The Social Principles of the Catholic Church

7/30/2019 The Social Principles of the CatholicChurch

1/64

The Social Principles of the Catholic Church

This is a summary of the social principles of the Catholic Church,

which can be found in the book:How Christ Changed the World:The Social Teachings of the Catholic Church by Msgr. LuigiCivardi of Catholic Action, published in 1961 (edited here by A. J.MacDonald, Jr. (.pdfhere.)

Introduction

Around the debatable questions concerning the social value of theGospel, three currents of ideas have been formed.

The first exaggerates this value, attributing to the divine Book apredominantly social content, and making Christ above alla reformer, an agitator, almost aforerunner of modernrevolutionaries. To this trend also belongs certain humanitariansocialists.

The second current goes in the opposite direction in that it stripsthe Gospel teachings of all social content. The teachings of Christ,say its champions, have always soared in the lofty spheres ofreligion. His heavenly doctrines transcend every earthly system.On the other hand, history plainly tells us that Christianity may
http://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://www.scribd.com/doc/67086650/Catholic-Teachings-on-Social-Justicehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/67086650/Catholic-Teachings-on-Social-Justicehttp://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://www.tanbooks.com/doct/changed_world.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo.jpg


2/64

spring up and flourish in any political and social environment,adapting itself to such forms of government as the aristocratic anddemocratic.

There is finally amiddle course. It acknowledges that the Gospelis primarily a treasure of religious and moral truths, but affirmsalso its inestimable social value, because it contains fundamentalnorms and guiding lines for a safe journey over the slipperyground of political and economic life. This middle course is thetrue one. Once again, truth asserts itself between two oppositeextremes.

Therefore, even though we find in the Gospel neither the expresscondemnation nor the approval of definite political or socialsystems, we do, nevertheless, find those doctrinal elements andthose ethical principles on the basis of which we are able to judgeof their soundness or unsoundness; so that they may be said to bejust or not, according to whether, viewed in their proper setting,they seem to agree or disagree with the Gospel principles of

justice and charity.

In fact, Jesus has ransomed us not only for future life, but for thepresent life. Christ has endowed us with riches for heaven and forearth. He was the defender of all the oppressed and thepersecuted, the strengthener of all weakness, the relievers of allmiseries. He cast upon the earth the leaven of a new civilization,which is rightly called Christian (or, a just society).

On the Family
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpg


3/64

The Christian belongs to three distinct societies: domestic, civil,and religious. These three are not opposed to one another, but aremutually complimentary, each one answering to particular needsof people. They should, therefore, live in perfect harmony, helpingone another.

Domestic society, the family, takes precedence over the other

societies. In fact, it was instituted by God Himself. The family is,therefore, a natural society, because it was founded by the Authorof nature himself. Moreover, it is necessary by reason of its end,which is the generation and education of young people.

Marriage is directed to these essential ends: the propagation oflife, and hence the preservation of humankind(principleend); mutual help between the spouses and the quieting oflust(secondary ends). Although the man is to be head of thefamily, this is because of the need of authority and order in thefamily, which calls for unity of command. Men and woman areequal in dignity as human persons and are to be as companions;neither is to be the servant of the other.
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/familyonthebeach.jpg


4/64

Outside the light of Christianity and justice, the small and theweak children are destined to be neglected , if not despisedand trampled upon. In an unjust (or non-Christian) familyparents often punish children at will, abuse them, sell them into

slavery, or even put them to death, often before they areborn. Tertullian, in the second century, wrote against thepersecutors of Christians as follows: Amongst those who thirstfor the blood of Christians, how many are there that have not putto death one or more of their children; that have not caused themto die of cold or of hunger or exposed them as prey to dogs?

Jesus has lifted up these frailest of beings, the child, and He hasdone so in many ways:

First of all, by becoming a child himself obedient to Joseph andMary: He was subject to them.(Luke. 2:51). How can aChristian today fail to surround with regard and kindness thisfrail creature, if the Son of God himself wished to put on suchfrailty. For the same reason, in the Christian family, the children

are not considered heavy burdens, but sweet pledges oflove. (Sertum Laetitiae).

Jesus showed his predilection for children; He caressed them,blessed them, praised them, nay, more, He identified Himselfwith them by saying: And he that shall receive one such littlechild in my name, receives me. (Matt. 18:5).

St. Paul, after having exhorted children to obey their parents,adds: And you, fathers, provoke not your children to anger, butbring them up in the discipline and correction of theLord. (Eph. 6:4). If the dignity of the child is so lofty, hiseducation is the noblest of of all arts and a most worthy action.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_01111939_sertum-laetitiae_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_01111939_sertum-laetitiae_en.htmlhttp://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tertullian.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_01111939_sertum-laetitiae_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_01111939_sertum-laetitiae_en.htmlhttp://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tertullian.htmlhttp://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tertullian.html


5/64

On Work

Work is defined as:human activity for the purpose of providingfor the needs of life and especially for its preservation (RerumNovarum). Work is at oncepersonalandnecessary. It is personalbecause it is activity of the person, an intelligent and free creature,superior to every other earthly creature. Hence, the dignity oflabor cannot even remotely be compared in the productive field toany activity whatever, whether of animals or of machines.

Moreover, work isnecessary because it is ordained to provide forthe needs of life.

Unfortunately, the dignity of the worker and the necessity of workwere misunderstood by humankind over the course of centuries.Christ rehabilitated work and the worker. The later oweseverything to the Divine Redeemer; not merely goods ofsupernatural life, but also of natural life. We speak ofmanual

labor as that which requires the exercise of physical energy.

Manual labor, and the mechanical arts in the vast Roman empireat the timeof Christ, were practiced almost entirely by slaves, sothat manual labor became equivalent to servile labor, i.e., slavelabor. Slaves were not regarded as menbut as beasts, or, worse,
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gifhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/how-central-heating-works.gif


6/64

as machines, as chattels. They were subjected to the mostexhausting labor without any renumeration. Their onlycompensation was a very coarse and scanty living, just enough tokeep up their strength that it might be employed to keep up their

strength that it might be employed in new and endless toils. Theslave had no rights before the law. He was the property of hismaster, who used him as he pleased. He could hire him out, or sellhim to anyone, and even put him to death. Indeed, there weremany citizens who hired out their slaves just as horses, beasts ofburden and vehicles are hired out today.

Christ rehabilitated the worker, by preaching one DivineFatherhood, the universal brotherhood of humankind, and thenatural equality of all peoples. This doctrine lays the axe to theroot of the evil tree of slavery by condemning every substantialdifference between people. Expounding the teachings of theMaster, St. Peter exclaims: God is not a respecter ofpersons. (Acts 10:34). And St. Paul says: There is neither bondnor free. (Gal. 3:28).

The stupendous example of Christ proved to be even moreefficacious than his teaching. The Son of God became thecarpenters son (Matt. 13:55). Furthermore, he himself became acarpenter, a fellow-worker of his foster father (Joseph). TheEvangelist Mark, tells us that when he preached for the first timein Nazareth, his native town, his fellow citizens who had alwaysseen him at work in his shop: And when the sabbath was come,

he began to teach in the synagogue; and many hearing him werein admiration at his doctrine, saying: How came this man by allthese things? and what wisdom is this that is given to him, andsuch mighty works as are wrought by his hands? Is not this thecarpenter, the son of Mary? And they were scandalized is regardof him. (Mark. 6:2-3).


7/64

Throughout the centuries, the teachings and example of Christbrought about a profound and universal renewal of society. In asociety full of idlers, the Church taught from the outset that workis a duty. St. Paul, in his letter to the Christians of Thessalonica,

wrote these significant words: If any one will not work, neitherlet them eat. (2 Thess.3:10). One must not, however, exaggeratethe meaning of these words. The apostle of the Gentiles does notmean to speak solely of manual labor, but of any work, moral orintellectual, ofany occupation whatever that may in any way betruly useful to humanity.

The Church taught that work is not only a duty but an honor. Shealways championed the dignity of manual labor. She constantlyrecalled, in a special way, the example of Christ and of theApostles, and in that way she contributed to the abolition ofslavery, which is one of her most notable social achievements. TheChurch has always taught that work is not onlya means ofsupport, but also ofexpiation and ofsanctification. It is a meansof life, both materialand spiritual. Indeed, what is sanctity afterall but the imitation of Christ, and how does Christ presenthimself to us but in the garb of the workingman?

In modern times the Church, has more than once presentedagainst the abuses of capitalism, which exploited labor byconsidering it as merchandise, to the detriment of the dignity ofthe worker. Religion teaches the owner and the employer thattheir working people are not to be accounted their bondsmen; that

in every person they must respect their dignity and worth aspersons; that labor is not a thing to be ashamed of, but anhonorable calling, enabling people to sustain their lives in a wayupright and creditable; and that it is shameful and inhuman totreat people like chattels to make money by, or to look upon them


8/64

merely as so much muscle or physical energy. (RerumNovarum).

Against the abuses of the capitalistic system, the Church likewisevindicated the right to work. In fact, The preservation of life isthe bounden duty of one and all, and to fail therein is a crime. Itfollows that each one has a right to procure what is required inorder to live. To the personal duty of work imposed by nature,there follows the corresponding right of each individual to makethe means of providing for his own livelihood as well as for that ofhis family. (Rerum Novarum). Work, therefore, is somethingsacred, like life, for which it provides the means.

On Poverty

Poverty is the condition of those who are more of less destitute oftemporal goods. There are different kinds of poverty:

It may be absolute or relative.Absolute poverty is the condition ofthose who are destitute of all temporal goods, who lack thenecessities of life and therefore need the help of others. Thiscondition is better knownas indigence, misery, beggary.Relative povertyis the condition
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/poverty-1.jpghttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htm


9/64

of those who have no superfluous goods, having only what isstrictly necessary for life. Such is the condition, for example, of anhonest common laborer whose wages are barely sufficient tosupport himself and his family.

Poverty, both absolute and relative, maybe involuntary or voluntary. It is involuntary when it is due toextrinsic conditions, even if such conditions are accepted withperfect resignation. It is voluntary when it is due to thespontaneous surrender of temporal goods. Such is the conditionof religious persons who take the vow of poverty in order to bebetter able to cultivate the virtues and to attain evangelicalperfection. This condition of poverty is ofcounsel, not of precept.One must also bear in mind that for Christianity, poverty is nota state of perfection, but simplya means of perfection. So that thepoor person may be perfect or imperfect according to the use theymake of their poverty.

It is also necessary to distinguish

between effective and affective poverty.Effective poverty is theactually lack of material goods, be it voluntary orinvoluntary.Affective poverty (form affection) is the detachmentof the heart form whatever wealth one may possess, be it little orgreat. According to the teachings of Christianity, all have a duty topractice affective poverty because it is necessary to perfection;while effective poverty can only be recommended as a means, notnecessary, but usefulto Christian perfection. The state of absolute

poverty or penury is generally not advisable because it may easilybecome an occasion of sin and of debasement. To the faithful theChurch recommends relative poverty which excludes allsuperfluities, but not penury, because only in cases of a specialvocation and consequently of special help from God can it becomea mean to perfection.


10/64

Jesus, who exalted the weak and raised up the oppressed, was notonly the redeemer of children and the worker, but also of thepoor. He so elevated as to endow it with dignity.

After the coming of Jesus into the world, there is a completereversal of values. Poverty is made honorable. It acquires a sacredcharacter and is surrounded with help, with perfection, andveneration. Jesus dignified poverty byexample and byhis teachings. He is heralded as King of Israel, but is born in astable and lives as a poor workingman in the little home ofNazareth until he is thirty years of age. One day, one of thescribes, having seen him perform many miracles and thinking thatby following him he could acquire wealth and glory, says: Master,I will follow you wherever you go. But Jesus disillusions him atonce by replying: The foxes have holes, and the birds of the airhave nests, but the son of man has nowhere to lay hishead. (Matt. 8:19-20). The poverty of Jesus reaches its climax onCalvary, where he is stripped of his garments, for which thesoldiers cast lots. (Matt. 27:35).

Jesuspracticedpoverty first, thenpreachedit. Here, too, hebegan to do and to teach. (Acts 1:1). Here, too, his words receivepower and strength from his conduct. Jesus exalts the poor;commands them that they be helped; he identifies himself withthem.

He exalts the poor. In the Old Testament, Christ is heralded as the

liberator of the poor: He shall deliver the poor from themighty. (Ps. 71:12). He began his preaching by calling himself hewho is sent to preach the gospel to the poor. (Luke. 4:18). Hesets forth his program in the Sermon on the Mount, and his firstwords are these: Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is thekingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:3). Later on, Jesus confirmed his


11/64

doctrine, which was strange to the ears of the world, with thestory about the rich man and the beggar Lazarus. The rich mandies and lifts up his eyes in the torments of hell. The beggarLazarus dies and is carried by angles to Abrahams bosom, which

was a place of comfort. This story is an exaltation of poverty, at atthe same time as condemnation of wealth: during their lifetimesthese men either enjoyed the good life (the rich man) or sufferedthe life of beggary (Lazarus), and after death they received theopposite of what they had enjoyed or suffered while they werealive: the rich man suffers the torments of hell, while the beggarLazarus enjoys the pleasures of heaven. (Luke. 16:19:22).

But Jesus was not satisfied with exalting the poor, he commandedthat the poor be relieved. He said bluntly to the rich: Give thatwhich remains as alms. (Luke. 11:41). One day a rich young manasked Jesus what he should do to obtain eternal life: Jesus said tohim: If you will be perfect, go sell what you have and give it to thepoor, then you will have treasures in heaven. (Matt. 19:21).

Jesus did more: he identified himself with the poor: On the day ofthe Last Judgement, he will speak these words to the elect: TrulyI say to you as long as you did it for one of the least of these mybrethren, you have done it for me. (Matt. 25:40). Oh the dignityof the poor! Hidden in them is the Lord himself incognito!

Imitating the example of the Redeemer, the Church has alwayshad a special concern for the poor and the needy, who are her

firstborn and authentic children in the family of God. This carebegan with the dawn of the Church. The apostles, in addition totheir strictly religious functions, performed works of charity andrelief, at first personally, and late through the ministry of thedeacons of the Church, who were commissioned to serve at thetables of the poor and of the widows. (Acts 6:1-4). In those


12/64

primitive times of the early Church of Jerusalem the multitude ofbelievers had bit one heart and one soul. For as many as wereowners of lands and houses sold them, and brought the price ofthe things they had sold to the apostles, and distribution was

made to every one, according as they had need. (Acts 4:32-35).Throughout the centuries how many institutions of charity havesprung from the bosom of the Church: almshouses, old ageshelters, institutions for the disabled and for the sickit may besaid that the history of the Church is the history of charity itself.

It has always been the teaching and mind of the Church thatcharity should be not only a contribution of money but of onesself: a charity that ministers not to the body but to the soul. Thegreatest temptation of an age that calls itself social, in which,besides the Church, the nation, the state, the cities, and otherpublic bodies attend to many social problems, is that persons,even among the faithful, when the poor man knocks at their door,simply send him to the Department, to the Office, to theOrganization, figuring that their personal obligation has beensufficiently satisfied by their contribution to those institutions inthe form of donations. No doubt the needy person would thenreceive your help in that other way. But often he counts on you, atleast for a word of kindness and of comfort from you. Your charitymust resemble Gods, who came in person to bring us help.

On Wealth
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpg


13/64

The principles of Christianity concerning poverty set forth above

should be complimented by the teachings of the Gospelsconcerning material goods and the use we should make of them.God told the first couple: Fill the earth and subdue it; and ruleover the fishes of the sea and the fouls of the air and all livingcreatures. (Gen. 1:28). Thus did God give to all humankind theright to occupy the earth, to till its soil, to enjoy its fruits and tomake the very animals serve their uses and needs (with duedignity and respect). In sum, he gave us the right to use all

material goods as means for the preservation and conservationof life.

But material goods not only serve to satisfythe legitimate needs oflife, they also serve to satisfy desires and provide comforts andpleasures. That is why they are so easily abused by people. Allpeople have the right to possess and enjoy the goods necessary forlife. The right to life, indeed, carries with it the right to the

possession of material goods. Here we should, however, point out,that material goods are unevenly distributed. This accounts forthe social phenomenon of poverty, which we have alreadyexamined, and the contrary phenomenon ofwealth, which we willexamine here.
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fountain_of_wealth_singapore_tour.jpg


14/64

Wealth is the condition of those who possess abundant means,beyond what is sufficient for life. We also give the name wealth tothe goods themselves thatproduce wealth. How must we lookupon wealth in the light of Christianity? What are the teachings of

Christ and the Church concerning its use and its distribution? Theyoung man who came to Jesus and asked him: Good Master,what good work shall I do that I may have life everlasting? Jesusreplied to him saying: Keep the commandments of God. Theyoung man responded: All these I have kept from my childhooduntil today, yet what is lacking in me? And Jesus answered him:If you will be perfect, go sell what you have and give to the poor,and you will have treasure in heaven; and come and follow

me. (Matt. 19:16-21). This, however, is a counsel, not a universalprecept. Jesus wanted his apostles to abandon everything: home,their few belongings, wife and children, in order to follow him.But among the disciples of Jesus during his apostolic travels, wefind also some pious women, who used to provide for them out oftheir means. (Luke. 8:1-3). To these he does not enjoin absolutepoverty. Lazarus of Bethany, was rich, and yet Jesus call him hisfriend. (John. 11:11). (This is the Lazarus whom Jesus raised from

the dead, not the beggar Lazarus mentioned above.)

The Gospel tells us how that the rich young man, upon hearingthe final proposal of Jesus, went away sad, for he had greatpossessions. And Jesus then said to him: Truly I say to you, thata rich person shall hardly enter into the kingdom ofheaven. (Matt. 19:22-23).

Riches make it difficultto enter the kingdom of heaven:

Because by affording us many comforts here below, they moreeasily make us forget God and heaven


15/64

Because they are afford us many means of gratifying our mostexigent and dangerous passions.

Because they are likely to render us proud and covetous bymaking us neglect the grave duties that riches impose.

Here is how St. Paul, faithful interpreter of Christs mind,comments on the advantages of poverty, contrasting them withthe dangers of riches: But godliness with contentment is greatgain. For we brought nothing into the world, and certainly we cancarry nothing out; but having food and wherewith to be clothed,

with these things we are content. For they that will be rich fall intotemptations and into the snare of the devil, and into manyunprofitable and hurtful desires, which men in destruction andperdition. For the desire of money is the root of all evils, whichsome coveting have erred from the faith, and have entangledthemselves in many sorrows. (1 Tim. 6:6-10).

With difficulty, said Jesus, will a rich man enter the kingdom

of heaven. But difficult does not mean impossible. The rich man,too, therefore can and mustbe saved. Indeed, he can attain thehighest degree of perfection, making good use of his wealth. Butin order to be saved, one must makeproper use of riches. For thatpurpose Jesus teaches that it is necessary:

To keep ones heart detached from earthly goods, that is to bepoor in spirit if not in fact. The later is required a few, the former

of all. Blessed are the poor in spirit. (Matt. 5:3), said our Lord:and poor in spiritare also the rich whose hearts are not attachedto their riches. Jesus said: You cannot serve God andmoney (namely riches). (Matt. 6:24). He did not say that onecannotpossess, but that one cannot serve wealth. That is, we maynot make a masteror an idolof money, sacrificing everything to it,


16/64

even our conscience. We may possess money without beingpossessed by it.

Before God we are to consider ourselves not as owner, but onlyas managers of our goods. Or what have you that you have notreceived? asks the apostle Paul. (1 Cor. 4:7). The absolute masterof everything is God, who grants usthe use ofsome of his goods.Of this use we must render him a strict account: Give an accountof your stewardship (see:Luke. 16:1-8)

Furthermore, he wants us to give what is superfluous to the poor.

Christ tell us: he that has two coats, let him give to him that hasnone; and he that has meat, let him do in likemanner. (Luke. 3:11). The divine Redeemer is even more absolutewith this precept of his: Give that which remains as alms (Luke.11:41); in other words, that which is not necessary for the supportof ones self and ones family, according to each ones socialcondition. When necessity and convenience have been satisfied, itis our duty to give what is left over to the poor. God has blessed us

with goods so that we may do good.

Pius XII, in commenting uponRerum Novarum, said: The goodscreated by God for all peoples must be made available to all in anequitable manner, according to the principles of justice andcharity. The economic wealth of a people does not consist ofabundance of goods, but rather in a fair distribution of goods.

On The Right of Property
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htm


17/64

The right of property is the moral power to possess and to use a

thing as ones own. This right is a corollary ofthe right to live,since it is impossible to live without the possession and the freeuse of definite material goods. There are various kinds ofproperty. The principle ones are:

Individualorpersonalproperty when the owner is an individualor physical person; collective or social, when the owner is acommunity or a moral person.

If it belongs to apublic community, such as a State or the Church,collective property is calledpublic. Otherwise it is private. Privateproperty, therefore, may be either individual or collective; in thelatter case it belongs to aprivate community, like a corporation.The State has the power to dispose of private property when thepublic interest requires it. For example, it can require the

property of citizens for war purposes and by paying compensationit can condemn property to construct a road, erect a building,etc

There are also classes of property:
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/unknown1.jpeg


18/64

Productive property that serves to produce other goods (forexample, lands, factories, machines, raw materials,etc.);consumer goods that satisfy human needs (such asmerchandise, furnishings, clothing, etc.).

Real property, that is, immovable property (such as lands, mines,buildings) andpersonal property (to wit: merchandise, money,securities, etc.).

Some regimes and systems, such as the liberal system, concedetoo much to the right of property, by failing to impose necessary

limitations and obligations; other systems instead either denysuch right or restrict it unduly. Such is the communist system,which advocates the communion of goods (hence its name).

What are we to say about the socialization of productive goods?The socialization, or nationalization, of the means of productionand of exchange (lands, factories, commerce) may eitherbe totalorpartial. When socialization actually contributes to the

common (public) good it does not contravene the principle ofChristian ethics on the subject of property. This should be ourcompass in this matter also. One may consent to such socializingof property only in those cases in which it seems really required bythe common good, that is to say, as the only truly effective meansof remedying an abuse or of preventing a waste of productiveforces and direct them for the good of the economic welfare of thecommunity so that the national economy in its normal and

peaceful development may open the way to the materialprosperity of all the people, a prosperity such as will at the sametime likewise afford a solid foundation for religious and culturallife.


19/64

The Church, following the teachings of Jesus Christ, has alwaystaught that the right of private property is natural, that is to sayestablished by the author of nature himself, namely God. This isso for the following reasons:

Because private property stimulates personal interest, which, inturn, stimulates production.

Because the system of private property is more apt to guaranteethe liberty and the dignity of peoples.

Because the just division of propertyfosters social peace, whilethe community of goods easily gives rise to quarrels and litigation.

The Church, having affirmed the right of private property as anessential factor and a condition of aprosperous, well ordered,respectable and peaceful life, has always distinguished betweenthe rightand the use of private property, by teaching that even thenatural law imposes limitations upon the use of property.

One must bear in mind two great truths in connection with thispoint:

God alone, Creator and Bestower of every good, is the absoluteowner of all things, while peoples, with respect to God, arenothing but tenants and simple administrators of them.

God has created and bestows the goods of the earth that they mayserve for the support of all peoples; since all have the duty and theright to live.


20/64

These two fundamental truths, naturally, give rise to severalconclusions of the utmost practical importance:

This first is this: the owner must use his goods not as it pleasesher, but as it pleases God, to whom she must render an account ofthe use of them. Therefore, the notion that the right to property isabsolute, the right to use and misuse, is false.

God wishes the owner to use his property in such a way that, whenhis legitimate needs have been satisfied, he should distribute therest to the needy.

Property, therefore, has not only an individual function, insofar asit has to provide for the needs of the owner, but has also a socialfunction insofar as it has to provide for the needs of othermembers of society. This special function, moreover, is not merelya counsel but a command, a command of charity which, in certaincases, becomes a command ofjustice.

Jesus Christ has implicitly affirmed the right of property and itssocial functions. In fact, he never condemned the ownership ofproperty, a thing he would certainly have done

if such ownership was wrong or contrary to natural law. But hedid explicitly and emphatically condemn all abuses, both privateand public, of his times and of his fellow citizens. The publicanZacheus says to our Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods Igive to the poor, and if I have wronged any man of any thing, Irestore to him fourfold. Jesus, approving, said to him: Todaysalvation has come to this house, since he, too, [Zacheus] is a sonof Abraham. (Luke. 19:8-9). Zacheus has thus obtained salvation


21/64

by giving away half or his possessions, but not all. That means hehad the right to own the other half.

Jesus affirmed the social function of property by pointing out theduties of the owner toward others. And that was in contrast withthe opinions of the teachers of Israel, who held the belief thatproperty ownership gave the owner unlimited power. Here are hisplain and unequivocal words: Nevertheless, give that whichremains as alms. (Luke. 11:41). And as we have seen, that whichremains are those goods we own above and beyond what isnecessary for the support of ourselves and our family, accordingto what is suitable to our condition in life.

Furthermore, the idea of the social function of property is implicitin the broader idea ofhuman brotherhood, which is one of thechief points of Christs message.

Among good brothers, in fact, the cold words mine and yours losetheir strict meaning, since one brother cannot feel satisfied if the

others stomach is empty.

The conduct of the first Christians of Jerusalem is concrete proofof the teachings of Christ on this subject: And the multitude ofbelievers had but one heart and one soul: neither did any one saythat anything was his own, but all things were common to themfor neither was there any one needy among them. For as many asmany as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought

the price of the the things they sold and laid it at the feet of theapostles, and distribution was made to each one, according asanyone had need. (Acts 4:32-35). It should be noted, however,that this communism of the first Christians, the fruit of a greatspirit of fraternal charity, was altogether free and spontaneous,


22/64

and, since it was not imposed upon anyone, it was never practicedwith strictness.

The Church, too, while it has at all times proclaimed the right toprivate property, has also insisted upon the social function ofproperty:

St. Peter writes to the early Christians: As every man has receivedgrace, ministering the same one to another. (1 Peter 4:10). Theapostle is here speaking both of spiritual and material gifts. St.Paul to his disciple Timothy as follows: Charge the rich of this

world to do good, to be rich in good works, to give easily, tocommunicate to others. (1 Tim. 6:17-18).

St. Thomas Aquinas, in hisSumma Theologica, offers us a clearand precise teaching: With respect to external goods man hastwo faculties, to wit: (a) the facultyofprocuring and distributing these goods; forwhat reason it islawful for man to possess these goods as his own (right of

property), indeed it is necessary to human life (b) the facultyofusing the the goods themselves; and as far as their use isconcerned, man ought to consider external goods not as his own,but as in common, so that he may readilyshare them with thoseon need. (II-II, Question 66, Art. 2.).

It follows from what we have termed the individual and at thesame time social character of ownership, that we must consider in

this matter not only their own advantage but also the commongood. To define these duties in detail, when necessity requires andthe natural law has not done so, is the function of theState. Therefore public authority, under the guiding light alwaysof the natural and divine law, can determine more accuratelyupon consideration of the true requirements of the common
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/http://www.newadvent.org/summa/http://www.newadvent.org/summa/http://www.newadvent.org/summa/


23/64

good, what is permitted and what is not permitted to owners inthe use of their property.

Without doubt, the natural order established by God requiresalso private property. But this right of private property must nothinder the primary and fundamental right that grants its use toall men. While the Church condemns everyunjust violation of theright of private property, she admonishes, however, that itis notunlimited nor absolute because it has precise socialobligations.

Catholic teaching holds a position midway between thecommunistic doctrine, that would suppress every right ofindividual and private property, and the liberal doctrine that doesnot recognize its due limits, thus justifying unjust inequalities.

Christianity and Social Justice

Justice is the cardinal virtue that prompts us to give everyone hisdue. According to its different objects, it assumes different names.Thus we have commutative, legal, and social justice.

Commutative justice regulates the relations between oneindividual and another; for example, the relations between seller
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/cwlogo1.jpg


24/64

and buyer; the former must give sound and wholesome goods, thelatter the just price agreed upon.

Legal justice governs the relations between rules and subjects.The rulers have to enact just laws, and citizens have to observethem. It is legal justice also that inflicts penalties corresponding tothe crimes, and in this case it is called punitive justice.

Social justice governs the relations between different socialclasses, between employers and employees, and distributes thebenefits and burdens of society. Fees, salaries, andpensions are

the object of social justice, which is also called distributive justice.

Justice is more compelling than charity in the sense that it has agreater binding force. The reason for this lies in the very natureof justice, which gives to others what belongs to them, what is dueto them by strict right. Hence, in justice, one does give of onesown. Consequently, the exercise of justice at bottom is nothingelse than a reintegration of a restitution. Not so with charity,

which gives to others what they are not strictly entitled to. Incharity, one gives of ones own.

The first duty of charity to ones neighbor is this: to do himjustice, to give him what is due him. The wage earner is not toreceive as alms what is his due in justice, and let no one attemptwith trifling charitable donations to exempt himself from thegreat duties imposed by justice. If the rich and prosperous are

obliged, out of ordinary motives of pity, to act generously towardthe poor, their obligation is all the greater to do them justice.

Our Lord taught and defended every kind of justice and socialjustice in particular. In the Sermon on the Mount he proclaimed:


25/64

Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice, for they shallhave their fill. (Matt. 5:6). Elsewhere he declares: The laborer isworthy of his hire. (Luke. 10:7).

Jesus makes himself a defender of justice, scourging the scribesand the Pharisees, who, while pedantically observing religiousprecepts, disregard the inviolable rules of justice: Woe to youscribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: because you devour the housesof widows, praying long prayers. For this you shall receive thegreater judgement. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites.because you tithe mint and anise and cummin andhave left the weightier things of the law; judgment and mercy andfaith. (Matt. 23:14-23). Mark this phrase: the weightier thingsof the law,which shows the importance of justice.

The apostles, too, were staunch defenders of social justice. St.Paul in his letter to the Colossians writes: Masters, do to yourservants that which is just and equal; knowing that you too have amaster in heaven. (Col. 4:1). Against employers who exploit their

workers, the apostle St. James says: Go to now, you rich men,weep and howl in your miseries, which shall come upon you. Yourriches are corrupted: and your garments are motheaten. Your goldand silver is cankered: and the rust of them shall be for atestimony against you, and shall eat your flesh like fire. You havestored up to yourselves wrath against the last days. Behold thehire of the laborers, who have reaped down your fields, which byfraud has been kept back by you: they cry out for justice, and their

cries have entered into the ears of the Lord. (James: 5:1-4).

The Church did not limit itself to repeating the teachings of Christand of the apostles, she translated them into works for the benefitof the working class first if all, in order to safeguard the dignity ofthe worker. She strove for the abolition of slavery and late sought


26/64

and pleaded for just compensation for work. Thus it was that inthe religious and social atmosphere created by the Church therearose in the Middle Ages the glorious guilds of arts and crafts.There were associations of men exercising the same vocation, men

who sought to safeguard not only their economic but also theirpolitical and social interests. The guild of arts and crafts wereabolished by the liberals of the French Revolution in the year 1789without substituting anything in their stead. They were abolishedunder the pretext of liberty, on the claim that the liberals wishedto set up a system of free competition in the field of labor also.The consequences soon made themselves felt. As soon as therestraints against the heartless speculations of the employers were

removed and the laborers left in hopeless isolation, then theexploitation of labor on a vast scale set in. This evil was made stillmore unbearableby the gigantic strides of industry that swelledprofits of owners out of all proportion. This gave rise to the socialquestion looking toward the settlement of relations betweencapital and labor, between employer and employees.

Pope Leo XIII, inRerum Novarum, condemned the capitalistsystem, introduced by liberalism, because it overestimates therights ofcapitaland does not give just consideration to the rightsof labor. He also reproves the socialistic system, which seeks theabolition of private property and class warfare, while Christianityis for thecollaboration of classes. He reminds the rich and theowners that when necessity and convenience have been supplied,it becomes a duty to give to the needy out of what remains over.He reminds governments of their duty to come to the aid of theworkingman with a whole set of laws and institutions asopposed to the laissez faire system then in place.

The wages of a workingman are in themselves something sacredbecause they represent bread, the stuff of life, which is sacred.
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htmhttp://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13rerum.htm


27/64

And yet liberalism left wages at the mercy of chance; it abandonedthem to the gamble of freedom of contract between the owner andthe workingman, and chance naturally was nearly alwaysunfavorable to the weaker of the contracting parties: the

workingman. Leo XIII condemns this arrangement because it isopposed to justice: The amount of renumeration must never beless than is necessary for the support of a frugal and well-behavedworkingman. The working man is entitled to wages that will beadequate for the support of himself and his family. It is onlyfitting that the salaries of the workers be such as to suffice forthemselves and their families.

Wages, however, is not the only method of compensation. There isanother method still more progressive: the participation in theprofits of business. This form of compensation represents anintegration and a corrective of wages. It is necessary that in thefuture the abundant fruits of production will not accrue unduly tothose who are rich, and will be distributed with ample sufficiencyamong the workers. Workers and other employees thus becomesharers in ownership or management and participate in somemeasure in the profits received. Such profit sharing is where alarge concern continues to yield good returns, the employeesshould be offered an opportunity of moderating the labor contractby means of a partnership contract.

In order to eliminate the exploitation of labor, Catholics alwaysfavored, moreover a wise cooperative system which offers the

great advantage of uniting capital and labor in the same hands, ofbreaking up excessive holdings without taking away the technicaladvantages of distributing the responsibility, and by augmentingthe small number of small owners. In fact, cooperatives of laborand production are partnerships in which their members are atonce the owners and wage earners of the concern dividing the


28/64

profits in equal shares. The Church always favored the cooperativesystem as suitable to the principles of social justice, of Christianbrotherhood, and of human solidarity.

Christianity and Charity

Justice and charity are the two foremost socialvirtues, inasmuch

as they dispose our minds to the fulfillment of our duties towardsociety, so that, after having considered the teachings ofChristianity with regard to justice, we are now to treat of charity,called the queen of the virtues.

Charity is the theological virtue that inclines us to love God forhimself and our neighbor for the love of God. Charity must notonly be affective (prompted byfeeling and sentiment), but

also effective (productive of effects and of works). Works are thetest of charity. Pity, therefore, is charity itself, insofar as itinclines us to help our neighbor in his spiritual and materialneeds. It is beneficentcharity. In fact, people, being composed ofbody and soul, have material, or corporal, and spiritualneeds.Charity bids us take care of both; hence, the corporaland
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/web-charity-gives-but-justi3.jpg


29/64

the spiritualworks of mercy. The fundamental point of the socialquestion is this, that the goods created by God for all men shouldin the same way reach all, justice guiding and charity helping.Charity, therefore, fills up the gaps left behind by justice; its arms

are longer, its sights keener, and it reaches out to places wherejustice cannot reach. Charity goes beyond the limits of justice andbrings relief where there is no right, but where there is real need.

Charity is the essence of Christianity and the sum of all virtues.Jesus taught the duty of beneficent charity both by his exampleand by his teaching.

The life of Jesus was one continuous act of kindness: in fact, St.Peter sums it up in this manner: Jesus went about doinggood. (Acts: 10:38). To the disciples of St. John the Baptist whoask him if he is the Messiah, Jesus as proof of the fact that he is,points to his good works: Go and relate to John what you haveheard and seen: the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers arecleansed, the deaf hear (Matt. 11:4-5). Twice he performs the

miracle of multiplication of loaves by pronouncing these touchingwords: I have with me now three days and have nothing to eatand I will not send them away hungry lest they faint on theway. (Matt. 15:32-39).

Jesus often spoke of the duty of beneficent charity. Suffice it hereto recall that at the Last Judgment the sentence that will bepronounced by him against the reprobates will be this: Depart

from me, accursed ones, into everlasting firefor I was hungry,and you gave me not to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me not todrink, etc., and upon being asked for an explanation, he replies:Truly I say to you, as long as you did not do it to one of the leastof these, neither did you do it to me. (Matt. 25:41-45).


30/64

The apostles were no less explicit. St. Paul commands theChristians of Rome to share their goods with their needy brothersand sisters: Loving one another with the charity of brotherhoodcommunicating to the necessities of the saints. (Rom. 12:10-13).

And writing to the Hebrews, he reminds them to of the duty ofhelping others: And do not forget to do good, and to impart; forby such sacrifices Gods favor is obtained (namely, his grace).(Heb. 13:16). St. John, on his part, writes these precise words forthe hard-hearted: He that has the substance of this worldsgoods, and sees his brother in need, and shall shut up compassionfrom him: how does the charity of God abide in him? (1John 3:14).

The charity commanded by Christ has the greatest possiblecomprehension, because the are no limitations to the sacrificescalled for by it, including even the sacrifice of life itself. The codeof Christian charity was written by the blood of our Savior; it wassanctioned by his supreme sacrifice. Jesus, in fact, was notcontent to call us brothers and to teach us brotherly love. He, thefirst-born among many brethren, gave his life for his lost sheep.Thus he taught us that we must give not merely our affection toour brothers, not merely our goods, but ourselves as well. Theapostle of charity, St. John, is very clear on this point, saying: Helaid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives forour brothers. (1 John 3:16).

The charity commanded by Christ has also the greatest possible

extension, because not a single person is excluded. Here are someenlightening words of Christ: Do good to them that hate you andpray for them that persecute and say evil things about you, thatyou may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, whomakes the sun to rise upon the just and the unjust. For if you lovethem that love you, what reward will you have? Do not even the


31/64

publicans do this? (Matt. 5:44-46). The children, like the Father,must love all, do good to all. Universal charity, therefore, is anecessary attribute of universal brotherhood.

But to love our enemies, to love those who have nothing lovablebut a great deal that is hateful, to do good to those who have doneus harm, is that not an absurd commandment, an unreasonabledemand? That is what some think and say who do notunderstand, or pay no heed to the motives of Christian lovetoward ones neighbor. We have said it already: we must loveGodfor himself, but we must also love our neighbor, not forhimself, but for the love of God: that is, because God commandsit, because in every person there is the image of God, becauseevery person can be redeemed by the blood of Christ, becauseevery Christian is a child of God and of the family of God.These claims to our love are present in all peoples, even in thosewho in themselves are not at all deserving of our love, no more sothan we ourselves, who are redeemed, were ever worthy of thelove of God, which has been granted to us through Christ Jesusour Lord.

Charity procures advantages for us both in this life and in thenext. The following are the principle ones:

Charity opens the gates of heaven for us. Jesus, on the day of theLast Judgment, will pronounce these words: Come, you blessedof my Father, possess the kingdom.for I was hungry and you

gave me to eat (Matt. 25:34-36).

Charity merits for us the help of God. Tobias gives his son thisadvice: Give alms out of the substance, and turn not away yourface from any poor person, and it will come to pass that the face of


32/64

the Lord will not be turned away from you. (Tob. 4:7). And here,by alms, is meant: every work of mercy.

Charity merits for us the pardon of our sins. The Lord said:Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. (Matt.5:7).

The works of mercy both corporeal and spiritual shouldtherefore hold a prominent place in our Christian life.

The restless and agitated mass of humankind seems no longer to

believe in truth, seems no longer to believe in justice, cannot makeup its mind whether or not to believe in charity. But many times,by taking care of a persons body, we heal their souls as well.

Let us be certain that our charity ispatientand kind. In doingworks of charity, let us avoid any air of superiority and ofcondescension that might humiliate the beneficiary. In otherwords: let us do our charity charitably.

Christianity and Authority
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpg


33/64

Man is naturallysociable, inasmuch as he is destined to live not inisolation but in society. Not only is domestic society, wherein he isborn and reared, but also in civil society, which is a naturalexpansion of the family. Cilvil society is necessary because thereinonly is it possible for man to develop all his faculties and to attainhis end. Hence history assures us that man always lived in society.Accordingly, society is not a phenomenon that sprang up by the

will of the associates, as some philosophers have fancied, but wasordained by Nature itself, or rather by God, the Creator.

There can be no society of any kind without an authority. Thus,just as society comes from God, so likewise does authority.Authority is justly called the soul of society; in fact, just as in thehuman organism the soul harmonizes the various members andmakes them concur toward the common end, which is life,

similarly in the social organism, authority is the unifying principlethat coordinates the wills of individuals and directs them to oneend, which is thecommon good. Without authority, anaggregation of men may be a crowd, but no a society, either publicor private.
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nys_bridge_authority_police_patch.jpg


34/64

Our Lord said: Every kingdom divided against itself will be madedesolate. (Matt. 12:25). Now every society without authority isdoomed to become divided against itself and hence to fall. Thushistory bears witness to another fact: There was never a society

without authority. The expressionpopular sovereignty can havethis meaning: The people determine the form of government(popular election). In this sense, popular sovereignty isadmissible, though not necessary. The Church, in fact, has alwaysdeclared that every form of government aristocratic ordemocratic is legitimate when suitable for the achievement of itsend, which is the good of the citizens.

As there are different societies, so there are different kinds ofauthority. The principle ones are the following:

Religious authority, that rules the religious society, which for usCatholics is the Church. This authority resides in the Pope and inthe Bishops.

Civil authority, that rules civil society and resides in the heads ofgovernment (emperors, kings, or presidents of republics, and intheir ministers and in legislative assemblies.)

Domestic authority, which resides in the parents, especially thefather, whence it is also calledpaternal authority.

Jesus taught the divine origins of authority by pointing to its endsand its limits. Jesus taught that all authority comes from God not only religious and paternal authority, but also civil; thereforeauthority is something sacred and entitled to the utmost respect.To Pilate, who reproaches him for his silence by saying to him:Do you not speak to me? Do you not know I have the power to


35/64

release you? Jesus answers solemnly: You would have no poweragainst me unless it were given you from above. (John 19:10-11).Even the authority of Pilate, like that of every ruler, comesthereforefrom above, from God. Thus Jesus has exalted,

ennobled, and tempered civil authority. Little wonder, then, thatin Christian times, kings were anointed after the manner ofpriests.

If authority comes from God, it is always sacred and worthy ofrespect, even when it resides in unworthy persons; subjects,therefore, are bound to obey even the wicked rulers when theircommands are not manifestly wicked. This was also the teachingof Christ, who said one day: The scribes and the Pharisees sit inMoses seat. All things therefore whatsoever they say to you,observe and do. But according to their works do not; for they say,and do not. (Matt. 23:2-3). And when they ask him if it is lawfulto pay tribute to Caesar (to the Roman emperor, whom his fellowcountrymen believed to be an unjust oppressor), Jesus replied:Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God thethings that are Gods. (Matt. 22:21).

Jesus teaches that authority is not a lordship but afatherhood,a ministry, a service. The subjects do not exist for the benefit ofthe former. The good of the people is the end of every civilauthority, as well as its limitation. Here are the priceless words ofChrist, spoken to his apostles but applicable to every authority:You know that the princes of the Gentiles lord it over them, and

they that are greater, exercise power upon them. It shall not be soamong you: but whomsoever will be the greater among you, lethim be your minister: And he that will be first among you, shall beyour servant. Even as the Son of man came not to be ministeredto, but to minister, and to give his life a redemption formany. (Matt. 20:25-28)


36/64

In fact, here, too, as elsewhere, Jesus confirms his teaching by hisexample. Take the touching and suggestive episode of the LastSupper. St. John relates: Knowing that the Father had given himall things into his hands, and that he came from God, and goes to

God, he rose from supper, and laid aside his garments, and havingtaken a towel, girded himself. After that, he put water into a basin,and began to wash the feet of the disciples, and to wipe them withthe towel he was girded with. (John 13:3-5). And after this action,he explained its significance to them, saying: For I have givenyou an example, that as I have done to you, so you doalso. (John 13:15).

By exalting the dignity of the superior (that is, by declaring himvested with an authority that comes from God), Jesus thereby alsoexalted the dignity of the subject. In fact, the latter, by obeying hissuperior, in reality does not obey a man like himself, but Godhimself. And to obey God is not to demean, but rather to exaltoneself. By that very means Christianity laid the most solidfoundation to obedience, which always has God for its final end.

By teaching the truth ofone divine Fatherhoodand, hence ofa universal brotherhood. The Christian ruler must look upon hissubject not as a servant, but as a brother, having the same rightsbefore God, their common Father. In fact, ruler and subjecttogether say: Our Father.By teaching the infinite value of aredeemed soul, purchased by the Blood of Christ: Knowing thatyou were not redeemed with corruptible things as gold or silver,

but with the precious blood of Christ. (1 Peter 1:18-19).

Jesus, moreover, showed us in a most touching manner the valueof a single individual, when he pictured himself as the GoodShepherd who has a hundred sheep and one of them go astrayand he leaves the other ninety-nine in the mountains and goes in


37/64

search of the one that has strayed. (Matt. 18:12). Even so, JesusChrist asserts, it is not the will of your Father in heaven that asingle one of these little ones should perish.

In this matter also, the teachings of the Christ found true echo inthe teachings of the Church in every age and among every people.Touching the divine origin of authority, we have the explicittestimony of the apostles. St. Paul teaches the early Christians ofimperial Rome: There is no power but from God;therefore, hethat resists the power, resists the ordinance of God; and they thatresist purchase to themselves damnationfor he is Gods ministerto you for good. (1 Peter 2:13-15).

Leo XIII, on the thorny question of the form of government,stated categorically: There is no reason why the Church shouldnot approve of the chief power being held by one man or by more;provided, only, it be just, and that it tend to the common good.Wherefore so long as justice is respected, people are free to choosefor themselves the form of government which suits it best either

their own disposition or the institution and customs of theirancestors. (Encyclical on Civil Government).

Concerning the use of authority, the same pontiff states: But inorder that justice may be retained in government, it is of thehighest importance that those who rule states should understandthat political power was not created for their particular advantage;and that the administration of the state must be carried on for the

benefit of those who have been committed to their care, not forthe benefit of those to whom it has been committed. (Encyclicalon Civil Government).

Developing this same idea, Pius XII says: Superiority is a service;to command is not to act arbitrarily, but in obedience to the
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_01111885_immortale-dei_en.html


38/64

external law of truth and justicealways giving preference to thecommon interests over the private interests of the individualgroup or party; and to do that solely in the light of justice, ofcharity, and of faith. Concerning the duties of the state, Pius XII

has taught us: It is the noble prerogative and function of theState to control, aid, and direct the private individual activities ofnational life so long as to make them concur harmoniously towardthe common good

To consider the State as an end in itself to which everything elsemust be subordinated and directed cannot but be harmful to thetrue and lasting prosperity of nations. This can come about eitherwhen unlimited power is attributed to the State as the mandataryof the nation, of the people, or even of a social class, or when theState claims such powers as absolute master, without anymandate whatsoever. (Encyclical Summi Ponificatus).

From this clear-cut and beneficent Christian doctrine concerningauthority, we will draw some practical corollaries:

First of all, a deep sense of gratitude to the Divine Redeemer forhaving conferred upon mankind also this great social blessing that of having restored authority by making it at once strong andmild, likefatherhood.

If we occupy some position of authority, whether within orwithout the family, let us bear in mind our dignity and

responsibility as representatives of God, to whom we will have torender a strict accounting of the use we have made of theauthority we received from him.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20101939_summi-pontificatus_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20101939_summi-pontificatus_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20101939_summi-pontificatus_en.html


39/64

All authority ought directly or indirectly to promote the glory ofGod and the salvation of souls. At least, it must never be ahinderance thereto. It is with such intentions that every Catholicought to accept and exercise authority.

Let us supernaturalize our obedience by looking upon everylegitimate authority not only religious, but civil as well as areflection of divine authority. In that way, our obedience willbecome at once easier and more meritorious.

Christianity and Liberty

The word liberty is equivalent to absence of necessity and hasvarious meanings. First of all, one should distinguish

betweenphysicalliberty and moralliberty:Physical,orpsychologicalliberty, is the individuals power to decide forthemselves to will or not to will; to will one thing or another.This self-determination presupposes an absence of necessity, notmerelyexternal, but also internal.
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/statue_of_liberty.jpg


40/64

External necessity, or constraint, derives from a power thatliesoutside of the individualand compels us to do that which wedo not want to do. Such is the power that forces an individual tobe placed under arrest, or to be shut up in jail. Internal necessity

comes instead from an impulse with us that forces us to act. Suchis the case of the sleepwalker, of the insane person, of those whoact under the stimulus of an interior power which they cannotcontrol.

From the above we can understand how two cases diametricallyopposed to each other may be supposed within us: the case of theexternal, without any internal necessity (as in the case of the jailedperson, because he is obliged to do so against his will), and that ofan internal, without any external necessity (as in the case of aperson who is insane, without being subject to any external force).

The absence of internal necessity is calledfree will, inasmuch as itmakes us the arbiter of our own actions. Free will is an effect ofthe spirituality of the soul, and is innate in us. However, there are

internal and external causes that may diminish or destroy freewill. Some such internal causes are: passions, temperaments,habits, ignorance, sleep, insanity. Mental illness and disordershave a more or less pronounced influence upon the will which, aswe know, follows the judgment of the mind.

Inasmuch as the extent of the influence of these internal causes isnearly always uncertain, in many cases it is almost impossible for

us to determine the exact degree ofresponsibility that attaches toan action, since obviously theresponsibility of an action is alwaysin proportion to its freedom.

The existence of free will has often been denied by philosophers,nowadays called determinists, because they claim that every act of


41/64

the human will is determined by an interior irresistible force likeinstinct in animals. But there are many arguments that prove theexistence of free will and we will examine two of these here. Thetestimony of conscience being the first.

We feel inwardly that it is in our power to act or not to act, to actin one way rather than another. We feel, for example, that we havethe power to eat or not to eat, to eat little or much, this or that;whereas it does not depend upon us to digest the food we eat.Therefore, our very conscience assures us that both free acts andnecessary acts are attributable to us.

The testimony of humankind is the second. Humankind hasalways praised virtue and blamed vice, rewarded merit andpunished guilt. But these words, praise and blame, reward andpunishment would have no meaning if we were not free and henceresponsible for our own actions. Were there ever any rewards orpunishments established for animals? Similarly, laws,prohibitions, counsels, and reproofs that humankind has always

made use of would become practical absurdities if we were notmasters of our own actions.

Moral freedom is entirely different from physical freedom, thoughhaving its roots in the latter. It consists in the power of doingeverything that is not forbidden by a just law. Moral freedom istherefore a right, the object of which is the good. No one has aright to do evil. Therefore, the power of doing evil is a defect and

does not belong to the essence of freedom, just as tendency tosickness does not does not belong to the essence of health.Consequently, public authorities, while allowing full liberty togoodness, cannot equate liberty to evil. That would not be trueliberty but license. Social order and peace are to be based upon aproper balance between authority and liberty.


42/64

There are different kinds of moral freedom, according to theobjects upon which it is exercised. Thus we have religious, civil,economic, professional, scientific freedom, and so on. Theliberals, by posing as the champions of all liberties, have

proclaimed the liberty of thought, of conscience, and of religion inopposition to the Church that prescribes doctrines to be believedand religious acts to be performed. If the liberals mean thatreligion cannot be imposed by force, they are stating the truth, butthey are not stating anything that has not already been proclaimedby the Church. Religion is a free homage to God; and no one canbe forced to believe or to profess that which she does not believe.

What the liberals mean to affirm is that each person is free toprofess the religion that pleases him and even profess none at all.They mean liberty to think and to do whatever one wishesconcerning God, which is religious indifference. This unlimitedfreedom in religious matters would be lawful only in the eventthat it were not possible to know the true God and the truereligion. But such is not the case, because the existence of Godand Christian revelation are truths that can be proved and havebeen proved by human reason.

The doctrine of human physical freedom is clearly set forth in theOld Testament. We read in Genesis that God, in creatinghumankind, uttered these significant words, which are notemployed for any other creature: Let us make man in our imageand likeness. (Gen. 1:26). Now this likeness (not equality) is

derived from the fact that humankind has a spiritual andimmortal soul and a free will. Spirituality, immortality, freedom,are attributes of God. In Ecclesiasticus we read these words: Godmade man from the beginning and left him in the hand of his owncounselBefore man is set life and death, good and evil; thatwhich he shall chose shall be given to him. (Ecclus. 15:14-18).


43/64

The New Testament takes for granted the freedom of the will. Thewhole preaching of Christ would be an absurd labor, all hisprecepts and counsels would be but empty words, if man wereforced to act automatically or instinctively. The whole plan of the

Gospel would have no reason for existence, because fallen manwould not be capable of redemption, and the punishment ofeternal fire, which which Jesus threatened the reprobates (Matt.25:51) would be an unheard of cruelty. For whoever is not free isnot responsible for what he does and deserves neither reward norpunishment.

The Church, walking in the footsteps of Christ, was at all times thechampion and the protector of every legitimate liberty and theenemy of every tyranny. First of all, the Church championed thephysical liberty of humankind and thus defended the crown of thisking of creation. She condemned the theories of the heresies ofLuther, Calvin, and Jansen who held that original sin destroyedour free will, and in our days the Church has condemned thenefarious doctrines of determinism and materialism.

St. Paul, writing to the Christians of Ephesus, exhorts them: Andyou, masters, do the same things to them [the slaves], forbearingthreatenings, knowing that the Lord both of them and you is inheaven; and there is no respect of persons with him. (Eph. 6:9).And to the Christians of Galatia he clearly states: There is neitherJew nor Greek;there is neither bond nor free; there is neithermale nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Gal. 3:28).

This means that before God there is no difference, eitherofnationality or ofsocial condition, or of gender, contrary towhat people, then, might have thought. These words of the apostleof the Gentiles, which have since been reiterated unceasingly bythe Church, are a clear condemnation of slavery, which among


44/64

Christians soon ceased to exist in their minds if not is outwardpractice. The Christian master was bound to see his brother in hisslave and to treat him accordingly.

The Church has made the highest proclamation of the highestliberty religious liberty through the martyrdom of countlesssons and daughters of hers. Martyrdom is the declaration of themost sacred rights of humankind, written in blood. The army ofChristian martyrs is a heroic defense of freedom.

Pius XII teaches us to distinguish between liberty and license,

which is liberty without restraint and without limitations. Trueliberty, he writes, that which truly deserves this name and whichconstitutes the happiness of peoples, has nothing in common withlicense, with brazenness. True liberty is just the contrary of that. Itis that which guarantees the professions and the practice of whatis true and of what is just under the guidance of the divinecommandments within the sphere of public welfare. It hastherefore need of just limitations.

Leo XIII, in his EncyclicalLibertas, condemns freedom of speech,worship, of teaching, and of conscience as understood byliberalism, which would grant the same rights to good and evil, totruth and error. While freedom of evil is always unlawful, thetoleration of evil may, at times, be advisable. On this point LeoXIII teaches: Without granting any rights except to truth andhonesty, the Church, in order to avoid a greater evil, or to achieve

or preserve a greater good, does not forbid public authority totolerate certain things that are at variance with truth andjustice. [Editors Note: An example of this for our day wouldbe allowing for the State to legalize civil unions betweenhomosexuals while not allowing for the State to legalize abortionson demand. The second being a far greater evilthan the first,
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.htmlhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.html


45/64

although bothare contrary to natural law.] Pius XII in hisEncyclicalSummi Pontificuscondemns the opposite error, to witStatism, which accords unrestricted power to the State, to theprejudice of the liberty of the individual and of the family,

pointing out that man and the family are by nature prior to theState and that the Creator endowed both with certain powers andrights and assigned to each a mission answering to positivenatural exigencies.

Christianity and the Law

Moral liberty, as we have seen, finds its limitations in law. Theaspects of law are manifold. In general: by law is meant aconstant manner of being and of acting. This manner of actingis either necessary or free, according to the nature of differentbeings. Thus we have the first division of lawintophysicaland moral.

Physical law is the manner of acting of beings devoid of reason.Their actions are necessary. The following are examples of
http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/ladyjustice325x500.jpghttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20101939_summi-pontificatus_en.htmlhttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/ladyjustice325x500.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/ladyjustice325x500.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/ladyjustice325x500.jpghttp://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordp

Documents

The Social Principles of the Catholic Church