CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
DOCTRINAL NOTE
on some questions regarding
The Participation of Catholics in Political Life
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
having received the opinion of the Pontifical Council for the
Laity, has decided that it would be appropriate to publish the
present Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding the participation
of Catholics in political life. This Note is directed to the
Bishops of the Catholic Church and, in a particular way, to
Catholic politicians and all lay members of the faithful called
to participate in the political life of democratic societies.
I. A constant teaching
1. The commitment of Christians in the world has found a variety
of expressions in the course of the past 2000 years. One such
expression has been Christian involvement in political life:
Christians, as one Early Church writer stated, "play their
full role as citizens".[1] Among the saints, the Church
venerates many men and women who served God through their generous
commitment to politics and government. Among these, Saint Thomas
More, who was proclaimed Patron of Statesmen and Politicians,
gave witness by his martyrdom to "the inalienable dignity
of the human conscience".[2] Though subjected to various
forms of psychological pressure, Saint Thomas More refused to
compromise, never forsaking the "constant fidelity to legitimate
authority and institutions" which distinguished him; he
taught by his life and his death that "man cannot be separated
from God, nor politics from morality".[3]
It is commendable that in today's democratic societies, in a
climate of true freedom, everyone is made a participant in directing
the body politic.[4] Such societies call for new and fuller
forms of participation in public life by Christian and non-Christian
citizens alike. Indeed, all can contribute, by voting in elections
for lawmakers and government officials, and in other ways as
well, to the development of political solutions and legislative
choices which, in their opinion, will benefit the common good.[5]
The life of a democracy could not be productive without the
active, responsible and generous involvement of everyone, "albeit
in a diversity and complementarity of forms, levels, tasks,
and responsibilities".[6]
By fulfilling their civic duties, "guided by a Christian
conscience",[7] in conformity with its values, the lay
faithful exercise their proper task of infusing the temporal
order with Christian values, all the while respecting the nature
and rightful autonomy of that order,[8] and cooperating with
other citizens according to their particular competence and
responsibility.[9] The consequence of this fundamental teaching
of the Second Vatican Council is that "the lay faithful
are never to relinquish their participation in 'public life',
that is, in the many different economic, social, legislative,
administrative and cultural areas, which are intended to promote
organically and institutionally the common good".[10] This
would include the promotion and defence of goods such as public
order and peace, freedom and equality, respect for human life
and for the environment, justice and solidarity.
The present Note does not seek to set out the entire teaching
of the Church on this matter, which is summarized in its essentials
in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, but intends only to
recall some principles proper to the Christian conscience, which
inspire the social and political involvement of Catholics in
democratic societies.[11] The emergence of ambiguities or questionable
positions in recent times, often because of the pressure of
world events, has made it necessary to clarify some important
elements of Church teaching in this area.
II. Central points in the current cultural and political
debate
2. Civil society today is undergoing a complex cultural process
as the end of an era brings with it a time of uncertainty in
the face of something new. The great strides made in our time
give evidence of humanity's progress in attaining conditions
of life which are more in keeping with human dignity. The growth
in the sense of responsibility towards countries still on the
path of development is without doubt an important sign, illustrative
of a greater sensitivity to the common good. At the same time,
however, one cannot close one's eyes to the real dangers which
certain tendencies in society are promoting through legislation,
nor can one ignore the effects this will have on future generations.
A kind of cultural relativism exists today, evident in the conceptualization
and defence of an ethical pluralism, which sanctions the decadence
and disintegration of reason and the principles of the natural
moral law. Furthermore, it is not unusual to hear the opinion
expressed in the public sphere that such ethical pluralism is
the very condition for democracy.[12] As a result, citizens
claim complete autonomy with regard to their moral choices,
and lawmakers maintain that they are respecting this freedom
of choice by enacting laws which ignore the principles of natural
ethics and yield to ephemeral cultural and moral trends,[13]
as if every possible outlook on life were of equal value. At
the same time, the value of tolerance is disingenuously invoked
when a large number of citizens, Catholics among them, are asked
not to base their contribution to society and political life
- through the legitimate means available to everyone in a democracy
- on their particular understanding of the human person and
the common good. The history of the twentieth century demonstrates
that those citizens were right who recognized the falsehood
of relativism, and with it, the notion that there is no moral
law rooted in the nature of the human person, which must govern
our understanding of man, the common good and the state.
3. Such relativism, of course, has nothing to do with the legitimate
freedom of Catholic citizens to choose among the various political
opinions that are compatible with faith and the natural moral
law, and to select, according to their own criteria, what best
corresponds to the needs of the common good. Political freedom
is not - and cannot be - based upon the relativistic idea that
all conceptions of the human person's good have the same value
and truth, but rather, on the fact that politics are concerned
with very concrete realizations of the true human and social
good in given historical, geographic, economic, technological
and cultural contexts. From the specificity of the task at hand
and the variety of circumstances, a plurality of morally acceptable
policies and solutions arises. It is not the Church's task to
set forth specific political solutions - and even less to propose
a single solution as the acceptable one - to temporal questions
that God has left to the free and responsible judgment of each
person. It is, however, the Church's right and duty to provide
a moral judgment on temporal matters when this is required by
faith or the moral law.[14] If Christians must "recognize
the legitimacy of differing points of view about the organization
of worldly affairs",[15] they are also called to reject,
as injurious to democratic life, a conception of pluralism that
reflects moral relativism. Democracy must be based on the true
and solid foundation of non-negotiable ethical principles, which
are the underpinning of life in society.
On the level of concrete political action, there can generally
be a plurality of political parties in which Catholics may exercise
- especially through legislative assemblies - their right and
duty to contribute to the public life of their country.[16]
This arises because of the contingent nature of certain choices
regarding the ordering of society, the variety of strategies
available for accomplishing or guaranteeing the same fundamental
value, the possibility of different interpretations of the basic
principles of political theory, and the technical complexity
of many political problems. It should not be confused, however,
with an ambiguous pluralism in the choice of moral principles
or essential values. The legitimate plurality of temporal options
is at the origin of the commitment of Catholics to politics
and relates directly to Christian moral and social teaching.
It is in the light of this teaching that lay Catholics must
assess their participation in political life so as to be sure
that it is marked by a coherent responsibility for temporal
reality.
The Church recognizes that while democracy is the best expression
of the direct participation of citizens in political choices,
it succeeds only to the extent that it is based on a correct
understanding of the human person.[17] Catholic involvement
in political life cannot compromise on this principle, for otherwise
the witness of the Christian faith in the world, as well as
the unity and interior coherence of the faithful, would be non-existent.
The democratic structures on which the modern state is based
would be quite fragile were its foundation not the centrality
of the human person. It is respect for the person that makes
democratic participation possible. As the Second Vatican Council
teaches, the protection of "the rights of the person is,
indeed, a necessary condition for citizens, individually and
collectively, to play an active part in public life and administration".[18]
4. The complex array of today's problems branches out from here,
including some never faced by past generations. Scientific progress
has resulted in advances that are unsettling for the consciences
of men and women and call for solutions that respect ethical
principles in a coherent and fundamental way. At the same time,
legislative proposals are put forward which, heedless of the
consequences for the existence and future of human beings with
regard to the formation of culture and social behaviour, attack
the very inviolability of human life. Catholics, in this difficult
situation, have the right and the duty to recall society to
a deeper understanding of human life and to the responsibility
of everyone in this regard. John Paul II, continuing the constant
teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those
who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a "grave
and clear obligation to oppose" any law that attacks human
life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote
such laws or to vote for them.[19] As John Paul II has taught
in his Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae regarding the situation
in which it is not possible to overturn or completely repeal
a law allowing abortion which is already in force or coming
up for a vote, "an elected official, whose absolute personal
opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly
support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a
law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level
of general opinion and public morality".[20]
In this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian
conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program
or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents
of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity,
and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element
to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political
commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church's social
doctrine does not exhaust one's responsibility towards the common
good. Nor can a Catholic think of delegating his Christian responsibility
to others; rather, the Gospel of Jesus Christ gives him this
task, so that the truth about man and the world might be proclaimed
and put into action.
When political activity comes up against moral principles that
do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation, the Catholic
commitment becomes more evident and laden with responsibility.
In the face of fundamental and inalienable ethical demands,
Christians must recognize that what is at stake is the essence
of the moral law, which concerns the integral good of the human
person. This is the case with laws concerning abortion and euthanasia
(not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary
treatments, which is morally legitimate). Such laws must defend
the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In
the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect
and protect the rights of the human embryo. Analogously, the
family needs to be safeguarded and promoted, based on monogamous
marriage between a man and a woman, and protected in its unity
and stability in the face of modern laws on divorce: in no way
can other forms of cohabitation be placed on the same level
as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.
The same is true for the freedom of parents regarding the education
of their children; it is an inalienable right recognized also
by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. In the same way,
one must consider society's protection of minors and freedom
from modern forms of slavery (drug abuse and prostitution, for
example). In addition, there is the right to religious freedom
and the development of an economy that is at the service of
the human person and of the common good, with respect for social
justice, the principles of human solidarity and subsidiarity,
according to which "the rights of all individuals, families,
and organizations and their practical implementation must be
acknowledged".[21] Finally, the question of peace must
be mentioned. Certain pacifistic and ideological visions tend
at times to secularize the value of peace, while, in other cases,
there is the problem of summary ethical judgments which forget
the complexity of the issues involved. Peace is always "the
work of justice and the effect of charity".[22] It demands
the absolute and radical rejection of violence and terrorism
and requires a constant and vigilant commitment on the part
of all political leaders.
III. Principles of Catholic doctrine on the autonomy of the
temporal order and on pluralism.
5. While a plurality of methodologies reflective of different
sensibilities and cultures can be legitimate in approaching
such questions, no Catholic can appeal to the principle of pluralism
or to the autonomy of lay involvement in political life to support
policies affecting the common good which compromise or undermine
fundamental ethical requirements. This is not a question of
"confessional values" per se, because such ethical
precepts are rooted in human nature itself and belong to the
natural moral law. They do not require from those who defend
them the profession of the Christian faith, although the Church's
teaching confirms and defends them always and everywhere as
part of her service to the truth about man and about the common
good of civil society. Moreover, it cannot be denied that politics
must refer to principles of absolute value precisely because
these are at the service of the dignity of the human person
and of true human progress.
6. The appeal often made to "the rightful autonomy of the
participation of lay Catholics" in politics needs to be
clarified. Promoting the common good of society, according to
one's conscience, has nothing to do with "confessionalism"
or religious intolerance. For Catholic moral doctrine, the rightful
autonomy of the political or civil sphere from that of religion
and the Church - but not from that of morality - is a value
that has been attained and recognized by the Catholic Church
and belongs to inheritance of contemporary civilization.[23]
John Paul II has warned many times of the dangers which follow
from confusion between the religious and political spheres.
"Extremely sensitive situations arise when a specifically
religious norm becomes or tends to become the law of a state
without due consideration for the distinction between the domains
proper to religion and to political society. In practice, the
identification of religious law with civil law can stifle religious
freedom, even going so far as to restrict or deny other inalienable
human rights".[24] All the faithful are well aware that
specifically religious activities (such as the profession of
faith, worship, administration of sacraments, theological doctrines,
interchange between religious authorities and the members of
religions) are outside the state's responsibility. The state
must not interfere, nor in any way require or prohibit these
activities, except when it is a question of public order. The
recognition of civil and political rights, as well as the allocation
of public services may not be made dependent upon citizens'
religious convictions or activities.
The right and duty of Catholics and all citizens to seek the
truth with sincerity and to promote and defend, by legitimate
means, moral truths concerning society, justice, freedom, respect
for human life and the other rights of the person, is something
quite different. The fact that some of these truths may also
be taught by the Church does not lessen the political legitimacy
or the rightful "autonomy" of the contribution of
those citizens who are committed to them, irrespective of the
role that reasoned inquiry or confirmation by the Christian
faith may have played in recognizing such truths. Such "autonomy"
refers first of all to the attitude of the person who respects
the truths that derive from natural knowledge regarding man's
life in society, even if such truths may also be taught by a
specific religion, because truth is one. It would be a mistake
to confuse the proper autonomy exercised by Catholics in political
life with the claim of a principle that prescinds from the moral
and social teaching of the Church.
By its interventions in this area, the Church's Magisterium
does not wish to exercise political power or eliminate the freedom
of opinion of Catholics regarding contingent questions. Instead,
it intends - as is its proper function - to instruct and illuminate
the consciences of the faithful, particularly those involved
in political life, so that their actions may always serve the
integral promotion of the human person and the common good.
The social doctrine of the Church is not an intrusion into the
government of individual countries. It is a question of the
lay Catholic's duty to be morally coherent, found within one's
conscience, which is one and indivisible. "There cannot
be two parallel lives in their existence: on the one hand, the
so-called 'spiritual life', with its values and demands; and
on the other, the so-called 'secular' life, that is, life in
a family, at work, in social responsibilities, in the responsibilities
of public life and in culture. The branch, engrafted to the
vine which is Christ, bears its fruit in every sphere of existence
and activity. In fact, every area of the lay faithful's lives,
as different as they are, enters into the plan of God, who desires
that these very areas be the 'places in time' where the love
of Christ is revealed and realized for both the glory of the
Father and service of others. Every activity, every situation,
every precise responsibility - as, for example, skill and solidarity
in work, love and dedication in the family and the education
of children, service to society and public life and the promotion
of truth in the area of culture - are the occasions ordained
by providence for a 'continuous exercise of faith, hope and
charity' (Apostolicam actuositatem, 4)".[25] Living and
acting in conformity with one's own conscience on questions
of politics is not slavish acceptance of positions alien to
politics or some kind of confessionalism, but rather the way
in which Christians offer their concrete contribution so that,
through political life, society will become more just and more
consistent with the dignity of the human person.
In democratic societies, all proposals are freely discussed
and examined. Those who, on the basis of respect for individual
conscience, would view the moral duty of Christians to act according
to their conscience as something that disqualifies them from
political life, denying the legitimacy of their political involvement
following from their convictions about the common good, would
be guilty of a form of intolerant secularism. Such a position
would seek to deny not only any engagement of Christianity in
public or political life, but even the possibility of natural
ethics itself. Were this the case, the road would be open to
moral anarchy, which would be anything but legitimate pluralism.
The oppression of the weak by the strong would be the obvious
consequence. The marginalization of Christianity, moreover,
would not bode well for the future of society or for consensus
among peoples; indeed, it would threaten the very spiritual
and cultural foundations of civilization.[26]
IV. Considerations regarding particular aspects
7. In recent years, there have been cases within some organizations
founded on Catholic principles, in which support has been given
to political forces or movements with positions contrary to
the moral and social teaching of the Church on fundamental ethical
questions. Such activities, in contradiction to basic principles
of Christian conscience, are not compatible with membership
in organizations or associations which define themselves as
Catholic. Similarly, some Catholic periodicals in certain countries
have expressed perspectives on political choices that have been
ambiguous or incorrect, by misinterpreting the idea of the political
autonomy enjoyed by Catholics and by not taking into consideration
the principles mentioned above.
Faith in Jesus Christ, who is "the way, the truth, and
the life"(Jn 14:6), calls Christians to exert a greater
effort in building a culture which, inspired by the Gospel,
will reclaim the values and contents of the Catholic Tradition.
The presentation of the fruits of the spiritual, intellectual
and moral heritage of Catholicism in terms understandable to
modern culture is a task of great urgency today, in order to
avoid also a kind of Catholic cultural diaspora. Furthermore,
the cultural achievements and mature experience of Catholics
in political life in various countries, especially since the
Second World War, do not permit any kind of 'inferiority complex'
in comparison with political programs which recent history has
revealed to be weak or totally ruinous. It is insufficient and
reductive to think that the commitment of Catholics in society
can be limited to a simple transformation of structures, because
if at the basic level there is no culture capable of receiving,
justifying and putting into practice positions deriving from
faith and morals, the changes will always rest on a weak foundation.
Christian faith has never presumed to impose a rigid framework
on social and political questions, conscious that the historical
dimension requires men and women to live in imperfect situations,
which are also susceptible to rapid change. For this reason,
Christians must reject political positions and activities inspired
by a utopian perspective which, turning the tradition of Biblical
faith into a kind of prophetic vision without God, makes ill
use of religion by directing consciences towards a hope which
is merely earthly and which empties or reinterprets the Christian
striving towards eternal life.
At the same time, the Church teaches that authentic freedom
does not exist without the truth. "Truth and freedom either
go together hand in hand or together they perish in misery".[27]
In a society in which truth is neither mentioned nor sought,
every form of authentic exercise of freedom will be weakened,
opening the way to libertine and individualistic distortions
and undermining the protection of the good of the human person
and of the entire society.
8. In this regard, it is helpful to recall a truth which today
is often not perceived or formulated correctly in public opinion:
the right to freedom of conscience and, in a special way, to
religious freedom, taught in the Declaration Dignitatis humanae
of the Second Vatican Council, is based on the ontological dignity
of the human person and not on a non-existent equality among
religions or cultural systems of human creation.[28] Reflecting
on this question, Paul VI taught that "in no way does the
Council base this right to religious freedom on the fact that
all religions and all teachings, including those that are erroneous,
would have more or less equal value; it is based rather on the
dignity of the human person, which demands that he not be subjected
to external limitations which tend to constrain the conscience
in its search for the true religion or in adhering to it".[29]
The teaching on freedom of conscience and on religious freedom
does not therefore contradict the condemnation of indifferentism
and religious relativism by Catholic doctrine;[30] on the contrary,
it is fully in accord with it.
V. Conclusion
9. The principles contained in the present Note are intended
to shed light on one of the most important aspects of the unity
of Christian life: coherence between faith and life, Gospel
and culture, as recalled by the Second Vatican Council. The
Council exhorted Christians "to fulfill their duties faithfully
in the spirit of the Gospel. It is a mistake to think that,
because we have here no lasting city, but seek the city which
is to come, we are entitled to shirk our earthly responsibilities;
this is to forget that by our faith we are bound all the more
to fulfill these responsibilities according to the vocation
of each... May Christians...be proud of the opportunity to carry
out their earthly activity in such a way as to integrate human,
domestic, professional, scientific and technical enterprises
with religious values, under whose supreme direction all things
are ordered to the glory of God".[31]
The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience of November
21, 2002, approved the present Note, adopted in the Plenary
Session of this Congregation, and ordered its publication.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith, November 24, 2002, the Solemnity of Christ the
King.
X Joseph Card. RATZINGER
Prefect
X Tarcisio BERTONE, S.D.B.
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli
Secretary
[1] Letter to Diognetus, 5,5; Cf. Catechism of the Catholic
Church, No. 2240.
[2] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Proclaiming
Saint Thomas More Patron of Statesmen and Politicians, 1: AAS
93 (2001), 76.
[3] Ibid., 4.
[4] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 31; Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1915.
[5] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 75.
[6] John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation, Christifideles laici,
42: AAS 81 (1989), 472. The present doctrinal Note refers to
the involvement in political life of lay members of the faithful.
The Bishops of the Church have the right and the duty to set
out the moral principles relating to the social order; "Nevertheless
active participation in political parties is reserved to the
lay faithful" (ibid., 60). Cf. Congregation for the Clergy,
Directory for the Ministry and Life of Priests (March 31, 1994),
33.
[7] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
spes, 76.
[8] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 36.
[9] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Apostolicam actuositatem,
7; Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 36; Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et spes, 31 and 43.
[10] John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles laici,
42.
[11] In the last two centuries, the Papal Magisterium has spoken
on the principal questions regarding the social and political
order. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Diuturnum illud: ASS
14 (1881-1882), 4 ff; Encyclical Letter Immortale Dei: ASS 18
(1885-1886), 162ff; Encyclical Letter Libertas præstantissimum:
ASS 20 (1887-1888), 593ff; Encyclical Letter Rerum novarum:
ASS 23 (1890-1891), 643ff; Benedict XV, Encyclical Letter Pacem
Dei munus pulcherrimum: AAS 12 (1920), 209ff; Pius XI, Encyclical
Letter Quadragesimo anno: AAS 23 (1931), 190ff; Encyclical Letter
Mit brennender Sorge: AAS 29 (1937), 145-167; Encyclical Letter
Divini Redemptoris: AAS 29 (1937), 78ff; Pius XII, Encyclical
Letter Summi Pontificatus: AAS 31 (1939), 423ff; Radiomessaggi
natalizi 1941-1944; John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et magistra:
AAS 53 (1961), 401-464; Encyclical Letter Pacem in terris: AAS
55 (1963), 257-304; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum progressio:
AAS 59 (1967), 257-299; Apostolic Letter Octogesima adveniens:
AAS 63 (1971), 401-441.
[12] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus annus, 46:
AAS 83 (1991); Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, 101: AAS
85 (1993), 1212-1213; Discourse to the Italian Parliament, 5:
L'Osservatore Romano (November 15, 2002).
[13] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, 22:
AAS 87 (1995), 425-426.
[14] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 76.
[15] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
spes, 75.
[16] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 43 and 75.
[17] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 25.
[18] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
spes, 73.
[19] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, 73.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
spes, 75.
[22] Catechism of the Catholic Church,No. 2304.
[23] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium
et spes, 76.
[24] John Paul II, Message for the 1991 World Day of Peace:
"If you want peace, respect the conscience of every person",
4: AAS 83 (1991), 414-415.
[25] John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles laici,
59.
[26] Cf. John Paul II, Address to the Diplomatic Corps accredited
to the Holy See: L'Osservatore Romano (January 11, 2002).
[27] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 90: AAS
91 (1999), 75.
[28] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Declaration Dignitatis humanae,
1: "This Sacred Council begins by professing that God himself
has made known to the human race how men by serving him can
be saved and reach the state of the blessed. We believe that
this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic
Church". This does not lessen the sincere respect that
the Church has for the various religious traditions, recognizing
in them "elements of truth and goodness". See also,
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,
16; Decree Ad gentes, 11; Declaration Nostra aetate, 2; John
Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55: AAS 83 (1991),
302-304; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration
Dominus Iesus, 2, 8, 21: AAS 92 (2000), 742-765.
[29] Paul VI, Address to the Sacred College and to the Roman
Prelature: in Insegnamenti di Paolo VI, 14 (1976), 1088-1089.
[30] Cf. Pius IX, Encyclical Letter Quanta cura: ASS 3 (1867),
162; Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Immortale Dei: ASS 18 (1885),
170-171; Pius XI, Encyclical Letter Quas primas: AAS 17 (1925),
604-605; Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2108; Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus, 22.
[31] Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
spes, 43; see also John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles
laici, 59.
