5

Nine Key Themes of

Catholic Social Teaching

he previous four chapters answered many important questions re­

T garding the significance and context of Catholic social teaching. The
material covered so far provides necessary background regarding such
topics as the motivation for social justice action on the part of the Chris­
tian community, the historical development of the Catholic Church's so­
cial teaching, and the scriptural and theological sources of the documents
that contain that teaching. In fact, it seems that we have accomplished
almost everything except what readers probably most desire: a detailed
description of the content of the teaching that we have heard so much
about.
It is time to reward the reader's patience. This chapter is the payoff,
as it investigates the actual messages contained in the social encyclicals.
Recall that table 3.1 provides brief summaries of the challenges and new
messages of each of the thirteen Vatican social teaching documents. This
chapter offers a greatly expanded account of the central topics and argu­
ments of these documents. The analysis offered here will proceed primar­
ily in a thematic way, rather than in a historical fashion. Instead of march­
ing through the encyclicals in chronological order, this chapter treats nine
themes that form the heart of Catholic social teaching as it has developed
over the course of more than one hundred years.
There is nothing magical about the number nine in this context and
nothing definitive about this particular listing of themes. Similar lists of
various lengths have been compiled by other observers of this tradition.
The Annotated List of Resources for Further Study at the end of this book
includes several sources that contain such lists. Although these lists rarely

79
80 Chapter 5

match perfectly, there is general agreement about the basic items that
belong on any list of the core Catholic social teaching principles. Table 5.1
offers a handy at-a-glance listing of these nine themes along with three
of the most important texts in the documents of Catholic social teaching
that treat each theme.

1. THE DIGNITY OF EVERY PERSON AND HUMAN RIGHTS

The claim that people have great worth and dignity is certainly a familiar
one. In fact, it would be hard to think of a culture or religion that did
not in some way affirm the value of human life. But the Catholic Church
addresses the topic of human dignity in a special way that leads to some
particularly firm conclusions about what is permissible both in individual
moral choices and in the ethical practices of entire societies. The positions

Table 5.1. Key Texts for Nine Themes in Catholic Social Teaching

Theme Most Important Texts

1. The Dignity of Every Person and Human Pacem in Terris 8-38
Rights Caudium et Spes 12-19
Centesimus Annus 6-7 7
2. Solidarity, Common Good, and Participation Pacem in Terris 98- 708
Caudium et Spes 26-32, 68-75
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis 35-40
3. Family Life Caudium et Spes 47-52
Octogesima Adveniens 13
Laborem Exercens 10, 19
4. Subsidiarity and the Proper Role of Quadragesimo Anno 76-87
Government Mater et Magistra 51-77, 122-77
Pacem in Terris 140-41
5. Property Ownership in Modern Society: Quadragesimo Anno 44-52
Rights and Responsibilities Mater et Magistra 51-67,104-21
Centesimus Annus 30^43
6. The Dignity of Work, Rights of Workers, and Rerum Novarum 1-3, 20-21, 31-38
Support for Labor Unions Mater et Magistra 68-81
Laborem Exercens 1-27
7. Colonialism and Economic Development Mater et Magistra 157-217
Populorum Progressio 1-87
Caritas in Veritate 10-33
8. Peace and Disarmament Pacem in Terris 109-19
Caudium et Spes 77-79
U.S. bishops' The Challenge o f Peace
9. Option for the Poor and Vulnerable Caudium et Spes 7
Octogesima Adveniens 23
Centesimus Annus 11
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 81

staked out by Catholic social teaching on a wide range of issues are sol­
idly grounded in a complete view of the origin, nature, and destiny of all
people.
One key foundation of this picture of human life is that all humans are
made in the image and likeness of God. This idea appears in the story of
creation that is portrayed in mythical language in the opening chapters
of the Book of Genesis (see Genesis 1:27). Because all humans somehow
reflect the image of God, they are all entitled to be treated with the great­
est of respect and dignity. Because we are intelligent, rational, and free
beings, God intends us to be immune from all slavery, manipulation, or
exploitation. At all stages of our lives—from the moment of conception
through the vulnerable years of childhood and old age to the very mo­
ment of natural death—we deserve the care and attention that belong
to beings of inestimable worth. Indeed, according to this doctrine, there
is nothing a person can do or undergo to forfeit this lofty status. Even
those who commit heinous crimes, acquire debilitating diseases, or find
themselves separated from their homelands or from gainful employment
retain immense worth and are to be accorded the greatest of dignity. All
people—whether they are languishing on death row in a prison, receiving
treatment at an AIDS clinic in a hospital, or living in a refugee camp in the
most remote corner of the world—deserve to be treated with inalienable
respect as children of God.
This insistence on the sanctity and immeasurable value of each hu­
man life has led the Catholic Church to uncompromising opposition to
all threats to human dignity, including abortion, euthanasia, and capital
punishment. In its moral teachings, the Church has courageously held
fast to a pro-life position on numerous controversial issues, advocating
respect for all human life, especially that of the vulnerable and outcast.
Perhaps the most articulate spokesman on these matters among Ameri­
can Catholics was the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin (1928-1996) of
Chicago. In the last decades of his life, this prominent church leader
wrote and spoke frequently about the topic of “a consistent ethic of life."
In advocating an attitude of profound respect for the sanctity of life at
every moment of its duration, from conception to natural death, Cardinal
Bernardin often used the biblical metaphor of the seamless garment (see
John 19:23). This comparison suggests that any attack against innocent life
is an offense and potential threat to all human life. Bernardin appealed
not just to believers but to all people of good will to recognize the worth
of all human life and to do all in their power to protect the vulnerable.
Pope Benedict XVI devoted several paragraphs (nos. 74-77) of his 2009
social encyclical Caritas in Veritate to a list of new threats to the sanctity
of human life, most of them stemming from rapid advances in the field
of biotechnology. The Church, of course, is by no means against scientific
82 Chapter 5

progress, but it does continue to voice serious concern about reduction-

istic mind-sets and medical techniques that threaten human dignity by
treating the human body in ways that amount to crass manipulation and
degradation.
One important aspect of human dignity is the notion of equality. The
Catholic tradition interprets the key moments of the drama of human life
in a way that treats all people equally. From God's original bestowal of
life (in the act of creation), to the sending of God's Son into the world to
save all people from sin (in the Incarnation), to the expectation of a final
invitation into God's Kingdom (in the Resurrection of the Dead), Catholic
doctrine testifies to a fundamental equality in God's gracious activity.
When Catholic social teaching calls for a more equal sharing of political
power, social status, and economic resources, it is merely extending the
Christian theological doctrine of equal human dignity to the concrete
realm of social existence. There are certain things that all children of God
deserve. When vast inequalities prevent people from attaining what they
need to preserve their lives and develop their potential, people of faith
must speak out against these injustices.
Of course, human life in actual societies has always been filled with
many types of inequality. Nothing could be more obvious than the basic
social fact that some people enjoy vast holdings of wealth and resources
while others struggle for mere survival. While it is surely true that many
affluent people deserve most or all of the possessions they accumulate
through hard work and effort, the sheer luck of being born into the right
family or a particularly thriving homeland also accounts for a major share
of the great global disparities in life chances and measurable outcomes.
The competition for income, wealth, and status does not take place on a
level playing field, as opportunities for education and social mobility are
never evenly distributed, either within or between societies.
Bridging the gap between the ideals of the Christian principle of equal
dignity, on one hand, and the blatant perennial differences of wealth and
privilege that divide people into distinct social classes, on the other hand,
is a major challenge. Just how much of the vast divide between the rich
and the poor is justified? What policies can and should be implemented
to alleviate the grinding poverty that so often persists side by side with
conspicuous and often wasteful luxury? No one expects rapid progress
toward the goal of universal recognition of fundamental equalities. It is
a safe bet to wager that future generations will witness the same glaring
disparities in wealth, income, and power that trap millions in destitution
and deprive them of their full dignity today. However, the realization of
greater equality, at least in guaranteeing all people life and access to the
basic goods necessary for a dignified livelihood, remains a noble aspira­
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 83

tion and a worthy focus for faith-based advocacy as well as other forms
of social activism.
The twentieth century witnessed a remarkable movement toward a
worldwide consensus regarding human rights. International covenants
(such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights approved by the United
Nations General Assembly in 1948) often base their arguments on the
centuries-old concept of human rights. Beginning especially with Pacem
in Terris in 1963, the documents of Catholic social teaching also use the
language of human rights as one way of expressing what is owed to all
human beings by virtue of their innate dignity. Pope John XXIII included
in Pacem in Terris a full listing of the many types of human rights, calling
these rights "universal, inviolable, and inalienable." This groundbreak­
ing encyclical treated various types of rights (including social, cultural,
religious, economic, political, and civil rights) and correlated them closely
with duties to be observed and fulfilled within society. Because it was the
first strong statement of a human rights position from the Church, Pacem
in Terris earned the nickname "the Catholic charter of human rights."
Pope John XXIII's encyclical echoes similar documents from other reli­
gious communities around the world that offer parallel calls for the rec­
ognition of a full range of human rights. The convergence of worldwide
opinion, both religious and secular, around human rights is an encourag­
ing sign for the prospect of greater cooperation and further improvement
in the social conditions facing people of all nations and creeds.
But it is helpful to note that the Catholic view of human rights is dis­
tinctive because it is grounded on a complete theological framework in
which the creator God is at center stage, as the ultimate source of our
rights. The Catholic tradition of reflection on human rights is also special
in that it always situates rights within human communities. In compari­
son, purely secular doctrines of rights have no similar foundation in a
compelling portrayal of human nature and its origin. In this sense, they
are "thin" doctrines, lacking a solid theory or cosmology behind them.
This is perhaps a necessary concession on the part of international human
rights advocates to the great pluralism of world opinion, a condition that
makes agreement on all but the most general principles very difficult to
sustain, but it remains a troublesome shortcoming. Such secular rights
theories are susceptible to the weighty charge that, in their portrayal of
social reality, rights just seem to float around, adhering to people without
any satisfying justification behind their passing claims and sweeping as­
sertions. Because of the resulting inability to link rights claims with cor­
responding obligations that specific parties must discharge for the benefit
of others, rights within such theories tend to remain vague and merely
hortatory in nature.
84 Chapter 5

While secular rights theories are certainly useful in speaking boldly

about our immunity from being harmed by others, the claims they make
have the shortcoming of not fitting into a shared comprehensive view of
the universe. Because they remain quite thin, such theories can offer little
guidance on difficult questions.
The treatment of rights in Catholic social teaching has the advantage of
situating talk about human rights within a more satisfying and complete
picture of the world. Because it is grounded in reverence for the sanctity
of creation and its Creator, the Catholic approach to human rights can
consider the entire web of relationships that connect God, the natural
environment, persons, governments, and local communities. Although
relatively recent, Catholic human rights theory is a particularly strong
contribution within the Church's social teaching.

2. SOLIDARITY, COMMON GOOD, AND PARTICIPATION

This second theme serves as an important counterbalance to the first

and helps to prevent a potential misunderstanding. In its high regard for
individual dignity and human rights, Catholic social teaching in no way
supports a rampant individualism that might restrict our ethical concern
to the level of isolated persons, treated merely as atomistic entities. Rights
should always be placed in the context of solidarity and concern for the
well-being of the wider community. To consider only the dignity and in­
trinsic worth of the individual in isolation risks neglecting the insight that
rights come paired with duties. All the things that persons have rightful
claims to are necessarily matched with the things these same persons are
expected to give back to others who depend upon them. The Catholic
social encyclicals teach that to be human is to experience not only rights
but also obligations to others.
Solidarity is a single word that captures a complex of meanings. It calls
attention to the readily observable and indisputable fact that people are
interdependent; they rely upon each other for almost all their biological
and emotional needs. The complex fabric of social life, including human
achievements such as language, art, culture, and education, testifies to the
many ways in which people depend on shared efforts in all fields of hu­
man endeavors. To employ the term solidarity entails recognizing human
interdependence not only as a necessary fact but also as a positive value in
our lives. We cannot realize our full potential or appreciate the full mean­
ing of our dignity unless we share our lives with others and cooperate on
projects that hold the promise of mutual benefit.
In his three social encyclicals—namely, Laborem Exercens, Sollicitudo Rei
Socialis, and Centesimus Annus—Pope John Paul II repeatedly lauds soli­
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 85

darity as an essential virtue of social life. For a variety of theological and

even political reasons, he invokes the term solidarity more than any pope
in history. He argues that God not only allows people to depend upon
each other, but absolutely wills that humans share themselves in the con­
text of intimate as well as large groupings of our neighbors. To be human
is to be a social being, one whose very life is and should be bound up with
those nearby and far away. Our destinies are linked to all other people,
whether they are our friends in close proximity or even distant strangers.
Solidarity begins as an inner attitude and, when it has fully taken root
within a person, expresses itself through numerous external activities
that demonstrate a person's commitment to the well-being of others. Just
as children naturally reach out to their peers to find playmates and to
build friendships, all humans display a natural propensity to form and
nourish many social relationships. Catholic social teaching portrays each
person as naturally fitting into the larger society. Except in unusual situa­
tions, such as pledging to become a consecrated hermit or finding oneself
shipwrecked on a desert island, human flourishing is always communal
and social. The full range of features that constitute human nature and
dignity come to maturity only in the context of community life, where
many relationships develop and ripen. Developing the virtue of solidarity
is thus the perfect antidote to any modern temptations toward an egoistic
individualism that neglects social obligations or subordinates the needs
of others to self-serving and possibly narcissistic agendas.
Two especially important aspects of social life are summarized by a
pair of terms frequently linked together in Catholic social teaching: com­
mon good and participation. To speak of the common good is to recognize
that there are numerous proper goals in life beyond our own private ben­
efits. Responsible people look for opportunities to contribute to worthy
causes and to improve society however possible, even when the benefits
of this progress will go primarily to others. In Mater et Magistra, Pope John
XXIII defines the common good as "the sum total of those conditions of
social living whereby men are enabled more fully and more readily to
achieve their own perfection" (no. 65). Everyone has an obligation to pro­
mote the common good by making whatever contributions are necessary
to improve the lives of all.
Consider one example that illustrates the obligation of all people to pro­
mote the common good. One of the key conditions for human flourishing
in society is the education and maturation of youth. Since this is often
an expensive task, and since everyone ultimately has a stake in quality
schools, it falls to every member of society to support education. It is not
far-fetched to imagine an elderly, childless couple launching an argument
to explain why they should be exempt from paying taxes to support edu­
cation for future generations. Perhaps this couple would argue that they
86 Chapter 5

themselves will not benefit from costly improvements in public schools,

as neither they nor any members of their immediate family will be at­
tending schools. At first blush, based solely on the logic of self-interest,
such an argument seems to make a certain amount of sense. However,
an understanding of common good that is consistent with Catholic social
teaching would point to the obligation of all citizens, however indirect
their stake, to make significant sacrifices for such improvements that will
bring broad benefits to society, including future generations. The impor­
tance of such contributions transcends the expected benefits to any given
individual; people pay their share of social dues simply because they are
members of society.
Perhaps the most compelling example of an urgent common good
issue today involves the natural environment. Every creature on earth
depends upon a healthy ecosystem for its continued existence. Human
mishandling of the environment has led to crises such as global warm­
ing, resource depletion, endangered species, and pollution in all its forms.
Everyone has an obligation to contribute to conditions that will serve life
better and provide ecological sustainability to benefit future generations.
Because this huge and important topic appears only quite recently and
belatedly in official documents of the Church, coverage of environmental
issues will be taken up in chapter 7, where the future of Catholic social
teaching is explored. The common good will emerge in that context as a
pivotal concept in sparking concern and activism for ecological justice
and as the single most important lens through which to view future ef­
forts to preserve environmental integrity.
The other related term is participation. As the tradition of Catholic
social teaching has unfolded in its full appreciation of the equality of all
members of society, the theme of equal participation has come to play a
more and more important role in its documents. Every person has at once
a right and a duty to participate in the full range of activities and institu­
tions of social life. To be excluded from playing a significant role in the
life of society is a serious injustice, for it frustrates the legitimate aspira­
tions of all people to express their human freedom. Anything that blocks
full political participation (such as unreasonable restrictions on voting
rights for minorities) or economic participation (such as racial or gender
discrimination in educational or employment opportunities) counts as a
serious offense against human rights. A sincere regard for the common
good will inspire concerned members of society to oppose such injustices
and encourage full participation for all, regardless of differences of race,
gender, or creed. Calls for full and fair participation in all sectors of soci­
ety punctuate the documents of the Catholic social tradition.
These moral imperatives apply to both economic and political life in hu­
man society. The ordinary way that people participate in the economy is
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 87

through their labor. (A close look at Catholic social teaching on questions

of work and employment will accompany the examination of item 6 on
this list of nine themes.) The ordinary way for people to participate in the
political life of society is through democratic activity that allows them to
determine the basic structures of their government and to exert consider­
able influence on its ongoing operations. When it is fulfilling its proper
role, government is a helpful instrument in the hands of a people, not a
burdensome thing that drains their resources or an oppressive force that
threatens to dominate them. Government earns its legitimacy when it as­
sists the people's efforts to pursue a happy, prosperous, and meaningful
life without unduly interfering with their God-given liberties, including
freedom of religion and conscience.
Catholic social teaching portrays government as the privileged agent
of the common good and as a natural part of a well-ordered human
community. The God who intends people to live together in society also
enlightens their minds as they seek to organize their large-scale social
cooperation. Citizens naturally turn to the assistance of properly selected
public authorities whose policies supplement private efforts to order
society justly. These government officials are entrusted with the task of
safeguarding the rights of all and carrying out the full range of duties to
other members of society. Without government as a vital expression of
human solidarity, individuals could do little to ensure peace and advance
the cause of social justice. Further commentary on how the tradition of
Catholic social thought treats the role of government, including prudent
limits to state intervention in society, appears in this chapter's section on
the principle of subsidiarity.

3. FAMILY LIFE

It makes good sense to follow the treatment of solidarity, which describes

that aspect of human identity pertaining to membership in the wider soci­
ety, with a complementary treatment of the most basic unit of society: the
family. The family occupies a special place in Catholic social teaching. It
is the most intimate sphere in which people cooperate and the first place
where children learn about themselves, develop their individual identi­
ties, and discover their vocations within the wider social world. Church
documents sometimes refer to the family as the "domestic church"
because it is also where young people first encounter God, form their
consciences, and learn moral virtues. Elsewhere the family is referred to
as the "first cell of society," for larger institutions cannot substitute for
the important social roles played by families. The responses of justice and
charity that are called for in the social encyclicals depend upon decisions
88 Chapter 5

made along with loved ones in the context of family life and on the fun­
damental level of the individual household.
The well-being of the entire society absolutely depends upon healthy
families, committed marriages, and responsible parenthood. Family life is
where people learn and practice the virtues of love and compassion that
allow them to imagine alternatives to the ruthless competition and selfish
individualism witnessed all too often in the sphere of business, commerce,
and market-based society. Outside of family life, it is rare to witness a
spirit of profound self-sacrifice and generous giving to others that refuses
to count the cost to oneself. But within our families, no one is surprised
by (and, indeed, we almost expect) habitual acts of forgiveness and self­
emptying love on the part of spouses, parents, and siblings. In a world of
bewildering complexity and rapid, unpredictable change, the stable rela­
tionships of family and home life are like a safe harbor in a fierce storm.
Families are the place where the unconditional love of God is reflected in
everyday human activities, where people gain a glimpse of the unity and
communion that they hope to experience in the Kingdom of God.
But it is wise also to be on guard against excessive idealism about fam­
ily life. Real-life families face serious challenges and numerous problems,
from within (stemming from their members, who are rarely saints) and
from outside (stemming from the public world beyond the household). To
its credit, Gaudium et Spes, the 1965 Vatican II document that contains the
most extended treatment of family life out of the thirteen Vatican social
teaching documents, describes a number of these challenges in a frank
and eye-opening way. Several pages of this document are devoted to the
problems encountered by families today. Gaudium et Spes introduces its
survey of these problems with the compassionate observation that

serious disturbances are caused in families by modern economic conditions,

by influences at once social and psychological, and by the demands of civil
society, (no. 47)

Many of these problems come from perennial sources of hardship that

vex humanity in every age, such as poverty, illness, materialism, and the
irresponsibility and routine inattentiveness of family members. Others
come from newer pressures, such as overwork, modern rootlessness, the
entry of more women into the paid workforce with a resulting scarcity
of reliable daycare, and the adjustments associated with divorce and
blended families. Indeed, our thinking about family life itself is constantly
challenged by the existence of new family patterns that do not conform
to accustomed notions of the nuclear family. One controversial challenge
is the growing legal recognition accorded to same-sex couples, who in
some jurisdictions are now entitled to a range of civil and economic ben­
efits that in some cases are exactly equivalent to what traditional married
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 89

couples enjoy. Households nowadays form and combine in numerous

nontraditional ways, often witnessing novel patterns of relationships
among children and adults drawn from several generations. Family ties
are not as simple as they once were.
In the face of such challenges, wise public policies can make a huge
contribution to the health of millions of families. A forward-thinking
government will invest prudentially in families through such measures as
social welfare programs, subsidies for quality daycare, medical leave pro­
visions, unemployment compensation, and suitable retirement benefits.
Pope John Paul II offers a comprehensive list of constructive government
policies toward families in his 1981 encyclical Laborem Exercens (see nos.
10 and 19). Certain nations, particularly in Western Europe, are far ahead
of the United States in adopting such family-friendly economic policies
and guaranteeing necessary resources to struggling families. Corpora­
tions and other private institutions are also under obligations to support
family life for the benefit of their employees, their customers, and all
citizens. Catholic social teaching suggests that any compassionate society
will count the health of family life as among the highest priorities on its
policy agenda.

4. SUBSIDIARITY AND THE PROPER ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

Of all nine themes treated in this chapter, this one features the title that
will probably baffle the most people. The term subsidiarity comes from
the Latin word for assistance, and it refers to the way the various levels
of society should relate to each other and assist one another in bringing
about the best outcomes for all people. The term was coined by Pope Pius
XI, who, in the 1931 encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, draws a distinction
between "higher collectivities" on one hand and "lesser and subordinate
bodies" on the other hand.
Pius XI's message is about the proper division of labor among human
institutions. For example, there are some tasks and goals that should be
accomplished on the local level and others that are more appropriate for
larger entities, such as national governments. While it is not always im­
mediately clear which level applies best to a given task, the rule of thumb
laid out in Catholic social teaching is to rely as much as possible on those
solutions that are closest to the people affected and that employ the small­
est groupings and mechanisms that are still effective and efficient. Abra­
ham Lincoln was thinking of the same delicate balance when he stated,

The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people

whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot so well
do, for themselves—in their separate, and individual capacities. (Abraham
90 Chapter 5

Lincoln, fragment on government, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, ed.

Roy P. Basler, vol. 2, pp. 220-21)

This wise description of the proper balance to be struck in relying on gov­

ernment action is surely a better guide to real-life situations than the often
quoted but overly simplistic motto "He governs best who governs least."
One of the benefits of the principle of subsidiarity is that it respects the
natural groupings that people form with their neighbors. For example, if
the people of a small village agree on a goal (say, constructing a new road
or cleaning up a polluted swamp) and have the means to accomplish it,
they should avoid involving any larger bodies in the task. Pope Pius XI
specifically mentions not only geographical but also vocational groupings
(trade and professional bodies such as labor unions and the medieval
occupational guilds they had gradually replaced) among those human
associations that should exercise rightful autonomy where possible. Their
activities should not be subsumed under larger umbrellas unless there are
good reasons and some real benefits from this shift.
But Pius XI hastens to add an insight that the common sense of any
attentive observer of human affairs might also suggest: there are many
occasions when larger bodies can make a real and indispensable contribu­
tion to local efforts. In terms of American government, this would refer to
the need for state or even federal assistance to supplement the efforts of
towns, municipalities, and counties. In many projects, such as large-scale
public works, regional infrastructure improvements, pollution control,
air-traffic control, and especially homeland security, there is no substitute
for government activity on higher levels.
As many episodes in human history demonstrate, large-scale efforts of
national governments are often the only effective means of marshaling and
mobilizing the resources needed for immense and complex tasks. Without
the authority and funding mechanisms of a centralized government, nei­
ther national defense, nor a parks system for preserving wildlife, nor many
other desirable resources would be possible. This insight is captured in the
common expression "You should have only the government you need, but
also all the government you need." While it will always be necessary to
make judgments on a case-by-case basis, a good summary of the wisdom
of subsidiarity is "as small as possible, but big when necessary."
Pope Pius XI lived in an age that was witnessing a disturbing rise of
totalitarianism, including the threats of fascism and communism. His
wise counsel to resist needless centralization echoes to our own day,
when so many people also recognize the drawbacks and inefficiencies of
an overreliance on large-scale government. Overly intrusive government
reduces incentives for beneficial self-help and may have such unintended
consequences as fostering an attitude of learned helplessness. To avoid
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 91

such pitfalls of what has been called "the nanny state," it is certainly
desirable to respect the authority of local institutions, from voluntary as­
sociations to families themselves. Nevertheless, the antigovernment reflex
often goes too far. It is prudent to remember that national governments
are not to be portrayed as our enemies but rather as the very instruments
by which citizens join their efforts together when necessary to accomplish
important goals that could not be addressed on local levels.
Members of the Catholic Church are, of course, not the only ones
grappling in recent decades with sincere efforts to strike a healthy bal­
ance in attitudes toward central government. A wide variety of political
philosophers, public officeholders, and other observers have reflected
profoundly on how best to recognize the proper circumstances that jus­
tify government action. Many such voices have converged around what
is sometimes called the "sensible center" of the spectrum of opinions
on such questions. Echoing the insights of the principle of subsidiarity,
whether or not they actually use the term, such commentators stress the
wisdom of avoiding either extreme position, in an effort to be neither
addicted nor allergic to state intervention in the life of society. Govern­
ment is not always the problem, nor is it always the solution to social
problems. The best way to judge proposals for public collective action is
on a case-by-case basis, carefully weighing goals and resources and avail­
able alternatives. Wise public policy depends upon a polity's ability to
grow beyond mere sloganeering, blanket generalizations, and ideological
posturing to come up with constructive discernment regarding what truly
advances the common good.
As long as a given society maintains a robust set of medium-sized bod­
ies and voluntary associations that bridge the levels between individuals
and their national government, a healthy balance can be established that
averts the threat of totalitarian control. People will still have the freedom
to join clubs and participate in local affairs without feeling dwarfed by
an overactive and intrusive government. Most citizens will discover their
richest satisfactions in belonging not just to a nation but also to organiza­
tions of like-minded people in groups such as the Knights of Columbus,
Rotary, Elks Clubs, the St. Vincent de Paul Society, and numerous leisure
associations, from bowling leagues to golf clubs. Through these affilia­
tions, society can progress smoothly, taking advantage of the efficiency of
large-scale endeavors at the same time that it respects the rights and pre­
rogatives of individuals and local bodies. Because it is widely recognized
that the health of a given society depends upon the vitality of such groups
(sometimes called the mediating structures of civil society), sociologists
take special care to measure the prevalence and popularity of such non­
governmental and voluntary associations. If people were to cease exercis­
ing their right to free assembly (that is, if they suddenly stopped being
92 Chapter 5

"joiners"), this would serve as a warning sign that democracy is losing

some of its strength and fading in its appeal.
At the heart of the principle of subsidiarity, then, is the crucial distinction
between state and society. Catholic social teaching has long been mindful
that the strength and vitality of a people goes far beyond its government
structures and officials. However useful and necessary government action
is, it must never be forgotten that the state is just one small part of the
larger society that it is meant to serve, never to dominate or control.

5. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP IN MODERN

SOCIETY: RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Chapter 4 noted the wisdom with which St. Thomas Aquinas treated the
difficult subject of private property. His writings on the subject recog­
nized two competing values: the requirements of the common good, on
one hand, and the advantages of individual ownership of property, on the
other hand. As seen earlier in this chapter, a true respect for the common
good suggests that the material things necessary for a good life should be
widely available for use by the whole human community. But the Catho­
lic tradition also testifies to the benefits of individual ownership, which
not only encourages the most efficient and orderly of arrangements for
material goods but also offers people an incentive to be productive and to
care for the goods God has created.
Catholic social teaching has closely followed the path mapped out by
Aquinas regarding property and has attempted to apply his principles
to new situations in the modern world. From the 1891 encyclical Rerum
Novarum on, Catholic social teaching has consistently defended the basic
right to private ownership of property. But it has also adjusted its mes­
sage to account for new situations and needs that place prudent limits
on property holding and therefore has issued stern warnings against
unlimited acquisition of wealth and inordinate concentrations of power.
To ignore the needs of our less-fortunate neighbors, whether out of selfish
motives or mere neglect, is to frustrate the very purpose of God in creat­
ing the material world we share. The Creator intends the common gift
of the earth to be used for the nourishment and sustenance of all God's
children, not just for the benefit of a few privileged members of society.
A good example of this type of prudential limitation on the holding
of property appears in the 1967 encyclical Populorum Progressio. In para­
graph 23 of that document, Pope Paul VI reminds us that

private property does not constitute for anyone an absolute and uncondi­
tional right. No one is justified in keeping for his [or her] exclusive use what
he [or she] does not need, when others lack necessities.
 Nine Keif Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 93

In the very next paragraph, the pope indicates the contemporary injustice
that prompted him to repeat this long-held Christian prohibition against
the hoarding of wealth. Those who hold a great deal of property (Paul
VI was probably thinking about the wealthy owners of Latin American
latifundia, or large landed estates) hurt the poor when they allow their
plantations to lie fallow for long periods of time while nearby landless
and jobless peasants are close to starvation. The encyclical reaches the
judgment that if these tracts of land are "extensive, unused or poorly
used" and if these ownership patterns "bring hardship to peoples or are
detrimental to the interests of the country, the common good sometimes
demands their expropriation" (no. 24).
To expropriate property means to take it from its present owner, a course
of action not normally recommended in the documents of Catholic social
teaching. The earliest social encyclicals strenuously opposed any attempts
to seize property, especially socialist and communist programs to nation­
alize industrial and agricultural property. According to Rerum Novarum
(1891) and Quadragesimo Anno (1931), this form of socialism is at variance
with natural law and constitutes an injustice to all property holders. But
by the 1960s, social conditions had changed so much that several recent
popes have modified the teaching to reflect new challenges. Even before
Pope Paul Vi's 1967 argument that some expropriation might be justified
in extreme conditions, Pope John XXIII had discussed the need to con­
sider larger shares and new types of property as the common possession
of the people of a nation. He presents these arguments in paragraphs 51
to 67 of his 1961 social encyclical Mater et Magistra. It will be helpful to
examine in some detail what he says in this pivotal passage.
Pope John XXIII spends many paragraphs of Mater et Magistra survey­
ing recent global developments, such as vast improvements in technol­
ogy, transportation, and communication. He notes,

One of the principal characteristics of our time is the multiplication of social

relationships, that is, a daily more complex interdependence of citizens. . . .
These developments in social living are at once both a symptom and a cause
of the growing intervention of public authorities in matters, (nos. 50, 60)

It follows that a proper understanding of property must also adjust to

these changed circumstances. Because all people are increasingly depen­
dent upon certain types of industrial production (such as electricity, oil,
and communications), the companies that make up these industries must
be especially responsive to the needs of all people.
John XXIII calls this process of guaranteeing greater accountability and
social responsibility socialization, and he identifies government as its pri­
mary agent. Alongside the familiar private obligation upon each person
to pursue the common good, the Church had now come to recognize
94 Chapter 5

the legitimacy of public and governmental efforts to exercise socially

responsible use of property. By no means does this suggest that all prop­
erty should be collectivized or that all industries should be nationalized.
Rather, it implies that the social character of property can be safeguarded
when certain key utilities are regulated or perhaps even owned by the en­
tire people as represented by their government. To contemporary observ­
ers, this is not really such an unfamiliar idea; many utilities, even in the
United States, are considered to be in the public domain or have come to
be at least partially regulated by various government agencies to prevent
harmful monopolistic behavior by private corporations.
The notion of socialization was widely misunderstood when Ma­
ter et Magistra first appeared. Some people, for example, confused the
term with the similar-sounding word socialism. William F. Buckley, a
prominent Catholic intellectual and political correspondent, commented,
"Mater si, Magistra no." With this Latin phrase, a play on words making
mischievous reference to the title of Pope John XXIII's letter, Buckley
meant that he would continue to consider the Church his spiritual mother
(mater) but no longer a reliable teacher (magistra) on social issues. Buckley
and other free-market conservatives feared that John XXIII was advocat­
ing not just the prudent limitation of private ownership of property, but
its utter elimination. They did not trust the principle of subsidiarity to
guard against a rampant centralization of the functions of government.
Nor did they welcome the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes, which,
when it appeared four years later in 1965, reaffirmed socialization as an
important principle to advance the common good and the rights of the
most vulnerable members of modern interdependent societies.
We have already seen Pope Paul Vi's treatment in 1967 of the oc­
casional necessity of expropriation of private property. Twenty years
after that comment appeared in Populorum Progressio, Pope John Paul II
introduced yet another way of thinking about limitations upon private
property. In paragraph 42 of Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, he writes,

The goods of this world are equally meant for all. The right to private prop­
erty is valid and necessary, but it does not nullify the value of this principle.
Private property, in fact, is under a social mortgage.

Anyone who has ever held a mortgage on a house surely knows what
this means. Just as borrowers cannot truthfully say that they fully own a
house until the bank mortgage is completely paid off, no one can really
claim to be the final owner of the material gifts that come from God. As
long as we remain God's handiwork, our holding of property is strictly
conditioned on fulfilling our social obligations to the rest of God's crea­
tures. As a matter of fact, this insight has long been incorporated into U.S.
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 95

law, which recognizes the principle of eminent domain as an exception

to the legal system's usual stance of according nearly absolute property
rights to holders of title deeds. Under this legal principle, land or other
property that is judged especially critical to the public interest may be
altered or even seized outright (usually with significant compensation to
its previous owner) by public authorities in order to provide for crucial
public needs, such as security or infrastructure improvements.
In either its legal or its more thoroughly theological versions, this in­
sight into the fundamental nature of property ownership challenges many
assumptions about the relationship between people and their goods. To
recognize our property as coming under a social mortgage means that we
cannot disregard the needs of the less fortunate, use our property in ways
that harm them, or exclude them from full participation in society. No one
who affirms the principle that material goods are intended for the benefit
of all, a prominent theme of Catholic social teaching, can rest easy with
an economic system where ability to pay is the only legitimate claim to
vital goods such as food, housing, and health care. John Paul II's words,
like those of several of his predecessors who issued social encyclicals, of­
fer much to think about regarding the social dimension of the property
that people hold.

6. THE DIGNITY OF WORK, RIGHTS OF WORKERS,

AND SUPPORT FOR LABOR UNIONS

As chapter 3 documented, the historical origin of the tradition of Catholic

social teaching is closely bound up with the Church's concern for work­
ers. Social Catholicism in the nineteenth century courageously dedicated
itself to improving the conditions of labor wherever possible. In many
ways, the Church was ahead of its time in advocating for better treatment
of workers. Contemporary observers may take for granted many of the
original goals of these early church efforts. Government has become the
instrument that now routinely enforces prevailing labor protections, at
least in most industrialized nations. These include minimum wage laws,
safety and health regulations, worker compensation, maternity leave,
pension plans, social insurance, and the rights of workers to organize into
labor unions.
The two encyclicals with the most extensive treatment of labor is­
sues are Rerum Novarum in 1891 and Laborem Exercens in 1981. Although
separated by ninety years, they share at least one remarkable feature:
both display a tendency to move back and forth rather quickly between
abstract theological reflection and practical principles of worker justice.
This quick passage from eternal truths to specific measures reflects the
96 Chapter 5

great confidence shared by both their authors that the concrete reforms
advocated in these documents are fully congruent with the will of God
for the world. Both Leo XIII and John Paul II hold up an ideal of worker
justice that demands close attention to the specific conditions that face
workers in the actual workplace and in the labor markets that determine
the availability of work and the terms of employment. While both popes
respect the fact that the great diversity of conditions complicates the way
broad principles of worker justice are applied from place to place, neither
is shy about insisting on the ethical importance of concrete measures,
such as the institution of "living wages" and reasonable work hours, for
the entire workforce.
Of all the positions regarding work staked out within Catholic social
teaching, perhaps the most controversial is the Church's abiding and
enthusiastic support for labor unions. Workers' rights to organize and
enter into collective bargaining are considered an important outgrowth
of other human rights, such as the right to free association and the right
to participate fully in the economic and political life of society. Of course,
it is well-known that labor unions have come under substantial criticism
on a number of grounds, sometimes with good reason. For example, we
often hear them associated with corruption, favoritism, and the threat
of disruptive and potentially violent strikes. They also are accused of
driving up the cost of doing business and sacrificing the international
competitiveness of domestic industries because of the allegedly excessive
wage demands they make. Union detractors often appear to be winning
the day, as the labor movement has suffered a series of setbacks in recent
decades.
Certain problematic aspects of union activity are undeniable. Yet
Catholic social teaching forthrightly contends that a world without labor
unions would witness a much less favorable environment for achiev­
ing justice and an equitable sharing of the earth's resources. Without
the ability to combine their voices through the collective bargaining
power of organized labor, workers would be at the mercy of their far
more powerful employers who could easily take advantage of workers'
inferior position. Viewed from this perspective, labor unions are crucial
elements in the overall balance of power in the economy, and Catholic
social teaching consistently portrays them as playing a constructive role
in the pursuit of economic justice. Indeed, it is increasingly a source of
concern that in many places unions seem to be on the decline. As unions
represent a smaller and smaller percentage of the overall workforce and
enjoy a lower profile in economic life, the power of workers to bargain ef­
fectively to protect their rights will unfortunately diminish greatly. This
is why Pope Benedict XVI's 2009 encyclical Caritas in Veritate (see no.
64) took such great pains to urge the expansion of labor unions in both
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 97

developed and developing countries. Expanding protections for workers

is an important measure of authentic human progress that transcends
merely material gains.
It is, of course, not surprising that owners and executives of large cor­
porations have frequently opposed and resisted, sometimes with coercive
and even blatantly illegal tactics, the unionization of their shops. Manage­
ment has every incentive to squeeze workers out of higher pay and fringe
benefits in order to lower the production costs of their enterprises. The
history of labor relations reflects the often conflictual nature of employer-
employee interactions, although the historical record also contains much
encouraging evidence that mutual respect and constructive cooperation
can develop, with or without the presence of labor unions. One recur­
ring problem is that union-free workplaces may easily devolve into
exploitative environments, as the persistence of degrading sweatshop
conditions in many places attests. A healthy union presence in a given
industry may well be the best way to retain adequate checks against po­
tential labor abuses. Those who argue that unions are unnecessary today
generally present only one side of these complex issues. Their argument
that benefits will eventually trickle down to all workers in a prosperous,
competitive industry, even in the absence of vital labor unions, is an as­
sumption that contradicts much of the evidence produced by studies in
labor economics.
Alongside its support of labor unions, Catholic social teaching contains
many additional messages about work. In these documents labor is por­
trayed neither as merely a necessary evil nor as a drudgery-filled means
to the end of supporting family life; rather, labor is presented as some­
thing that is intrinsically good for all people. Through their work, ordi­
nary people regularly discover rich sources of meaning, a renewed sense
of purpose, and the opportunity to develop their full potential. Even in
the humdrum routine of daily life in the workplace, work is more than
a taxing or boring necessity. At its best, engaging in labor opens up new
avenues of communication and planning with our colleagues, with whom
we toil for common purposes and build up mutual respect.
Of course, by painting this rosy picture of the creative possibilities of
work, Catholic social teaching in no way intends to ignore or invalidate
the real-life problems that accompany so many jobs. For too many people,
the workplace does remain a place of drudgery, conflict, repeated humili­
ation, and even despair. But at the same time, work represents a positive
opportunity to collaborate with others, to develop particular skills, and
to contribute distinctive individual talents to the wider society. As long
as people work, they will have to look at both sides of the coin of human
experience, neglecting neither the positive nor the negative aspects of
what it means to labor.
98 Chapter 5

Besides its practical benefits, then, human labor also carries theological
significance, as it contains the human response to the God who invites
all people to become cocreators of the material world. This is why hu­
man work should never be treated as a mere commodity, something to
be bought and sold in a cavalier way in impersonal markets. This is also
why workers must not be treated as cogs in the huge machine of produc­
tion—an attitude that offends the dignity of all. These concerns are espe­
cially prominent in Laborem Exercens, where John Paul II repeatedly insists
on the "priority of labor over capital." Through labor, people pursue not
only a job or a career but also a vocation—a calling in which they are sum­
moned by God to develop their capabilities and to follow the Carpenter
from Nazareth on the path of discipleship. Catholic social teaching is a
great resource for the increasingly numerous attempts to develop a full­
blown theology of work and indeed to discover a spirituality of labor
appropriate for our age.

7. COLONIALISM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

A major topic of Catholic social teaching in the last half century concerns
the legacy of colonialism and the challenge of economic development in
the poorest parts of the world. In advocating for reforms to ensure fairer
treatment for less-developed nations, the Church enters into a long and
complex debate about the nature of economic justice on the international
scene. Understanding what is at stake involves appreciating the historical
dimensions of the world economy and its roots in the unfolding events of
the past five hundred years or more. Some of the ongoing conversation
focuses on formal patterns of colonization, while other observers express
concern about less obvious but equally pernicious practices described as
neocolonialism or neo-imperialism. While some of these concerns may
sound like old news by now, the Catholic Church's long advocacy for
core values like fair international trade and self-determination displays a
relevance that spans the centuries.
In the contemporary race for economic progress and higher standards
of living, it is obvious that entire regions of the world suffer serious and
unfair disadvantages. Competition today does not unfold on a level play­
ing field at all, for the simple reason that centuries of domination and
unfair practices have trapped many lands into conditions of economic
backwardness and subordination. Even after achieving formal political
independence, such nations find themselves deprived of true self-deter­
mination, largely because the economies of these lands have been warped
by prolonged experiences of dependency and domination. These many
faces of injustice are the contemporary legacy of patterns of trade and
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 99

resource exploitation that began with the age of global exploration in

the fifteenth century. They eventually included the horrendous African
slave trade, the bloody age of the gold-obsessed Conquistadors in Latin
America, and other brutal episodes on all those continents that fell under
the domination of European colonial powers. Because these long-stand­
ing patterns of inequity cannot be attributed to any single individual, but
rather are rightly blamed on entire social systems that display a certain
momentum of their own, the terms social sin or structural evil have been
applied to them in recent Catholic ethical thought. Chapter 7 will treat the
topic of social sin more thoroughly as it considers future themes within
Catholic social teaching.
Besides the political and economic changes wrought by Europeans ar­
riving in the New World, Africa, and Asia after the time of Columbus,
the colonizers also pursued a religious agenda. The ships of European
explorers and soldiers also carried priests, preachers, and missionaries
seeking to spread Christianity to indigenous peoples around the world.
Historians have long debated how best to construe the activities and last­
ing legacy of that age of exploration and colonization. Critics of Western
Christianity are quick to point out that European-controlled churches
were, for too long, silent about the abuses of the British, French, Spanish,
Dutch, Portuguese, and other empires, for the obvious reason that Catho­
lic and Protestant missionaries often relied on these European colonial
regimes as their own base of operations. Accounts of forced baptisms
and dubious conversions coerced at gunpoint only add to the sense of
shameful behavior on the part of colonizing powers and their religious
collaborators. There is much truth in the charge that missionaries of many
stripes were complicit in the injustices of the colonial era, although careful
historical research reveals that many such preachers and ministers were
also bold in denouncing injustices, including the slave trade and horrify­
ing patterns of murderous assaults against indigenous populations.
Everyone agrees that the present economic order features large and dis­
turbing gaps between the world's richest and poorest lands. Most people
further agree that the histories of European colonialism and superpower
imperialism have played an important role in causing these glaring dis­
parities. The remaining differences of opinion concern how much blame
to assign to particular international actors who have contributed to these
injustices, as well as the hard task of identifying the wisest strategy to ad­
dress global poverty and underdevelopment today.
Catholic social teaching weighs in on these complicated topics by offer­
ing two sets of ideas. The first is the more consistent part of its message. The
Church repeatedly insists that all people have a moral obligation to care
deeply about world poverty and to do all they can to address this scourge
on our common humanity. Despite the artificial divisions of people
100 Chapter 5

into races, religions, and nations, all are members of a single human fam­
ily. Hunger and disease in any part of the world should be a concern for
all people and demands the urgent attention of all. The strenuous efforts
of people in the richest nations to combat poverty in the poorest lands,
even thousands of miles away, are essential and encouraging expressions
of human solidarity.
Repeated calls for "mutual assistance among nations" and "taking into
account the interests of others" are sprinkled throughout paragraphs 157
through 211 of Pope John XXIII's 1961 letter Mater et Magistra, the first
section of any social encyclical to deal extensively with global poverty.
The injunction that believers cannot remain indifferent to any human suf­
fering, no matter how far away it might be, is heard frequently in practi­
cally all the social encyclicals since then. If we are indeed to fulfill our
role as our brother's keeper, then we must resist all temptations toward
utter selfishness and isolationism and truly involve ourselves in advanc­
ing the well-being of the very poorest residents of our planet. While we
often hear the expressions first world/third world or global north/global
south, we are called to look beyond these artificial divisions to the com­
mon humanity and essential unity of all who share the earth.
The second way Catholic social teaching addresses poverty and under­
development is by inviting believers to ponder the causes of these prob­
lems and to offer suggestions for improvement. This message is harder to
summarize because the advice offered by church leaders has shifted over
time. At first, proposals contained in encyclicals remained cautious and
halfhearted, as they focused mainly on the moralistic level of urging in­
dividual moral enlightenment and recommending the practice of virtues
such as charity and prudence. This turns out to be quite understandable,
since it is much easier to call attention to problems such as world poverty
than it is to enter the controversial arena of debate over the precise causes
of and most effective solutions to these problems. But as the seriousness
of global poverty became clearer, the Church felt a new urgency to reach
beyond the level of vague recommendations, such as Mater et Magistra's
somewhat timid call for "international cooperation." In a postcolonial
age, Catholic social teaching needed to become more specific about the
changes that were so desperately needed. The time had come to start in­
quiring about particular solutions: What kind of cooperation? To combat
which evils? To change which structures?
Among the church leaders most impatient for sweeping changes were
the bishops assembled at the Second Vatican Council, including Pope
Paul VI, who presided over the concluding sessions of the Council and
led the Church until his death in 1978. Because the bishops at Vatican II
were assembled from all over the world and shared close quarters for
many months, they had ample opportunity to consult with one another.
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 101

They talked frequently about the dire conditions facing millions of people
who aspired against long odds for a better life. In their many formal as
well as informal deliberations, these hundreds of bishops compared notes
about how their efforts to be good pastors were so often frustrated by the
desperate poverty that discouraged, disrupted, and even directly threat­
ened millions of human lives in their various homelands.
Several inspiring passages in the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes
reflect the concern and sincere search for solutions on the part of the
world's bishops. An especially stirring section, paragraphs 63 through 72,
includes a lament over the state of a world in which, all too often, "luxury
and misery rub shoulders." Paul VI, the first modern pope to travel
widely outside of Europe, went even further in addressing the Church's
concerns about maldistribution. He dedicated major sections of three
important social teaching documents (Populorum Progressio, Octogesima
Adveniens, and Evangelii Nuntiandi) to the problem of world poverty. Here
and in many other writings and speeches, Pope Paul VI sincerely wrestled
with the urgent puzzle regarding what should be done by the Church,
by individual nations, and by international agencies to address global
underdevelopment.
The writings of Paul VI ushered the Catholic Church into a new era
of reflection and advocacy regarding international economics. After the
1967 encyclical Populorum Progressio, there was no turning back to the
former timid approach that consisted mostly of hand-wringing and vague
moralizing about how the wealthy should find it in their hearts to offer
charitable assistance to the destitute. The pope boldly identified the vast
inequalities separating rich and poor nations as unjust results of sinful
greed and of evil structures within world trade and finance that shut the
majority of the world's population out of opportunities for self-improve­
ment. While some of the blame might be placed on past generations and
the inheritance of European colonialism from previous centuries, the
continuation of these imbalances must be confronted and condemned.
Pope Paul VI contended that economies must be restructured to
serve true and deep human needs, not primarily the mere wants of the
most affluent. He advocated such measures as (1) land reform in the
third world; (2) an end to export-maximizing policies that warped lo­
cal economies by favoring the production of goods like cash crops and
extracted raw materials that would be most profitable for a few, not
most useful for the many; and (3) more generous international aid to
support micro-development and to increase the availability of credit to
farmers and townspeople in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Measures
such as these are designed to place more of the tools necessary for self­
improvement in the hands of those who currently have no access to
these critical resources.
102 Chapter 5

Sometimes in discussions on development issues, the word tools is used

metaphorically, standing for educational and employment opportunities
or other abstract categories of resources. In other instances, it is access
to tools in the literal sense that participants find themselves debating.
Micro-development projects that supply sewing machines to women's
cooperatives in Africa or farm implements to villagers in Central America
are the practical forms of assistance that produce quite tangible results
to improve the lives of the most vulnerable. Often what is required is
not necessarily an outright gift but, rather, access to credit and market­
ing arrangements that make possible modest but life-changing income­
generating enterprises such as handcrafts and fish farming.
To its considerable credit, the Church has sponsored numerous projects
such as these through Catholic Relief Services, Caritas International, and
similar faith-based organizations, but of course far more remains to be
done through international agencies, religious and secular alike. Of par­
ticular concern are the economic prospects of millions of displaced people
around the world—refugees living in semipermanent camps, asylum
seekers fleeing political persecution, and other marginalized people sepa­
rated from their homelands and normal sources of livelihood. If global
solidarity is to have real meaning beyond pleasant-sounding phrases,
then Christians and all others must commit themselves to concrete mea­
sures to restructure the world economy and provide opportunities to the
disinherited, even where these measures may entail considerable sacri­
fices on the part of the affluent.
The path taken by Paul VI was continued by John Paul II, whose three
social encyclicals also emphasize the structural dimensions of global in­
justice and maldistribution of resources. Especially in his 1987 encyclical
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, John Paul II bemoans the growing gap between rich
and poor nations, frequently contrasting the superabundance enjoyed by
a few with the desperate struggle for survival experienced by so many.
He condemns the excesses of wasteful consumerism and materialism as
evidence of a distortion he calls "super-development."
Elsewhere in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, Pope John Paul II identifies a
number of "structures of evil," including the crushing burden of inter­
national debt, the arms race, and a form of economic domination often
termed neocolonialism. Drawing upon his observations from numerous
trips throughout the world, the most well-traveled pope in all of history
denounces these harmful trends and patterns, which are responsible for
the worsening plight of the poorest as they suffer from the effects of un­
employment, housing crises, illiteracy, and other obstacles to their full hu­
man development. In prophetic words in paragraph 37 of that encyclical,
John Paul II attributes many of these global problems to two basic social
sins: the "all-consuming desire for profit" and the "thirst for power."
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 103

These evils have come to resemble idolatries in the modern world. As

mentioned previously, the relatively new notions of social sin and struc­
tures of evil will be treated more fully in chapter 7, as will the concept of
globalization, which bears obvious and close relation to the issues of eco­
nomic development and the legacy of colonialism. Suffice it to say here
that both John Paul II and his successor Benedict XVI made ample use of
the encyclical genre to urge all participants in the global economy to use
their influence to fight injustice and reform international structures that
have trapped so many in abject poverty.
Stepping back now from the details of these types of international
economic issues, let's look at questions of personal perspective that often
come into play when such large and sweeping topics are broached. It may
be hard for average Christians to know how to respond to the Church's
challenging message about worldwide economic development. Most
middle-class churchgoers in the affluent nations of the north may have a
vague sense of guilt about living in a society that benefits from the cheap
labor and resources extracted from less-developed nations, but they prob­
ably struggle to come up with practical suggestions for making immedi­
ate improvements. After all, when Paul VI called for a "civilization of
love" or John Paul II urged a "more authentic development" or Benedict
XVI appealed for "a more humane market and society," they had in mind
a thorough restructuring of worldwide patterns of trade, production, and
finance that would spread the benefits of economic progress more fairly
and widely. Although Catholic social teaching seeks to energize people
of good will to attack these problems, the astounding dimensions of the
challenges ahead can easily be experienced as paralyzing in the extreme.
Because no individual in isolation has sufficient power to change the
enormous economic and political structures that determine present con­
ditions, the model of change adopted will have to be one of gradual and
modest action, with each person pitching in as he or she is able. But even
if progress is measured in baby steps rather than giant leaps, it is impos­
sible in good conscience to ignore the call to all Christians to contribute
in some ways to alleviate the suffering of the poorest inhabitants of the
world. Besides calling individuals to be generous with the goods they
might personally control, Catholic social teaching urges its listeners to
discern and discover new expressions of solidarity with the poor. Con­
cerned Christians energized by this prophetic call might join campaigns
for worker justice, boycott products that are objectionable because they
come from sweatshops, or pressure Congress and the World Bank to for­
give more of the staggering global debt owed by less-developed nations.
These and similar action steps of our own design can be creative ways
of responding personally to the general call to global responsibility that
comes from official voices of the Catholic Church. It is understandable, of
104 Chapter 5

course, that most of the time our energies and imaginations are focused
on the smaller circle of our families, workplaces, and neighborhoods.
But this natural proclivity to tend most ardently to the familiar world at
our doorsteps should not serve as an excuse for shortsightedness or the
wearing of blinders. All socially responsible people should take to heart
the insightful (if somewhat cliched) bumper-sticker message, to "think
globally, act locally."

8. PEACE AND DISARMAMENT

In the documents of Catholic social teaching, the goal of justice is closely

linked to the ideal of peace. The proper ordering of God's creation in­
cludes not only prosperity and a fair distribution of resources but also
the security and stability that is so well summarized in the Hebrew word
for peace, shalom. Meaning more than just a temporary absence of open
hostilities, the ideal of shalom calls people to a thorough respect for all
their neighbors in relationships that are characterized by an ever-deeper
trust and a commitment to providing mutual assistance.
Of course, history teaches many hard lessons that lead perceptive
observers to expect anything but the full and immediate attainment of
the ideals of shalom. Every human age has witnessed wars, bloody civil
strife, genocide, and violent ethnic conflict of greatly disturbing propor­
tions. The shame of "man's inhumanity to man" (to cite Robert Burns's
mournful sentiment, expressed as far back as 1785) has been sparked by
greed, petty jealousies, and sometimes even explicitly religious motiva­
tions. Christian responses to war and violence must go beyond vague
feelings of distress and regret to genuine and effective strategies of peace­
making and conflict transformation. Of all the possible approaches to the
task of building peace, the two dominant Christian approaches to peace
are pacifism and the just war theory.
Chapter 4 noted the development of the just war theory as one Chris­
tian response to the conflicting values present in the real world of human
sin and division. (For a handy summary of the criteria that make up the
just war theory in its traditional formulation, see table 5.2.) It is helpful to
keep in mind the specific history of the just war approach. This tradition
of reflection grew out of the agonizing task of reconciling lofty principles
such as love of enemies and harming no one with the imperative to pro­
tect innocent and defenseless people endangered by unjust aggression in
a fallen world. From the very start, Christians rejected the extreme posi­
tion of the "total war" approach, recognizing it as completely opposed to
the teachings of Christ. However, after a few centuries questions began to
surface about whether some types of limited warfare might be allowable.
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 105

Might there be situations when we could reconcile, however uneasily,

the use of the sword with genuine Christian discipleship? Starting with
St. Augustine, Christian thinkers began to justify the use of force against
unjust aggressors in certain circumstances as the most appropriate way
to respond to the command to demonstrate love for others with all the
means at one's disposal.
The Christian presumption against violence thus encountered the noble
desire to protect the innocent from harm. Many believers reached the con­
clusion that the best anyone can do in these difficult situations is to limit
the damage that occurs while defending innocent civilians by means of
the deadly force one otherwise would choose to avoid. Taking up arms
in justified causes such as these came to be referred to as "strange acts of
love," undertaken with the same reluctance and even anguish that par­
ents feel when they are forced to discipline their unruly children. Because
it insists on employing the absolute minimum of force to achieve the ob­
jective of resolving conflicts, the just war theory can never rightly be used
to exact disproportionate revenge or to support agendas of militarism or
extreme nationalism. The just war theory came to form the mainstream of
Christian reflection on violence for many centuries, and the documents of
modern Catholic social teaching generally assume this stance in the few
places where they treat issues of war and peace in any significant detail.
Recall that chapter 4's brief treatment of the just war theory was in­
tended to illustrate how human reason serves as an important source of
Catholic social teaching and Christian ethics in general. The point being
made there was that theologians reasoned their way to the criteria of the
just war theory, rather than discovering this approach in any already ex­
isting Christian source. Another of the four sources examined in chapter
4 is revelation, specifically scripture. Surveying the New Testament, par­
ticularly the Gospels in their portrayals of the life and teaching of Jesus,
discloses no obvious support for the just war theory, or indeed for any
approach that would permit the use of force, even to defend innocent
lives. Jesus did not lift a finger to save his own life and, in fact, rebuked
those who drew the sword to defend him (see John 18:11). Many of the
sayings of Jesus lend credibility to the pacifists' claim that a true follower
of Christ follows a strict policy of nonviolence, never resorting to force
for self-defense or even in defense of innocent neighbors. If evil is to be
overcome, it will be accomplished by means that are in themselves good.
There are many versions and traditions of pacifism. Some of these are
directly inspired by the New Testament and are practiced by communi­
ties of Christians, such as the Mennonites, Quakers, and related groups
that began as offshoots of the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth
century. Within modern Catholicism, advocates of pacifism have been
relatively rare, but some branches of lay movements, such as the Catholic
Table 5.2. Categories and Criteria of Just War Theory
Latin Title English Meaning Goal Criteria
)us ad bellum Justice in entering a war Seeks to limit war by ruling out entry Traditional criteria for when war is permissible:
into conflicts for inappropriate reasons
1. Just cause: Must establish that there is a real
and certain danger.
2. Competent authority: Must be legitimate and
public (not private vigilantism).
3. Comparative justice: One's side must be
clearly more right than the adversary.
4. Right intention: Must be for the sake of
establishing peace, not for revenge.
5. Last resort: All reasonable peaceful alternatives
to war (e.g., diplomacy, economic sanctions)
must have been exhausted.
6. Probability of success: Avoid futile resistance
for a hopeless cause.
7. Proportionality: Costs incurred by the conflict
must be justified by greater expected gains.
] us in bello Justice in the conduct of a war Seeks to limit war by ruling out the use Traditional criteria for when the conduct of war is
of inappropriate means within conflicts allowable:
1. Proportionality: Responses to aggression must
not exceed initial harm. Obligation to counter
the possibility of escalation to weapons of mass
destruction.
2. Discrimination: No direct attacks on
noncombatants. Protections for all civilians.
Latin Title English Meaning Criteria Coal
lus post Justice after a war Seeks to limit war by ruling out Proposed criteria for when war planning provides
bellum strategies of withdrawal that inhibit adequately for a transition to peace:
future peace
1. Prudent withdrawal: Adequate plans for an exit
strategy to end occupations within a reasonable
period of time.
2. Immediate security: Guarantees of protection
for all parties after the shooting has stopped.
3. Long-term security: Provision for future
political stability and regional security.
4. Just accords: Promotion of treaties that deal
with all parties fairly, allow for equitable
participation, and prevent future hostilities.
5. Physical reconstruction: Commitment to repair
material infrastructure, encourage economic
revival, and clean up environmental damage
and other residual effects of war.
6. Social restoration: Efforts to rebuild social trust,
including resolving cases of wartime atrocities
and setting up truth and reconciliation
commissions as needed.
108 Chapter 5

Worker and Sant'Egidio communities, have been outspoken in support

of a lifestyle of strict nonviolence, including opposition to capital punish­
ment and all taking of life. The issue of who actually qualifies as a pacifist
becomes complicated when we start considering the many distinctions
between related schools of thought, such as those labeled "nonviolence,"
"nonresistance," and "passive resistance to evil." Despite the complexity
of the topic, suffice it to say that until quite recently, pacifism seldom re­
ceived much sustained attention in mainstream Catholic circles.
One would look in vain through the thirteen major Vatican social
teaching documents for a detailed treatment of the relative merits of
pacifism and the just war theory. The encyclicals generally assume that
a proportionate and carefully ordered use of force, when justified by a
serious threat to a nation or to innocent people, can qualify as a socially
responsible reaction when other options have been exhausted. Several
times in these writings, popes take the opportunity to decry how regret­
table the resort to violence is, urging diplomacy and negotiation as attrac­
tive alternatives to counterattacks against aggressors. Although several
of the documents use phrases such as "never again war!" the basic stance
of the encyclical tradition remains in the just war camp. However much
they detest and denounce war, popes have been reluctant to deny sover­
eign states the right they claim to engage in what they might consider to
be legitimate defensive operations. The principle that warfare might be
justified under certain conditions remains dominant in Catholic social
thought. Most recently, Pope Benedict XVI has endorsed the notion of
"the responsibility to protect" (R2P, for short) which aligns quite readily
with just war theory. This recently articulated principle of international
relations not only allows but also actively encourages great powers to use
force to resolve humanitarian crises, prevent atrocities against human
rights, and avert genocide. By praising R2P in his April 2008 address to
the United Nations and mentioning it in Caritas in Veritate (no. 67), Bene­
dict appears to be proposing R2P as a laudable justification for the use of
force, one that is in continuity with the mainstream of Catholic teaching,
as it seeks peace but makes exceptions for carefully delimited uses of war.
Especially noteworthy is Pacem in Terris, the 1963 encyclical of John
XXIII, one of several recent popes who witnessed firsthand the horror of
modern warfare. John XXIII had served in the Italian army during World
War I and was aghast at the prospect of further escalating violence, es­
pecially if it were directed against civilians. He published Pacem in Terris
in the wake of the Berlin and Cuban missile crises, when the superpower
rivalry had recklessly placed the world on the brink of nuclear war. His
heartfelt plea for peaceful resolution of differences is extremely poignant,
especially where he dedicates fifteen paragraphs (nos. 109-19 and 126-29)
to a description of the merits of disarmament and negotiation. Here the
 Nine Ke\j Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 109

anguished pontiff, writing just weeks before his own untimely death,
characterizes any nuclear exchange as completely contrary to reason, as it
would risk destroying the basis of life for everyone on earth, not just those
targeted by detonated nuclear missiles. Pope John XXIII even quotes the
words of his predecessor, Pius XII, the pope who agonized so long over
the bloody course of the Second World War, which swept around his
lonely perch in the Vatican: "Nothing is lost by peace; everything may be
lost by war."
There are several recent indications that Catholic social teaching is
moving toward a position that is somewhat closer to pacifism, as more
doubts are cast on how the just war theory is applied in modern circum­
stances. Obviously, in a nuclear age, it is hard to imagine how the just war
criteria (which prohibit disproportionate responses, needless escalation
of hostilities, and the targeting of civilians) can justify many of the ways
current weapons of mass destruction are likely to be used. In light of the
ever-present threat of swift escalation of hostilities from rifles to tanks to
nuclear weapons, all responsible observers should be hesitant to justify
the use of even conventional weapons, especially in tense regions such as
the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. Further, many voices within
and beyond the Church have pointed out how often the just war theory
has been misused in cynical efforts to cover up self-interested aggression.
Pope John Paul II, in several statements issued during the 1990s (on the
occasions of the first Persian Gulf war and later air strikes by the United
States and its allies against Iraq and in the Balkans), scolded world pow­
ers for a premature resort to force before the full range of peaceful chan­
nels had been exhausted.
The war in Iraq that started in 2003 was the occasion for further heated
debate over the merits of the just war theory. Critics cited two types of
shortcomings of the just war theory that appeared to be on display in new
and serious ways in the Iraq conflict: (1) flaws inherent in the traditional
framework; and (2) a tendency for that framework to be misused in actual
practice. Various serious controversies surrounding the false pretences
that contributed to the rush to war in March 2003 led many to conclude
that this tradition of reflection was either entirely bankrupt or at least ill-
suited to contemporary conditions. When supporters of the U.S. invasion
of Iraq claimed that action against Saddam Hussein's Iraq was justified as
a preemptive intervention, they were stretching a traditional category be­
yond recognition, as observers within and beyond religious circles made
the case that any threats coming from Iraq were so remote that they did
not really satisfy the just war theory.
Further, a modern government's ability to produce false evidence such
as manipulated intelligence data to support its case for starting a war
raises serious doubts about many of the established criteria for justifying
110 Chapter 5

the onset of hostilities. These so-called jus ad helium (Latin for "justice in
entering a war") criteria include several conditions that must be fulfilled
in order to make a credible claim that a given war has been entered into
with due cause and following correct procedures. Other new varieties
of complications include uncertainty about how to invoke properly the
authority of international institutions like the United Nations and new
questions regarding tools like economic sanctions and how they relate to
the criterion of using war only as the last resort. These novel issues raise
profound doubts about the continued viability of the traditional jus ad
helium criteria.
The other category of criteria traditionally used to measure the just
use of force is called the jus in hello ("justice in the conduct of war")
standards, which seek to limit war in specific ways once a given armed
conflict has begun. This bundle of concerns includes stern warnings ad­
dressed even to parties who can justify their involvement in a defensive
and unavoidable war. Armed forces must conduct their operations in
such a way that no harm comes to civilians, who rightly enjoy blanket
immunity from the lethal damage of war. Combatants must also conduct
themselves in such a way that their reactions are considered proportion­
ate to the threats and capability of the enemy and must not needlessly
escalate hostilities by introducing battlefield weapons of ever-increasing
destructive scale. Here, too, new global realities are raising serious
doubts that the just war theory is still capable of offering adequate guid­
ance to military powers. In an age of widespread terrorist threats, where
civilians are routinely targeted and even used cynically as either suicide
bombers or deliberate shields against enemy responses, the jus in hello
criteria appear to be terribly outdated. Even military planners who in
good faith intend to observe the rules of international law and just war
theory find their positions untenable in the face of new conditions that
blur boundaries that formerly appeared quite clear.
Interestingly, even as the war in Iraq cast growing doubts on the tradi­
tional framework for evaluating the morality of warfare, certain promi­
nent voices spoke up in an effort to salvage and perhaps to revive just war
theory. Even if the theory were renounced overnight, it would need to be
reinvented immediately, some argued, since imposing some limits upon
warfare is a recurring desire of all who seek peace. Others sought to bol­
ster a fundamental premise of just war theory, namely, its presumption
against violence, against rather hawkish commentators who increasingly
portrayed war as a neutral option that states might choose to employ on
a routine basis, as if it were just another instrument in the large tool kit
of diplomacy and foreign policy. This latter approach, influenced by the
realpolitik school of international relations, seems markedly at odds with
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 111

the original moral underpinnings of just war theory, grounded as it was

in a sincere quest to find ways to practice love of all humankind.
Perhaps the most creative recent development in just war theory is the
proposal to add a third category of criteria that must be fulfilled before
any war, even a defensive one, may be considered allowable. To the jus
ad bellum and the jus in bello criteria might be added concern for jus post
bellum—the ensuring of right order after the shooting has stopped. Pre­
sumably this would require powerful nations deciding to go to war, even
for otherwise justifiable defensive purposes, to draw up adequate plans
for the aftermath of the conflict. They would have to provide not only a
realistic exit strategy for their own forces on a reasonable timeline but also
more comprehensive arrangements for security, political stability, the
resolution of local interparty conflicts, and even environmental cleanup
after the cessation of the actual fighting. These items emerge as a solemn
responsibility of powerful countries resorting to force and must not be
treated as mere afterthoughts for invading parties, no matter how well
intentioned they might be.
It is not hard to see how this proposal for the development of jus post
bellum criteria gained broad appeal as the occupation of Iraq dragged on
for many years. The swift and successful invasion of Iraq in 2003 was
followed by a disastrous quagmire of unanticipated insurgency activ­
ity, which cost many thousands of lives on all sides and reflected a huge
failure to plan ahead. Much needless suffering could have been avoided
if the United States and its allies had drawn up postconquest plans in
advance, or if they had perhaps considered the difficulty of doing so as
a cogent reason for forestalling the invasion. Many public commentators
remarked that if the Iraq fiasco is the logical outcome of using the just
war theory, then that theory should be replaced immediately by some
alternative, perhaps even a version of nonviolence or pacifism. The case
for pacifism could be based on a number of weighty reasons. Compared
with just war theory, it is more highly principled, possesses an equally
long and rich pedigree, and may turn out to be just as practical under the
complex new conditions of international relations.
Perhaps the two most significant indications of a more favorable view
of pacifist stances within Catholicism originated not from recent popes
but from gatherings of bishops. First, Vatican IPs document Gaudium et
Spes specifically advocates the rights of conscientious objectors or, as it
describes them, "those who for reasons of conscience refuse to bear arms"
(no. 79). This innovation within Catholic social teaching opens up the way
to seeing this pacifist response to the military draft, at least on the indi­
vidual level, as a justifiable position worthy of respect. Second, the U.S.
bishops' 1983 pastoral letter The Challenge of Peace went to great lengths
112 Chapter 5

to explain the pacifist position and treated it more sympathetically than

perhaps any other major document of the Church. The letter lifted up the
contribution of this minority position in taking seriously the universal
call to commit ourselves to peacemaking and to begin this task within
our own hearts and through the lifestyle choices we make. By returning
to the New Testament and paying close attention to the signs of the times
in a dangerous world, Catholic social teaching appears to be on the brink
of passing a further negative judgment on almost all forms of warfare.
Following the U.S. bishops' call to take seriously the task of peacemak­
ing leads easily to the discovery that this path of shalom is a well-trod
route. The Christian tradition contains numerous rich resources beyond
official church teachings that feed the hunger of many for knowing and
pursuing the way of peace. Spiritual writers such as St. Francis of Assisi
and more recent social commentators such as Leo Tolstoy, Gandhi, and
Martin Luther King Jr. offer inspiring words that challenge us to imag­
ine a world of true and lasting harmony. Organized groups such as Pax
Christi, Plowshares, and Fellowship of Reconciliation extend a variety of
opportunities to pursue activism dedicated to building a more peaceful
world.
Perhaps the greatest American Catholic witness to peace comes from
the Catholic Worker, a lay movement founded in 1933 by Dorothy Day
and Peter Maurin. Although best known for publishing a newspaper and
sponsoring remarkable houses of hospitality for the needy, members of
the Catholic Worker count among their primary goals the building up of
a firm witness to peace. The organization's often-reprinted mission state­
ment, "Aims and Means of the Catholic Worker," explains the inspiration
and principles of this approach to peacemaking:

Jesus calls us to fight against violence with the spiritual weapons of prayer,
fasting, and noncooperation with evil. Refusal to pay taxes for war, to reg­
ister for conscription, to comply with any unjust legislation; participation in
nonviolent strikes and boycotts, protests, or vigils; withdrawal of support
for dominant systems, corporate funding, or usurious practices are all excel­
lent means to establish peace. ("Aims and Means of the Catholic Worker," in
Joseph J. Fahey and Richard J. Armstrong (eds.), A Peace Reader [New York:
Paulist Press, 1992], pp. 163-167)

Even those who are unable to adopt for themselves all aspects of this ap­
proach may affirm the utter dedication of the Catholic Worker movement
to offer alternatives and to shape their lives so that peacemaking becomes
one of the central concerns of everyday life. A great debt of gratitude is
owed to Dorothy Day, Peter Maurin, and their followers for supplying
this extraordinary vision for the pursuit of holiness and shalom in the
modern world.
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 113

9. OPTION FOR THE POOR AND VULNERABLE

In one sense, the notion of the preferential option for the poor is relatively
new to Catholic social teaching, as this phrase appeared in no papal so­
cial encyclical until 1987 and in no official church documents at all until
1979. But in another sense, the preferential option for those who are poor
and vulnerable has been present within the Christian tradition from the
very start. The ministry of Jesus, in both words and deeds, was deeply
wrapped up with this commitment to the well-being of the least fortu­
nate. Making an option for the poor is not just a knee-jerk reaction to give
the benefit of the doubt to those considered to be underdogs, but an abid­
ing commitment, grounded in scripture and tradition, to support social
justice by placing oneself on the side of the vulnerable and marginalized.
Through the ages, theologians and spiritual writers have reflected on
God's special relationship with the poor and disadvantaged. In bold ser­
mons and writings since the earliest years of Christianity, many church
leaders have challenged the faithful to discern certain moral obligations
suggested in the biblical motif of "the great reversal." This phrase refers to
the tendency of scripture to overturn conventional expectations about so­
cial order, such as the surprising conclusions contained in the Beatitudes
(Matthew 5:3-12 and Luke 6:20-26) and the poetic way that Mary's prayer
called the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55) praises God for lifting up the lowly.
Prophetic voices of the Catholic Church have called especially upon the
privileged to reverse the usual logic of the secular world, where the un­
bridled pursuit of self-interest and massive accumulations of wealth raise
no eyebrows, and to imitate God as best they can in exercising special
care for the poor. Without using the precise phrase preferential option for
the poor, the Church has long practiced this option in many ways, formal
and informal, as it has placed concern for the most vulnerable members
of society among its top priorities. Of course, we can all think of examples
of church leaders and practices from the past or present that have not
lived up to this principle and set of priorities, but these exceptions do not
detract from the fact that the Christian faithful over the centuries have
served as "friends of the poor."
Echoes of the preferential option for the poor ring strongly in the stir­
ring opening sentence of the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes:

The joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the [people] of this age,
especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these too are the joys
and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ, (no. 1)

In identifying itself with the concerns of the poor, the Church is here in­
terpreting its entire mission as one of service to those in need. Bringing
114 Chapter 5

the Gospel to people in the fullest sense means caring simultaneously for
their many needs, both spiritual and material. The Church is most faithful
to its identity when it is acting on the imperative to meet the urgent needs
of the most vulnerable—the ones Jesus Christ so loves. All such expres­
sions of solidarity and resulting efforts for social change are grounded on
the insight that the good news Jesus heralded was above all good news
for the poor.
The worldwide Catholic Church inherits the precise phrase preferential
option for the poor from documents of the 1979 meeting of CELAM, the
abbreviation for the Spanish words Cornejo Episcopal Latinoamericano,
translated as the Bishops' Conference of Latin America. At that meeting
in Puebla, Mexico, as at the previous CELAM meeting in Medellin, Co­
lombia, in 1968, the bishops of those lands, sharply divided as they are
between extremes of rich and poor, boldly identified the Church with the
struggles of the poor. This decisive shift was not meant to exclude anyone
from the life or concerns of the Church and certainly was not an invitation
to pass harsh judgments upon certain people simply because their bank
accounts or land holdings were exceedingly large.
Rather, the significance of this shift lies in the way it reverses a centu-
ries-long pattern that had quite tragically warped the proper understand­
ing of the mission of the Church. As long as the Church was perceived
as solidly aligned with the economic interests of wealthy landholders of
Latin America, it would remain a hindrance to the full human develop­
ment of the poor in that region. If the vast majority of people continued
to see the Church as a tool in the hands of the upper-class bosses who
appeared completely indifferent to their well-being, then this perception
would prevent the Church from ever becoming the True Church of the
poor Jesus. The initiative of the Latin American Catholic Church to adopt
the option for the poor as central to its mission was a sincere local attempt
to fulfill a mandate of Pope John XXIII. In a 1962 address explaining his
hopes for the upcoming Second Vatican Council, Pope John charted this
anticipated course: "In the face of the undeveloped countries, the church
is, and wants to be, the church of all, and especially the church of the
poor."
Clearly, the significance of this sudden about-face in the Church's
self-understanding was hard to explain outside of Latin America. To ob­
servers from other continents where social class divisions were never as
sharp, it hardly made sense. They may have feared that church leaders
were embracing uncritically a polarizing Marxist concept of class struggle
or entirely excluding the affluent from the ambit of Christian concern in
an ill-advised way. The Church has, of course, received a mission to be
an evenhanded agent of reconciliation between all people, so it would be
distressing to think of the Church as taking sides between social groups
 Nine Keif Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 115

in some crass way. It is best to understand the renewed embrace of the

option of the poor as an act of correcting an equilibrium that had over the
centuries swung sharply out of balance. The forceful restatement of the
Church's mission had become particularly necessary in Latin America
because of the need to offset that continent's long history of clerical abuse
and warped priorities.
Vatican social teaching itself had never gotten off on such a wrong
track. From its very beginning, when nineteenth-century European so­
cial Catholicism started to notice and address the plight of hard-pressed
working families, this tradition of social concern had consistently ex­
pressed the Church's mission to act as Jesus had acted in befriending the
poor of his time. In fact, the 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus contains a
passage in which Pope John Paul II interprets Rerum Novarum's call, a full
century earlier, to improve the conditions of workers as a manifestation
of the preferential option for the poor long before the phrase was coined.
John Paul points to the similarity between the Church's role as advocate
of the poor in 1891 and 1991 as evidence of the "church's constant concern
for and dedication to categories of people who are especially beloved to
the Lord Jesus" (no. 11). Indeed, throughout his long pontificate, John
Paul II made frequent reference to this concept, phrased in various
ways, as part of his trademark call to universal solidarity. Though by no
means an uncritical proponent of liberation theology, the movement that
originated the phrase preferential option for the poor, Pope John Paul II often
raised up in his addresses and writings this social priority of working for
the benefit of the least-advantaged members of society. As noted earlier in
this chapter, many of his celebrated travels abroad, especially early in his
reign as pope, featured visits to desperately impoverished neighborhoods
where he publicized the need for greater solidarity between rich and poor
around the world.
The imperative to make an option for the poor takes on distinctive
features, of course, in the social context of the world's most affluent na­
tions. Consider, for example, the significance of such an option within the
United States, the richest society in the history of the world. Although
tens of millions of Americans actually live below the federally defined
poverty line, the extent and depth of poverty in the United States cannot
compare to Latin America and similar parts of the developing world.
Distressing social divisions are not nearly as profound in a society that
is dominated by a middle-class ethos and where upward mobility, while
never easy, is at least imaginably within the reach of citizens of quite
modest means. Opportunities for advancement into the mainstream and
even upper echelons of American society exist beyond the dreams of the
vast majority of people living in other countries, who find most doors to
a materially better life shut firmly against them.
116 Chapter 5

What does it mean, then, in U.S. society, to make a preferential option

for the poor? There are no easy answers, of course, as each individual
must discern an appropriate personal response to this universal but
imprecise call. Interestingly, in the course of their 1986 pastoral letter
Economic Justice for All, the U.S. Catholic bishops speak frequently of the
option for the poor, mentioning the phrase explicitly nine times. Concern
for the poor quite evidently pervades the entire letter, and the document
urges lawmakers, citizens, consumers, and all others to measure all their
decisions by the likely effects they will exert upon the least-advantaged
members of society. To make a preferential option for the poor in a rela­
tively affluent society may not entail an agenda of drastic social change
to right a history of deep offenses against human solidarity, but it does
probably mean much greater sensitivity to the impact one's actions exert
upon the vulnerable and marginalized. In a largely middle-class society
like America, making a sincere preferential option for the poor will lead
people to revise their lifestyle choices and numerous personal decisions,
as well as to advocate for public policies to advance social justice. This
commitment might include greater support for progressive taxation mea­
sures, for social safety net programs to assist low-income families, and for
better funding for educational services and schools that serve underprivi­
leged neighborhoods.
The entire tradition of Catholic social teaching, including all nine
themes surveyed in this chapter, can be interpreted as a unified effort on
the part of church leaders to advocate for a more humane society where
the most vulnerable members are better protected from harm. With its
limited financial resources, the Church itself can do only so much to ad­
vance the lives of the poor. However, popes and bishops, as the official
voices of the Church, have exerted great efforts to speak publicly about
political, economic, and social issues that have profound impact upon the
prospects of our neediest neighbors. The rationale for all the Church's ef­
forts in this regard may be summarized precisely as the desire to make a
preferential option for the poor.
If these church efforts were to really bear fruit, then what would the
results look like? If the message of justice and peace within Catholic social
teaching were to take root in the hearts of many believers, these disciples
would work energetically for a better world, a world characterized by not
only acts of individual charity but also structures of justice and equity for
all people. Racial discrimination and unfair barriers to progress would
be eliminated. True human development would be fostered by wider
access to property and by socially responsible policies of businesses and
governments throughout the world. All social institutions, from schools
to corporations to social clubs, would be measured by how they treat all
members of society, especially the poorest. Priorities would be altered
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 117

so that more of the benefits of this abundantly blessed world would find
their way to those who currently possess the least. In a prosperous age
like the present one, no one should be excluded from enjoying an ample
array of opportunities or be left to experience the disturbing fear of per­
manent powerlessness and deprivation.
Catholic social teaching includes a call for involvement in collaborative
efforts to invite all people into the social mainstream; it is not an ethic for
apathetic or complacent people. To adopt the principles of Catholic social
thought is to concur that all people need to make sincere and vigorous
efforts so that full participation is extended to all, without favoritism or
discrimination. We all have something to contribute to the common good,
and all may benefit from the gifts that we bring to the common table of
human community and solidarity.
Although it surveys most of the ground covered in the documents of
Catholic social teaching, the list of nine themes in this chapter is far from
complete. Several of the most obvious omissions will be treated in chapter
7, which peers into the likely future of this tradition. Among the topics
noted there are globalization and environmental concern, which, as noted
earlier, richly overlap the already well-articulated concerns regarding the
common good, economic development, and other elements of Catholic
social thought.

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION

1. Which of these nine themes of Catholic social teaching do you

consider most important? Are certain ones more foundational than
others? Do some appear more peripheral, or merely build upon the
more basic ones? Do any of them challenge your previously held
belief systems or opinions regarding the role of institutions such as
government, property, labor unions, or family life?
2. How would you explain the principle of subsidiarity to a child, us­
ing the simplest possible language? Do you think that this technical-
sounding idea is at its root a commonsense principle that almost
anyone can understand if it is explained properly?
3. How helpful are the tools offered by recent Catholic social teaching
on private property? Do you think this teaching strikes the proper
balance between the individual and social functions of property
when it speaks of (1) socialization, (2) the social mortgage on prop­
erty, and even (3) the possibility of a justified expropriation of some
means of production?
4. Besides the positions mentioned in section 6 of this chapter, such
as support for organized labor and basic worker rights, what else
118 Chapter 5

could the Church be doing to foster a sense of the dignity of all

human labor? Can you think of concrete measures for spiritual en­
richment, theological education, or outreach programs that would
demonstrate greater church commitment to improving the lives of
all who work?
5. Many readers might feel that the Church's treatment of families (see
theme 3 within this chapter) is too vague or sketchy to be of much
help. What more should the Church say about family life and the
challenges facing all families today? Which further details would
be helpful to provide? Or is it in the end better to offer only quite
general principles and advice?
6. Do you find yourself favoring the approach of just war theory or of
pacifism? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each of these
Christian approaches to the task of peacemaking? Can you imagine
any creative ways of combining the insights and advantages of each?
How do recent world developments (the growth of terrorism, the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) shed light on your opinions regarding
approaches to war and peace?
7. Do you see the preferential option for the poor as primarily a re­
cently added element of the Church's social message or as truly a
continuation of what came before? Is it anachronistic to speak of the
option for the poor as a practice of the Church before the twentieth
century? How would you defend your opinion? Whether novel or
not, in what concrete ways may the option for the poor be practiced
by affluent citizens today?

TOPICS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

1. Cardinal Joseph Bernardin and his advocacy of the "consistent ethic

of life"
2. The development of human rights theory and various international
agreements to protect human rights around the world
3. The history of progress against racial and gender discrimination
and other barriers to full participation of all demographic groups in
political and economic life
4. The great variety of church documents, besides social encyclicals, on
family issues
5. The notion of civil society and the major threats to its flourishing
and vitality
6. Patterns of wealth distribution and the growth of inequality in recent
decades
 Nine Key Themes of Catholic Social Teaching 119

7. The history of the U.S. labor movement and its relationship to reli­
gious communities
8. The major schools of developmental economics and postcolonial
theory
9. Various schools of pacifism and nonviolence; the antiwar and dis­
armament movements in recent U.S. history
10. The accomplishments of successive meetings of the Conference of
Latin American Bishops (CELAM)