The Advocate - May 2005 Index

PJP II and the Social Question

Paolo Morisi

“I never said that he was a reactionary,” said Fausto Bertinotti, leader of the Italian Communist party about Pope John Paul II. Fidel Castro, the Cuban communist leader, said, “As I read the pope’s documents, I found total agreement between his theoretical arguments and mine,” referring to the pope’s concern with “capitalism” and “globalizing solidarity.”

Is there something wrong with these statements? Why are communists and leaders of the Left agreeing with the social views and policies of the deceased Pope John Paul II, renowned for his moral conservatism?

To answer this question we have to discuss the origins and the development of the Catholic Church’s social doctrine and its newfound relevance following the collapse of communism.

The Catholic Church ?rst addressed the social issue with the papal encyclical Rerum Novarum published by Pope Leo XIII, on May 15, 1891 at the outset of mass industrialization. At the time, Europe’s class system was solidifying and the labor movement was taking the ?rst steps toward developing a highly centralized organization dedicated to defending workers from exploitation and low wages.

The Rerum Novarum sought to develop a vision of society which contrasted with both socialism and capitalism – a third way. As a religious organization, the Church’s Rerum did not call for a set of policies or endorse a particular economic system, but rather proposed an alternative vision based on a few general guiding principles. The Rerum criticizes the free market economics and argues on behalf of workers, describing the economic grievances of the working classes. But it also refutes the alternative to capitalism proposed by socialists, instead defending the right of private property by advocating widespread ownership. Leo XIII argues that, “the law, therefore, should favor ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many people as possible to become owners” (Rerum Novarum, no. 35).

The true remedy, continues the Rerum, is also to be found in the combined action of the state, employer organizations, and the labor unions, all of which should collaborate to decide upon the major socioeconomic policies.

The Rerum also spurred Catholics to become involved in socioeconomic movements and as a result many new organizations and labor unions formed.
One of the most important movements inspired by the social vision of Rerum Novarum was distributism, a political organization created by two well-known British literary figures, G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc.

Distributism advocated an economic system in which private property is well-distributed, and in which “as many people as possible” are owners. Probably the most complete statement of distributism can be found in Hilaire Belloc’s book, The Restoration of Property (1936). The distributists argued that under capitalism property—productive property in particular—was the preserve of the rich, and that this gave them in?uence and power far beyond that afforded to the poor. Yes, they argued, the formal right to private property exists for all under capitalism, but in practice it is restricted to the rich.

A further implication of distributist argumentation is that in a distributist economy, the amassing of property will be limited. This implies that in a distributist system monopolies would be considered obstacles to the welfare of society.

G. K. Chesterton’s What’s Wrong With the World (1910) doesn’t mention distributism as such, but asserts, “We can now only avoid Socialism by a change as vast as Socialism. If we are to save property, we must distribute property, almost as sternly and sweepingly as did the French Revolution.”

In the 1920s both men founded the Distributist League and edited its widely read periodical G.K’s Weekly. They also regularly debated their socioeconomic views and, in 1928, participated in a major conference promoted by the ?edgling BBC titled “Do we agree?” where Chesterton and Belloc argued on behalf of distributism and Bernard Shaw on behalf of socialism.

Distributists also engaged in political activism. On one occasion they organized a protest against the state’s having granted the London General Omnibus Company status as a legal monopoly at the expense of privately owned buses. More than a million people signed a petition against it, but the monopoly was ?nally established in 1933. The distributists conditionally endorsed the Labour Party, on account of MP Sir Henry Slesser, and they hoped to convince trade unionists to join them; G.K.’s Weekly strongly supported the General Strike of 1926. However, as the unions showed themselves more amenable to bureaucratization and state dependency than to the distributist system, the League turned against them in 1930.

Despite reaching a high level of popularity in the 1920s, the social doctrine of the Church and the distributist movement, were overshadowed by the Cold War and the opposition between the two blocs after WWII. On one side stood the western system and on the other the communist. There seemed no room for a third way.

But when communism collapsed at the beginning of the last decade, distributism and the social doctrine of the Church became relevant once again. With the end of the communist system, the collectivist critique of modern capitalist economic systems was weakened. This allowed a major opening for the Catholic Church to provide not only a moral critique of the inequality that exists within western society but it also allowed the church to become a spokesperson for the underprivileged and for the so-called third world.

From a doctrinal perspective John Paul II was always a traditionalist striving to perpetuate the cultural heritage of the Church and, especially, the Rerum Novarum. When Communism fell he began to talk more frequently about the need for solidarity and for balance and fairness in employer/employee relations.
In a neglected passage of the encyclical Centesimus Annus, for instance, John Paul II points out that many of the same social issues described in Rerum Novarum have not gone away:

“Would that these words, written at a time when what has been called “unbridled capitalism” was pressing forward, should not have to be repeated today with the same severity. Unfortunately, even today one ?nds instances of contracts between employers and employees which lack reference to the most elementary justice regarding the employment of children or women, working hours, the hygienic condition of the workplace and fair pay; and this is the case despite the international declarations and conventions on the subject.” (Centesimus Annus, no. 26)

In another passage in line with the distributist vision, he writes that, “It is necessary to break down the barriers and monopolies which leave so many countries on the margins of development, and to provide all individuals and nations with the basic conditions which will enable them to share in development. This goal calls for programmed and responsible efforts on the part of the entire international community” (Centesimus Annus, no. 28).

In Laborem Exercens (no. 14), John Paul II writes that the alternative to a laissez-faire economy is a society in which “as many people as possible...become owners.” In this picture, the fatal separation of ownership and work will be, if not removed, at least lessened in its extent and in?uence. It will no longer be the hallmark of our economic system, even if it still exists to some extent.

During his travels, John Paul II frequently noted that the poor are often the victims of an economic system that does not lift them from their miserly existence. His popularity in the third world often stemmed from the positions he took on behalf of the poor; this also explains why a communist such as Bertinotti or a social democrat such as Anthony Giddens spoke about him favorably.

After the Berlin Wall fell many left-wing intellectuals such as Giddens, who became a key advisor to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, began to argue on behalf of the third way. They pointed to the mixed systems found in countries such as Germany and Sweden (social market economies) as interesting experiments that have achieved a high degree of consensus between labor and the employee associations.

In the same way, Pope John Paul II sought to critique the excesses of western society and promote collaboration between the classes. His stance on the social question has often been praised by a Left in search of new ideas.

Paolo Morisi is a student in the PhD program in Political Science.