CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING AND THE ROLE OF STATE

A policy program based on the principles of Catholic social teaching.

Introduction

The body of writings known as catholic social teaching is not an abstract compendium of moral guidelines for the faithful, but offers a set of principles that allow the development of a complete policy program. Such a program is presented in this paper through three steps.The first step summarizes the three relationships that form the foundations of catholic social teaching: man with God, man with nature, and man with neighbor and with society. The second step discusses the principles that underly the policy program. The final step contains the details of the program.

Relationships

Man and God. The relationship between man and God is the foundation of all human activity. Life proceeds from God and is destined to return to Him. God’s love, when we open our hearts to it, powers our behavior and creates an inclination to love our neighbor and all creation. While prayer is a fundamental avenue of communication with God, what ultimately matters is our behavior and commitment to work for the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. This commitment is manifested in our relationships with nature and with neighbor.

Man and Nature. For most of the history of Catholicism there was little mention of environmental issues probably because until modern times the pollution produced by human activity was not severe enough to endanger the health of the environment. While environmental degradation intensified during the industrial revolution, low population levels facilitated its dispersion, avoiding global consequences. Saint Thomas Aquinas placed man at the apex of the natural world but did not condone environmental abuses. Still, it is safe to say that, with the exception of Saint Francis of Assisi, catholic social teaching up to Pope Benedict XVI supported an anthropocentric view of the world. Inspired by Saint Francis, Pope Francis brought environmental issues to the fore. He went beyond the duty of man to take care of nature and eliminated Saint Thomas’ ranking order of creation, elevating nature to the same level of man and recognizing the twin issues of natural ecology and human ecology. He stressed the inextricable link between the two, pointing out that the natural ecology crisis is a manifestation of the human ecology crisis because a society that neglects the poor, the weak, and the marginalized can hardly be expected to care for nature. Following Pope Francis, we can safely say that restoring a healthy relationship between man and nature requires a paradigm shift from an egocentric to an ecocentric view of the world.    

Man and Neighbor. Finally, there is the relationship among men and between man and society (the State). In this respect we should note that human activity generates moral and legal issues that require redress. The redress of legal issues is reserved for the civic authorities and is based on the need to protect life and on the magnitude of the injuries, financial and other, that individual activities impose on other persons or on society as a whole. The judgment about moral issues is God’s exclusive domain: “Vengeance is mine, and recompense”¹; God will bring every deed in judgment”². Jesus ordered us: “Judge not, and you will not be judged”³; and in the Nicene Creed we express the belief that Jesus “will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.” Thus, any religious or government body or any other organization that imposes redressing measures based on moral judgements or in cases where there are no demonstrable injuries to persons or society is usurping God’s power. The relationship among individuals is an extension of the connection between man and God. This means that even when we act in our interest we must take into account the effects of our actions on others. In economic terms, we internalize negative externalities in order to avoid injuring our neighbor and reducing the welfare of society. In the relationship between persons and society, the dominant principle is that of Saint Thomas Aquinas’s distributive justice which requires that every organization, from family to the State, must take care of all its members in a fair manner.

Principles

In this section I summarize the main principles of catholic social teaching that serve as the foundation for the policy program presented in the next section.

1. Man is the center of all human activity, not as Lord of creation but as kin to nature.

2. Because he is a child of God, man has inherent dignity and inalienable rights, including life, freedom, ownership of private property, membership in associations of mutual support, and a quality of life that allows him to be a willing and able participant in God’s plan for humanity.

4. Man finds fulfillment through work which generates benefits to both individuals and society. Work provides the means of sustenance for the individual and his family, offers the opportunity for expressing one’s creativity, strengthens social connections, and increases social welfare by expanding the wealth of the community.

5. Man has the right to a living income for himself and his family through work, to healthy working conditions, and sufficient financial support after retirement.

6. The purpose of the economic system is not to generate wealth that is appropriated by the few, but to create job opportunities for the capable and willing. It is the responsibility of government, in coordination with business and labor organizations, to support a macroeconomic structure that offers high and stable levels of employment.

7. Government policies should follow the principle of subsidiarity which implies that the central government should not take over activities that can be more effectively performed by lower levels of government or private organizations.

Policies

I can now sketch a policy program based on the above principles.

Life. Catholic social teaching is universally pro-life, an orientation not confined to the nine months of a woman’s pregnancy but extending to the entire lifespan from conception to the last breath. Moreover, it goes beyond survival and includes safety from any type of violence, particularly against women, children, and the elderly, the availability of safe drinking water and breathable air, protection of one’s means of survival, safe working conditions, and the capacity to lead a life suitable for a being originating from God and destined to return to his celestial abode. The main responsibility for the protection of life in all its elements rests with the State, and this responsibility transcends national borders. The most powerful and richest nations have a duty to help those living in poor countries to enjoy in safety a life fit for human beings.

Freedom. To fulfill his mission as a worker in the vineyard of the Lord, man must operate in an environment that guarantees freedom from compulsory indoctrination and freedom of speech, conditioned by the prohibition to do injury to others with our speech. Hate is a grave sin against the Lord. Christians are commanded to love both friend and foe and to direct their language at encouraging and uplifting others, and at bringing comfort and hope to those who suffer. Above all, man needs freedom of association and freedom of worship because he is a spiritual being. While the Church bears a major responsibility for moral development, the State has the duty and the tools to ensure that people develop their capabilities in an environment that protects freedom as well as life and property.

Kinship with Nature. For most of human history man lived in harmony with nature. Many aboriginal people revered “mother earth” and developed sustainable economic systems that respected intergenerational justice. With the onset of the industrial revolution, the bonds of this kinship began to weaken and now we have reached the point where man has turned from kin to foe of nature. The natural world is more resilient than humanity and it will still thrive after the last human walks on earth. Moreover, nature is striking back against man’s attacks. As greenhouse gases heat up the atmosphere, the climate is changing worldwide, intensifying droughts, hurricanes and floods, melting glaciers, dissolving the permaculture and releasing methane gas, raising ocean water levels, threatening many coastal cities, and making expanding areas unsuitable for human habitation. The costs of redressing the effects of nature’s vengeance are staggering and increasing with each passing year. While these expenditures add to the Gross National Product, they do not improve social welfare because they simply reverse the damage generated by the human disregard for environmental health and divert resources from the production of goods and services useful to man. The effects of environmental degradation are not spread evenly around the globe, but vary depending on geography and geopolitical conditions. As they disrupt food production, often in the poorer regions, they are forcing a new wave of migration that is adding to international military conflicts which are further diverting resources away from what people need. Soon, our conflict with nature will reach existential levels. Restoring peace with nature has become a universal obligation which requires the dedicated efforts of individuals, businesses, the Church, and the State, and requires closer international cooperation.

So far, in most countries the intervention of the State has been feeble and largely based on market mechanisms. This approach is inefficient because market mechanisms rely on price changes, but the human response to change in the prices of environmentally-destructive goods is quite weak. We need stronger laws and more punitive measures against any human activity that causes harm to the environment. Another failure of public policy is the inconsistent messaging about the environment. In some developed countries a large portion of the population, led by many politicians and public officials, ignores all the scientific evidence about climate change and manufactures conspiracy theories to explain atmospheric weather events. I suggest that governments begin delivering a more consistent message on environmental issues and expand its education reach. One effective option is the introduction of compulsory ecology classes from elementary school all the way to high school. The Church also needs to intensify its education efforts. One option would be to establish an ecology month during which homilies as commentaries of daily sacred readings would be replaced by explanations of the natural and human ecology using the blueprint contained in Pope Francis’ encyclical Beato Si’.    

Health Care. The importance of a healthy body and mind for a productive workforce has long been recognized by economists and policymakers. Because many diseases are transmissible and workers do not live and act in isolation, it has also been acknowledged that a healthy labor force can operate effectively only within a healthy society. For these reasons, all industrialized countries have developed some form of government-funded health care system that in most advanced countries covers all citizens. While the economic rationale for universal publicly-funded health care is consistent with the principles of catholic social teaching, its fundamental rationale differs drastically. For the Church, it rests on the inherent dignity of human beings as children of God. According to catholic social teaching, the provision of universal publicly-funded health care is an inalienable human right.

Education. A similar argument can be made for education. In fact, economists call health care and education merit goods on account of the large positive externalities they generate which, for the efficient allocation of resources, require public subsidization. Government support for education has evolved over time and has been predicated largely on economic considerations. As the economic structure evolved from industries that required limited educational skills - natural resources industries, primarily agriculture �" to manufacturing and later knowledge-based industries, the educational requirements of the workforce increased. Recognizing that economic growth depended to an increasing extent on the acquisition and employment of human capital, governments in industrialized countries responded by financing public education to increasing degrees and making parts of it compulsory. Starting from elementary education, the compulsory state was expanded to middle school and then to high school in many developed countries. We have now reached the stage where greater externalities are generated by post-secondary education and there is a push to extend free public education to community colleges.

While requiring increasing levels of education of the labor force, technological advances also offer cost-effective solutions for the delivery of free post-secondary education services up to the bachelor’s level. According to the US National Center for Education Statistics⁴, in 2023 over half (53.2%) of post-secondary students in the United States were enrolled in distance education. Central governments could take advantage of these rapidly-evolving technological and behavioral changes to establish national on-line universities that offer up to four years of free college and university courses. For courses requiring laboratory work, special arrangements would be made with local providers. Also, to prevent the potential of indoctrination, a central university would offer for each program a variety of streams with online courses recorded by professors with different ideological perspectives, leaving the choice to the students.  

Employment. The economic side of catholic social teaching rests on two fundamental pillars: the right to own private property and the right to earn a living income through work. According to the Church, work serves a variety of functions. At the basic level, work provides the means of physical survival for the worker and his family. To the thrifty worker it also offers the opportunity for improvements in the standard of living through the acquisition of private property with the income he saves. Work also improves social welfare as it helps transform natural resources into useful goods for the community and provides a source of income for the State.  Work also strengthens the social fabric of society because it is not performed in isolation but in groups, thus expanding the scope of interpersonal relationships, strengthening social cohesion, and enhancing the role of social capital. Finally, work helps the individual explore his capabilities and reach higher levels of self-fulfillment, and facilitates a person’s ability to participate in God’s plan for humanity. For these reasons, catholic social teaching assigns top priority to full employment as a policy objective. For the Church, the purpose of any economic system is not the maximization of profits for businesses or the maximization of utility for consumers. It is the provision of employment opportunities for all able-bodied individuals. The focus of catholic social teaching on full employment also assigns responsibilities to the individual and to the State. Because work has personal, social, and spiritual dimensions, able-bodied individuals have the obligation to be productive members of society. For its part, the State has the responsibility to create the conditions that allow every person who wants to work to find gainful employment. According to catholic social teaching, the purpose of the economic system is not to generate the highest rate of growth but to maintain high levels of employment. Moreover, economic efficiency is not a goal in itself or a means of fattening business profits, but an instrument for improving the quality of life for everyone without sacrificing the employment of many. Thus, reforms of labor laws, regulations, business practices, macroeconomic policies are legitimate only to the extent that they support the goal of full employment.

Living Wages. A cornerstone of catholic social teaching is the principle that each worker is entitled to a living wage for himself and his family. In the postwar period, policymakers tried to fulfill this principle by legislating minimum wages that would keep a full-time worker out of poverty. Over time minimum wages have failed to rise in line with overall wages and now we have reached the point where an individual working for a minimum wage is guaranteed a life of poverty. Opponents to substantial increases in minimum wages argue that such a policy would lead to higher unemployment because many small businesses, which are the backbone of the economy, could not afford to pay them. Acknowledging that the issue of the employment effects of higher minimum wages has not been conclusively resolved in the relevant literature, I suggest an alternative that includes a minimum wage and a living income, adjusted for family size. The minimum wage would be set at a level that would not create disincentives to hire while the living income would measure the financial resources required to provide a worker and his family a standard of living suitable for human beings. Technically, the development of measures of a living income is quite simple. Many countries have already developed income thresholds for measuring poverty and delivering anti-poverty programs. What is needed is determining how much higher than the poverty line should be the living income. For example, in one of the poverty measures, in Canada called the low-income measure (LIM), the poverty threshold is calculated as 50 percent of the national median income. For this living income, this rate could be raised to 75 percent, halfway between the poverty threshold and median income. Because the cost of living varies among regions within a country, living income thresholds could be adjusted to regional economic conditions. The living income would comprise two components: the wages paid by the employer and a supplement in cases where wage income falls short of the living income threshold. The living income would apply to both employees and retirees. While individuals would retain the right to work as long as they can be productive, once they decide to retire from gainful employment they should be guaranteed a living income through a combination of contributory and no-contributory pensions. The combination of publicly-funded health care and the living income would render ineffective any manipulation of working hours by firms directed at minimizing work-related benefits. The provision of universal health care would be disconnected from a person’s employment status, part-time workers would receive the living income regardless of the number of hours they worked, and all workers would receive a living income after retirement through the combination of pensions. The just treatment of part-time workers finds support in the parable of the workers in the vineyard.⁵    

In modern times, pensions and wage supplements are delivered by the State. This practice is contrary to the principle of subsidiarity and Saint Thomas Aquinas’ principle of distributive justice. The former refers to the inefficiency of a higher organization performing a job that can be better done by a lower one while the latter deals with the just distribution of resources within a given organization, from the family to the State. Burke⁶ has applied these two principles to a private firm, which is an organization (a community) united by the purpose of producing goods and services for sale. It includes all forms of business, from a sole proprietorship to a large corporation. For distributive justice to be upheld there needs to be a fair distribution of the organization’s resources and the absence of conflict among its members. In a corporation there are three groups of members: the managers (decision-makers), the workers (producers), and the shareholders (owners of capital). According to Burke, the current structure of the firm creates confrontational relationships because it treats wages as a cost that affects the salaries of the managers (who set wage rates and their own compensation) and the profits that determine the return to the shareholders. This structure has a built-in incentive to minimize labor income in order to maximize the revenue to be shared by managers and shareholders. To restore distributive justice, which is injured by the firm’s confrontational structure, Burke suggests some form of profit sharing for workers in addition to their wages.

I extend Burke’s analysis in two ways. First, I suggest that if a firm is a community subject to the requirements of distributive justice, so is the large community made up by all firms operating in the private sector. This means that the responsibility to implement distributive justice (the fair treatment of all members of the community) rests within an umbrella organization representing all firms. Second, in this context a major element of distributive justice is the provision of a living income for all private sector workers, which extends also to working conditions and pensions. It also means that the administration of the program that bridges the gap between the minimum wage and the living income would be left in the hands of a private sector organization composed of representatives of labor, management, and shareholders. The role of the government would be limited to legislating the levels of the minimum wage and of the living income and ensuring that the private sector organization functions properly. The provision of the living income in the public sector is more direct because each level of government (central, regional, and local) has the ability to legislate and deliver the living income to all public employees.   

Redistribution. While the modern social State is less than a century old, the roots of catholic social teaching regarding income inequality go back millennia. The mosaic covenant set up a complete framework for preventing the accumulation of wealth and the increase in wealth inequality and for moderating the scope and impact of poverty. This framework included the prohibition to sell the land gifted to each family by God, gleaning, the jubilee year with the associated forgiveness of debts, and the command to take care of widows and orphans, members of society with no property or means of earning income. Jesus offers several warnings against the evil of riches.⁷ He also praises the act of giving to those in need.⁸ The members of the early Church shared with one another all that they possessed. The Church Fathers were particularly concerned with the licentious lifestyle of the rich and the plight of the poor. The social encyclicals focus on income inequality and the economic conditions of workers.

To explore further the catholic social teaching approach to income redistribution I have divided the entire population into several groups. The first group includes the employed and is the largest one. For this group redistribution occurs internally through the combination of the minimum wage and the living income administered by a private-sector organization. This approach extends also to those workers who have retired through their contributory and no-contributory pensions. In both cases, the redistribution within the private sector applies to individuals and families. The second group refers to those who are able and willing to work but temporarily cannot find employment. Because these people are willing to work or to be retrained, they are entitled to the same treatment as those who are employed. Also, since in the Church’s view macroeconomic policy is directed at maintaining full employment, the number of people accessing these benefits at any time would be relatively small and the duration of the payment short. While it is feasible to assign this program to a private sector organization similar to that administering the living income, it may be more efficient to leave this task to the government, with national standards set by the central government possibly with regional differentials negotiated with regional government and with joint financing. The third group is made up of people who are unable to work due to physical and non-physical impairments. These people have the right to a living income because of their inherent dignity as children of God. Finally, there is a potential group composed of able-bodied people who are unemployed but do not seek employment. The Bible is not very kind to people who are unproductive by choice. In a parable reported in Luke 13: 6-9, the owner of a vineyard had a fig tree that had not produced any figs for three years. He ordered to have it cut down. In Corinthians 12:12-27, Saint Paul compares the members of the Church to the various parts of the human body, with each part playing a vital role in its healthy functioning. Therefore, each member of the community of the faithful must be productive to ensure the health of “the body of Christ.” In 2 Thessalonians 3:10, Saint Paul goes further stating that anyone who is not willing to work is not entitled to any support from the community. The notion that able-bodied human beings who are unwilling to be productive members of society are entitled to a living income is alien to the body of catholic social teaching, and programs that provide guaranteed income support to everyone as a right of birth or citizenship are inconsistent with the social teachings of the Church.

The social State and the social Gospel differ not in terms of the degree of income or wealth redistribution, but on the approach and the principles underlying redistribution. The modern social State practices what I call corrective redistribution, an approach that leaves the market free to generate any degree of income and wealth inequality and then tries to correct its excessive negative effects. This approach assumes implicitly that the potential efficiencies from an unfettered market exceed the inefficiencies generated by the taxes required to finance redistribution. In the social State, individuals and businesses bear no behavioral responsibilities, though they finance redistribution, and the government carries the burden of collecting taxes and making payments. Catholic social teaching favors preventive redistribution, an approach focused on government intervention in the market in order to prevent the creation of income and wealth inequalities. A cornerstone of this type of redistribution is the provision of a living income through a program administered by the private sector and enforced by the State. Because preventive redistribution is delivered through legislation, regulation, and private sector administration of the living income, it reduces the size of government associated with any degree of redistribution. Preventive redistribution is based on justice, not economic efficiency, although it may be more efficient than corrective redistribution. Catholic social teaching places the responsibility for taking care of the poor on those who have more than they need. According to the Church, what creates a just society is not a complex system of government transfers, but the universal and constant practice of Christian charity. This approach is consistent with the command to love our neighbor, the principle of the universal destination of goods, and the principle of subsidiarity. 

Taxation. Because government collects revenue for the purpose of financing public spending programs, it may be useful to review the components of public spending. For the purpose of this section, I have separated government spending into two categories: programs that deliver benefits to identifiable individuals or groups and programs that deliver benefits to society at large. In the first part of the first category (individuals), the revenue collected by the government through fees and charges is equivalent to a price for the benefits received. Examples are motor vehicle licenses and registration, highway tolls, and licenses for operating a business. Very similar are fuel taxes earmarked for the construction and maintenance of roads. In the case where benefits accrue to a specific group, the payment is akin to an insurance premium which offers collective protection to the members of the group. While in this case there is no complete correspondence between the payment and the actual benefit received, there is equality in the protection that each member is afforded. The two most important programs in this category are unemployment insurance and the implementation of a living income. If the latter is administered by a private sector body, the revenue collected does not flow into the general revenue fund of the government. Any such type of program administered by a private sector agency, even if its operations are controlled by the government, reduces the size of the government sector. According to catholic social teaching, the financing of government programs directed at society as a whole, such as publicly-funded health care and education, where the benefits cannot be partitioned, should be based on the principle of ability to pay. This implies taxes on income, wealth, and inheritance. Moreover, the structure of the income tax should include a full exemption for income up to the living income and should have a progressive rate structure. The sources of catholic social teaching reviewed in this book stress the obligation of the rich to share with the others not a small portion of their wealth but all the surplus above what they need for a living standard commensurate with their station in life, which does not include spending directed at conspicuous consumption. Progressive income taxation would simply transform this moral obligation into a legal requirement. There is no mention of consumption taxes in the body of the Church’s social teaching. Should these taxes be imposed, the estimated amount paid by those with income up to the living income should be refunded.

The Role of the Public Sector. In order to understand how catholic social teaching views the role of government in society, it is useful to distinguish between the scope of government and its size. By scope I mean the breath of government activity delivered through financial and no-financial instruments, such as legislation and regulations. The size of government refers to the share of economic activity assigned to the public sector and is often measured by the ratio of government spending to Gross National Product (GDP). Catholic social teaching supports a broad scope of the State: the protection of life from conception to the last breath, the defense of personal freedom, the enforcement of private property rights, the provision of universal health care, financial support for education, care for the environment, macroeconomic policies supporting high levels of employment, the maintenance of a functioning labor market, the protection of workers’ rights, and the guarantee of financial support for the poor and the marginalized. Through the principles of distributive justice, the universal destination of goods, and subsidiarity, and with the focus on personal responsibility, this broad scope of government activity is associated with a smaller size of government than under the social State. The burden of redistribution on the State is minimized through a combination of distributive justice (the delivery by the private sector of the living income) subsidiarity (the support for the poor by local private-sector agencies), and the stress on charity as a moral obligation of all Christians. The cost of environmental protection and health is reduced by the emphasis on individual responsibility. The stress by the Church on a balanced lifestyle guided by faith, a relationship of love with God and neighbor, and the search for peaceful solutions to any conflict, reduces spending on the military and on the judicial system, and leads to a more harmonious society without any costs to individuals or the State.

 

Notes to chapter 12

¹Deuteronomy, 35

²Ecclesiates, 12:14

³Matthew, 7; Luke 6:37

⁴https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/TrendsGenerator/app/build-table/2/42?rid=6&cid=85

⁵Matthew, 12:16

⁶Joseph Burke (2010), “Distributive Justice and Subsidiarity: The Firm and the State in the Social Order,” Journal of Markets and Morality, Volume 14, Number 2, pp. 297-317

⁷Mark, 10:23; Mark, 6:24; Matthew, 13:22; Luke, 12:15

⁸Luke, 6:30; Matthew, 10:8; Matthew 19:21-24; Matthew, 25:34-46