Modern Catholic Social teaching begins with Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum (The Condition of Labour) written in 1891. This letter speaks out against the inhuman conditions of workers during the industrial revolution. Recognizing that three key factors underlie economic life, workers, productive property and the state, Leo indicated that a just and equitable interrelationship between the three was the crucial issue for Catholic Social Teaching.
On the 40th anniversary of Rerum Novarum (1931) Pope Pius XI composed the next major social encyclical called The Reconstruction of the Social Order (Quadragesimo Anno). Written during a world wide economic depression Pope Pius addresses the issue of social injustice and calls for the reconstruction of the social order along the lines set forth by Pope Leo in Rerum Novarum. He affirms the right of the Church to address social issues while condemning capitalism and unregulated competition He also condemns communism for its promotion of class warfare and a narrow reliance for leadership on the working class. Stressing the social responsibility of private property, he continues Pope Leo’s promotion of the rights of the people to a job and a just wage while pointing out the positive role of governments in promoting the economic good.
Thirty years later Pope John XXIII wrote two major social encyclicals. Mater et Magistra (1961, Christianity and Social Progress) and Pacem in Terris (1963, Peace on Earth), set down principles to guide Christians and policy makers in addressing the gap between rich and poor nations along with threats to world peace. He calls on Christians as well as “all people of good will” to work together to create institutions which would respect human dignity and promote justice and peace. He emphasizes that the growing interdependence of the world community calls for effective government which would safeguard the rights of the individual as well as promoting the common good. Following the tradition of Popes Leo and Pius XI he stresses economic rights (right to work, just wage).
Vatican council II produced Gaudium et Spes (1965, The church in the Modern World). This document affirmed that the Church’s religious mission gave it a “function” which can structure the community according to divine law when circumstances create this need.
After Vatican council II, statements by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II have clarified the role of the Church in meeting the responsibilities of contemporary times. The Church has no universal solution to all of the complex issues faced by society. Pope Paul’s Populorum Progresssio (1967, The Development of Peoples), responds to the problem of world hunger and addresses the structural dimensions of global injustice. He appeals to a solidarity between rich and poor nations to work for a just order. In Octogesima Adveniens (1971, A Call to Action), Pope Paul acknowledges the difficulties in establishing a just social order and outlines the role of Christian communities in meeting this need. Christians must be hearers as well as doers of the word, pray, discern and reflect and fight injustice while laboring to bring in the reign of God. Basically, Pope Paul links the Gospel, the mission of the Church and social justice repeatedly in his writings.
Finally in Laborem Exercens (1981,On Human Work), the central theme is labour over capital. Here Pope John Paul II, criticizes an “economism” which would reduce humans to mere instruments of production. He continues his predecessors warnings against liberal capitalism and collectivist socialism. John Paul’s Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1988, The Social Concerns of the Church) pushes the link between peace and justice further by emphasizing the plight of the third world. He calls the thirst for power and profit a “structure of sin.” In Centesimus Annus (1991,One Hundred Years) Pope John Paul II states that all have the right to acquire the skills and technology which will enable them to participate in the contemporary economy. Stronger nations have a duty to allow the weaker nations to assume their rightful place in the world. The primary role of the Church is forming minds and hearts to the gospel values.
Liberation Theology VS. Catholic Social Teaching.
The main thrust of liberation theology is a critique of structures that create oppression. In the case of justice, Liberation theology would focus more on the question of economic freedom and political oppression. Narrowing this down to economics only, I believe that Liberation theology in the extreme would be very critical of Catholic social teaching’s lack of collectivist leanings. Although Catholic Social tradition stresses the “common good” it also tends to support political as well as economic structures that continue to manifest economic oppression. At least this is the way I think Liberation theology would view this issue. Pope’s Leo and Pius XI attempted to find a mid point between the extremes of liberal capitalism and Communism. Liberation theology’s economic views tend to focus more on collectivism than on free markets. Hence in my view Liberation theology would find Catholic Social teaching part of the structure that props up an unjust economic order. In my opinion some Liberation theologians such as Jon Sobrino would accuse the Vatican of silence in the face of world hunger and political oppression. Liberation theologians would most likely focus on the following main points in their critique of Catholic Social Teachings.
1. A lack of critique of capitalistic economic structures.
2. Maintaining a silence in the face of world hunger/poverty.
3. Of supporting and fostering established political and economic structures that create poverty and oppression.
4. Not using the Church’s political power to promote a just social order.
5. Promoting a dualism or dichotomy between the gospel/church and the political order
6. Of not breaking relationships with states that foster oppression (South America).
7. Pressuring the laity for change and not the institutional structures that rule (governments).
8. Of being insensitive to cultural diversities (developmentalism).
Catholic Social Teachings VS. feminist, mujerista, and womanist theologies
Feminist theologies would critique Catholic Social Teachings for its lack of attention to feminist issues. The vast majority of Catholic Social Teachings see women in a subordinate role to men. Women are not seen as economic beings or bread winners. Their role is to be mothers sisters and wives. In other words to support (help-mate) men who rule, run, foster, and supply the economy.
In my view, Catholic Social teachings address women in terms of morality only and neglects the fact that women are a major part of the world economy. Issues of motherhood, sexual immorality and children are addressed of course but usually in the vein of morality and not economics. Feminist theology would also (in a liberationist style) attack Catholic Social teachings as a structure that fosters the oppression, not only morally but economically, of women. The cultural critique would be heavily used against Catholic Social Teachings to argue against a universalist view of motherhood and women in general. All cultures do not hold Western European values that Catholic Social Teachings tend to emphasize. Therefore the Feminist critique would see this as further patriarchy which results in the moral as well as economic oppression of women as well as men.
In closing, Feminist theology would hammer away on the point of “common good” and “just wage” in regards to the inclusion of women. It would demand a more inclusive view of human kind that would gather in cultural as well as feminist needs. The gospel values and the preferential option for the poor which Catholic Social Teachings propound would have to be re-structured to shed light on feminist issues or suffer further critique from Feminist theology as an unjust structure.
