Thou Shall Not Steal

The seventh commandment in the Decalogue, “You shall not steal,” is expounded upon in the Catechism in the following excerpt:

[The seventh commandment] commands justice and charity in the care of earthly goods and the fruits of men’s labor. For the sake of the common good, it requires respect for the universal destination of goods and respect for the right to private property.¹

This short paragraph raises several questions on what the common good is and why it is important, what the universal destination of goods is, why man has a right to private property, and what these have to do with theft. This article will seek to answer these questions and more, by way of a commentary on the universal destination of goods, the private ownership of goods, and love for the poor as taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.²

The Common Good

A common good is a good that can be shared among individuals simultaneously without it diminishing in any way, as opposed to a private good.³ The common good often alluded to in the social teachings of the Church is the political common good that is particular to society, defined as “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily.”⁴ This definition raises the questions of what fulfilment for man is, why social conditions are necessary for man to achieve it, and whether said fulfilment can be achieved without the common good.

Man’s Fulfillment

It is first to be noted that the word fulfillment has been translated from the Latin perfectionem, more commonly translated to English as perfection. Perfection carries with it the notion of completion,⁵ and this notion is extremely pertinent for the discussion on what it means for man to be fulfilled.

Aristotle teaches that every action and decision seeks some good which is found in its end, or telos.⁶ Socrates teaches that there are three types of goods: that which is useful for a higher purpose, that which is in itself good but also useful for a higher purpose, and that which is good for its own sake.⁷ Certainly the highest or most superordinate good must be that which is good for its own sake, because anything that is useful for something else will necessarily be subordinate to it as “lower ends are also pursued for the sake of the higher.”⁸ Aristotle teaches that the best good is complete,⁹ or teleion, which is translated into Latin as absolutus and perfectus,¹⁰ thus carrying it with the notion of fulfilment, as stated above. Happiness, or eudaimonia, is the name given to this unqualifiedly most perfect good.

This perfection is the actualization of the good of a thing, i.e., doing well what it is supposed to do or what is unique to it.¹¹ For example, a knife is good when it cuts well, and a pianist is good when he plays the piano well. So too for man, when he does well what is proper to his nature. The question that follows is what the activity proper to man’s nature is. Man, sharing life and growth with all living creatures, and sharing sensitivity with all other animals, is distinguished by his ability to reason; it is what makes him a rational animal.¹² Man’s rational principle, therefore, must be that by which he performs and fulfills the activity that is unique to him.¹³ The happy man, thus, is he “whose activities accord with complete virtue, with an adequate supply of external goods, not for just any time but for a complete life.”¹⁴

Man’s Communal Nature

Aristotle speaks of friendship as necessary for the excellent actualization of virtues because good friends wish for and help actualize what it best for the other.¹⁵ This fact points towards man needing others to reach perfection or fulfillment, which is in line with Aristotle’s teaching that man is a political animal.¹⁶ Man’s political or communal nature can be seen from the use of language to communicate which is unique to man, and also from the fact man requires a community to live excellently. The latter is so because a lone man can only provide for his own survival; but when pooling resources, living, and working with others, he is able to share in what goes beyond survival and, indeed, brings about excellent living. This communal striving for well-being is the common good: the good of all that brings about the good of each, common “because it is indivisible and because only together is it possible to attain it, increase it and safeguard its effectiveness, with regard also to the future.”¹⁷

It has thus been shown from natural reason what fulfillment is for man, why social conditions are necessary for man to achieve it, and that the common good is absolutely necessary for man’s fulfillment.

The Universal Destination of Goods

Pope St. John Paul II teaches in Centesimus Annus that:

God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone. This is the foundation of the universal destination of the earth’s goods. The earth, by reason of its fruitfulness and its capacity to satisfy human needs, is God’s first gift for the sustenance of human life.¹⁸

The Catechism of the Catholic Church builds on this teaching, alluding to the fact that “in the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits.”¹⁹ It is also evident from Scripture, where God creates man and commands him to “subdue [the earth,] and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”²⁰

God did not entrust all creation to one man in private, which is clear when the above verse is read in its entirety, where it is preceded by the command to “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.”²¹ This verse shows that God entrusts creation to all men, which is consistent with what the Church teaches: “The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race.”²²

The universal destination of goods is closely linked with the principle of the common use of the goods, which is the “first principle of the whole ethical and social order,”²³ allowing man to “make use of the material goods of the earth.”²⁴ This stems from the fact that man requires material goods for his existence, which are “absolutely indispensable if he is to feed himself, grow, communicate, associate with others, and attain the highest purposes to which he is called,”²⁵ and thus it is a natural fundamental right.

The Right to Private Property

Even though “the earth was established in common for all,”²⁶ it does not imply that man can do whatever he wants with the land without limit, but rather that “no part of it was assigned to any one in particular, and that the limits of private possession have been left to be fixed by man’s own industry, and by the laws of individual races.”²⁷ This does not mean that the earth caters only to the few who own land, but indeed to all because “there is not one who does not sustain life from what the land produces.”²⁸ The Church teaches:

The earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge.²⁹

Man, in accord with his rational nature, is able to plan for his survival and well-being far into the future, and thus needs to and has a natural right to have possessions stably and permanently, unlike other creatures which only have them temporarily and momentarily.³⁰ Since God gave the earth to man for his survival, it would follow that the earth has everything that man needs to survive.

However, the fruits of the earth are not available without some kind of labor, congruent to the call in Genesis to subdue the earth:

But the earth does not yield its fruits without a particular human response to God’s gift, that is to say, without work. It is through work that man, using his intelligence and exercising his freedom, succeeds in dominating the earth and making it a fitting home. In this way, he makes part of the earth his own, precisely the part which he has acquired through work; this is the origin of individual property.³¹

Not everyone possesses land from which he can yield the earth’s fruits. Thus Pope Leo XIII writes that, “Those who do not possess the soil contribute their labor; hence, it may truly be said that all human subsistence is derived either from labor on one’s own land, or from some toil, some calling, which is paid for either in the produce of the land itself, or in that which is exchanged for what the land brings forth.”³² The necessary relationship between those who own the land and those who labor on it leads to the development of natural solidarity between men that the Church calls for.³³ Indeed, private property is for the sake of the common good.

The Use of Private Property

The Church teaches:

The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.³⁴

Unlike some modern philosophies, the Church does not proclaim that the right to property is inalienable or absolute. “On the contrary, it has always understood this right within the broader context of the right common to all to use the goods of the whole of creation: the right to private property is subordinated to the right to common use.”³⁵ Man has a right to private property, but this does not mean he has the right to hoard property. “No one is commanded to distribute to others that which is required for his own needs and those of his household; nor even to give away what is reasonably required to keep up becomingly his condition in life.”³⁶ This is qualified by the fact that the end of his right to private property is for his needs to be fulfilled and for him to stand fairly in life, but once these have been fulfilled, it is his “duty to give to the indigent out of what remains over.”³⁷

Private property, therefore, is to be ordered to and used for the good of all, as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches:

Man ought to possess external things, not as his own, but as common, so that, to wit, he is ready to communicate them to others in their need. Hence the Apostle says (1 Tim 6:17, 18): “Charge the rich of this world . . . to give easily, to communicate to others, etc.”³⁸

This point is stated clearly in the Catechism, quoting Gaudium et Spes:

“In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself.”³⁹ The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.⁴⁰

Indeed, owning property allows one to share in the divine office of providing for others, just as God has provided the earth and all its fruit for man.

Love for the Poor

The Catechism teaches that “love for the poor is incompatible with immoderate love of riches or their selfish use.”⁴¹ This is explained by the universal destination of goods, and how the right to private property is ordered to it, with a preferential option for the poor.

The Church also teaches that “love for the poor is even one of the motives for the duty of working so as to ‘be able to give to those in need.’”⁴² This love for the poor, or preferential option for the poor,⁴³ is based on Jesus’s own words, when He identifies Himself with the poor, saying, “as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.”⁴⁴

The duty to give out of one’s excess is one of Christian charity, but when it pertains to the poor, it becomes a matter of justice. The Church calls for “the demands of justice [to] be satisfied lest the giving of what is due in justice be represented as the offering of a charitable gift.”⁴⁵ This duty of justice is alluded to by several Fathers of the Church. St. John Chrysostom teaches that “not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs.”⁴⁶ St. Basil the Great harshly reprimands his congregation on the same topic:

When someone steals another’s clothes, we call them a thief. Should we not give the same name to one who could clothe the naked and does not? The bread in your cupboard belongs to the hungry; the coat unused in your closet belongs to the one who needs it; the shoes rotting in your closet belong to the one who has no shoes; the money which you hoard up belongs to the poor.⁴⁷

St. Gregory the Great, in his Regula Pastoralis, teaches that “when we administer necessities to the needy, we give them what is their own, not what is ours; we pay a debt of justice, rather than do a work of mercy.”⁴⁸

Conclusion

“For the sake of the common good, [the seventh commandment] requires respect for the universal destination of goods and respect for the right to private property.”⁴⁹ The commandment to not steal requires man to first recognize that God created the world for all and, therefore, all have a share in it. This does not mean that one cannot own private property, since private property is proper to man’s nature and is necessary for man’s survival and well-being. Instead, private property is to be subordinate to the common good of all via the universal destination of goods. It would be theft to hoard private property, and to not order it to the common good, just as advocating the abolition of private property would be advocating theft.

The universal destination of goods calls for the proper treatment of the many who live in abject poverty, and do not have a proper share in God’s gift of creation. It would also be theft, therefore, to not give out of one’s excess to the poor what rightfully is theirs.

The words of Pope Paul VI ring ever more true today, especially for Christians who have a special call to justice and charity as recipients of God’s justice and charity:

Countless millions are starving, countless families are destitute, countless men are steeped in ignorance; countless people need schools, hospitals, and homes worthy of the name. In such circumstances, we cannot tolerate public and private expenditures of a wasteful nature; we cannot but condemn lavish displays of wealth by nations or individuals; we cannot approve a debilitating arms race. It is our solemn duty to speak out against them.⁵⁰