The Catholic Church in Sweden
Social Documents of the Catholic Church
The social and economic order
Markings are in line with the union's values, in my opinion
19. The social issue.
The emergence in the nineteenth century of a proletarian class of elaborate workers brought about what came to be called the "social question." Although it has lost much of its original bitterness in many places, some unresolved aspects of the social question continue to persist. Originally, its primary concern was to deal with the obvious injustices of workers' wages: very scarce income, serious lack of protection, job insecurity, etc. On the basis of this situation there was a prevailing individualistic liberalism, which adopted a commercial attitude towards work and which made it subordinate to the law of supply and demand. At the same time, intermediate institutions such as guilds and other labor organizations were abolished by advocates of "freedom of contract," and workers were left without the means to settle with their employers.
From the beginning it was suspected that the root of the social question went deeper than the economic situation of the workers. While the birth of the industrial age (the Industrial Revolution) brought new insight into the production of everyday goods, it also brought about a "new social-economic order" which emphasized the changed relationship in productive labor between those who owned the means of production ("capital") and those who distributed the goods produced. Theoretical and practical attempts to solve the problems this had caused for the workers led to a new understanding of the economic and social order, which was revolutionary in terms of liberal middle-class norms.
Fundamentally, these attempts were reversed by the liberal representatives. Now the social policy order was to be based on labour and common ownership of the means of production. A "class struggle," originally conceived as a means to this end, was extended by Marxism to and made a major principle of human history. The combination of these theories, to have individualism completely succeeded by collectivism (a view of man as purely social), adopted the general name of "socialism". The first step in this development, which Marx called "utopian socialism," was accompanied by his own "scientific theory" of man and his historical development—a political, economic, and social theory and practice in a larger context of materialist and atheistic views of man and the world.
These opposing positions, both contrary to the principle of divine law, form the background to the social doctrine of the Church, which first pointed out the fundamental errors of individualist liberalism (but also referred to it as "capitalism" in view of the prerogativeness it gave to capital) and of collectivist socialism. It then went out to prescribe a complete orientation on the solution of the social question.
Over time, these teachings have shifted with varying social conditions. Liberalism has given rise to several economic systems, all of which preserve the essential features of capitalism, some of them more moderate and others with temporary new injustices. Socialism has also experienced internal divisions: communism, socialism, social democracy, new Marxism, Euro-communism, Maoism. In some cases, the previous principle has been reformed, but the various Marxist tendencies still remain atheistic and anti-Christian at their core.
Although the conditions of workers' wages remain deplorable in some places, in other places a majority have struggled for better living conditions and achieved a measure of equality within the civic community. "Affluent societies" have emerged, where unbridled consumption has been followed by a decline in moral values. The Magisterium of the Church has kept pace with this development in its treatment of various questions by emphasizing in each case the moral criteria that need to be applied in different situations and drawing attention to the dominant thrust of the social-economic order.
Like the reality it deals with, the social teaching of the Church is completely complex. The following touches on only some of its principles.
20. Dignity of work.
It is God's will that man should occupy himself with work, an activity that includes all human efforts aimed at improving living conditions (or, better still, the process by which man understands, cares, supervises, and changes the earth and its resources. When man was created in God's image and likeness, he was commanded to rule over the world, to conquer the earth and all that it contains, thus to continue and cooperate in God's creation. In accordance with the distinction usually made between labor and capital, the social doctrine of the Church has often been driven to give up the fairly precise meaning of a transitive action that culminates in an action—the production of commodities.
As a human activity, work must correspond to the dignity of the human being. It comes immediately from a person who puts his stamp on the raw material and makes it correspond to his will, thereby refining it. By his labor, man not only transforms nature, but perfects it. The worker realizes that he himself is a human being, and he becomes in a certain way "more human." All this shows why it is necessary that the social order should allow the worker to perfect himself and not degrade him and diminish his dignity.
21. Purpose of work.
Work is the perfection of man's calling, his ability to make a living, the way in which he relates to other persons whom he serves, and his path to holiness. Through their labors, people are connected to Christ in His atoning work. As a result, man has both a duty and a right to work.
22. Duty to work.
Everyone is obliged to work, whether it is the only means of supporting himself or not, for work is the ordinary instrument of personal perfection and is a necessary means of achieving the common good, to which everyone is obliged to contribute.
23. Right to work.
The correct order in social work means tha t everyone has the right to work.This means that this means that unemployment and dismissals are solved.The fulfilment of this right is the primary responsibility of every individual, and it is a private initiative, because creating work is a social function and of great importance.As an indirect employer, the state has a complementary role, part of guarding the public good. One of the fundamental elements of the social order is the ability of people to find work. Preventing work from stalling must be one of the most serious concerns of the state. The methods that the state must use to solve the problem of unemployment are usually indirect – to establish proper social policies and to promote economic development in all sectors. evertheless, it should be necessary for the state to provide work itself and to guarantee funds for support for those who are involuntarily out of work. This may also justify the nationalization of certain means of production if conditions so require.
Solving work problems requires cooperation between all those concerned, both at national and international level. It is a fact of great importance that there is a lack of proportion between areas where large resources of natural resources lie undeveloped and other areas where whole groups are unemployed or have too little work and large numbers are starving. These are clearly incorrect solutions on continental and even global proportions on issues of critical social importance.
24. Precedence of work.
Human labor engaged in production, trade, and service takes precedence over other elements of economic life, which play only a contributing role.Capital occupies a place among these contributing funds.The relation between labour and capital must therefore be regulated by the principle of the "primacy of labour", or the primacy of labour over capital. This principle refers directly to the process of production itself, in which labour (labour-power) is the substance which takes precedence and is the acting cause, while capital is only a means of production or a contributing cause. This means of production must be regulated, so that preference is given to the working man rather than to his being placed in the service of capital .
From another point of view, capital or the means of production as a whole can be seen as the historical inheritance resulting from labour. It should therefore be false to argue "dialectically" in terms of a "struggle" between labor and capital.This result would occur if the worker not only receives due remuneration, but also realizes that he is really doing "his own cause," that he is really a self-governing object engaged in a deeply personal process.
Those who are united in an economic commitment are persons, human beings, who are free and independent, created in the image of God. Therefore, taking into account the various functions of each element (owner, supervisor, technician, worker) of the ubiquitous unit, which are determined by executive decisions, the active participation of each in the whole enterprise can take many forms. In many cases, it is not within the company itself, but at some higher level of organization, that economic and social decisions are made. The workers must also participate in these decisions, either themselves or through freely elected representatives.
25. Ownership of the means of production.
Against the denial of the right to property, to which there have been and still are certain tendencies in socialism, the social teaching of the Church has constantly and anew reaffirmed this natural right, taking into account both the commodities consumed and those produced. It also follows that this economic life should be chiefly a matter of private initiative.
26. The Universal Distribution of Goods.
The Magisterium of the Church has also established, and this no less unshakenly, that private property has a social function (or, in the words of John Paul II, is leased to society). This means that goods intended for general use must therefore reach everyone. God intended that the earth and its contents should be for the benefit of all men and all nations. Consequently, the goods produced must be equally accessible to everyone. This is something that is about justice and love. Whatever forms of ownership in different and varied circumstances may prescribe as legitimate institutions in different countries, this universal distribution of commodities must never be overlooked. Therefore, when men make use of these commodities, they must not regard the things they possess outwardly legitimately as their own. In the sense that these goods are also intended to benefit others, they are at the same time common.
The result of this is that the state must respect and defend the right to property and prevent injustice from being committed against it. This happens at the same time as it needs property to fulfill its social function.
27. Public Ownership.
Respect for the ownership of each does not exclude the legitimacy of public ownership of certain means of production. The position of strict ownership of certain means of production is wrong if one insists that it is an undisputed dogma in economic life that one may privately own the means of production. The basic principle governing this subject may be summed up as follows:(a) The government or public corporation is subordinate to private organizations.(b) Public ownership is justified when the property in question is associated with so great a power that it would constitute a threat to the public good in private hands. As such obligations of public undertakings tend to increase, it is normal for the scope of public ownership to increase. But the principle of subordination must always be observed, lest public ownership be extended beyond what is true and manifested needs for the common good to such a point as to diminish or abolish private property.
28. Socialization.
If by socialization we mean the active participation in leading all those who form part of the public or private corporation, this is certainly desirable. Therefore, proposals for joint ownership of the workplace, sharing the profits, having shares among the workers and similar traits, are commendable. This type of socialization is not brought about by the complete exclusion of private ownership of the means of production, since the simple transformation of these funds from private to public would only cause them to have monopolistic administration and a disposition to change owners. Socialism is not the same thing as expropriation or nationalism. It is simply a practice of the principle of the prerogativeness of work.
Regarding socialization in the sense of nationalism, see section 27.
29. Salary. Work provides means for subsistence.
The principle must be considered at several levels. Universally, labor provides the means of subsistence for the entire human race. In the life of the nation, it provides resources for those who build the political community at the most elementary levels, it provides means for the subsistence of the family and the individual. This means that the results of what is obtained throughout the productive process must be extended to all people, to those who are not considered productive as well as to those who are actively working thanks to a proper system of distribution.This distribution of goods usually takes place through two complementary systems: wages and various social benefits. Among these, first of all, there is a fair estimate of the work performed, which is the most important, since it is a specific means of distributing goods.
Labor is not merely a part of mercantilism, something to be subordinated to the law of supply and demand, as liberalism used to assert.Nor is it the only source of economic value, as Marxism emphasized. Consequently, the correct distribution of the profits of an enterprise between capital and labour is of fundamental importance.The grade must therefore be fixed in relation to the condition of a company. On the other hand, since work is the means by which the person supports himself and those who depend on him, the wage must take into account the needs of the employed staff as well as those of their families.
Finally, grades must reflect the economic life of political society, for this is of important importance for the common good. The principle prevents privileged groups and excessive remuneration for tasks of little importance. An effort must be made to employ as many people as possible and to maintain a favourable balance between wages and price developments. This dimension for the common good must be considered not only within a given country but also internationally. The amount of each one's wages must also be seen in relation to the worker's contribution to the enterprise and his personal productivity.
30 Social benefits.
The financial position of a company can often prevent the payment of wages which are satisfactory to meet the standard of living to which the employee and his family are entitled in view of the contribution his work makes to society as a whole. When this occurs, the salary must be supplemented by various social benefits, which serve as alternative means of providing benefits. In this respect, the basic criterion is to satisfy the fundamental rights, as previously indicated, in relation to the total sum of the goods produced within political society, and as far as possible within international society.