goods among individuals, families (QA 58, 61; MM 73, 74, 112), the various sectors of society (MM 125, 127, 147, 150), and other nations (MM 153-160). Material goods do not constitute the sole reason for the political community. While it is commonly held today that the purpose of civil society is confined to economic and social development, the Christian must be mindful that besides material goods, the common good also embraces the moral dimension of human life, and in a general way the needs of the spirit (PT 57-59). Among the different facets of the common good, the moral dimension holds first place (RN 25; MM 207, 208). Therefore, legislation which ignores moral considerations is profoundly opposed to the common good since it is degrading to society. Laws, then, must not only conform to morality, but also positively favor it. The historical dimension of the common good must also be kept in
12

mind. The correct requirements of the common good are intimately related to the social conditions prevailing at various times. Since these conditions are subject to constant change, the requirements of the common good change with them (GS 78). For example, the requirements of the common good are not the same in times of abundance and of scarcity.

The purpose of public administration is to direct and ordain all activities pertaining to the common good, to promote it, and to choose the best means to attain it. Not only does the common good legitimize public power, it is also the supreme law concerning the exercise of that power.
The purpose of public administration is to direct and ordain all activities pertaining to the common good, to promote it, and to choose the best means to attain it. Not only does the common good legitimize public power, it is also the supreme law concerning the exercise of that power. But the public sector is not the only agency that secures the common good; since this is the very purpose of the entire political community, it is also the task of all citizens (RN 25; MM 96; PT 23; GS 73; OA 24). Everyone must be conscious of his responsibility for the common good. To reawaken this con(196)

O N SOCIETY sciousness in everyone is an urgent task. The responsibility of citizens for the common good has two aspects. One is the basic civic duty (it is binding in conscience) to take part in public life in accord with each ones possibilities (PT 74). The loss of this sense of duty is evident in apathy toward public affairs, nonvoting, misappropriation of public funds, negative criticism of authority, and selfishness in holding onto ones privileges at the expense of the general interest (Pius XII, En ouvrant, 10). The other aspect is the citizens responsibility, in so far as he is able, to make use of his goodsmaterial and spiritualand to act with social awareness, placing them at the service of the common good. This responsibility opens a wide range of cultural, beneficent, scientific, charitable, and sporting activities carried on with social awareness through the initiatives of citizens. This aspect is as much a duty as the previous one. The social doctrine of the Church has particularly stressed the social function of property, since this is so often forgotten. To the extent that private possessions surpass the owners need for a decent standard of living, they must be disposed for the service of others; that is, for the common good. Otherwise, the owner is guilty of an unjust use of wealth. This principle, which is clearly rooted in the Gospel (the parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus), was especially emphasized by the Fathers of the Church and is a constant theme of Catholic writers.
(197) 13

The Principle of Subsidiarity As we have just seen, the common good is a task for public and private sectors of society, each functioning according to its nature. Some things fall within the competence of the public organization (the government) of the political community, as for example, making laws, administering justice, and providing for the common defense. Other matters belong to private individuals, for example, whatever pertains to the family. In addition, there is a broad range of activities in which both sectors, public and private, interact because the subject matter pertains to both for example, the production and distribution of goods, the promotion of scientific research and of the arts. Here the principle of the primacy of private initiative is to be strictly applied. In substance, this principle states that such activities belong in the first place to the individual person since they constitute part of his natural end. Consequently, they are the means by which a person perfects himself and cooperates in the perfecting of others. The political community is ordained to the perfecting of persons; hence the public organization must not deprive persons of the means for their perfection and personal fulfillment. Far from restricting it, the government must assist them and empower them to act. The mission of the state is to encourage, to assist, and when necessary to supplement the initiatives of its citizens. The social doctrine of the Church calls this the principle of subsidiarity (QA 80).

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE The most well-known formulation of this principle was given by Pius XI: That most weighty principle, which cannot be set aside or changed, remains fixed and unshaken in social philosophy: Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the social body, and never destroy or absorb them (QA 79). Three other principles can be discerned within the principle of subsidiarity: First, persons and small communities must enjoy the autonomy necessary to attain the ends and to carry out the activities within their own competence. Second, larger communities must aid the initiatives of those who come under their authority, neither stifling nor absorbing them. Third, the larger society must supply the deficiencies of persons and smaller communities when they are unable by themselves to promote the common good, and for so long as the deficiency should last. Two conditions must be met for this principle to be applied correctly: First, the private enterprise must have social significance; that is, it must be carried out with a consciousness of social responsibility. Second, the state must not act to the detriment of the defenseless (QA
14

78; MM 11), and it must guarantee and assist private enterprises. Legislation Laws are norms of obligatory action by which the organization of the political community is regulated and each of its members is assigned the role which belongs to him in terms of the common good. The fulfillment of the laws pertains to that part of justice which is called legal justice. The fundamental structure of society and the basic principles of human conduct arise from the eternal law, which is the divine reason as it governs the entire universe (L 6). The eternal law is called natural law or natural right (L 6) in view of mans participation in it, as it has been impressed upon the hearts of all men (Rom. 2:14-15). Natural right is engraved in human nature (PT 63); it contains the dictates of mans reason which command him to do what is by nature good for him and prohibit him from doing what is bad. Although the terms are often used synonymously, natural right is that part of natural law which refers to human relationships. The precepts of the natural law are not simply a moral guide or an ideal which ought to be attained. They constitute the very core of the legal order, the standard by which the positive laws made by man are to be interpreted, and the norm of their validity in conscience (RN 35; MBS 35). The natural law is the common patrimony of humanity and obliges everyone (L 18). It is the universal law given to all men without any distinction.
(198)

O N SOCIETY The natural law regulates only the moral center of human life; besides Gods commands and precepts, He has bestowed upon man the capacity for self-government. Therefore, society has the power (founded on the natural law) to make laws. These are called positive laws or positive right. The function of positive law is to regulate social relations, completing the social order in those matters about which nature is silent (Pius XII, Il programa 16). The same principles that apply to civil authority also apply to positive laws, since they are exercises of that power.

Introduction to Social Encyclicals

Mater et Magistra
Encyclical of Pope John XXIII on Christianity and Social Progress, 15 May 1961 Published at the end of the post-war era, on the seventieth anniversary of Rerum Novarum, Mater et Magistra expresses the deep concern of a beloved Pope for justice. The Church was preparing for the Second Vatican Council in a decade of prosperity and hope, mingled with cold war tensions. Pope John XXIII welcomes new systems of social welfare and social security, while rejecting inordinate state control. He repeats the teaching of Pope Pius XII in favor of small business enterprises, based on the principle of subsidiarity. But he raises the problem of the growing disparity between rich and poor nations, a trend too evident amidst rapid developments of industry, trade and technology in the second half of the century.

Pacem in Terris
Encyclical of Pope John XXIII on Peace on Earth, 11 April 1963 Teaching on peace and war is an important recurring theme in the social magisterium of all the modern Popes. Several months before his death, in the midst of the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XXIII appeals for peace. He speaks in the year following the Cuban crisis, perhaps the most dangerous phase of the cold war, when a global nuclear holocaust was a real threat. This was also an era when colonial systems were being dismantled in many nations, at times with tragic strife, involving racism, tribalism, and the brutal application of Marxist ideology. To advance a peaceful social order, Pope John favors the participation of people in decisions affecting the common good, especially through democratic processes.
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

(199)

15

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE Summary 4

Marriage and the Family

The Family Both individualism and collectivism affirm that the political community is no different from many other associations which are composed of an aggregate of human persons considered as single individuals. Accordingly, the political community would be made up of individuals and lack intermediate social bodies or strata. The social doctrine of the Church considers this thesis to be erroneous. When he was created by God as an end-oriented being (i.e., directed to natural ends), man was ordained to those ends in a social manner by means of bonds that are prior to and distinct from those proper to the political community. Thus the state is not simply a conventional society (the result of a compact) limited to the defense of individual rights and interests (the argument of individualist liberalism); nor does it embrace within itself the whole social dimension of human life (the argument of collectivist totalitarianism). While the political community represents only one dimension of mans sociability, it is the highest expression of that sociability since it pertains to the common good (previously described). Hence the political community brings together men who are already grouped into social bodies. Men approach that community both individually, as
16

private citizens, and as persons joined by social bonds in communities, business undertakings, and other social bodies. The most fundamental and the most important of those communities is the family, the community of parents and children. When God created man and bestowed upon him the benefits of work (lordship and dominion over the earth), He had in mind not individuals but the union of male and female. This union itself receives the benefits of creation, together with the propagation of the human race (Gen. 1:27-28; LE 4). This means that the family is the primary social structure of mankind, the basic cell of society (QA 2). Just as the human body is composed of its members, so the political community is composed of persons and families (CC 37). Upon his birth, a man is brought into the community of life his parents have formed, to be raised and educated by them. Consequently, since every man is the offspring of marriage, the natural union of male and female, the family is the first manifestation and the root of human sociability. As a human person, the specific acts by which a man carries out his nature are knowledge and love. Thus the deepest meaning of human sociability is not simply common action but the social relation of knowing and lov(200)

MARRIAGE

AND THE

FAMILY

ing others as persons at the same time that one is known and loved by them. Since this is so, a man is the offspring of the engendering act of a father and mother who know and love each other as marriage partners. And at the same time he finds in union with them, and with the family as a whole, the most natural and the most basic experience of sociability as reciprocal knowledge and love (FC 18, 21). The family, founded upon marriage, is therefore the fundamental nucleus of human sociability, the means provided by nature itself for personal development and mutual assistance. Marriage What begins and establishes the family, and therefore the human community, is marriage (CC 1). In marriage, male and female form one flesh (Gen. 2:24; cf. GS 48) by means of a bond which joins their souls (a duty of mutual love) and their bodies (a right to the acts proper to conjugal life). Male and female unite in marriage through a free act of mutual self-giving which is by its nature irrevocable (GS 48). The essential ends and properties of marriage proceed from its author, God Himself (GS 48); thus the institution of marriage existsby natural law. The marriage contract gives rise to the intimate community of life and love which belongs to marriage (GS 48). Although this contract proceeds from mutual consent, the marriage bond pertains to natural law because the consent only actualizes a potentiality given to nature when it was created (CC 6). Therefore, on the basis of mu(201) 17

tual consent, the marriage bond is established by natural law; that is, by God Himself (Mt. 19:6). It follows that marriage is indissoluble. And since God made of the two, the male and the female, one flesh, marriage is also monogamousthat is, a union of one man and one woman. Genesis tells us that when God created man, He created them male and female, blessed them, and commanded them to increase and multiply. That primordial blessing indicates why there is a difference between male and female and the reason for their union; the original expression of human sociability is the generation and education of offspring. In other words, the very institution of marriage and conjugal love are ordained by nature to the procreation and education of offspring (GS 48). Marriage provides husband and wife with the means to live conjugal chastity and mutual help (its personal, or secondary ends); these are to be placed, according to the order of nature, at the disposition of the primordial command. This rule has found expression as the subordination of the personal ends to the primary end of procreation and education of offspring (Pius XII, Discourse of Oct. 29, 1951, 31 ff.). One can infer from this that an anti-procreative or contraceptive attitude would imply a grave alteration of the order of conjugal life, which it degrades and corrupts. This matter cannot be reduced to a question of methods; any method which proceeds from a contraceptive mentality is wrong (at least by reason of the end in view), even if it only

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE makes use of infertile periods (Pius XII, Discourse of Oct. 29, 1951, 23). In other words, regardless of the method, the contraceptive mentality is always wrongmorally evil. Quite distinctboth morally and humanlyis the attitude of those who sincerely accept the fruitfulness of marriage but for objectively just reasons (medical, eugenic, financial, or social) are advised not to have more childreneither for a time or permanently. In such cases it is permissible to make use of infertile periods or periodic continence (FC 32)but no other methods and there may be good reason to advise complete continence. The Population Problem Closely related to marriage is the so-called population problemthe increase of population to levels which might be regarded as harmful from economic and social points of view. Concerning this question, the social doctrine of the Church has adopted a posture which is both realistic and confident in divine providence. She realizes that there are overpopulated areas which suffer from hunger and real difficulties, especially in lesser developed countries (MM 190). But such difficulties can be traced to defective economic structures and the lack of solidarity among peoples (MM 190, 198). Viewing this matter in the context of the entire world, she sees that God has placed enough goods at mans disposition, and the ability to increase them (MM 188, 189, 199). In order to overcome this problem in areas where it exists, true and just solutions must be em18

ployed: economic development and social progress (MM 189, 191, 192, 196, 197); cooperation among peoples (MM 192; PP passim.); recognition that human life is sacred (MM 194) and that divine laws must be respected (MM 189, 191, 193); education of youth in the establishment of their own families (MM 195). Aside from other considerations, it is highly unjust for countries to spend enormous amounts in the arms race and to orient technology toward ever more powerful weapons when resources are lacking to feed and provide a worthy life for all men (MM 190). Rights of the Family The situation many families face in different countries is most problematic and even openly destructive. Institutions and laws fail to recognize the inviolable rights of the person and of the family; instead of serving the family, society violently attacks its values and its basic needs. Therefore, on various occasions the Church has recalled the rights of the human person in connection with the family, or simply, the rights of the family (FC 46): 1) the right of every man to found a family and to obtain the resources needed to maintain it; 2) the right to exercise ones responsibility in the transmission of life; 3) the right to the intimacy of conjugal and family life; 4) the right to a marriage which is one and indissoluble; 5) the right to believe, profess, and propagate ones faith; 6) the right to educate offspring
(202)

MARRIAGE

AND THE

FAMILY

in accord with ones traditions, religious and cultural values, by means of the necessary instruments, methods, and institutions; 7) the right to the physical, social, political, and financial security of the family; 8) the right to housing which is adequate for a worthy family life; 9) the right of expression and of representation in dealing with public, economic, social, and cultural authorities and their subordinate agenciesboth individually and in association; 10) the right to form associations with other families and institutions, more adequately to fulfill the mission of the family; 11) the right to protect minors, by means of appropriate institutions and laws, from dangerous drugs, pornography, alcoholism. etc.: 12) the right to a just amount of leisure time in order to foster the values of the family; 13) the right of the elderly to live and to die in a worthy manner; 14) the right to emigrate as a family in order to seek better living conditions. Rights and Duties of Parents The one primary end of marriage has two facets: procreation and the education of offspring. These form a single end because education is an extension of generation; the ultimate end of marriage is the educated child (RN 9; CC 12). Through generation the parents form the childs body (the soul having been created by God); through education they form him spiritually. In natural law, the parents are the source
(203) 19

of life and the source of education for life (DIM 25, 26). Parents have the missionthe grave duty (DIM 29; GE 3)and the right (which others must recognize) to educate their children. For that reason, it is a fundamental right of parents to see that their children are educated in accordance with their religious and moral convictions (FC 46). This right of parents (and by extension, of the family) cannot be set aside, and it takes precedence to any right of society and of the state; therefore, it is inviolable (DIM 27, 30). The right which we have just set forth requires respect for the educational dimension of family life, the atmosphere within which a child receives this important educational influence (DIM 55). It further entails the right of parents to choose schools for their children (GE 6) and to set up and maintain educational institutions which are in accord with their convictions. Freedom to Teach The principle underlying the legal order with respect to instruction and education is the freedom to teach. Instruction and education presuppose the transmission of knowledge and formation in the virtues. This being so, the proper subject of knowledge and of moral action is not the state but the human person. Consequently, teaching and educational roles belong to persons. Instruction is a mission proper to personal initiative; as a result, the fundamental right to establish and to operate educational centers at all levels belongs to the person.

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE In keeping with this principle, the states mission is: to regulate educational matters in conformity with the principle of the freedom to teach; to guarantee the rights of parents and of educational institutions; to guard the right of all citizens to education; and to establish educational institutions in the absence of private initiatives (DIM 3638; GE 6). An educational monopoly would be opposed to the innate rights of man, whether it meant only one school system or one standard textbook (GE 6). The Right To Education Since all men of every race, condition, and age possess human dignity, they have an inalienable right to an education in keeping with each ones purpose, gender, particular characteristics, and whatever belongs to their national culture and traditions. The purpose of education is the formation of the human person in the pursuit of his ultimate end and for the welfare of the societies (civil, religious, internaIntroduction to Social Encyclicals tional) which he belongs to and whose obligations he must share (GE 1). Education is not complete if it does not embrace the religious and moral dimensions of personality (DIM 30, 31). Since education is the natural right of every person, it is an obligation of private initiative to take actions which will develop instruction and learning so that no one is overlooked. For the same reason, it is a duty of the state and of competent public agencies to assist parents and private citizens with initiatives that effectively bring teaching and learning within the reach of everyone (DIM 37; GE 1). The state must also supplement the initiatives of families and private citizens when they are unable to carry out their educational mission or neglect their duties in this regard (DIM 38). The states role in teaching and education can be summarized as follows: to guarantee, to protect, to encourage, and to supplement (DIM 38, 66; GE 6).

Populorum Progressio
Encyclical of Pope Paul VI on the Development of Peoples, 26 March 1967 Pope Paul VI speaks on behalf of the millions of peoples of developing nations, the men and women of the third world. Confronting the everwidening disparity between rich and poor nations, he affirms that justice is inseparable from development. The encyclical encouraged many Catholics to make a preferential option for the poor and to take up the cause of the helpless and the oppressed. Populorum Progressio also includes a rejection of population control, an unfashionable position to take in the years when demographic trends were still largely interpreted in an alarmist way.
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

20

(204)

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER Summary 5

The Socio-Economic Order

The Social Question The appearance in the 19th century proletarian class of impoverished workers brought with it what came, to be called the social question. Although it has lost most of its initial virulence in many places, certain unresolved aspects of the social question continue to persist. Originally its primary concern was with flagrant injustices suffered by wage laborers: very meagre income, serious lack of protection, job insecurity, etc. At the basis of this situation was a prevalent individualistic liberalism which took a commercial attitude toward work and subjected it to the law of supply and demand. At the same time, intermediate agencies such as guilds and other worker organizations were abolished by the champions of freedom of contract, and workers were left without means of bargaining with their employers. From the outset, it was suspected that the root of the social question went deeper than the economic situation of laborers. While the birth of the industrial age (the Industrial Revolution) gave fresh insight into the production of goods, it also brought about a new socio-economic order which emphasized the
(205) 21

changed relationship of productive labor to ownership of the means of production (capital) and distribution of the goods produced. Theoretical and practical attempts to resolve the resulting problems for workers led to a new conception of the economic and social order which was revolutionary by liberal-bourgeois standards. Basically these attempts reversed the liberal priorities; now the sociopolitical order would be founded on work and public ownership of the means of production. A class struggle, originally understood as the means to achieve this objective, was expanded by Marxism into the leading principle of human history. The combination of these theories, all seeking to replace individualism with collectivism (a view of man as entirely social), received the generic name socialism. The first stage in its development, which Marx called utopian socialism, was followed by his own scientific theory of man and his historical developmenta political, economic, and social theory and praxis in the larger context of a materialistic and atheistic view of man and the world. These opposed positions, both contrary to the principles of the di-

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE vine law, form the background of the Churchs social doctrine, which first pointed out the fundamental errors of individualistic liberalism (also referred to as capitalism, in view of the primacy it gave to capital) and of collectivist socialism, and then went on to provide an overall orientation for the resolution of the social question. In time, these doctrines have shifted with changing social conditions. Liberalism has given rise to several economic systems, all preserving the essential features of capitalism, some of them more moderate and others occasioning new injustices. Socialism, too, has experienced internal divisions: communism, socialism, social democracy, neo-Marxism, Eurocommunism, Maoism. In some cases its earlier principles have been reformed, but the Marxist varieties still retain atheistic and anti-Christian foundations. Although the condition of wage laborers remains distressing in some places, elsewhere the majority have made strides toward improved living conditions and have attained a measure of equality within the civic body. There have even appeared affluent societies in which unchecked consumerism has accompanied a decline of moral values. The Magisterium of the Church has kept pace with these developments in its treatment of various questions, emphasizing in each case the moral criteria which need to be applied to different situations, and calling attention to the dominant thrust of the socio-economic order.
22

The Churchs doctrine concerning socio-economic questions does not constitute a final theory or a complete body of doctrine relative to the production of goods, ownership of the means of production, and distribution of finished products. Neither does it contain specific political programs. Both of these fall within the province of philosophers and politicians. Like the reality it deals with, the Churchs social doctrine is quite complex; what follows will only touch on some of its principles. The Dignity of Work It is Gods will that man should engage in work, an activity which encompasses all those human efforts which aim at improved conditions of life (or better still, the process by which man understands, cares for, superintends, and transforms the earth and its resources) (GS 3). When he was created in the image and likeness of God, man received the command to rule the world, subduing the earth and all it contains (GS 34), thus continuing and cooperating in the creative work of God (LE 4). In accord with the distinction commonly made between labor and capital, the Churchs social doctrine often gives to work the rather precise meaning of a transitive action which terminates in an objectthe production of goods (LE 4). As a human activity, work must correspond to the dignity of man (RN 32; MM 18, 92). It comes immediately from a person, who places his stamp upon the raw material and makes it conform to his will
(206)

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER (GS 67), thereby ennobling it (LE 9). Through his work, man not only transforms nature but perfects it (QA 135; MM 82, 149, 255). The worker realizes himself as a man and in a certain sense becomes more human (LE 9). All of this shows why it is necessary for the social order to permit the worker to perfect himself, not to degrade him and diminish his dignity (LE 9). The Purpose of Work Work is the fulfillment of mans vocation (MM 149, 256), his means of subsistence (RN 6; QA 61; GS 67), the way he relates to other men, whom he serves (GS 67), and his path to holiness (LG 41). Through their labor, men are associated with Christ in His redemptive work. As a consequence, every man has a duty as well as a right to work (GS 67). The Duty to Work Everyone is obligated to work (RN 13)whether it is the only means of self-support (RN 6; QA 61) or not (RN 13)for work is the ordinary instrument of personal perfection and a necessary means to attain the common good, to which all are obliged to contribute (RN 8, 14; QA 135). The Right to Work The correct ordering of social life implies that all have a right to work; this means resolving the problem of unemployment and layoffs (LE 18). Fulfillment of this right is the primary responsibility of each individual and of private initiative (MM 44), for the creation of jobs is a social function of great importance
(207) 23

(QA 51). As indirect employer, the state has a supplementary role (LE 17, 18), part of its vigilance for the common good (MM 44); one of the fundamental elements of the social order is the opportunity for all men to find employment (QA 74; MM 79). The avoidance of work stoppages has to be one of the states most serious concerns (RN 40; MM 54). The methods the state must use in resolving the unemployment problem are generally indirectestablishing a correct social policy and promoting economic development in all sectors (MM 52-55, 150, 151). Nevertheless, should it be necessary, the state must itself provide jobs (RN 29; MM 44) and guarantee the means of subsistence to those who are involuntarily out of work. This may even justify nationalizing certain means of production if conditions require it (LE 14). Solving the unemployment problem requires the cooperation of all those concerned, both at the national and at the international level. It is a fact of great significance that a disproportion exists between areas where large supplies of natural resources lie undeveloped and other areas where whole groups are unemployed or underemployed and large numbers are starving. This is evidence of incorrect solutions of continental and even global proportions in matters of critical social importance (LE 18). The Primacy of Labor Human work that is engaged in production, trade and services is prior to other elements of economic life

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE which only serve an instrumental role (GS 67). Capital occupies a place among these instrumental means; the relation between labor and capital must therefore be regulated by the principle of the primacy of labor (or the priority of labor to capital)(LE 12). This principle refers directly to the very production process, wherein labor (the work force) is the primary subject and efficient cause, while capital is only a means of production or instrumental cause. This means that the production process must be so regulated that primacy is given to the working man rather than placing him in the service of capital. From another point of view, capital, or the means of production as a whole, may be seen as the historic patrimony which has resulted from labor (LE 12). It would thus be false to argue dialectically about a struggle between labor and capital. A just system of work, one which is intrinsically true and morally legitimate, would fundamentally overcome this opposition between labor and capital (LE 13). That result will occur when the worker not only receives due recompense but also realizes that he is actually doing his own thing, that he is truly an autonomous subject engaged in a deeply personal process (LE 15). Those who associate together in economic undertakings are personsmen who are free and independent, created in the image of God. Therefore, while taking into account the diverse functions of each element (owners, managers, technicians, workers) within the overall unity provided by executive deci24

sion, everyones active participation in the whole enterprise can take any number of forms. In many cases it is not within the firm itself but at higher levels of organization that economic and social decisions are reached; workers must also participate in those decisions, either on their own or through freely elected representatives (GS 68).

A just system of work, one which is intrinsically true and morally legitimate, would fundamentally overcome the opposition between labor and capital. That result will occur when the worker not only receives due recompense but also realizes that he is actually doing his own thing, that he is truly an autonomous subject engaged in a deeply personal process.
Ownership of the Means of Production Against the denial of the right of ownership which has been and is still found in certain tendencies of socialism, the social doctrine of the Church has constantly reaffirmed this natural right, with respect both to goods that are used in consumption and in production (RN 6, 7; QA 44; MM 109-115). It follows as well that economic life ought to be prin(208)

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER cipally a concern of private initiative (MM 51). Universal Distribution of Goods The ecclesiastical Magisterium has also affirmed, however, and no less firmly, that private property has a social function (or, in the words of John Paul II, is leased to society); that is, goods are intended for a common use and consequently must reach everyone (RN 6; QA 45; MM 43). God intended the earth and its contents to be useful to all men and all nations. Consequently, created goods must be equally accessible to everyone; this is a matter of justice and of charity. Whatever the forms of ownership which diverse and varying circumstances may prescribe as legitimate institutions in different nations, this universal distribution of goods must never be lost sight of. Therefore, in making use of these goods, men must not regard as exclusively their own the external things they legitimately possess; in the sense that these goods also have advantages for others, they are common as well (GS 69). As a result, the state must respect and defend the right of ownership, and prevent injustices from being committed against it (RN 28), while at the same time requiring property to fulfill its social function (QA 49). Public Ownership Respect for and defense of private ownership does not exclude the legitimacy of public ownership of certain means of production. The position of rigid capitalism is wrong in
(209) 25

maintaining that the exclusive right to private ownership of the means of production is an unassailable dogma of economic life (LE 14). The basic principles which govern this subject can be summarized as follows: a) Government or public corporations are subsidiary to private firms (MM 117); b) Public ownership is justified when the goods in question entail such great economic power that in private hands they would pose a threat to the common good (QA 114; MM 116); c) Since the obligations of public agencies tend to increase, it is normal for the scope of public ownership to be enlarged (MM 117), but the principle of subsidiarity must always be observed, lest public ownership be extended beyond the true and manifest needs of the common good to the point that private ownership is diminished or suspended (MM 117). Socialization If we understand by socialization the active participation in management of all who form a part of public and private corporations, it is surely desirable (MM 91-93; LE 14). Therefore, proposals for joint ownership of the workplace, profit sharing, shareholding by workers, and similar features are laudable. This type of socialization is not achieved by outright elimination of private ownership of the means of production, for the simple conversion of those means from private to public would only cause their monopolistic administration and disposition to change hands. Socialization, then, is not the same as expropriation or nationalization; it sim-

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE ply puts into practice the principle of the primacy of labor (LE 14). Wages Work provides for the sustenance of persons. This principle must be considered at several levels: Universally, work provides for the sustenance of all mankind; in the life of a nation, it provides the resources of those who make up the political community; at the most elementary level, it provides for the maintenance of families and individuals. This means that the outcome of the entire productive process must extend to all mento those who are considered unproductive as well as to those who are actively employedby means of a correct system of distribution. This distribution of goods normally occurs through two complementary systems: wages and various social benefits. Of these, the first onejust remuneration for work doneis the more important since it is a specific means for distributing goods. Work is not a piece of merchandise to be subjected to the law of supply and demand, as liberalism used to affirm (RN 1, 32; QA 107, 109, 110; MM 11, 12). Nor is it the only source of economic value, as Marxism holds (QA 55, 68). Hence the just distribution of a firms profits between capital and labor is of prime importance (QA 53-58). Wage rates must therefore be fixed in relation to the condition of a firm (QA 72). On the other hand, since work is the means whereby persons support themselves and their dependents, the wage must take into ac26

count both the employees personal needs and those of his family (QA 71; LE 19). Finally, wage rates must reflect the economic life of the political community for they have an important bearing upon the common good (QA 74). This principle prohibits privileged groups (MM 79) and excessive remuneration for tasks of little consequence (MM 70). An effort must be made to employ the largest possible number (QA 78; MM 79) and to maintain a favorable balance between wages and prices (QA 75; MM 79). This dimension of the common good must be considered not only within a given country, but also internationally (MM 80). The amount of each wage must also take into account the workers contribution to the enterprise (QA 57, 58; MM 71) and his personal productivity (RN 13: MM 70). Social Benefits A firms financial condition might often prevent the payment of a wage sufficient to meet the level of life to which a worker and his family are entitled in view of the contribution his work makes to the whole community. When this occurs, the wage must be supplemented by various social benefits which serve as alternate means of distributing profits (LE 19). In this matter, the basic criterion is satisfaction of the fundamental rights previously indicated, in proportion to the sum total of goods produced within that political community and, insofar as possible, within the international community. !
(210)

THE SOCIO-ESOCIAL ENCYCLICALS INTRODUCTION TO CONOMIC ORDER

Introduction to Social Encyclicals

Laborem Exercens
Encyclical of Pope John Paul II on the Dignity of Work, 14 September 1981 In Poland, the future Pope John Paul II experienced the world of manual labor himself and the suffering of his people under Nazism and communism. Drawing on Catholic social teaching and his profound Christian personalism, he sets forth the dignity of human work in the divine plan as well as our problems with work and ways to resolve them. This encyclical was written after the Pope had survived an assassination attempt and when the Solidarity movement was directly challenging communism in Poland, events which opened the way for the collapse of a system based on a false doctrine of human nature and a misunderstanding of the purpose of work.

Sollicitudo Rei Socialis

Encyclical of Pope John Paul II on the Twentieth Anniversary of Populorum Progressio 30 December 1987 Just before the startling social and political changes in Eastern Europe, Pope John Paul II delineates the need for solidarity and freedom, for true justice and a better way beyond either socialism or free-market capitalism. He re-focuses Catholic social doctrine around the meaning and value of the human person. With a global vision of the social changes he observed among the nations, the most widely-traveled Pope in history also denounces the burden of debt incurred by developing nations and the new imperialism of population control which was being imposed on them. (cf. n. 25)

Centesimus Annus
Encyclical of Pope John Paul II Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum 15 May 1991 The chapter headed 1989 provides the dramatic historical context for the encyclical marking the centenary of Rerum Novarum. The year 1989 was a turning-point in world history. The world marveled at the sudden collapse of communism, first in Eastern Europe and then in the Soviet Union which broke up into separate sovereign states soon after a failed communist coup in August 1991. The key figure in the midst of the most dramatic political and social change of the century was Pope John Paul II himself. The Pope does not hesitate to go to the roots of the failure of Marxist ideology, but at the same time he strongly criticizes the prevailing economic rationalism of the liberal west. This was one of the most widely discussed papal documents of the late twentieth century.
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

(211)

27

D OCUMENTATION iSERVICE Reflect on

Ecology in the Light of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church*

by Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino
President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace

An International Expo on Water and Sustainable Development was held in Zaragoza, Spain, from 14 June to 14 September,2008.. To celebrate the International Expo, the Archdiocese of Zaragoza and the Holy See held a congress (10-12 July) on the theme The Ecological Question; the Life of Man in the World, focusing on water as an integral part of the Catholic faith and celebrated as a life-giving sign of Gods presence in Creation, thus recalling the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, adopted by world leaders in 2000. Printed below are excerpts of the concluding reflection, Ecology in the Light of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church: Love and Rationality of Man in Relation to the World, presented on 12 July, by Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.

he author of the Book of Genesis thought it necessary to remind us of the presence of God in creation: And the spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters (1:2). As each day unfolds, in the account of Creation, the world draws closer to its completion. At the end of each day God places a value on his work and in the end it is not only good but it is very good. During the late 1960s and early 1970s a new awareness began to take root as the environmental movement began to gather more support and people began to better understand the impact that human activity was having on nature. In the past few years
28

we have begun to pay more attention to the earth and the natural environment that sustains our lives. Thus, the movement that began some 40 years ago continues and is even stronger today. Unfortunately, in many ways the early movement ran contrary to the teachings of the Church and took on an earth centeredness that frequently bordered upon neo-paganism. At the same time, even though the Church often found herself excluded from or sometimes at odds with certain aspects of the environmental
* Taken from LOsservatore Romano, English Weekly Edition, 16 July 2008, p. 9.

(212)

ECOLOGY

IN THE

LIGHT

OF THE

S OCIAL DOCTRINE

OF THE

CATHOLIC CHURCH

movement, she continued to address the environmental movement within the context of Her social teaching. The author of Genesis tells us that God viewed each aspect of the created world, each aspect of his work, the heavens, the sea, the earth and all that is and lives upon it, as good. However, God viewed the creation of man and woman, as the summit of his Creation, as very good, setting mankind in a position of trust over the rest of Creation. It was only after entrusting the care of the earth to mankind that God rested on the seventh day. In his Message for the 41st World Day of Peace, 1 January 2008, Pope Benedict XVI placed his understanding of peace, Creation, responsibility and love into the context of the family and the environment. He wrote: The family needs a home, a fit environment in which to develop its proper relationships. For the human family, this home is the earth, the environment that God the Creator has given us to inhabit with creativity and responsibility. We need to care for the environment: it has been entrusted to men and women to be protected and cultivated with responsible freedom, with, the good of all as a constant guiding criterion (n. 7, LOsservatore Romano English Edition [ORE], 19/26 December 2007, p. 8). The Social Doctrine of the Church Beginning in 1891 with what is recognized as the first Social Encyclical, Rerum Novarum, Pope Leo XIII addressed the world situation. The Encyclical Letter conveyed not only the concern of the Church for society,
(213) 29

for the poor and the misery of increasing numbers of people; it also established the Church as the true voice in dealing with issues surrounding social justiceincluding protection of the natural environment. The Popes of the 20th century continued to address social justice issues applying Church teachings to a variety of subjects, thus continuing to prove her concern for the people of the world. In the Second Vatican Council, The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (1965) also pointed out the value of Creation, noting that in carrying out everyday tasks, mankind cooperates in and completes the work of the Creator. In Gaudium et Spes there is a solidification of the Church teaching on the centrality of mankind within creation and also within human development. This understanding of the centrality of the human person continues to be essential, not only in light of the social teaching of the Church but also with regard to the role and relationship of mankind with the environment. Following the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI turned his attention to the need for cooperation and development. In his Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, (1967) he addressed the role of mankind within creation. He also addressed the right which is possessed by all the people of the world to access and use the goods of the earth. By 1971 and the publication of Octogesima Adveniens, the environmental movement had gained significant strength. This did not go unnoticed by Pope Paul VI who responded

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE
to the environmental situation in much the same way that Pope Leo XIII, with Rerum Novarum, responded to the labour situation of 1891: Man is suddenly becoming aware that by an ill-considered exploitation of nature he risks destroying it and becoming in his turn the victim of this degradation. Not only is the material environment becoming a permanent menacepollution and refuse, new illness and absolute destructive capacitybut the human framework is no longer under mans control, thus creating an environment for tomorrow which may well be intolerable. This is a wide-ranging social problem which concerns the entire human family. The Christian must turn to these new perceptions in order to take on responsibility, together with the rest of men, for a destiny which from now on is shared by all (n. 21). Following the themes of Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II took up the call for development and the eradication of poverty while calling attention to environmental issues. In his understanding of solidarity he showed the interdependence that exists among all people and that exists among peoples and the world around them. In his three great social Encyclicals, Laborem Exercens (1981), Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987) and Centesimus Annus (1991), Pope John Paul II continued to teach the need to safeguard the natural environment while striving for social and economic development. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis emphasized the urgency that exists to care for the earth and protect its resources if development is to become a reality.
30

Returning to the 41st Message for the World Day of Peace, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI continued the call for cooperation in dealing with mans impact on the environment: Respecting the environment does not mean considering material or animal nature more important than man. Rather it means not selfishly considering nature to be at the complete disposal of our own interests, for future generations also have the right to reap its benefits and to exhibit towards nature the same responsible freedom that we claim for ourselves. Nor must we overlook the poor, who are excluded in many cases from the goods of creation destined for all (World Day of Peace Message, 1 January 2008, n. 7, ORE, 19/26 December 2007, p. 8.). According to the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, there must also be a consideration of the relationship between development and exploitation of natural resources and it states that Catholic social teaching calls for economic activity to reconcile the needs of economic development with those of environmental protection (n. 470). Man - Environment relationship A reductionist attitude which moves toward unsustainable consumption and development which disregards the fragile balance within the natural environment not only puts the future at risk but it also leads to a denial of the relationship between man and God the Creator. The reductionist attitude toward Creation, the idea that the worlds resources were inexhaustible and that the earth had the ability to heal it(214)

ECOLOGY

IN THE

LIGHT

OF THE

S OCIAL DOCTRINE

OF THE

CATHOLIC CHURCH

self from mans exploitation was directly opposed to the true understanding of the relationship between man and Creation. As the relationship between mankind and the environment breaks down, his relationship with God also suffers. It is for this reason that the Church reminds us that the natural environment and every living thing in it is a gift from God. In the Book of Daniel we read: Let the earth bless the Lord. Praise and exalt him above all forever. Mountains and hills, bless the Lord. Everything growing from the earth, bless the Lord. You springs, bless the lord. Seas and rivers, bless the Lord. You dolphins and all water creatures, bless the Lord. Everything growing from the earth, bless the Lord. All you birds of the air, bless the Lord. All you beasts, wild and tame, bless the Lord, you sons of men, bless the Lord (Dan 3:52). These gifts are to be safeguarded and nurtured with a sense of gratitude toward the Creator. Again, that understanding of dominion rather than domination is seen as a guiding principle in mans relationship with the world around him. As, has been and continues to be seen within the environmental movement, there is a close if not inseparable relationship between the environment and religion, whether formal or informal. It is not by accident that the relationship between religion and ethical behaviour has developed by an understanding of the presence in the universe of an order that must be respected. It is that order which has helped to guide the spiritual and intellectual development of
(215) 31

mankind through the ages and has placed limits on our behaviour and activities. Indeed, it is this order which has also shown that the human person occupies the central place in Creation. Without the conviction of this human centeredness, mans humanity is lost and development becomes a sort of soulless mechanism. Man becomes a means toward an end rather than the reason for striving toward a better life for all. With the understanding of mankinds centrality comes the recognition of the human dignity. Although recognition of that dignity is often denied, it is, nevertheless, the guiding principle of the Churchs social teaching. However, an incorrect notion of our centrality inclines the individual to see everything in relation to his or her personal needs and the meeting of those needs, no matter the cost. It is this misdirected understanding that endangers the future by over-consumption and abuse of the earths resources. The principle of solidarity defines our social nature. It calls upon each one of us to realize the equality that we share through our human dignity and our human rights that develop from it. Jesus told his listeners of their obligation toward one another : I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me (Mt 25:35-36). An understanding of the relation-

D OCUMENTATION SERVICE
ship of mankind to the earth comes through an understanding of solidarity. We share a common bond that unites individuals and societies. This bond calls us to be concerned for the life and welfare of others. It reveals itself as a commitment to go beyond individual interests and offer oneself ! for the good of our neighbour.

Introduction to Social Encyclicals

Caritas in Veritate
Encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI on Integral Human Development in Charity and Truth, 29 June 2009 Caritas in Veritate reflects on Pope Paul VIs Populorum Progressio 40 years ago and John Paul IIs Sollicitudo Rei Socialis 20 years ago, discussing the global financial crisis in the context of the widespread relativism rampant in todays world. Pope Benedict XVI summarizes: In the present social and cultural context, where there is a widespread tendency to relativize truth, practising charity in truth helps people to understand that adhering to the values of Christianity is not merely useful but essential for building a good society and for true integral human development. In brief, with Christ as the center of our understanding, we have a firm basis in truth to understand the universal destination of goods CCC 2402-2406. Benedict looks beyond the traditional categories of market power on the right and state power on the left. Observing that every economic decision has a moral consequence, Benedict emphasizes economic arrangements focused on the dignity of the ordinary man. He declares that there is nevertheless a growing conviction that business management cannot concern itself only with the interests of the proprietors, but must also assume responsibility for all the other stakeholders who contribute to the life of the business: the workers, the clients, the suppliers of various elements of production, the community of reference. But he adds that the consumer has a specific social responsibility, which goes hand-in-hand with the social responsibility of the enterprise. Consumers should be continually educated regarding their daily role, which can be exercised with respect for moral principles without diminishing the intrinsic economic rationality of the act of purchasing. He cites as examples, credit unions and forms of cooperative purchasing like the consumer cooperatives that have been in operation since the nineteenth century, partly through the initiative of Catholics. I would also suggest the Ave Maria Mutual Funds as reflecting Benedicts perspective. Overall, Caritas in Veritate is now the definitive summary of Catholic social teaching in the world today.
Source: www.secondexodus.com.

32

(216)

Theological Centrum
A Project of Studium Theologiae Foundation, Inc. 5/F, Quad Alpha Centrum Building 125 Pioneer Street, Mandaluyong Metro Manila, Philippines 1501 Tel. 634-85-90, 635-61-13

Published by

25.00

JULY 2010

pesos