Is Catholic Social Teaching Liberal or Conservative?

 

by CAPP-USA

 

Not Liberal or Conservative, Just Catholic

It is tempting to read Catholic Social Teaching through the lens of American politics.

Conservatives can find much that sounds familiar: the importance of the family, private property, religious freedom, personal responsibility, economic initiative and the principle of subsidiarity.

Liberals can point just as readily to the Church’s concern for workers, migrants and the poor, its insistence on solidarity, and its repeated criticism of economic systems that leave people behind.

This sometimes produces an odd result. Catholics on both sides of the political divide can become convinced that Catholic Social Teaching essentially agrees with them—and that its principal purpose is to correct the people on the other side.

That raises a larger question about Catholic Social Teaching and politics: are its principles liberal, conservative—or something entirely different?

It begins somewhere else.

Before Politics Comes the Human Person

The Church begins with the human person, created in the image and likeness of God and possessing a dignity that precedes the state, the market and every political party.

Pope St. John Paul II put the point plainly in Centesimus Annus: the guiding principle of the Church’s social doctrine is “a correct view of the human person and of his unique value.” (Centesimus Annus, 11)

The principles of Catholic Social Teaching flow from that understanding of the person. They begin with human dignity, solidarity, and subsidiarity, all ordered toward the common good.

These principles are not independent ideas. Human dignity, solidarity and subsidiarity work together in pursuit of the common good in Catholic Social Teaching.

Pope Leo XIV makes the same ordering explicit: “progress is measured by the dignity of each person”. (Magnifica Humanitas, 12)

Later in the encyclical he returns to the same conviction: “It is individuals that matter, each and every person, together with their families.” Social movements, ideologies and grand political proclamations, he says, are “worthless unless they lead to the flourishing of persons.” (Magnifica Humanitas, 58)

These are principles, not political positions.

That distinction matters because political ideologies tend to emphasize some truths while neglecting others. Catholic Social Teaching does not permit us that luxury.

Pope Benedict XVI offered an important warning when he wrote that Christian charitable activity “must be independent of parties and ideologies.” (Deus Caritas Est, 31) The same caution applies when we bring the Church’s social doctrine into public life.

And, as Pope Francis said: “politics is one of the highest forms of charity because it seeks the common good”. (Address to Students)

The same caution applies when we bring the Church’s social doctrine into public life.

Catholic teaching cannot simply become religious language attached to a political platform.

Catholic Social Teaching, Private Property and the Political Right

Consider economic life.

The Catholic view of private property and capitalism does not begin with hostility toward markets. Catholic teaching strongly defends private property and recognizes the importance of free economic initiative. It does not regard business, entrepreneurship or profit as inherently suspect. Work and the creation of wealth can contribute greatly to human flourishing.

But none of these is absolute.

Property has a social purpose. Markets exist for people, not people for markets. Workers cannot be treated simply as units of production, and economic efficiency cannot justify ignoring the poor or vulnerable.

Pope Leo XIV states the point without hedging: the right to private property “is always subordinate to the universal destination of goods.” (Magnifica Humanitas, 66)

This is where Catholic Social Teaching can become uncomfortable for the political right.

Solidarity is not simply generosity toward those who are struggling. Pope St. John Paul II rejected the idea that it is merely a feeling of compassion. In Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, he called solidarity a “firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good.” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 38)

Pope Leo XIV expresses the same truth succinctly: “no one is saved alone.” (Magnifica Humanitas, 73)

That is a demanding definition.

It means that the condition of our neighbor is not irrelevant to us. Poverty, exclusion and economic hardship cannot simply be dismissed as someone else’s responsibility.

A society committed to human dignity must ask not only whether an economy produces wealth, but whether economic life allows people to participate, to work with dignity, to support families and to share appropriately in the goods of society.

Solidarity, Subsidiarity and the Political Left

Yet the Church’s insistence on solidarity and concern for the poor does not mean that every social problem should be handed upward to the state.

Here Catholic Social Teaching can become equally uncomfortable for the political left.

The principle of subsidiarity insists that people and the institutions closest to them should retain the responsibilities they are capable of exercising. It also requires higher political bodies to assist and empower lower ones.

Pope Pius XI described the principle in unusually strong terms in Quadragesimo Anno, calling it “an injustice and at the same time a grave evil” (Quadragesimo Anno, 79) to assign to higher bodies what smaller communities can accomplish themselves. 

Subsidiarity is sometimes reduced to the slogan “smaller government,” but that misses its deeper meaning. Its purpose is to protect the human person.

Families, businesses, churches, voluntary associations, local communities and other institutions are not merely administrative conveniences between the individual and the state. They are places where people exercise freedom, assume responsibility, form relationships and participate directly in society.

Higher levels of authority have necessary responsibilities. But they should assist these smaller communities rather than unnecessarily replace them.

As Pope Leo XIV emphasizes, “Subsidiarity does not justify the State’s disengagement”; (Magnifica Humanitas, 69) it guides how higher authority should serve rather than supplant lower communities. 

This is why solidarity and subsidiarity in Catholic Social Teaching must remain together.

Solidarity without subsidiarity can become paternalism, treating people primarily as recipients of assistance instead of persons capable of responsibility and participation.

Subsidiarity without solidarity can become an excuse for indifference.

Pope Leo XIV echoes this same caution, teaching that a healthy society must “move beyond any form of paternalistic or welfare-based management of societal life.” (Magnifica Humanitas, 70)

Catholic Social Teaching rejects both.

Pope St. John Paul II captured the balance in Centesimus Annus, explaining that the state acts indirectly through subsidiarity by creating conditions for economic activity and directly through solidarity by “defending the weakest.” (Centesimus Annus, 15)

Neither principle cancels the other.

Does Catholic Social Teaching Tell Catholics How to Vote?

This is where discussions of Catholic political beliefs can become misleading.

There is no single list of Catholic political positions that maps neatly onto an American party platform.

Catholic Social Teaching provides moral principles by which political and economic choices should be judged. It does not ordinarily provide a detailed legislative program or tell Catholics that every prudential policy question has only one permissible answer.

The better question, then, is not: “Does Catholic Social Teaching support my political views?”

It is: “Where does Catholic Social Teaching challenge them?”

That is considerably more difficult.

It asks the conservative who strongly defends economic freedom whether that freedom is actually serving human dignity and the common good.

It asks the liberal who strongly supports solidarity whether the solutions being proposed also respect subsidiarity, personal responsibility and the legitimate role of families, communities and civil society.

And it asks all of us whether we are applying Catholic principles consistently—or selecting only those that validate positions we already hold.

Pope Leo XIV names the temptation that overtakes public life on every side. When politics “abandons a long-term perspective and reduces itself to short-term calculations or sterile polarizations,” he warns, “the language of the common good loses credibility.” (Magnifica Humanitas, 63)

Catholics Can Disagree About Politics

There will, of course, continue to be legitimate disagreements among Catholics about public policy.

Two Catholics can agree that society has an obligation to assist the poor and disagree about the most effective way to do it.

They can recognize the dignity of migrants while disagreeing about particular immigration policies.

They can agree that workers deserve protection while reaching different conclusions about the proper roles of employers, unions and government.

Such disagreement does not necessarily represent a rejection of Catholic Social Teaching.

Prudence is necessary in deciding how the principles of Catholic Social Teaching should be applied to particular circumstances.

That is why neither Catholicism and liberalism nor Catholicism and conservatism can simply be treated as interchangeable.

No modern political ideology fully captures the Church’s vision of the human person and society.

What matters is where we begin. Are we beginning with our political ideology and asking the Church to validate it?

Or are we beginning with the Church’s understanding of the human person and allowing it to form our political judgment?

The Harder Conversion

There is a subtler danger in allowing politics to become our starting point.

A conservative Catholic can become very skilled at identifying the parts of Catholic Social Teaching that challenge liberals. A liberal Catholic can become equally skilled at identifying the teachings that challenge conservatives.

Much harder is allowing Catholic Social Teaching to challenge ourselves:

• Where have we allowed economic efficiency to outweigh human dignity?
• Where have we mistaken government action for solidarity?
• Where have we invoked subsidiarity simply because it supports the political conclusion we already preferred?
• Where have we expressed concern for the poor while avoiding any personal obligation toward them?

Those questions cannot be answered by a party platform.

And ultimately, Catholic Social Teaching asks something more of us than correct public policy.

Pope Benedict XVI reminded us: “No economic, social, or political project can replace that gift of self to another through which charity is expressed.” (Message for Lent, 2006)

The Bottom Line

So, is Catholic Social Teaching liberal or conservative?

Neither.

Catholic Social Teaching begins with the dignity of the human person and applies principles including solidarity, subsidiarity – in pursuit of the common good – to political, economic and social life.

Those principles may lead Catholics to conclusions associated with the political right in some circumstances and the political left in others. At still other times, they challenge assumptions shared by both.

Catholic Social Teaching is not liberal. It is not conservative.

And it is not somewhere halfway between the two. It is Catholic.

That is precisely why it has something important to say to everyone—including, perhaps especially, when what it says is not what we wanted to hear.

Read more:

10 Questions About Catholic Social Teaching

The Origin of Catholic Social Teaching

Why Are There 3 Key Principles in Catholic Social Teaching?

5 Surprising Things from Catholic Social Teaching

Are there 7 “themes” of Catholic Social Teaching?

Catholic Social Teaching vs. Secular Social Theory

Faith Formation in Catholic Social Teaching

A Compass for Young Generations