Along with the announcement this month that Pope Benedict XVI had accepted the resignation of the head of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Lubomyr Cardinal Husar, came an assurance that many of the beloved patriarch's activities would continue. In particular, he plans to prolong his series of audio recordings for the laity. Among the topics he will discuss is the church and business. One can expect that he will examine not only specific business practices, but the church's teaching on economics in general.

Nothing could be more distant from religion, many people would say, than economics. Economics is a hard-headed, hard-hearted field, known as "the dismal science." It is for pragmatists, not idealists; it deals with the corporal, not the spiritual.

Yet it only takes a moment's reflection to see that Christianity has a great deal to say about economics. Think of the various parables about the rich and the poor. Think of the sharing of goods in the early Church. Furthermore, there is a long tradition of Catholic philosophy dealing with economic questions such as usury. And since 1891, when Pope Leo XIII issued his encyclical "Rerum novarum" on the condition of the working classes, there has been a series of papal encyclicals on the socio-economic questions of the industrial and post-industrial age.

This does not mean that there is a single Catholic doctrine of economics, or even an "approved" theory – though there have been Catholic economists, as well as economists who considered their ideas to be in harmony with Catholic thought. It does mean that there are certain principles about social and economic life that Catholic economists should consider. It also means that Catholics have a right, and indeed an obligation, to question their country's economic policies in the light of these principles.

How well known are Catholic socio-economic principles in Ukraine? In 1904, Metropolitan Andrei Sheptytsky's pastoral letter "On the Social Question" introduced the principles of "Rerum novarum" directly to the Ukrainians of Austrian Galicia. Pope Pius XI's encyclical "Quadragesimo anno" of 1931 surely had an impact on the inter-war Church. But in the Communist period, Pope John the XXIII's encyclical "Mater et magistra" (1961) could hardly reach the faithful in Ukraine. Nor could the documents of the Second Vatican Council, including the Pastoral Constitution "Gaudium et spes" (1965) on the Church in the modern world, and in particular its chapter on economic and social life (Nos. 63-72). Likewise, neither Pope Paul VI's encyclical "Populorum progressio" of 1967, on the development of peoples, nor his apostolic letter "Octogesima adveniens" (1971), could have much impact on Ukraine. Even Pope John Paul II's encyclicals "Laborem exercens" of 1981, on human work, and "Sollicitudo rei socialis" (1987), on the social question, could only have reached a limited audience. It was only "Centesimus annus," which came out on the hundredth anniversary of Leo XIII's historic encyclical – a year that proved historic for Ukraine as well – that could finally receive full attention there; indeed, a conference was even held to discuss its message. Pope Benedict's first encyclical, "Deus caritas est" (2005), which treats the relationship between charity and justice, and the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, published in 2004, are presumably available to Ukrainians.

What, then, are the principles of Catholic social teaching? It would be impossible to summarize them here. But it may be useful to raise several questions, which readers may pursue on their own by referring to the appropriate encyclicals or other writings.

First, what is a just wage? Is it a family wage, that is, a wage sufficient to sustain the worker and his family? Or should it simply be the market rate, established by the law of supply and demand, even if it is not sufficient to sustain one person? This question was discussed in "Rerum novarum" no. 34, in "Quadragesimo anno" nos. 66-75, in "Mater et magistra" nos. 71-72, and in "Laborem exercens" no. 19.

In advanced countries, women are free to enter the work force on an equal basis with men. But what if a woman prefers to stay at home and care for her children and her household? Should the economic system make this financially possible? Should she be compensated for her work at home, either by her husband or by the state?

Does a private corporation have a duty only to its stockholders? Or does it have a duty to its workers? To the local community? To the general public? All of the above?

Which is a better economic principle, competition or cooperation? When you compete with your brother, are you seeking his betterment or his harm? Is an economy based on competition consistent with Christian teaching? In the 1920s and 1930s, the cooperative movement was widespread and successful in Polish-ruled western Ukraine, and spread to Canada. Cooperatives remain popular in many countries. Why are they not more common in Ukraine? Cooperatives were discussed in "Mater et magistra," nos. 85-90; the family farm was treated in the same encyclical at nos. 142-143.

Poverty is a fact of life in developed countries as varied as the United States and Ukraine. Should Catholics in such countries try to plug the gaps in the economic system through taxation, social benefits, and charity, or should they demand a fundamental restructuring of the economy? Charitable activity, while admirable and necessary, is not enough. As the American civil rights activist and clergyman Martin Luther King (1929-1968) once said, "True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring." Pope John XXIII discussed the structure of economic systems in "Mater et magistra" nos. 82-83. More recently, Pope Benedict XVI has emphasized the role of charity in relation to the need for social justice in "Deus caritas est" nos. 28-29.

Is class conflict inevitable? Must society be divided horizontally into struggling classes, or can it be divided vertically into cooperating bodies? The "corporatist" school of economic thought, popular in the inter-war period, held that class conflict could be overcome if associations of workers, employers, and professionals participated directly in government (see "Quadragesimo anno" nos. 84-96). This theory was discredited, perhaps unfairly, when fascist Italy created a corporatist state in which the associations were controlled by the regime. But in true corporatism, individuals exercise political sovereignty through their associations.

In our times, does capital still tend to be separate from labor? Does labor still tend to be separated from the means of production? If so, can anything be done about this? Or must we all be employees of entities we can neither own nor control? One approach is to protect the small producer, such as the individual farmer -- though in Ukraine's ruined countryside it may be too late. The urban small entrepreneur, however, can still be saved. And even large enterprises can be partly owned and managed by their workers, through employee stockholding plans (as in some U.S. companies) and codetermination, where workers participate in management (as in Germany). Pope Pius XI discussed this issue in "Quadragesimo anno" no. 65, as did Pope John Paul II in "Laborem exercens" no. 14 and "Centesimus annus" no. 43.

Finally, what is the purpose of economic activity? To get as rich as possible? To produce as many things as possible? To constantly increase the Gross National Product? Or something else? An economic theory or approach that does not begin by answering this question is bound to fail.

The defeat of Communism is not a green light for a revival of liberal capitalism. Today, growing economic inequalities are contributing to massive discontent, mass migration, and political extremism. Islamism and radical nationalism are but two symptoms of this global disease. Ukrainians should not deceive themselves that they are immune to these processes. They are sometimes told that the only alternative to a Russian-style state-managed economy, or rule by an oligarchy of robber-barons, is free-market capitalism. But that depends on what one means by free-market capitalism. An economy controlled by large corporate interests largely free of international regulation, which squeeze out the individual producer (whether a family farmer or a small business entrepreneur) is hardly free. Yet that is precisely the kind of economy, characterized by large-scale agribusiness and control of industry by multinational corporations, that some Western advisors are proposing to Ukraine. Is this kind of economy in the interests of the Ukrainian people? Let us leave the last word to the late Pope John Paul II:

"The Marxist solution has failed, but the realities of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially the Third World, as does the reality of human alienation, especially in the more advanced countries. Against these phenomena the Church strongly raises her voice. Vast multitudes are still living in conditions of great material and moral poverty. The collapse of the Communist system in so many countries certainly removes an obstacle to facing these problems in an appropriate and realistic way, but it is not enough to bring about their solution. Indeed, there is a risk that a radical capitalistic ideology could spread which refuses even to consider these problems, in the a priori belief that any attempt to solve them is doomed to failure, and which blindly entrusts their solution to the free development of market forces."

(Centesimus annus, no. 42).

Andrew SOROKOWSKI