What Pope Leo XIII had to say —Part1 of a 4-part series
Rev. Msgr. Gerald E. Twaddell, D.Phil., KCHS
Contributor
Since the election of Pope Leo XIV, we have heard many observations about his admiration for the teachings of Pope Leo XIII. Frequent comments have referred to the encyclical “Rerum Novarum” that brought Catholic Social Teaching (CST) into the spotlight in 1891. That was not really something new, since CST is simply the application of long-established moral principles to situations that develop in the relationships of people in their social interactions. Moral theology extends to more than just the choices of individual persons.
We should first recall the turmoil that marked the end of the 18th and the whole of the 19th centuries, the “new concerns” that the title of the encyclical refers to. Intellectually, there was the rise the Enlightenment which sought, in the name of progress and reason, to sweep aside all religion as nothing more than sentimental, superstitious nonsense. It was an era of rising individualism and liberation from all forms of authority, whether of Church, or King, or any other.
Politically, Enlightenment ideals were embodied in the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the War of 1812, the various European revolutions in 1848, the FrancoPrussian War, etc., all of which disrupted the stability of monarchies, introduced republics (condemned by Blessed Pope Pius IX) and wrenched the Papal States out of the control of the Catholic Church.
Economically, there was the rise of industrial capitalism which shifted the control of productive forces from traditional artisans and small family shopkeepers into the hands of wealthy individuals pursuing ever greater concentration of political and economic power. The Popes were dismayed, and did their best to dampen such destructive forces, and advance the alternative of the teachings of the Gospel to the people being trampled and oppressed in these circumstances. Pope Leo XIII had addressed several of the issues in a suite of documents. “Rerum Novarum” must be read against the backdrop of the many disturbing trends that surrounded the life of the Church in his day. This is why it is important for people, Catholic or not, to know what he had to say. The purpose here is to get a sense of the teaching of Pope Leo XIII in just this one encyclical.
The pope’s concern was the condition of workers in a time marked by conflict brought about by the factors shifting the landscape. The first he lists is the expansion of industrial pursuits and scientific discoveries in the 19th century. Second were the changing relations between owners and workers. Third, he noted the enormous fortunes of a few and the utter poverty of the vast majority. Next were the increasing self reliance and mutual organizations among workers. Finally, the pope pointed to the “prevailing moral degeneracy.” (§ 1) Each of these factors receives attention in the encyclical.
In this first part of this series of articles, we will focus on how Pope Leo XIII presented the underlying problem.
Property and Society
In the first portion of the encyclical, the pope reflects extensively on the economic conditions that had emerged with the rise of industrialism in the 19th century.
Leo XIII wanted to bring the principles dictated by truth and justice to bear in confronting those taking advantage of these changes to pervert people’s judgment and stir up revolts. (§ 2) He saw a need to find a remedy quickly for “the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class.” (§ 3)
As a result of the elimination of ancient protections by public institutions and laws, “working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition.” In addition, usury, long condemned by the Church, was being practiced under new guises “by covetous and grasping men.” The pope’s judgment was that “a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.” (§ 3) After this critique of the workings of industrial capitalism, Pope Leo XIII turns his attention to another morally unacceptable proposal.
One answer being put forward came from socialists who sought to eliminate private ownership of the means of production, seen as the root of the problem. The pope did not state specifically whose theory of socialism he had in mind. There were several, and not all agreed on every point. In any case, the false solution of eliminating all private property long ago introduced by Plato in his “Republic” would have had the effect of taking away from workers themselves what little they had.
Laborers have a right both to be paid for their efforts, and to use that pay as they see fit. The socialist plan to transfer people’s possessions to the community at large would deprive the laborer of all hope for improved living conditions. (§5) These practical problems call for a deeper consideration of the implications of human nature itself.
A distinctive feature of human beings, flowing from the capacity for rational thought, is the right of every person to possess property not just for immediate use as in other animals, but also to hold it on a stable basis to meet future needs. (§6) Reason links the future with the present, enabling humans to make choices about what might be advantageous at a later date. All this is grounded in humanity itself, so before any State ever comes into existence, possession of property already provides for the needs of the body. (§7)
The pope explains that the fact that God gives the earth for the use and enjoyment of the whole hu-man race can in no way exclude the owning of private property. (§8) For in giving the earth to all in general, “no part of it was assigned to anyone in particular,” thereby leaving the limits of private ownership to be worked out by people themselves. So private ownership “is in accordance with the law of nature.” (§9) An important means by which people come to own things is by their own labor. Thus, the pope asks, “Is it just that the fruit of a man’s own sweat and labor should be possessed by and enjoyed by anyone else?” (§10)
Civil laws affirm this provision. Given that such laws are just, the law of nature gives them their binding force, and the divine law against covetousness adds further sanction. (§11) These rights are also affected by the right of each person to choose a state of life, single or married, so that provision for whatever is necessary for the preservation and just freedom of the family is also a right. No state can hinder or control the life of the family. (§13)
Indeed, “if a family finds itself in exceeding distress, utterly deprived of the counsel of friends, and without any prospect of extricating itself, it is right that extreme necessity be met by public aid, since each family is a part of the commonwealth.” Likewise, when, within the family, mutual rights are not respected, the public authority must intervene to safeguard and strengthen those rights. Still, parental rights cannot be abolished or absorbed by the State as the socialists would have it. (§ 14) Since the result of applying the idea of communal holding of all goods would upset all relations among people, leaving them in a situation worse than slavery, the socialist “solution” must be rejected. (§15)
A true solution to the challenge of industrialism must be found by involving State leaders, employers of labor, the wealthy, and the working classes as well. But their efforts will fail if the Church is not permitted to contribute her services in endeavoring to uplift the working classes. (§16) The variety of capacities, skills, strength, etc. that people possess need to be recognized. Each person should be able to choose what best suits their own situation. (§17) In making such choices, people need to see the world as it truly is, with all its ills and troubles. It is a mistake to deceive oneself about some simplistic solution that will supposedly make them disappear. (§18)
In the next article in the series we will discover the mutual duties and responsibilities of employees and employers that Pope Leo XIII identified.
