The Dignity of Pope Leo
Much has been written about the new Pope, and this post focuses only on one small part of the story – the part that implicates human dignity — as expressed in encyclicals, letters, and tweets.
Of course, we can’t say yet what the newly elected Pope will do in his new role nor what kind of legacy he will leave. There are indications, however, that he will follow in the footsteps of his immediate predecessor in emphasizing the inherent and equal dignity of all human beings. Just a few days into his papacy, we already know a few things about how he thinks about dignity.
In his first address as Pope, he mentioned dignity only once and only in passing, and only in terms of its violation as a consequence of the loss of faith: “A lack of faith is often tragically accompanied by the loss of meaning in life, the neglect of mercy, appalling violations of human dignity, the crisis of the family and so many other wounds that afflict our society.” Still, it is worth noting that he referred to “human dignity,” invoking its inherent and universal aspect associated with humanity itself.
As has been noted, too, his choice of papal name is indicative of the values he espouses. In his first address to the College of Cardinals, he explained that he chose the name “mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical Rerum Novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution. In our own day, the Church offers to everyone the treasury of her social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice and labour.”
The 1891 Rerum Novarum, the Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Capital and Labor, is sometimes also known as “On the Condition of the Working Classes. In the Rerum Novarum, Leo XIII excoriated against class division, arguing that the unity of labor and capital classes is as natural as the “symmetry of the human frame”: “so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other… The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character.”
Elsewhere in the Encyclical, Pope Leo XIII reiterates that degrading conditions should not be imposed on working people that would be “repugnant to their dignity as human beings.” And yet a third mention of dignity denotes the essential equality of all people: “In this respect all men are equal; there is here no difference between rich and poor, master and servant, ruler and ruled, ‘for the same is Lord over all.’ No man may with impunity outrage that human dignity which God Himself treats with great reverence…”
This is a fascinating world view that recognizes the dignity of every man “as a person” (a phrase commonly seen in today’s constitutions and court cases); indeed, it goes further in bolstering not only the equality but the essential interconnectedness of all people. This is what Martin Luther King, in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, would call the “inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.” Each needs the other.
King – sandwiched between the two Leos and as if channeling them -- explained the political implications of the inescapable network of mutuality: “Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial ‘outside agitator’ idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.” Words that have special salience today.
The Pope’s view seems to be that there is enough love for everyone and that everyone is equally deserving of love — a view that reflects the inherent, equal, and universal dignity of every person as a person.