Continuing Encyclical
on
Social Reconstruction
by
POPE PIUS XI
May 15, 1931
                                                                                         
The Power Of The State

    It follows from the twofold character of ownership, which We have termed individual and social, that men must take into account in this matter, not only their own advantage, but also the common good.  To define in detail these duties, when the need occurs and when the natural law does not do so, is the function of the government.  Provided that the natural and Divine Law be observed, the public authority, in view of the common good, may specify more accurately what is licit and what is illicit for property owners in the use of their possessions.  Moreover, Leo XIII had wisely taught that "the defining of private possession has been left by God to man's industry and to the laws of individual peoples." (Encycl. Rerum novarun, Para. 7.)  History proves that the right of ownership, like other elements of social life, is not absolutely rigid, and this doctrine We Ourselves have given utterance to on a previous occasion in the following terms: "How varied are the forms which the right of property has assumed!  First, the primitive form in use amongst the rude and savage peoples, which still exists in certain localities even in our own day; then, that of the Patriarchal age; later came various tyrannical types (We use the word in its classical meaning); finally, the feudal and monarchic systems down to the varieties of more recent times." (Allocution to the A. C. I., May 16, 1926.)  It is plain, however, that the State may not discharge this duty in an arbitrary manner.  Man's natural right of possessing and transmitting property by inheritance must remain intact and cannot be taken away by the State; "for man precedes the State," (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 6.)  and, "the domestic household is antecedent, as well in idea as in fact, to the gathering of men into a community." (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 10.)
    Hence the prudent Pontiff had already declared it unlawful for the state to exhaust the means of individuals by crushing taxes and tributes.  "The right to possess private property is derived from nature, not from man; and the state has by no means the right to abolish it, but only to control its use and bring it into harmony with the interests of the public good." (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 35.)  However, when the civil authority adjusts ownership to meet the needs of the public good it acts not as an enemy, but as the friend of private owners; for thus it effectively prevents the possessions of private property, by Nature's Author in His Wisdom for the sustaining of human life, from creating intolerable burdens and so rushiing to its own destruction.  It does not therefore abolish, but protects private ownership; and, far from weakening the right of private property, it gives it new strength.

    At the same time a man's superfluous income is not left entirely to his own discretion.  We speak of that portion of his income which he does not need in order to live as becomes his station.  On the contrary, the grave obligations of Charity, beneficence and liberality which rest upon the wealthy, is constantly insisted upon in telling words by Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church.
    However, the investment of superfluous income in securing favorable opportunities for employment, provided the labor employed produces results which are really useful, is to be considered, according to the teaching of the Angelic Doctor, (S. Thomas 2. 2. q. 134.)  an act of real liberality particularly appropriate to the needs of our time.

    The original acquisition of property takes place by first occupation and by industry, or, as it is called, specification.  This is the universal teaching of Tradition and the Doctrine of Our Predecessor,  Despite unreasonable assertions to the contrary, no wrong is done to any man by the occupation of goods unclaimed and which belong to nobody.  The only form of labor, however, which gives the workingman a title to its fruits, is that which a man exercises as his own master, and by which some new form or new value is produced.

    Altogether different is the labor one man hires out to another, and which is expended on the property of another.  To it apply appositely the words of Leo XIII: "It is only by the labor of workingmen that states grow rich." (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 27.)  Is it not indeed apparent that the huge possessions which constitute human wealth are begotten by and flow from the hands of the workingman, toiling either unaided or with the assistance of tools and machinery which wonderfully intensify his efficiency?
    Universal experience teaches us that no nation has ever yet risen from want and poverty to a better and loftier station without the unremitting toil of all its citizens, both employers and employed.  But it is no less self-evident that these ceaseless labors would have remained ineffective, indeed would never have been attempted, had not God, the Creator of all things, in His goodness bestowed in the first instance the wealth and resources of nature, its treasures and its powers.  For what else is work but the application of one's forces of soul and body to these gifts of nature for the development of one's powers by their means?
    Now, the natural law, or rather, God's Will manifested by it, demands that right order be observed in the application of natural resources to human need; and this order consists in everything having its proper owner.  Hence it follows that unless a man apply his labor to his own property, an alliance must be formed between his toil and his neighbor's property; for each is helpless without the other.  "This was what Leo XIII had in mind when he wrote: ""Captial cannot do without Labor, nor Labor without Capital". (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 15.)  It is therefore entirely false to ascribe the results of their combined efforts to either party alone; and it is flagrantly unjust that either should deny the efficacy of the other and seize all the profits.

    Capital, however, was long able to appropriate to itself excessive advantages; it claimed all the products and profits, and left to the laborer the barest minimum necessary to repair his strength and to ensure the continuation of his class.  For by an inexorahle economic law, it was held, all accumulation of riches must fall to the share of the wealthy, while the workingman must remain perpetually in indigence or reduced to the minimum needed for existence.  It is true that the actual state of things was not always and everywhere as deplorable as the liberalistic tenets of the so-called Manchester School might lead us to conclude; but it cannot be denied that a steady drift of economic and social tendencies was in this direction.  These false oppinions and specious axioms were vehemently attacked, as was to be expected, and by others also than merely those whom such principles deprived of their innate right to better their condition.

    The cause of the harassed workingman was espoused by the "intellectuals", as they are called, who set up in opposition to this fictitious law another equally false moral principle: that all products and profits, excepting those required to repair and replace invested capital, belong by every right to the workingman.  This error, more subtle than that of the Socialists, who held that all means of production should be transferred to the State, (or, as they term it, socialized), is for that reason more dangerous and apt to deceive the unwary.  It is an alluring poison, consumed with avidity by many not deceived by open Socialism.

    To prevent erroneous doctrines of this kind from blocking the path of justice and peace, the advocates of these opinions should have hearkened to the wise words of Our Predecessor: "The earth even though apportioned amongst private owners, ceases not thereby to minister to the needs of all". (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 7.)  This teaching We Ourselves have reaffirmed above, when We wrote that the division of goods, which is effected by private ownership is ordained by nature itself and has for its purpose that created things may minister to man's needs in an orderly and stable fashion.  These principles must be constantly borne in mind, if we would not wander from the path of Truth.
    Now, not every kind of distribution of wealth and property amongst men is such that it can at all, and still less can adequately, attain the end intended by God.  Wealth, therefore, which is constantly being augmented by social and economic progress, must be so distributed amongst the various individuals and classes of society, that the common good of all, of which Leo XIII spoke, be thereby promoted.  In other words, the good of the whole community must be safeguarded.  By these prinicples of social justice, one class is forbidden to exclude the other from a share in the profits.  This Sacred Law is violated by an irresponsible wealthy class who, in the excess of their good fortune, deem it a just state of things that they should receive everything and the laborer nothing; it is violated also by a propertyless wage-earning class who demand for themselves all the fruits of production, as being the work of their hands.  Such men, vehemently incensed against the violation of justice by capitalists, go too far in vindicating the one right of which they are conscious; they attack and seek to abolish all forms of ownership and all profits not obtained by labor, whatever be their nature or significance in human society, for the sole reason that they are not acquired by toil.  In this connection it must be noted that the appeal made by some to the words of the Apostle: "If any man will not work, neither let him eat", (2. Thess. 3, 10.)  is as inept as it is unfounded.  The Apostle is here passing judgment on those who refuse to work though they could and ought to do so; he admonishes us to use diligently our time and our powers of body and mind, and not to become burdensome to others as long as we are able to provide for ourselves.  In no sense does he teach that labor is the sole title which gives a right to a living or to profits. (2. Thess. 2, 8, 10.)
    Each class, then, must receive its due share, and the distribution of created goods must be brought into conformity with the demands of the common good and social justice, for every sincere observer is conscious that the vast differences between the few who hold excessive wealth and the many who live in destitution constitute a grave evil in modern society.

    This is the aim which Our Predecessor urged as the necessary object of Our efforts: the uplifting of the proletariat.  It calls for more emphatic assertion and more insistent repetition on the present occasion, because these slautary injunctions of the Pontiff have not infrequently been forgotten, deliberately ignored, or deemed impracticable, though they were both feasible and imperative.  They have lost none of their force or wisdom for our own age, even though the horrible "pauperism" of the days of Leo XIII is less prevalent today.  The condition of the workingman has indeed been improved and rendered more equitable in many respects, particularly in the largest and more civilized States, where the laboring class can no longer be said to be universally in misery and want.  But after modern machinery and modern industry had progressed with astonishing speed and taken possession of many newly colonized countries no less than of the ancient civilizations of the Far East, the number of the dispossessed laboring masses, whose groans mount to Heaven from these lands, increased beyond all measure.  Moreover, there is the immense army of hired rural laborers, whose condition is depressed in the extreme, and who have no hope of ever obtaining a share in the land. (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 35.)  These, too, unless efficacious remedies be applied, will remain perpetually sunk in the proletarian condition.
    It is true that there is a formal difference between pauperism and proletarianism.  Nevertheless, the immense number of propertyless wage-earners on the one hand, and the superabundant riches of the fortunate few on the other, is an unanswerable argument that the earthly goods so abundantly produced in this age of industrialism are far from rightly distributed and equitably shared among the various classes of men.

    Every effort, therefore, must be made that at least in future a just share only of the fruits of production be permitted to accumulate in the hands of the wealthy, and that an ample sufficiency be supplied to the workingmen.  The purpose is not that these become slack at their work, for man is born to labor as the bird to fly, but that by thrift they may increase their possessions and by the prudent management of the same may be enabled to bear the family burden with greater ease and security, being freed from that hand-to-mouth uncertainty which is the lot of the proletarian.  Thus they will not only be in a position to support life's changing fortunes, but will also have the reassuring confidence that, when their own lives are ended, some little provision will remain for those whom they leave behind them.
    These ideas were not merely suggested, but stated in frank and open terms by Our Predecessor.  We emphasize them with renewed insistence in this present Encyclical; for unless serious attempts be made, with all energy and without delay to put them into practice, let nobody persuade himself that the peace and tranquillity of human society can be effectively defended against the forces of revolution!

    This program cannot, however, be realized unless the propertyless wage-earner be placed in such circumstances that by skill and thrift he can acquire a certain moderate ownership, as was already declared by Us, following the footsteps of Our Predecessor.  But how can he ever save money, except from his wages and by living sparingly, who has nothing but his labor by which to obtain food and the necessities of life?  Let Us turn, therefore, to the question of wage, which Leo XIII held to be "of great importance", (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 34.)  stating and explaining where necessary its principles and precepts.

    And first of all, those who hold that the wage-contract is essentially unjust, and that in its place must be introduced the contract of partnership, are certainly in error.  They do a grave injury to Our Predecessor, whose Encyclical not only admits this contract, but devotes much space to its determination according to the principle of justice.
    In the present state of human society, however, We deem it advisable that the wage-contract should, when possible, be modified somewhat by a contract of partnership, as is already being tried in various ways to the no small gain both of the wage-earners and of the employers.  In this way wage-earners are made sharers in some sort in the ownership, or the management, or the profits.
    In estimating a just wage, not one consideration alone but many must be taken into account, according to the wise words of Leo XIII: "Before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered." (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 17.)
    Entirely false is the principle, widely propagated today, that the worth of labor and therefore the equitable return to be made for it, should equal the worth of its net result.  Thus the right to the full product of his toil is claimed for the wage-earner.  How erroneous this is appears from what We have written above concerning Capital and Labor.

    The obvious truth is that in labor, especially hired labor, as in ownership, there is a social as well as a personal or individual aspect to be considered.  For unless human society forms a truly social and organic body; unless labor be protected in the social and juridical order; unless the various forms of human endeavor, dependent one upon the other, are united in mutual harmony and mutual support; unless, above all, brains, capital and labor combine together for common effort, man's toil cannot produce due fruit.  Hence, if the social and individual character of labor be overlooked, it can be neither equitably appraised nor properly recompensed according to strict justice.

    From this double aspect, growing out of the very notion of human labor, follow important conclusions for the regulation and fixing of wages.

a)   Support of the workingman and his family
    In the first place, the wage paid to the workingman must be sufficient for the support of himself and of his family. (Encycl. Casti Connumil, December 31, 1930.)  It is right indeed that the rest of the family contribute according to their power towards the common maintenance, as in the rural home or in the families of many artisans and small shopkeepers.  But it is wrong to abuse the tender years of children or the weakness of woman.  Mothers will above all devote their work to the home and the things connected with it: intolerable, and to be opposed with all Our strength, is the abuse whereby the mothers of families, because of the insufficiency of the father's salary, are forced to engage in gainful occupations outside the domestic walls to the neglect of their own proper cares and duties, particularly the education of their children.
    Every effort must therefore he made that fathers of families receive a wage sufficient to meet adequately ordinary domestic needs.  If in the presnt state of society this is not always feasible, social justice demands that reforms be introduced without delay which will guarantee every adult workingman just such a wage.  In this connection We might utter a word of praise for various systems devised and attempted in practice, by which an increased wage is paid in view of increased family burdens, and a special provision is made for special needs.

b)   The state of business
    The condition of any particular business and of its owner must also come into question in settling the scale of wages; for it is unjust to demand wages so high that an employer cannot pay them without ruin, and without consequent distress amongst the working peoples themselves.  If the business makes smaller profits on account of bad management, want of enterprise or out-of-date methods, this is not a just reason for reducing the workingmen's wages.  If, however, the business does not make enough money to pay the workman a just wage, either because it is overwhelmed with unjust burdens, or because it is compelled to sell its products at an unjustly low price, those who thus injure it are guilty of grievous wrong, for it is they who deprive the workingmen of the just wage, and force them to accept lower terms.
    Let employers, therefore, and employed join in their plans and efforts to overcome all difficulties and obstacles, and let them be aided in this wholesome endeavor by the wise measures of the public authority.  In the last extreme, counsel must be taken whether the business can continue, or whether some other provision should be made for the workers.  The guiding spirit in this crucial decision should be one of mutual understanding and Christian harmony between employers and workers.

c)   The exigencies of the common good
    Finally the wage-scale must be regulated with a view to the economic welfare of the whole people.  We have already shown how conducive it is to the common good that wage-earners of all kinds be enabled by economizing that portion of their wage which remains after necessary expenses have been met, to attain to the possession of a certain modest fortune.  Another point, however, of no less importance must not be overlooked, in these our days especially, namely, that opportunities for work be provided for those who are willing and able to work.  This depends in large measure upon the scale of wages, which multiples opportunities for work as long as it remains within proper limits,  and reduces them if allowed to pass these limits. All are aware that a scale of wages too low, no less than a scale excessively high, causes unemployment.  Now unemployment, particularly if widespread and of long duration, as We have been forced to experience it during Our Pontificate, is a dreadful scourge; it causes misery and temptation to the laborer, ruins the prosperity of nations, and endangers public order, peace and tranquillity the world over.  To lower or raise wages unduly, with a view to private profit, and with no consideration for the common good, is contrary to social justice which demands that by union of effort and good will such a scale of wages be set up, if possible, as to offer to the greatest number opportunities of employment and of securing for themselves suitable means of livelihood.
    A reasonable relationship between different wages here enters into consideration.  Intimately connected with this is a reasonable relationship between the prices obtained for the products of the various economic groups; agrarian, industrial, etc.  Where this harmonious proportion is kept, man's various economic activities combine and unite into one single organism and become members of a common body, lending each other mutual help and service.  For then only will the economic and social organism be soundly established and attain its end, when it secures for all and each those goods which the wealth and resources of nature, technical achievement, and the social organization of economic affairs can give.  These goods should be sufficient to supply all needs and an honest livelihood, and to uplift men to that higher level of prosperity and culture which, provided it be used with prudence, is not only no hindrance but is of singular help to virtue. (Cf. S. Thomas, De Regimine Principum, 1, 15.  Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 27.)

    What We have written thus far regarding a right distribution of property and a just scale of wages is concerned directly with the individual, and deals only indirectly with the social order.  To this latter, however, Our Predecessor, Leo XIII, devoted special thought and care, in his efforts to reconstruct and perfect it according to the principles of sound philosophy and the sublime Precepts of the Gospel.
    A happy beginning has here been made.  But in order that what has been well begun may be rendered stable, that what has not yet been accomplished may now be achieved, and that still richer and brighter blessings may descend upon mankind, two things are particularly necessary: the reform of the social order and the correction of morals.
    When We speak of the reform of the social order it is principally the state We have in mind.  Not indeed that all salvation is to be hoped from its intervention, but because on account of the evil of "individualism", as We called it, things have come to such a pass that the highly developed social life which once flourished in a variety of prosperous institutions organically linked with each other, has been damaged and all but ruined, leaving thus virtually only individuals and the state.  Social life lost entirely its organic form.  The state, which now was encumbered with all the burdens once born by associations rendered extinct by it, was in consequence submerged and overwhelmed by an infinity of affairs and duties.
    It is indeed true, as history clearly proves, that owing to the change in social conditions, much that was formerly done by small bodies these days can only be accomplished by large corporations.  None the less, just as it is wrong to withdraw from the individual and commit to the community at large what private enterprise and industry can accomplish, so too, it is an injustice, a grave evil and a disturbance of right order for a larger and higher organization to arrogate to itself functions which can be performed efficiently by smaller and lower bodies.  This is a fundamental principle of social philosophy, unshaken and unchangeable, and it retains its full truth today.  Of its very nature the true aim of all social activity should be to help individual members of the social body, but never to destroy or absorb them.
    The state should leave to these smaller groups the settlement of business of minor importance.  It will thus carry out with greater freedom, power and success the tasks belonging to it, because it alone can effectively accomplish these, directing, watching, stimulating and restraining, as circumstances suggest or necessity demands.  Let those in power, therefore, be convinced that the more faithfully this principle be followed, and a gradual hierarchical order exist between the various subsidiary organizations, the more excellent will be both the authority and the efficiency of the social organization as a whole and the happier and more prosperous the condition of the state.

    Now this is the primary duty of the State and of all good citizens; to abolish conflict between classes with divergent interests, and thus foster and promote harmony between the various ranks of society.
    The aim of social legislation must therefore be the re-establishment of vocational groups.  Society today still remains in a strained and therefore unstable and uncertain state, being founded on classes with contradictory interests and hence opposed to each other, and consequently prone to enmity and strife.  Labor, indeed, as has been well said by Our Predecessor in his Encyclical, (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 16.)  is not a mere chattel, since the human dignity of the workingman must be recognized in it, and consequently it cannot be bought and sold like any piece of merchandise.  None the less the demand and supply of labor divides men on the labor-market into two classes, as into two camps, and the bargaining between these parties transforms this labor market into an arena where the two armies are engaged in combat.  To this grave disorder which is leading society to ruin, a remedy must evidently be applied as speedily as possible.  But there cannot be question of any perfect cure, except this opposition be done away with, and well-ordered members of the social body come into being anew, vocational groups namely, binding men together not according to the position they occupy in the labor market, but according to the diverse functions which they exercise in society.  For as nature induces those who dwell in close proximity to unite into municipalities, so those who practice the same trade or profession, economic or otherwise, combine into vocational groups.  These groups, in a true sense autonomous, are considered by many to be, if not essential to civil society, at least its natural and spontaneous development.
    Order, as the Angelic Doctor well defines, (St. Thomas, Cont. Gent. 3, 71; cf. Summa. Theol., 1, q. 65, a. 2 i. c.)  is unity arising from the apt arrangement of a plurality of objects; hence, true and genuine social order demands various members of society, joined together by a common bond.  Such a bond of union is provided on the one hand by the common effort of employers and employees of one and the same group joining forces to produce goods or give service; on the other hand, by the common good which all groups should unite to promote, each in its own sphere, with friendly harmony.  Now this union will become powerful and efficacious in proportion to the fidelity with which the individuals and the groups strive to discharge their professional duties and to excel in them.
    From this it is easy to conclude that in these associations the common interest of the whole group must predominate; and among these interests the most important is the directing of the activities of the group to the common good.  Regarding cases in which interests of employers and employees call for special care and protection against opposing interests, separate deliberation will take place in their respective assemblies and separate votes will be taken as the matter may require.
    It is hardly necessary to note that what Leo XIII taught concerning the form of political government, can, in due measure, be applied also to vocational groups.  Here, too, men may choose whatever form they please, provided that both justice and the common good be taken into account. (Encycl. Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
    Just as the citizens of the same municipality are wont to form associations with diverse aims, which various individuals are free to join or not, similarly, those who are engaged in the same trade or profession will form free associations among themselves for purposes connected with their occupations.  Our Predecessor has explained clearly and lucidly the nature of these free associations.  We are content, therefore, to emphasize this one point: not only is man free to institute these unions which are of a private character, but he has "the further right to adopt such organization and such rules as may best conduce to the attainment of their respective objects". (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 42.)  The same liberty must be claimed for the founding of associations which extend beyond the limits of a single trade.  Let those free associations which already flourish and produce salutary fruits make it the goal of their endeavors, in accordance with Christian social doctrine, to prepare the way and to do their part towards the realization of that ideal type of vocational groups which We have mentioned above.

    Still another aim, intimately connected with the preceding, must be kept in view.  Just as the unity of human society cannot be built upon class-warfare, so the proper ordering of economic affairs cannot be left to free competition alone.  From this source have proceeded in the past all the errors of the "Individualistic" school.  This school, ignorant or forgetful of the social and moral aspects of economic matters, teaches that the State should refrain in theory and practice from interfering therein, because these possess in free competition and open markets a principle of self-direction better able to control them than any created intellect.  Free competition, however, though within certain liimits just and productive of good results, cannot be the ruling principle of the economic world.  This has been abundantly proved by the consequences that have followed from the free rein given to these dangerous individualistic ideals.  It is therefore very necessary that economic affairs be once more subjected to and governed by a true and effective guiding principle.  Still less can this function be exrcised by the economic supremacy which within recent times has taken the place of free competition; for this is a headstrong and vehement power, which, if it is to prove beneficial to mankind, needs to be curbed strongly and ruled with prudence.  It cannot, however, be curbed and governed by itself.  More lofty and noble principles must therefore be sought in order to control this supremacy sternly and uncompromisingly; to wit, social justice and social Charity.  To that end all the institutions of public and social life must be imbued with the spirit of justice; and this justice must above all be truly operative, must build up a juridical and social order able to pervade all economic activity.  Social Charity should be, as it were, the soul of this order and the duty of the State will be to protect and defend it effectively.  This task it will perform the more readily, if it free itself from those burdens which, as we have already declared, are not properly its own.
    Further, it would be well if the various nations in common counsel and endeavor strove to promote a healthy economic cooperation by prudent pacts and institutions, since in economic matters they are largely dependent one upon the other, and need one another's help.
    If then the members of the social body be thus reformed, and if the true directive principle of social and economic activity be thus re-established, it will be possible to say, in a sense, of this body what the Apostle said of the Mystical Body of Christ:  "The whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together, by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in Charity". (Eph. 4, 16.)
    Within recent times, as all are aware, a special syndical and corporative organization has been inaugurated which, in view of the subject of the present Encyclical, demands of Us some mention and opportune comment.
    The State here grants legal recognition to the syndicate or union, and thereby confers on it some of the features of a monoply, for in virtue of this recognition, it alone can represent respectively workingmen and employers, and it alone can conclude labor contracts and labor agreements.  Affiliation to the syndicate is optional for everyone; but in this sense only can the syndical organizations be said to be free, since the contribution to the union and other special taxes are obligatory for all who belong to a given branch, whether workingmen or employers, and the labor-contracts drawn up by the legal syndicate are likewise obligatory.  It is true that it has been authoritatively declared that the legal syndicate does not exclude the existence of unrecognized trade associations.
    The corporations are composed of representatives of the unions of workingmen and employers of the same trade or profession, and as true and genuine organs and institutions of the State, they direct and coordinate the activities of the unions in all matters of common interest.
    Strikes and lock-outs are forbidden.  If the contending parties cannot come to an agreement, public authority intervenes.
   Little reflectionn is required to perceive the advantage of the institution thus summarily described: peaceful collaboration of the classes, repression of Socialist organizations and efforts, the moderating influence of a special ministry.
    But in order to overlook nothing in a matter of such importance, and in the light of the general principles stated above, as well as of that which We are now about to formulate, We feel bound to add that to Our knowledge there are some who fear that the state is substituting itself in the place of private initiative, instead of limiting itself to necessary and sufficient help and assistance.  It is feared that the new syndical and corporative institution possesses an excessively bureaucratic and political character, and that, notwithstanding the general advantages referred to above, it risks serving particular aims rather than contributing to the initiation of a better social order.
    We believe that to attain this last named lofty purpose for the true and permanent advantage of the commonwealth, there is need before and above all else of the blessing of God, and, in the second place of the cooperation of all men of good will.  We believe, moreover, as a necessary consequence, that the end intended will be the more certainly attained, the greater the contribution furnished by men of technical, commercial and social competence, and more still, by Catholic prinicples and their application.  We look for this contribution, not to Catholic Action (which has no intention of displaying any strictly syndical or political activities), but to Our sons, whom Catholic Action imbues with these principles and trains for the Apostolate under the guidance and direction of the Church -- of the Church, We say, which in the above mentioned sphere, as in all others where moral questions are discussed and regulated, cannot forget or neglect its mandate as custodian and teacher, given it by God.
    However, all that We have taught about reconstructiing and perfecting the social order will be of no avail without a reform of manners; of this, history affords the clearest evidence.  At one period there existed a social order which, though by no means perfect in every respect, corresponded neverthelss in a certain measure to right reason according to the needs and conditions of the times.  That this order has long since perished is not due to the fact that it was incapable of development and adaptation to changing needs and circumstances, but rather to the wrong-doing of men.  Men were hardened in excessive self-love and refused to extend that order, as was their duty, to the increasing numbers of the people; or else deceived by the attractions of false liberty and other errors, they grew impatient of every restraint and endeavored to throw off all authority.
    It remains for Us then to turn Our attention to the actual condition of the economic order and to its bitterest adversary and accuser -- We mean Socialism.  On these We shall pronounce a frank and just sentence; shall examine more closely the root of the present grave evils; and shall indicate the first and most necessary remedy, which lies in a reform of morals.

1 -- The change in economic conditions
    Since the time of Leo XIII important changes have taken place both in economic conditions and in regard to Socialism.  In the first place, it is obvious to all that the entire economic scene has greatly changed.  You are aware, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Children, that Our Predecessor, of happy memory, had chiefly in mind that economic regime in which were provided by different people the capital and labor jointly needed for production.  He described it in a happy phrase: "Capital cannot do without Labor, nor Labor without Capital". (Encycl. Rerum novarum, Para. 15.)
    Leo XIII's whole endeavor was to adjust this economic regime to the standards of True Order; whence it follows that the system itself is not to be condemned.  And surely it is not vicious of its very nature; but it violates right order whenever capital so employs the working or wage-earning classes as to divert business and economic activity entirely to its own arbitrary will and advantage, without any regard to the human dignity of the workers, the social character of economic life, social justice and the common good.
    It is true that even today these economic conditions do not everywhere exist exclusively, for there is another economic system which still embraces a very large and influential group of men.  There are for instance the agricultural classes, who form the larger portion of the human family, and who find in their occupation the means of obtaining honestly and justly what is needful for their maintenance.  This system, too, has its difficulties and problems, of which Our Predecessor spoke repeatedly in his Encyclical, and to which We Ourselves have more than once referred in the present Letter.
    But it is the capitalist economic regime that, with the world-wide diffusion of industry, has penetrated everywhere, particularly since the publication of Leo XIII's Encyclical. It has invaded and pervaded the economic and social sphere even of those who live outside its ambit, influencing them, and, as it were, intimately affecting them by its advantages, inconveniences and vices.
    When We turn Our attention, therefore, to the changes which this capitalistic economic order has undergone since the days of Leo XIII, We have regard to the interests, not of those only who live in countries where "capital" and industry prevail, but of the whole human race.

    In the first place, then, it is patent that in our days not alone is wealth accumulated, but immense power and despotic economic domination is concentrated in the hands of a few, and that those few are frequently not the owners, but only the trustees and directors of invested funds, who administer them at their good pleasure.
    This power becomes particularly irrestible when exercised by those who, because they hold and control money, are able also to govern credit and determine its allotment, for that reason supplying so to speak, the life-blood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of production, so that no one dare breath against their will.
    This accumulation of power, the characteriestic note of the modern economic order, is a natural result of limitless free competition, which permits the survival of those only who are the strongest, which often means those who fight most relentlessly, who pay least heed to the dictates of conscience.
    This concentration of power has led to a threefold struggle for domination.  First, there is the struggle for dictatorship in the economic sphere itself; then, the fierce battle to acquire control of the state, so that its resources and authority may be abused in the economic struggles; finally, the clash between States themelves.  This latter arises from two causes; because the nations apply their power and political influence, regardless of circumtances, to promote the economic advantage of their citizens; and because, vice versa, economic forces and economic domination are used to decide political controversies between peoples.

    You assuredly know, Venerable Brethren and Beloved Children, and you lament the ultimate consequences of this Individualistic spirit in economic affairs.  Free competition is dead; economic dictatorship has taken its place.  Unbridled ambition for domination has succeeded the desire for gain; the whole economic life has become hard, cruel and relentless in a ghastly measure.  Furthermore, the nntermingling and scandalous confusing of the duties and offices of civil authority and of economics has produced crying evils and have gone so far as to degrade the majesty of the State.  The State which should be the supreme arbiter, ruling in kingly fashion far above all party contention, intent only upon justice and the common good, has become instead a slave, bound over to the service of human passion and greed.  As regards the relations of peoples among themelves, a double stream has issued forth from this one fountainhead: on the one hand, economic nationalism or even econimic imperialism; on the other, a not less noxious and detestable internationalism or international imperialism in financial affairs, which holds that where a man's fortune is, there is his country.

    (To continue click on CONTINUE below.)
 
 

 Social Reconstruction
 Social Reconstruction 3