Why We Work for "Stuff": A Catholic View of Private Property

Part of why we work is to get "stuff," otherwise and more formally known as "property." We're using "stuff" here because "property" might be confused with land and/or a house. Property, in its most general form, just means "stuff."

Now that we've cleared that up, let's look at a Catholic idea of property, specifically private property. Yes, despite what those influenced by liberal or Marxist ideas might think or say, the Catholic Church has never had a problem with private property. In fact, it's considered "good" - as long as it's handled properly. One quick and simple way to grasp the Church's view of private property comes from St. Paul, who tells us in Ephesians: "Let each man work instead, and earn by his own labor the blessings he will be able to share with those who are in need."

As for the desire to get stuff, it's really just the normal result of working. Your work represents, in a sense, units of your labor. In exchange for those units, your work, you typically get money. Some of that money (most? all?) is then exchanged for stuff so that you can satisfy the needs of your family. And, of course, as we've been discussing at length recently, what's left over can, or rather should, be directed to others in need.

Okay, so we know that a natural result of work is getting stuff, more formally known as "property." Now let's look at a specifically Catholic view of property. In Working Your Way into Heaven, Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski tells us that the Catholic view is different from what he calls "capitalist thought." Let's see what we can learn from Wyszynski here.

Private possession and common usage of goods is the leading principle of a well-regulated society. For the preservation of order in society, God willed that man's right to possession should become divided in this manner. He expressed His will in the nature of things and in the nature of human needs.

So right away, we see that, there's nothing wrong with private property. Sorry all you socialists (and Marxists) out there, but private possession, not state possession, provides for a well-regulated society. But note that this is balanced by a "common usage" of goods, which differs from what's ours is ours, and no one has a right to it in any way, shape, or fashion. The typical capitalist view promotes this exclusively individual ownership of property. So what about this "common usage" to which Wyszynski refers? Does this undermine our right to possession of private property in any way?

Private property is protected by the law of custom, by public arrangement, and by the law of God. Man can defend his right with the help of distributive justice. Thanks to this fact, external order and the just usage of the goods of this earth are protected.

We won't get into a discussion of the concept of "distributive justice" here - a distinctly Catholic concept - but it does differ from a purely capitalist view. In differing, though, it doesn't contradict the idea of private property. It does, however, provide the basis to sort out disputes, and determine when one's use of private property contradicts or opposes the common good. That's the important point here.

If you've followed our recent posts, you'll likely not be surprised by what Wyszynski has to say next:

However, although shielded by justice, the law of property is still burdened by social duty. For although human work and property are intended for the satisfaction of our own needs, a certain amount of goods generally remains unused. And no man is free to do just what he likes with these surplus goods. Everyone has a duty to use what is left over for social purposes, in the spirit of love of one's neighbor, of charity, and of magnanimity.

Previously we saw that we were obligated to help others. It might seem that, while we recognized the obligation to share our stuff with others, the stuff itself is strictly ours to give, leaving open the possibility of ignoring our obligation. But here we find a much stronger expression of our obligation, one that, in a sense, does not acknowledge our absolute ownership of our stuff. What we acquire, what we own, of its very nature, is intended from the get-go not only for us, but for the common good.

Rather than delve into the theory or theology behind this understanding, next time we'll see the practical implications of it, specifically how it effects everything we do at work.