Last week’s post examined commutative justice as part of the virtue justice in the third principle that influenced the 1983 Code. Today’s post focuses on distributive justice.
Distributive justice entails relationships between a person and the community concerning the just distribution of benefits and burdens among community members. Therefore, distributive justice guides authorities in distributing benefits and burdens according to equity or proportional equality rather than mere equality. Proportional equality means that benefits and burdens are distributed according to the resources available and in line with the recipients’ qualifications, dedication and commitment to service, needs of capabilities, and merits of individuals. Resources are not always sufficient, and these differences or stratification among community members are always present.
Unlike commutative justice, which focuses on giving each person what is agreed on in a contract, distributive justice focuses on giving each person their due based on the peculiarities of the recipients and available resources. Distributive injustice is disproportion and partiality in distributing burdens and awarding favours.
Distributive justice applies to the spirituality of canon law. The first manifestation is in the remuneration of clerics. Canon 281 states: “§1 Since clerics dedicate themselves to the ecclesiastical ministry, they deserve the remuneration that befits their condition, taking into account both the nature of their office and the conditions of time and place. It is to be such that it provides for the necessities of their life and for the just remuneration of those whose services they need. §2 Suitable provision is likewise to be made for such social welfare as they may need in infirmity, sickness or old age.”
This means that the ecclesiastical ministry is not a work contract in which one is paid according to the principles of commutative justice, that is, according to the arithmetic relationship between work and payment.
The remuneration of priests instead follows distributive justice, which is hinged on equity.
Canon 281 §1 identifies factors considered when remunerating priests. The first is the nature of the function of a priest and the extent of dedication to service. This means that the amount would vary for a parish priest, parochial vicar, and priests working in the curia and ecclesiastical institutes. At the same time, years of service in the ministry can also be considered when determining the amount a priest receives.
Second, the conditions of time and place where the priest lives and exercises his ministry. Since inflation is very high in Nigeria, affecting the cost of goods and services, the amount a priest receives should be reviewed regularly and, if need be, increased to balance the difference due to inflation and other economic fluctuations. This amount should provide the basic necessities of life, be sufficient for the priest to continue his education (can. 279), go on a vacation (can. 283 §2) and help the needy (Presbyterorum Ordinis, 20).
The third is the equitable payment of those whose services a priest needs. In other words, a priest should be able to appropriately pay those working in the presbytery, such as the domestic staff. Pope John Paul II, while referring to clerics employed by the Holy See in his 1982 letter, added that adequate remuneration should provide priests with the means “to carry out the duties of their state, including responsibilities which they may have in certain cases toward parents or other family members dependent on them”.
Finally, the resources available determine how much a priest can receive. Remuneration in wealthier dioceses should not be relatively the same as in poorer dioceses, even if the cost of living is higher in wealthier dioceses. The availability of resources should be reflected in higher remuneration.
This is also why the law requires religious institutes to consider the circumstances (culture, place, and economic situation) of individual communities when fulfilling the obligation to donate to the needs of the Church and support the poor (Can. 640; Perfectate Caritatis, 13). Similarly, the law requires administrators of ecclesiastical goods to pay their workers “a just and honest wage which will be sufficient to provide for their needs and those of their dependents” (Can. 1286, 2°).
On the other hand, Canon 1274 stipulates how to fund the remuneration and social assistance of priests. It obliges all dioceses to establish a special institute to collect goods and offerings for this purpose. Paul VI in Ecclesiae Sanctae, directs the diocesan bishop to administer this fund with the assistance of some priests. If necessary, he recommends incorporating the laity skilled in economic affairs (n.8). Canon 1274 also proposes amalgamating various diocesan funds or cooperation between various dioceses at the regional or national level so that richer dioceses can assist poorer dioceses in fulfilling this purpose. These institutes are to be established in such a way that they are recognised in civil law. However, the canon also allows dioceses to make alternative arrangements as long as they guarantee adequate and equitable remuneration and provide social assistance for priests.
Distributive justice also applies in appointments to ecclesiastical offices and elevation to an ecclesiastical dignity.
Regarding members of the presbyterial council, the law provides that members are to be appointed “in such a way that as far as possible the priests of the presbyterium are represented, with special regard to the diversity of ministries and to the various regions of the diocese” (Canon 499). The same goes for the pastoral council of the diocese in which members are to be selected in a way that “the council truly reflects the entire portion of the people of God which constitutes the diocese, taking account of the different regions of the diocese, of social conditions and professions, and of the part played in the apostolate by the members, whether individually or in association with others” (Canon 512 §2). Pope Francis’ decision to appoint cardinals in uncharacteristically unknown dioceses around the world also hinged on distributive justice.
May God continue to help us🙏🏾
K’ọdị🙋🏾♂️
