On August 15, 1969 a Motu Proprio was issued by Pope Paul VI, along with implementation norms of the Congregation for Bishops, about the care of people who migrate among or within nations of the world, whatever the causes of the migration.(1) Implementation norms or instructions for pastoral care were discussed under seven sections or chapters. Some had material pertinent to labor-management issues; others did not.
Chapter One of the instruction was "General Principles." Among reasons for migration, growth of industry and a desire for city life were highlighted. Such were attributed to economic cooperation among nations, better facilities looking for work in other places, effective cooperation in science and technology especially in developing lands, and closer cultural relations due to international organizations and opportunities to attend foreign universities. Indeed, migrations prompting mutual understanding and cooperation "witness and promote the unity of the human family." Among the hazards and difficulties of migration, highlighted were the tensions due to: economic inequality, conflicts from differences in mentality and tradition, types of discrimination, and historical prejudices and political or ideological intolerance.
The reasons and hazards of modern migration are a concern to the church, not only because of relaxations in religious practice, but also because of violations of fundamental human rights. These include rights to: a homeland, voluntary migration, preservation of one's cultural and religious heritage, and material and spiritual fulfillment as individuals and families. Such fulfillment entails rights to adequate jobs, working conditions, remuneration, social insurance, education, and housing.
Migrants were told to accommodate themselves to host communities and learn the language, be integrated better, "if one's residence there turns out to be long or even definitive." Citizens blessed with benefits of wealth and education were urged to resist enticements of greed to emigrate, lest they "deprive the community of the material and spiritual aid it needs." Similarly, governments were urged to develop policies "of bringing work to the workers . . . rather than drafting workers to the scene of the work."
Since migrants included not only workers, technicians and managers but also students, volunteers, refugees and deportees, norms for pastoral care touched on concerns other than those of workers. Yet, there are some constants. The Church's concern should be adapted to needs of migrants, foster unity among Christians, signify Christ to non-Christians and non-believers, and involve all the people of God.
Given these constants and principles, remaining chapters of the document promulgated norms for applying the same at various levels of the church's structure. As such, the norms were largely procedural with no substantive comments about migrant workers, technicians or managers.
On August 12, 1980 the Congregation for Religious and Secular Institutes issued the document, "Religious Profession and Human Development."(2) The document, an outcome of two meetings of the Congregation, reflected on the relationship between religious consecration and mission--especially in such areas as defense of human rights, political action, social work and labor. Pertaining to all areas, preliminary theological comments were made on the urgent need for integral human development, as well as the new forms of ministry and the prophetic roles in the church and religious life. In the context of emphasizing a necessity of new forms of solidarity and participation, the Congregation gave a cautionary note echoed throughout the document.
Religious will thus have an opportunity to activate specific charisma, which qualify them in a unique way to develop "ministries" in keeping with the apostolic and social goals of their own institutes.
Participation of the laity in the activities and works of religious and development of ecclesial co-responsibility for a common mission are more prevalent. With adequate preparation, the laity can assume administration of works, hitherto assigned only to religious.
The reflections on religious involvement in labor began with notice that Mater et Magistra had expressed the pastoral concern of the church in the world of labor "in a perspective that is open to a new economic and social situation." Reference was made to motives, perspectives and conditions for guiding priests in more important commitments to the labor world, found in the document, Ministerial Priesthood, of the 1971 Synod of Bishops. There, the priesthood was regarded as a valid and full-time activity. Decisions to combine it with other activities, in special circumstances, were to be made by the bishop with his presbytery and for furthering the pastoral mission of the church. The document of the Congregation of Religious and Secular Institutes applied these same directives to religious, whether clerics or not, whether men or women.
Yet, additional norms were proposed by that document for the motivation and guidance of religious, who become involved in the world of labor,
. . . dynamic fidelity to the purpose for which the Spirit raised their institutes in the Church;
. . . effort to bear witness to those gospel values that will restore dignity to labor and show its true purposes.
. . . commitment to reinforcing the same religious dimensions of human life that characterize their profession and show how attractive is the reign of God which they have accepted with all its radical demands;
. . . fraternal sharing, which daily experience of communal life maintains and develops, witnessing thereby the new role played by love of Christ in the formation of human solidarity.
The document noted two forms of solidarity with the world of labor. The first was "the adoption of a civil profession Religious exercise under the same economic and social conditions as fellow citizens." Examples might be employment in schools, hospitals, etc. Sometimes such employment follows from nationalization institutions or other legislative changes in a nation. Sometimes such employment flows from internal needs of the religious community or experiments with new modes of ministry. Whatever the cause such employment makes a religious more dependent on organizations and structures outside the religious community. Thus, such employment must be evaluated "in the light of legitimate requirements of community life and obligations of religious obedience and poverty."
A second form of solidarity with the world of labor was "acceptance of the working-class condition and the values to be thus realized." In so sharing, religious desire to witness to the pastoral concern of the church for the world of labor, but they also embrace a world,
. . . that has its own laws, its own tensions, and, especially in our day, its own marked attitudes which are due to prevailing ideologies and often distressing and ambiguous labor conflicts.
Consequently, religious may find themselves confronted with visions of the human person, society, history and the world of labor much at odds with values and directives of Catholic social teaching.
Special precautions and guarantees were issued for religious embracing this second type of solidarity with the world of labor.
There seems to be no intrinsic incompatibility between religious life and . . . some form of union involvement. At times . . . participation in union activities may be connected of necessity with presence in the world of labor; sometimes participation may be called for by solidarity in the legitimate maintenance of just rights.
Various types of political interference sometimes raise difficult problems. . . Particular attention would have to be paid to ideologies which promote a "class struggle. . . ."
Religious . . . will . . . reject certain means used in union activities or certain political values that do not meet the requirements of justice, to which alone they can bind themselves. . . .
[C]ommitment to development of solidarity and justice in temporal structures is primarily the duty of the laity . . . and must be regarded as an essential criterion in deciding on the presence of religious [in the world of labor].
In the last quarter of 1980, the Pontifical Council for the Laity issued the document, "The Rights of Women."(3) After comments about wider acknowledgment of the rich diversity among women and men, mutual qualities and tasks for women and men and the economic importance of women in the home, the Council discussed employment of women and men.
Given evolution in production circumstances, even rural workers in developing countries cannot live off their own crops. All workers become involved in complicated economic structures. Finding and keeping a job become such a nagging problem that one or other members of a family has to seek work far away from home. Women face special problems under such circumstances.
. . . their wage, which is often seen as a little extra for the family budget, is usually lower than the wage paid to a man doing the same job. Many women have no professional formation and therefore have no hope of promotion. Some of the young are given very heavy work to do. Others, domestic helpers, for example, are often totally dependent on the families that employ them and they receive virtually no education.
Despite the tension and distraction producing aspects of modern day employment, the Council called for the examination of fundamental questions going beyond economic criteria of advancement and success. These questions would touch upon: the distribution of wealth today, the yardstick for sharing work among everyone, the hope of everyone to have real freedom of choice in work and the place of work in lives of men and women. The Council tried to formulate an answer to the place of work in life.
Work must be seen as a person's means of earning a living and developing creative capacities and skills, participation in the process of building a more just society where people can experience and develop solidarity with others, occasion for mutual searching and fulfillment, and sources of linking the "social" and the "private" sides of people's lives.
The Council applied the principles of its answer to women in the world of labor. In addition to an opportunity for renewal and personality development, activities of women in the home must be considered dignified work, "particularly the education of their children which is of such great importance." Women and families will experience genuine human growth, if education, training, and leisure time are made available.
After comments about health, nutrition, and abortion, the Council paid tribute to the devotion of women in the health professions. Sincere expressions including providing: facilities necessary for professional and ethical training, as well as opportunities for executive responsibilities. Expressly regretted was the widespread ignoring of a June 21, 1977 ILO convention, "on employment and working and living conditions of nursing staffs."
The Council concluded with several questions worthy of further study. Of interest here are: criteria by which occupational and family duties can be combined, the economic life of the country being at the service of the human person, people participating in harmonizing professional and family life with imagination and creativity for new models of society to arise, equitable and fair distribution of economic goods, respect for minorities, and protection of human rights.
<< Catholic Social Thought on Labor-Management Issues, 1960-1980 >>