Pope John Paul II’s legacy of paradox

The Financial Times considers Pope John Paul II’s legacy of paradox from the viewpoint of Capitalism.

It began with the Vatican's contribution to the demise of the totalitarian regimes of Communist Europe but it ended with division in the Church as a revered but authoritarian pope refused to tackle what critics saw as crucial issues of reform. The deep conservatism of the man who had fought so hard for glasnost - openness - in the Soviet Union meant he was having none of it in his own Church.

First off, the Catholic Church is a voluntary organisation with a fundamental set of beliefs - the dogmas. If you cannot subscribe to these dogmas, then you cannot be a member of the Catholic Chuch. If you to challenge these dogmas, then you put yourself outside of the Catholic Church. Secondly, there is very vigorous discussion within the Catholic Church about many other matters which do not surface in the Capitalist media. For example, the question of the role of the laity is still hotly debated.

If you want to turn this question around, you can question anything in the Capitalist media except Capitalism.

The real paradox of Pope John Paul II was that he was anti-Communist but not pro-Capitalist.

His 19891991 encyclical, Centesimus Annus, written with the Berlin Wall falling, gave an insight into his views on labour exploitation and legitimate profit. The core of his economic philosophy was a rather ill-defined need to uphold the dignity of man.

The ill-defintion comes from the incompatibility of Capitalism and human dignity. Pope John Paul II write in article 6 of Centesimus annus:

6. With the intention of shedding light on the conflict which had arisen between capital and labour, Pope Leo XIII affirmed the fundamental rights of workers. Indeed, the key to reading the Encyclical is the dignity of the worker as such, and, for the same reason, the dignity of work, which is defined as follows: "to exert oneself for the sake of procuring what is necessary for the various purposes of life, and first of all for self-preservation". The Pope describes work as "personal, inasmuch as the energy expended is bound up with the personality and is the exclusive property of him who acts, and, furthermore, was given to him for his advantage". Work thus belongs to the vocation of every person; indeed, man expresses and fulfils himself by working. At the same time, work has a "social" dimension through its intimate relationship not only to the family, but also to the common good, since "it may truly be said that it is only by the labour of working-men that States grow rich". These are themes that I have taken up and developed in my Encyclical Laborem exercens.

The pope continues in article 10:

10. Another important aspect, which has many applications to our own day, is the concept of the relationship between the State and its citizens. Rerum novarum criticizes two social and economic systems: socialism and liberalism. The opening section, in which the right to private property is reaffirmed, is devoted to socialism. Liberalism is not the subject of a special section, but it is worth noting that criticisms of it are raised in the treatment of the duties of the State. The State cannot limit itself to "favouring one portion of the citizens", namely the rich and prosperous, nor can it "neglect the other", which clearly represents the majority of society. Otherwise, there would be a violation of that law of justice which ordains that every person should receive his due. "When there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the defenceless and the poor have a claim to special consideration. The richer class has many ways of shielding itself, and stands less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back on, and must chiefly depend on the assistance of the State. It is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong to the latter class, should be specially cared for and protected by the Government".

It is at this point the pope wants the state to intervene to protect the dignity of the workers against the depredations of the rich. This is the "paradox" that the Capitalist media finds so hard.

This is also where the papal doctrine has a serious flaw. He assumes that the state operates independently of the ruling class. The state exists solely to oppress the other classes. For the state to adhere to this papal doctrine means that the state must self-destruct.