The Political Theology of Catholic Social Teaching:

(MARÍA TERESA DÁVILA)

The “introduction” (pp. 317–318) does two key things:

First, it spotlights an internal tension in the tradition, between Catholic social teaching
being “considered as authoritative as to the principles it uses and develops over time” and
“its specific observations [being] perceived more as recommendations for human
flourishing rather than hard and fast rules for economic and political life” (p. 318).

Second, it speaks to the aims of the whole chapter. The chapter will cover the “intend[ed]”
role of Catholic social teaching, “its vision and guiding principles” and the “emerging
themes and objectives of the first five years of Pope Francis’ leadership” (p. 318). The
author, Dávila, will argue, furthermore, that positioning “the preferential option for the
poor” as “the key principle” both exposes and responds to “inherent biases and
contradictions” in Catholic social teaching, especially

1. “its partiality toward private industry (for example, corporations and free markets),

2. its lack of acknowledgment of how gender plays a role in local and global
economic and political conditions for human flourishing, and

3. its apparent allergy to confronting conflict in history as a direct challenge to the

common good of the poor and vulnerable” (p. 318).

The next section, “Challenges to Catholic social thought as political theology” (pp.
318–320), situates Catholic social teaching “as a body of work defined by the writings of
popes and others in the hierarchy of the Church, the 1891 publication of Rerum Novarum
[being] considered the beginning” (p. 319). This body of work

1. is a “documentary tradition”,

2. which is “shaped by the rubric ‘see–judge–act’, with the intention of”

3. “‘seeing’ a situation, particularly how certain conditions, events, or circumstances

impact the person and life in the community”
 4. “make a judgment using the resources of the tradition”,

5. “and promote particular avenues for action at different levels of power and
influence to transform the situation toward greater humanization”,

6. and which is a “process [that] gives rise to a set of principles (discussed below)
that come to stand for compact expressions of key ethical norms arising from the
Christian tradition but understood as having universal validity”

As such, the tradition offers four distinct resources:

1. “alternative visions for addressing the needs of life in community from the
perspective of the suffering of so many”,

2. “the development of a set of principles that, though not presenting prescriptions to

specific situations, provide significantly robust criteria for enriching the social,
economic, and political arenas”,

3. through “an ab[ility] to adapt to the most critical challenges of the time” (as “an
evolving tradition”),

4. and in “the framework of the struggle between the vagaries of human existence
and belief in a God that has a plan for creation”.

Dávila then moves to specify “ten principles for life in community” (pp. 320–326), which
are drawn from the work of the moral theologian Thomas Massaro. You will notice
immediately that this list of principles has ten, not nine, as ACU does. You will also notice
that Massaro’s labels for the principles often differ from ACU’s, if not always (e.g., “the
preferential option for the poor”). Sometimes a resemblance is clear (e.g., “human dignity
and human rights”); other times it is not (e.g., “family life”). “While there are variations in
the numbering and naming of these principles among various analysts of the tradition,
the essential doctrines and values these represent are not in question” (p. 321), Dávila
asserts.
 1. Human dignity and human rights: This is the “foundational principle” that “shapes
all aspects of life in community” and “aligns with human rights”.

2. The preferential option for the poor: This principle “orients policy considerations to
advocate for the most vulnerable, and judges their effectiveness according to how
they impact the prospects for survival and flourishing of the most vulnerable as
integral members of the community”.

3. Solidarity, common good, and participation: “Through solidarity we are able to

share in the suffering of another through the practice of mercy and compassion...
The common good and participation are ways in which we institutionalize the call
to safeguard human dignity, and practice solidarity with the most vulnerable. They
demand that political and economic systems be organized for the benefit of all,
and pay particular attention to the places where systems act against the human
dignity of particular groups for the benefit of a few. The common good
institutionalizes solidarity by insuring that all are able to participate in the goods,
rights, and benefits therein. Participation is the political and social practice by
which all members of society engage and impact the structures that determine
their destinies, guarding against systemic exclusions”.

Dávila strategically divides the initial three from the subsequent seven, which “describe
with more specificity the kinds of relations we ought to have politically and economically
with each other” (p. 322).

1. Family life: This principle emphasises notions of “protection of the family” and
“rights of parents”.

2. Dignity of work, rights of workers and support of labor unions: This principle
concerning “human labor and work” deals especially with “the ways in which the
dignity of workers is violated, including unjust wages, unsafe conditions, benefits
such as healthcare, and terms of employment”.
3. Subsidiarity and the proper role of government: This principle holds that “different
communities ought to be able to build their own immediate structures for
addressing the needs closest to them, unimpeded by cumbersome government
processes or excessive regulations”. As such, it “promotes a notion of human
agency that empowers local bodies to build community” which can then
“determine the best forms of participatory and representative government that
uphold the rights of all its members”.

4. Private property, the universal destination of material goods, and rights and
responsibilities: “While one has the right to private property as the product of one’s
labor, this has the ultimate purpose of serving the larger community, especially
when a deep need is present, such as during a drought or other natural disaster, or
during deep economic downturns”.

5. Colonialism and economic development: Decolonisation made “the need for

ongoing development efforts ... more apparent”, but “this development ought not
to depend on new forms of colonialism—political, economic, or ideological. This
principle points to the right of nations to seek avenues regionally and globally to
develop their economies for the benefit of their population without having to yield
their sovereignty”.

6. Peace and disarmament: Catholic social teaching seeks “to limit the evil of war”, as
it also “continues to promote an understanding of the human being made for
peace”. In this vein, Francis has recently declared that “disarmament, eliminating
the sale of weapons to other states, to groups or factions within a state, and to
individuals must be a priority of all governments”.

7. Care of creation: As the “most recent principle”, “the projections of the various
peoples who will be most directly impacted by climate change ... led Pope Francis
to unequivocally declare climate justice and care of creation one of the primary
responsibilities and challenges for the human family, causing a ripple effect on all
dimensions of life”.
Two more general points concerning the social tradition are important. Overall, Catholic
social teaching “implicitly takes into account human experience and context, especially
political, cultural, and economic experiences, in developing faithful responses to ongoing
threats to human dignity” (p. 320). But also, Dávila observes that “these principles present
seemingly inherent contradictions, such as balancing human dignity and participation in
the common good with the primacy of the family as the essential social unit” (p. 325).

So, in the next section, “Primacy of option for the poor” (pp. 326–327), Dávila clarifies that
the preferential option for the poor, when used “as an organizing principle”, can address
and sort out those “contradictions”, or “tensions”; Dávila will even refer to this principle as
“the compass” that other principles “must follow” (p. 326). Some, however, would disagree
and suppose that “privileging the option for the poor is not a recipe for building and
protecting the common good, but, rather, a recipe for fanning the fires of class warfare,
emphasizing inequalities that might very well be a natural state for various healthy
economic systems” (p. 327).

Next: “Critiques and failures” (pp. 327–328) looks at “not just complications arising from
Catholic social teaching, but outright failures that up until now plague the tradition”: it

1. “represents a reactionary rather than a proactive stance”;

2. “reflects in large part a church struggling to make sense of the current moment”;

3. only recently “overc[a]me [its] partiality toward liberal democratic capitalist

societies as the model of political and economic community most amenable to
encourage human freedom and flourishing”;

4. is “difficult to implement”;

5. “has avoided reading history from the perspective of the conflicts that mark the
everyday lives of so many”;

6. has not “properly address[ed] the way in which social and political conditions
particularly impact the dignity of women beyond the privileged spaces of
motherhood and family”;
 7. has a “perennial tension [with] other liberationist perspectives in Christian political
thought”.

Emphasising the current pope’s Latin American and liberationist identity, Dávila then
overviews three recent instances of social teaching in “Conclusion: The Pope Francis
moment” (pp. 328–330):

1. “Evangelii Gaudium (2013) Francis clearly linked the message of the gospel and
encountering Christ to the lives of the poor. Specifically, he urges the Church to
move out of its sanctuary and beyond its doors, to encounter the poor and
recognize the ways we participate in the structures that oppress them, and do
grave damage to the environment”.

2. “Francis determinedly brings the principle of care of creation to the fore in Laudato
Si (2015). This encyclical, above any other before, innovatively integrates two
unique sources into the tradition: the witness of the natural sciences and the social
teaching coming from regional and local bishops’ conferences struggling with the
issue of climate change in their immediate context”.

3. “In Gaudete et Exsultate (2018), Francis affirms the call for every faithful to be holy,
and to humbly and actively walk the path of holiness that is the call of every
Christian community”.

To conclude, the tradition, under Francis, has now reached a critical moment, where its
“adaptive and developing” nature is hotly disputed. To what degree does Catholic social
teaching contain “universal principles”? Should it "be receptive to learning new things”?
 References

María Teresa Dávila, “The Political Theology of Catholic Social Teaching,” in T&T Clark

Handbook of Political Theology, ed. Rubén Rosario Rodríguez (London: T&T Clark,

2020) 317–336.