Church Social TeachingI. The Nature of Church Social Teaching (CST)A. What is Catholic Social Teaching?
1. “The Church’s social doctrine is . . . the accurate formulation of the results of a careful reflection on the complex realities of human existence, in society and in the international order, in the light of the faith and of the Church’s tradition. Its main aim is to interpret these realities, determining their conformity with or divergence from the lines of the Gospel teaching on the human person and his/her vocation, which is at once earthly and transcendent; its aim is thus to guide Christian behavior. (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 41) 2. CST as fruit of the encounter of the Gospel with modern industrial society: Followers of Christ engage and transform the world and CST can help them discern and reflect on their current situation as part of discerning their appropriate actions and responses. 3. CST makes use of social sciences but its perspective is always moral, and it is essentially, “A body of wisdom that can help us live justly in the contemporary world.” (Krietemeyer, 20). Given its moral perspective, the human person is central, as “the Church’s social doctrine focuses especially on the human person as s/he is involved in a complex network of relationships within modern societies. The human sciences and philosophy are helpful for interpreting the human person’s central place within society and for enabling her/him to understand him/herself better as a social being. However, the human person’s true identity is only fully revealed to her/him through faith, and it is precisely from faith that the Church’s social teaching begins.” (Centesimus Annus, 54) 4. Thus, CST is not an ideology (specific blueprint for particular politico-economic system) nor a social theory (a specific framework of analysis derived from the social sciences): “The Church has no models to present; models that are real and truly effective can only arise within the framework of different historical situations, through the efforts of all those who responsibly confront concrete problems in all their social, economic, political and cultural aspects, as these interact with one another (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 36; Octogesima Adveniens, 2-5). For such a task the Church offers her social teaching as an indispensable and ideal orientation, a teaching which, as already mentioned, recognizes the positive value of the market and of enterprise, but which at the same time points out that these must be oriented towards the common good.” (Centesimus Annus, 43) B. How does CST apply to our lives? 1. CST provides “‘principles of reflection,’ ‘criteria for judgment’ and ‘directives for action’” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 8) a. “principles of reflection”-- fundamental moral values and principles b. “criteria for judgment”--interpretation & evaluation of historical situations, structures & institutions c. “directives for action”--general directives for pastoral action given particular circumstances 2. CST helps committed Christians to take a step back from the society and culture that they are part of and question it (“re-visioning their moral horizon”); helps them reflect on the means and ends of their social involvement and action; does not relieve individuals from burden of making personal decisions 3. Situated in the context of the total life of the Church, “the Church’s social teaching is itself a valid instrument of evangelization.” (Centesimus Annus, 51) 4. End-goal of CST is ultimately a spirituality: “[T]he social message of the Gospel must not be considered a theory, but above all else a basis and a motivation for action . . . (it) will gain credibility more from the witness of actions than as a result of its internal logic and consistency.” (Centesimus Annus, 57) C. Where does CST come from? What are its sources? 1. CST is the result of the Church's reflection on the Gospel and the current social reality, “There can be no genuine solution of the 'social problem' apart from the Gospel, and the 'new things' can find in the Gospel the context for their correct understanding and the proper moral perspective for judgment.” (Centesimus, 5). 2. Universal teaching – documents of Church Councils and Synods, Papal social encylicals and apostolic letters, Vatican Instructions; 3. Local teaching – plenary and provincial Councils of Philippine Church, CBCP pastoral letters II. Principles of CST A. Dignity of the Human Person 1. The dignity of the human person created in the image and likeness of God and elevated to a supernatural destiny transcending earthly life, is the primary principle and the heart and soul of CST. “The Church sees in men and women, in every person, the living image of God himself… (one which) finds… an ever deeper and fuller unfolding of itself in the mystery of Christ, the Perfect Image of God, the One who reveals God to man and man to himself.” (CSDC, 105) All of the Church’s work for justice and peace is meant to protect and promote human dignity, for each person—whether rich or poor, young or old, healthy or cripple—is the highest expression of God’s creative work and the meaning of Christ’s redemptive ministry. 2. Respect for human dignity today demands fulfilling the contemporary aspirations of people everywhere for freedom, equality and participation. In this regard what is affirmed is the human person as “subject, foundation and purpose” of all social life. He is “never simply a means to the end of another person or of society, he/she is always an acting, deciding subject, never simply an object of others’ decisions.” (Carroll, 1) a. The above statements emphasize that at the core of promoting the dignity of those who are poor and marginalized is not so much providing them with the material basis for a dignified human existence as much as it is restoring their own sense of being responsible, deciding and acting human persons, not mere objects of society but subjects and authors of their own history. 3. Human dignity is the basis of inalienable human rights which safeguard the dignity of the human person. “Human rights may be defined as those fundamental rights of human beings which are essential to the exercise of human dignity.” (Intengan) a. “Christian thinking about human rights emphasizes not only the dignity ... of humanity but also the fact that this dignity... is constantly violated.... Thus in any theological discussion of human rights the doctrine of sin has an important place beside the doctrine of God. Christian theology sees the need to affirm human rights because of human sin.” (Intengan) b. Human rights consist not only of civil and political rights (the right to life, to liberty, to freedom of speech and association, to equality before the law, etc.) but also of economic, social and cultural rights (the right to shelter, to work, to a just wage, to education, etc.) B. Social Nature of Human Beings: Common Good, Solidarity, Subsidiarity and Participation 1. Common Good: “While having his individual dignity and destiny, the human person is by nature social . . . Society and community are real and supportive entities, not simply arenas in which each seeks his or her private goals in competition with others.” (Carroll 1) Thus, the dignity and rights of the individual are always safeguarded in the context of the promotion of the common good. a. The common good is “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) These include peace and order, personal freedom, the rule of law, economic, educational and cultural opportunities, an efficient economy, a healthy environment. “Society owes these to its members; but the members must contribute to creating and maintaining them for the good of all; the individual has duties as well as rights with regard to society.” (Carroll 1) b. “The common good consists of three essential elements: First, the common good presupposes respect for the person as such. In the name of the common good, public authorities are bound to respect the fundamental and inalienable rights of the human person. Society should permit each of its members to fulfill his vocation. . . . Second, the common good requires the social well-being and development of the group itself. Development is the epitome of all social duties . . . Finally, the common good requires peace, that is, the stability and security of a just order. It presupposes that authority should ensure by morally acceptable means the security of society and its members. It is the basis of the right to legitimate personal and collective defense.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1906–1909) 2. Solidarity: Proceeding from the social nature of human beings, the key social virtue is solidarity. a. Solidarity is “a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good, that is to say, to the good of all and of each individual because we are all responsible for all.” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 38) b. “(E)very new movements of solidarity of the workers and with the workers (are necessary) ... wherever it is called for by the social degrading of the subject of work, by exploitation of the workers and by the growing areas of poverty and even hunger.” (Laborem Exercens, 8) c. “In order to overcome today's widespread individualistic mentality, what is required is a concrete commitment to solidarity and charity, beginning in the family with the mutual support of husband and wife and the care which the different generations give to one another. In this sense the family, too, can be called a community of work and solidarity.” (Centesimus Annus, 49) d. For the Church, solidarity with the poor is “her mission, her service, a proof of her fidelity to Christ.” (Laborem Exercens, 11) Centesimus Annus speaks of the “preferential option for the poor” of the Church “which is never exclusive or discriminatory toward other groups… (nor) limited to material poverty, since it is well known that there are many other forms of poverty.” (57) This option has deep roots in both Scripture and the whole Tradition of the Church. Its ultimate basis is Christ himself. Concern for and identification with the poor is the way of Jesus: his ministry was marked by a close association with the outcasts of Jewish society and in the parable of the Last Judgment he specifically identifies himself with the hungry, thirsty, naked, homeless, sick and imprisoned (Matt. 25). 3. Subsidiarity: The principle of subsidiarity places responsibility as close as possible to the grassroots. The people/groups most directly affected by a decision or policy should have a key decision-making role. They should only be interfered with in order to support them in cases of need, and to help coordinate their activities with the activities of the rest of society with a view to the common good. a. “Promoting the dignity of the person requires concern for the family, groups, associations, local territorial realities - the aggregate of expressions to which people spontaneously give life and which make it possible for them to achieve effective social growth.” (CSDC, 185). b. “It is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and a disturbance of right order to transfer to larger and higher collectivity functions which can be performed and provided for by lessor and subordinate bodies” (Quadragesimo Anno, 9) 4. Participation: At the root of much poverty and injustice is a lack of participation, in which individuals and/or groups are excluded from basic involvement in the community and structures of society. Because of intelligence and free will, people have both a right and a duty to actively shape their own destiny by participating in those decisions that most directly affect them rather than simply accepting others’ decisions. a. “Participation is expressed essentially in a series of activities by means of which the citizen, either as an individual or in association with others, whether directly or through representation, contributes to the cultural, economic, political and social life of the civil community to which he belongs. Participation is a duty to be fulfilled consciously by all, with responsibility and with a view to the common good.” (CSDC, 189) b. “It is a strict duty of justice not to allow fundamental human needs to remain unsatisfied, and not allow those burdened by such needs to perish. It is also necessary to help these needy people to acquire expertise, to enter the circle of exchange, and to develop their skills in order to make the best use of their capacities and resources.” (Centesimus Annus, 34) c. The principle of participation leads us to the conviction that the most appropriate and fundamental solutions to poverty will be those that enable people to take control of their own lives. For poverty is not merely the lack of financial resources. It entails a more profound kind of deprivation, a denial of full participation in the economic, social, and political life of society and an inability to influence decisions that affect one’s life. It means being powerless in a way that assaults not only one’s pocketbook but also one’s fundamental human dignity.” (US Conference of Catholic Bishops—Economic Justice for All, 188) C. Integral Human Development 1. “Development cannot be limited to mere economic growth. In order to be authentic, it must be complete: integral, that is, it has to promote the good of every person and of the whole person.” (Populorum Progressio, 14) It must fulfill the human aspiration “to do more, know more and have more in order to be more.” (Populorum Progressio, 6) This involves not only material progress and an increase in material possessions (“having”) but more so our moral and spiritual growth (towards growth in “being” or the fulfillment of our human vocation to grow in image and likeness of God). 2. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis describes the tragedy of contemporary development that results in the “superdevelopment” of the few (“the excessive availability of every kind of material goods for the benefit of certain social groups”) who are trapped in the “cult of having” and the underdevelopment of the many who suffer material deprivation. In both cases, there is a failure of “being.” It is thus argued that “development cannot consist only in the use, dominion over and indiscriminate possession of created things and the products of human industry, but rather in subordinating the possession, dominion and use to man’s divine likeness and to his vocation to immortality.” (28-29) And it goes on to identify the root of these problems saying, “This determination is based on the solid conviction that what is hindering full development is that desire for profit and that thirst for power already mentioned.” (38) D. Dignity of Human Work 1. Through work the person achieves his/ her fundamental vocation to share in God’s creative activity in the world. “Work remains a good thing, not only because it is useful and enjoyable, but also because it expresses and increases the worker’s dignity. Through work, we not only transform the world, but we are transformed ourselves, becoming ‘more a human being.’” (Laborem Exercens, 9) “(H)uman work is a key, probably the essential key, to the whole social question. To consider work is of decisive importance when trying to make life more ‘human.’” (Laborem Exercens, 3) 2. The subjective dimension of work (the person who is subject of work and his vocation to work) has primacy over its objective dimension (technical aspects of work, output and productivity of labor). This is the basis of the criticism of the “economism” and “materialism” of prevailing economic systems that reduce humans to mere instruments of production. (Laborem Exercens, 3-6, 13) a. “(T)he primary basis of the value of work is man himself, who is its subject . . . (W)ork is ‘for the person’ and not the person ‘for work’” (Laborem Exercens, 6) 3. Labor has priority over capital; labor is not merely a factor of production on the same level with or even subordinate to capital. “(The) ‘great workbench’ which we call capital--everything from simple tools to irrigation systems, computers and vast industrial plants--is itself the product of the earth’s resources, which are God’s free gift intended for the benefit of all men, transformed and made productive by human labor. Capital is the common heritage of all who work; it is neither the master of labor nor its opponent, but its servant.” Capital is meant to serve labor and not the other way around. (Laborem Exercens, 12) 4. From the proper appreciation of human work flow three basic rights: (1) the right to work; (2) the right to a just share in the fruits of production; and (3) the right to organize “for the purpose of defending (workers’) interests and contributing as responsible partners to the common good.” (Laborem Exercens, 16-23) a. Laborem Exercens speaks of the workers’ right of participation flowing from the dignity of the worker as a human person. “As a free and intelligent being, the worker has the right to a part in the decisions which affect his working conditions and his wages, as well as the right to share in the profits due to his work.” (Laborem Exercens, 14) b. Mater et Magistra speaks of justice and equity as the central values in determining fair wages for workers, “We consider it a duty to reaffirm that the remuneraion of work is not something that can be left to the laws of the marketplace; nor should it be a decision left to the will of the more powerful. It must be determined in accordance with justice and equity; which means that workers must be paid a wage which allows them to live a truly human life and to fulfill their family obligations in a worthy manner. (Mater et Magistra, 15) c. “The State must contribute to the achievement of these goals [restore dignity to work and protecting worker from unemployment] both directly and indirectly. Indirectly and according to the principle of subsidiarity, by creating favorable conditions for the free exercise of economic activity, which will lead to abundant opportunities for employment and sources of wealth. Directly and according to the principle of solidarity, by placing certain limits on the autonomy of the parties who determine working conditions, and by ensuring in every case the necessary minimum support for the unemployed worker.” (Centesimus Annus, 15) E. Universal Destination of Goods and Private Property 1. “God destined the earth and all it contains for the use of every individual and all peoples.” (Gaudium et Spes, 69) As co-creators with God, human beings are thus called to develop the earth’s resources as stewards and partners for the human well-being and fulfillment of all. In this context, the right to private property, although valid and necessary to safeguard the dignity of the individual human person, is never absolute and is conditioned by the more primary right of all people to share in the goods of the earth. (Laborem Exercens, 14) “(T)he goods of the earth ... are in the first place the patrimony of the community; individual ownership and private property are secondary, and they can and should be limited by the State for the good of all.” (Carroll 3, 3) 2. “Private property, in fact, is under a ‘social mortgage,’ which means it has an intrinsically social function based upon and justified precisely by the principle of the universal destination of goods.” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 42) (If one does not “pay his mortgage”--fulfill the social obligations attendant to ownership--society may “foreclose” or expropriate his property). “Political authority has the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2406) 3. “Ownership of the means of production ... is just and legitimate if it serves useful work. It becomes illegitimate, however, when it is not utilized or when it serves to impede the work of others, in an effort to gain a profit which is not the result of the overall expansion of work and the wealth of society, but rather is the result of curbing them or of illicit exploitation, speculation or the breaking of solidarity among working people.” (Centesimus Annus, 43) 4. “In our time, in particular, there exists another form of ownership which is becoming no less important than land: the possession of know-how, technology and skill. The wealth of the industrialized nations is based much more on this kind of ownership than on natural resources.” (Centisimus Annus, 32) It is in this context that Centesimus Annus emphasizes the right of workers to participate in production—the right to productive work and the skills which make this possible. 5. Property is misused objectively when it becomes a means of exercising oppressive domination over others, and subjectively when craving for possessions becomes the goal of life destroying the dignity of both the rich and poor. (Catechism for Filipino Catholics, 1175) F. Integrity of Creation 1. Our relationship with the rest of creation and our stewardship grows out of the recognition that “we humans are not the ultimate owners of these goods, but rather, the temporary stewards. We are entrusted with the responsibility of caring for these gifts and preserving them for future generations.” (Krietemeyer, 33) Thus, our respect of and relationship with creation is representative of our relationship with God. a. “Material good and the way we are developing the use of them should be seen as God's gifts to us. They are meant to bring out in each one of us the image of God. We must never lose sight of how we have been created: from the earth and from the breath of God.” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 29) b. “Private property does not constitute for anyone an absolute and unconditioned right. No one is justified in keeping for his or her exclusive use what he or she does not need, when others lack necessities. In a word, ‘according to the traditional doctrine as it is found in the Fathers of the Church, and the great theologians, the right to property must never be exercised to the detriment of the common good.” (Peace on Earth, 23) 2. “The dominion granted to man by the Creator is not an absolute power, nor can one speak of a freedom to ‘use or misuse,’ or to dispose of things as one pleases. The limitation imposed from the beginning by the Creator himself and expressed symbolically by the prohibition not to ‘eat of the fruit of the tree’ (cf. Gen. 2:16-17) shows clearly enough that, when it comes to the natural world, we are subject not only to biological laws but also to moral ones, which cannot be violated with impunity.” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 34) 3. “It is manifestly unjust that a privileged few should continue to accumulate excess goods, squandering available resources, while masses of people are living in conditions of misery at the very lowest level of subsistence. Today, the dramatic threat of ecological breakdown is teaching us the extent to which greed and selfishness—both individual and collective—are contrary to the order of creation, an order which is characterized by mutual interdependence…Respect for life, and above all for the dignity of the human person, is the ultimate guiding norm for any sound economic, industrial or scientific progress…The ecological crisis reveals the urgent moral need for a new solidarity….” (1990 World Day of Peace message of Pope John Paul II) 4. (U)nrestrained economic development is not the answer to improving the lives of the poor… authentic development supports moderation and even austerity in the use of material resources.” (US Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Renewing the Earth,” III.G.) Notes Carroll, John J., S.J., “Civil Society: Tool of Analysis and Guide for Action.” Handout prepared for SJSA Forum, Pansol, July 1996. (cited as Carroll 1). Carroll, John J., S.J., “Laborem Exercens: A Worker-Pope Speaks to Workers.” Intersect 8 (April-May 1990) (cited as Carroll 2). Carroll, John J., S.J., “Centesimus Annus: Ideas Do Have Consequences.” Intersect 5 (August 1991): 1-3, 16-17. (cited as Carroll 3). Intengan, Romeo J., S.J.; “Human Dignity and Human Rights: Moral Aspect.” Landas 7 (1993): 117-140. Krietemeyer, Ronald. Leaven for the Modern World: Catholic Social Teaching and Catholic Education. Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association, 2000. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004. (Cited as CSDC) Available online at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html Sirico, Robert A. & Maciej Zieba, O.P. The Social Agenda of the Catholic Church: A Collection of Magisterial Texts. London: Burns & Oats, 2000. Also available online at http://www.thesocialagenda.org. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Renewing the Earth: An Invitation to Reflection and Action on Environment in Light of Catholic Social Teaching.” Available online at http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/bishopsstatement.shtml |
|