Benedict XVI weighs in on "Redistribution"

Since “redistribution” is in the news these days, I thought it might be valuable to offer some passages from Benedict XVI’s 2009 encyclical Caritas in Veritate on the theme.  He uses the term 8 times.  The basic concept of redistribution is accepted as moral obligation to achieve distributive justice that the market alone cannot deliver on both the national and international scale.  This doesn’t preclude critical awareness of the need for doing it well and preserving the participation and full development of persons in need.

As Tom Reese says so often, in these matters, the Popes are far to the left of any politician in America. 

The final passage does not mention redistribution, but so tracks the current stakes in our politics I have found myself returning to it repeatedly since it was written.


32. Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country's international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development. Moreover, the human consequences of current tendencies towards a short-term economy — sometimes very short-term — need to be carefully evaluated. This requires further and deeper reflection on the meaning of the economy and its goals, as well as a profound and far-sighted revision of the current model of development, so as to correct its dysfunctions and deviations.

36. Economic activity cannot solve all social problems through the simple application of commercial logic. This needs to be directed towards the pursuit of the common good, for which the political community in particular must also take responsibility. Therefore, it must be borne in mind that grave imbalances are produced when economic action, conceived merely as an engine for wealth creation, is detached from political action, conceived as a means for pursuing justice through redistribution.

37. Economic life undoubtedly requires contracts, in order to regulate relations of exchange between goods of equivalent value. But it also needs just laws and forms of redistribution governed by politics, and what is more, it needs works redolent of the spirit of gift. The economy in the global era seems to privilege the former logic, that of contractual exchange, but directly or indirectly it also demonstrates its need for the other two: political logic, and the logic of the unconditional gift.

39. Paul VI in Populorum Progressio called for the creation of a model of market economy capable of including within its range all peoples and not just the better off. He called for efforts to build a more human world for all, a world in which “all will be able to give and receive, without one group making progress at the expense of the other.” In this way he was applying on a global scale the insights and aspirations contained in Rerum Novarum, written when, as a result of the Industrial Revolution, the idea was first proposed — somewhat ahead of its time — that the civil order, for its self-regulation, also needed intervention from the State for purposes of redistribution.

42. The processes of globalization, suitably understood and directed, open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale; if badly directed, however, they can lead to an increase in poverty and inequality, and could even trigger a global crisis. It is necessary to correct the malfunctions, some of them serious, that cause new divisions between peoples and within peoples, and also to ensure that the redistribution of wealth does not come about through the redistribution or increase of poverty: a real danger if the present situation were to be badly managed. For a long time it was thought that poor peoples should remain at a fixed stage of development, and should be content to receive assistance from the philanthropy of developed peoples. Paul VI strongly opposed this mentality in Populorum Progressio. Today the material resources available for rescuing these peoples from poverty are potentially greater than before, but they have ended up largely in the hands of people from developed countries, who have benefited more from the liberalization that has occurred in the mobility of capital and labour. The world-wide diffusion of forms of prosperity should not therefore be held up by projects that are self-centred, protectionist or at the service of private interests. Indeed the involvement of emerging or developing countries allows us to manage the crisis better today. The transition inherent in the process of globalization presents great difficulties and dangers that can only be overcome if we are able to appropriate the underlying anthropological and ethical spirit that drives globalization towards the humanizing goal of solidarity. Unfortunately this spirit is often overwhelmed or suppressed by ethical and cultural considerations of an individualistic and utilitarian nature.

49. What is also needed, though, is a worldwide redistribution of energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to them. The fate of those countries cannot be left in the hands of whoever is first to claim the spoils, or whoever is able to prevail over the rest.



25. From the social point of view, systems of protection and welfare, already present in many countries in Paul VI's day, are finding it hard and could find it even harder in the future to pursue their goals of true social justice in today's profoundly changed environment. The global market has stimulated first and foremost, on the part of rich countries, a search for areas in which to outsource production at low cost with a view to reducing the prices of many goods, increasing purchasing power and thus accelerating the rate of development in terms of greater availability of consumer goods for the domestic market. Consequently, the market has prompted new forms of competition between States as they seek to attract foreign businesses to set up production centres, by means of a variety of instruments, including favourable fiscal regimes and deregulation of the labour market. These processes have led to a downsizing of social security systems as the price to be paid for seeking greater competitive advantage in the global market, with consequent grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State. Systems of social security can lose the capacity to carry out their task, both in emerging countries and in those that were among the earliest to develop, as well as in poor countries. Here budgetary policies, with cuts in social spending often made under pressure from international financial institutions, can leave citizens powerless in the face of old and new risks; such powerlessness is increased by the lack of effective protection on the part of workers' associations. Through the combination of social and economic change, trade union organizations experience greater difficulty in carrying out their task of representing the interests of workers, partly because Governments, for reasons of economic utility, often limit the freedom or the negotiating capacity of labour unions. Hence traditional networks of solidarity have more and more obstacles to overcome. The repeated calls issued within the Church's social doctrine, beginning with Rerum Novarum,60 for the promotion of workers' associations that can defend their rights must therefore be honoured today even more than in the past, as a prompt and far-sighted response to the urgent need for new forms of cooperation at the international level, as well as the local level.


J Cosgrove
4 years 4 months ago
'' I got your position correctly It does not allow for bargaining between roughly equal human beings but only for one master in an enterprise and everyone else a servant. ''

That correctly describes the world of public service unions in a large part of this country.  Public service unions are where the unions elect those they negotiate with and the people who pay both the union personnel and the ones they elect are a third party not in the negotiations.  Mancur Olsen described this process in his book, The Rise and Fall of Nations, where smaller groups can organize but large diffuse groups cannot.  In that way small cohesive groups actually rule the majority for a certain period of time.  It is a major problem with our society as these ''rent seekers'' end up controlling a lot of the economic power without the rest realizing it.

For example, The discussions on unions on this blog is mainly on a now minor form of unions in the private sector not on what they have morphed into in the public sector.  Arguments in favor of the public sector unions use the arguments for the private sector unions of over 50-100 years ago even though the unions are very different types of organizations and have very different bargaining practices.  It is exactly the same rhetorical technique Clayton Sinyai has used often on this site.  Bring up past grievances in the private sector to justify modern public service unions.  Complete non-sequiturs but useful for obscuring the actual debate. 

Unions are not a small part of redistribution which is the theme of this OP but nevertheless they are a redistribution in our society.  Today for the public service unions it is a redistribution of the lower middle class to the upper middle class, not what I am sure Mr. Miller wants one to focus on.  There is a similarity in the arguments used here on the discussion of unions with the arguments of the OP.  The OP uses rhetorical techniques to obscure the basic issue.  It is a technique the authors here are good at.  They never want one to focus on the actual core issues but use mis-direction or vagueness to get one to nod their heads without any real insight into the actual issues.  All geared to support a particular political approach as opposed to the implementation of a religious principle.  If you believe the terms ''social justice'' or ''subsidiarity'' or ''solidarity'' as used here has anything to do with helping the poor then I have a bridge I want to sell you in lower Manhattan.
Vince Killoran
4 years 4 months ago
I take your point David-but when the same points are submitted time & again it isnt' dialogue. It's tedious.

Don't miss the best from America

Sign up for our Newsletter to get the Jesuit perspective on news, faith and culture.

The latest from america

Although Ms. McCorvey was the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, she later became a pro-life activist.
Deciding whether or not to #deleteUber or to boycott Ivanka is a luxury most Americans cannot afford.
The EditorsFebruary 17, 2017
The love and healing to be found in prayer and meditation are available to all.
Nathan SchneiderFebruary 17, 2017
Summit participants learned about mental health awareness, suicide prevention and pastoral wellness.
Wyatt MasseyFebruary 17, 2017