Dear St. Rita Parishioners,
If seeking the common good demands freedom and a space for man in society to be able to achieve his Last End, God, it follows that that freedom and space are not, as it were, unlimited. Thus the laws of society are not to be for the sake of each person being unhindered from doing what he wants. This approach would make every last one of us enemies of each other, presuming that the presence of the other is a threat to my own freedom. But this is freedom wrongly conceived. In reality, the presence of the other does make demands on my free will, and good use of my free will makes me more free. It is that demand, however, on my free will made by the other that we will consider today, in the Principle of the Universal Destination of Goods.
In an overly simplistic sense, the Universal Destination of Goods means that everything is for everyone. This phrasing is overly simplistic, however, because the Principle of the Universal Destination of Goods is held in tension with the fact that we also have a right to private property, made explicit by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum, paragraphs 4-13. Indeed, in paragraph 8, he even says that “The fact that God has given the earth for the use and enjoyment of the whole human race can in no way be a bar to the owning of private property.” Therefore, it may be good to think about the various ways in which something can be “for” someone – myself or another.
Leo XIII is partially concerned with opposing the socialist approach to things, since they wish, in the end, to abolish private property. We can say, then, that in principle, the socialist approach wants “everything for everyone” to mean that anyone should be able to use whatever resources they want (in the whole world!) whenever they want to. This approach, of course, manifestly would lead to immediate chaos, fighting, and war. The approach is justified, however, by saying that many people (especially the rich) are selfish in their greed for these things, which makes people suffer unjustly, and so the government must step in to adjudicate who gets how much of what, when (because, as we all know, governments and all those who work in them are free of all sin and are paragons of virtue and holiness). Sadly, this approach is the result of envy, pride, and greed, and in practice only serves to make people in government richer and more powerful. The people still suffer, and they suffer more, because literally every other principle of Catholic Social Teaching is violated when this one is exalted.
If a socialist, then, would want to use the true Catholic Principle of the Universal Destination of Goods to suggest and promote the idea that private property is inherently vicious (i.e. the opposite of virtuous), simply because some or even many people who have private property are themselves vicious, as Catholics we would rather suggest that it is indeed possible to hold these two principles in tension by reading “everything is for everyone” in a different way. For example, we can ask the question, “How is my private property both for me and for others?” It is for me because I have earned it or bought it or made it or grown it out of the ground. Therefore, I have the right to use it as I see fit. “As I see fit” is the space where “for others” becomes possible.
We tell our children all the time that with rights come responsibilities, and “responsibility” is a way of saying that certain powers, abilities, or goods that I have are “for” something. And it is precisely here where the greed of rich people must be combatted – within the soul of the rich person himself. The goods that are properly mine have also been entrusted to me by my God, since it is from Him that my abilities, my life circumstances, my opportunities, etc. come, either actively by Him or permitted by Him. Our Lord Himself says that “From those to whom much is given, much will be expected” (Lk 12:48). Thus, my responsibilities regarding the goods entrusted to me come from God Himself, and the call to recognize the Universal Destination of Goods is a call from God to the depths of my being. What is my purpose in life? Wealth? Comfort? Pleasure? Honor? Power? If so, I will use my goods improperly – “for” those selfish ends. But if my purpose in life is Love of God and neighbor, then I will seriously ponder how to use those goods “for” others, in my family, in my community, in the world.
“For everyone”, then, comes from the intention in my own heart, when I direct my goods in charity for another. It does not come from the government or anyone else directing to another that which is properly mine. That would mean that government has lost sight of the human person and of what makes for real human happiness and flourishing, namely God. It would mean that government is not seeking the common good, because it doesn’t know what good is. It would also mean that government is trying to play God, to make me love Big Brother as if it were God. We can see here the necessity for right religion and God. It is God who converts hearts and properly directs us to love Him and our neighbor. Government can (and ought to) support that, but it can never replace God. It has neither the virtue nor the power.
For us, we simply remember that the right to private property is rooted in the Love of God for us, and the Universal Destination of Goods is rooted in Love of God and neighbor. Thus, private property is prior (and necessary) to the Universal Destination of Goods, and the Universal Destination of Goods is necessary such that I direct my private property towards its proper end.
In Christ,
Fr. Christensen