Roots of the Catholic Worker Movement: Distributism: Ownershipof the Means of Production and Alternative to the Brutal Global Market

by Mark and Louise Zwick

The plight of workers throughout the world is at a crisis stage. Manyare not only working for slave wages, but have been removed from their owncommunities and local economics and left desperate.

The Business pages of the Houston Chronicle of August 1, 1999,featured several entire pages on the economic devastation of Latin Americain 1999, exactly like that of Asia in 1997. It is incredible that the reportercould quote "experts" as pointing out that the hope for thesecountries was more "economic reform," in the shape of the verystructural adjustment and austerity programs, combined with speculationin the stock market which had devastated the economies in the first place.

This appalling situation makes the study of the roots of the CatholicWorker movement more relevant than ever.

It is very much in the tradition of Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin towrite about economics. Under the editorship of Dorothy Day, the CatholicWorker criticized an unbridled capitalism which put the majority of moneyand resources in the hands of a few big corporations and individuals. TheCatholic Workers not only disagreed with industrial capitalism on a massivescale, but presented an alternative economics called distributism-a person-centeredeconomics.

Person-Centered Economics

As personalists, Catholic Workers believed there had to be a betterway than to have the world run by Standard Oil, General Motors and HenryFord (today we have the global market, giant corporations, sweatshops, maquiladoras).

Peter and Dorothy re-commended the works of G. K. Chesterton, HilaireBelloc and Fr. Vincent McNabb, O.P., on distributism and R. H. Tawney oncapitalism, and their ideas were published in the paper. These writers insistedthat all people were created in the image and likeness of God, and shouldnot be treated like cogs in a machine or made to work twelve hours a dayin back-breaking work as wage slaves (in coal mines, for example), whilelarge corporations and their directors became fabulously wealthy.

Chesterton, theorist of person-centered economics and critic of theexcesses of capitalism, shared the views of the Catholic Workers. He knewthat the opinions of Henry Ford (who said that most people preferred themechanical action of the assembly line and were only fitted for it), wereagainst Catholic teaching on the dignity of the human person. Ford madeit clear that most people were not smart enough to do anything except repetitiouswork. As Chesterton put it in The Outline of Sanity, "It willbe noted that Mr. Ford does not say that he is only fitted to mind machines."

Chesterton argued that the Catholic Church taught that every human beingwas worth saving. He insisted on "respect for the humanity and dignityof ordinary, shabby, ignorant people." (Margaret Canovan, G. K.Chesterton: Radical Populist, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977,p. 9).

Property for Everyone

After extensive discussion of distributism, people still ask, "Justexactly what is it?" The word and the answer come from the idea thata just social order can be achieved through a much more widespread distributionof property. Distributism means a society of owners. It means that propertybelongs to the many rather than the few. It is related to the idea of subsidiarity,emphasized in all papal encyclicals relating to social teaching and economics.Subsidiarity, in the words of the Quadragesimo Anno, means that "Itis an injustice and at the same time a great evil and disturbance of rightorder to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinateorganizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very natureto furnish help to the members of the body social and never destroy andabsorb them."

Peter and Dorothy also recommended subsidiarity. This meant they wereopposed to big government. They were also opposed to massive governmentprograms to care for the poor, believing that Christians should care forothers in need. However, neither were they in favor of privatizing all governmentprograms and passing laws to increase the concentration of wealth and powerin the hands of the few or in huge corporations, at the same time as takingaway the opportunities of the poor to be self-sustaining.

Dorothy described it this way: "The aim of distributism is familyownership of land, workshops, stores, transport, trades, professions, andso on. Family ownership in the means of production so widely distributedas to be the mark of the economic life of the community-this is the Distributist'sdesire. It is also the world's desire. (Catholic Worker, June, 1948).

The CW Program

In The Long Loneliness, Dorothy spelled out the way in whichdistributism was at the heart of the Catholic Worker program: "As Peterpointed out, ours was a long-range program, looking for ownership by theworkers of the means of production, the abolition of the assembly line,decentralized factories, the restoration of crafts and ownership of property.This meant, of course, an accent on the agrarian and rural aspects of oureconomy and a changing emphasis from the city to the land" (TheLong Loneliness, San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1952 p. 221).

While Peter emphasized aiming for the ownership of the means of production,he spoke just as strongly about "acceptance of the responsibility itentailed (LL, p. 222).

The economics of the Catholic Worker was rooted in the Gospel and inthe papal encyclicals, beginning with Rerum Novarum. Workers and distributistsbelieved in ownership of property, but property for everyone, includingthe means of production. They knew that owners would benefit and businesswould benefit if workers had a sense of responsibility and ownership ofthe work they did-worker ownership paid off with better production.

The Land

One of the keystones of the three-point program that Peter Maurin presentedto Dorothy when they met in 1932, in addition to cult and culture, was cultivation.

In The Long Loneliness, Dorothy reported that, "Every talkof Peter's about the social order led to the land. He spoke always as apeasant, but as a practical one. He knew the craving of the human heartfor a toehold on the land, for a home of one's own, but he also knew howimpossible it was to attain it except through community." (LL,p. 224). Because of this, Peter suggested farming communes, credit unions,cooperatives.

One hope for the survival of family farms in the face of the competitiveedge of agribusiness is in cooperatives where farmers bond together to selltheir products.

The Catholic Worker recommended setting up farms and many were started.Catholic Worker lore and legend tend to denigrate the farms because theywere not run like model, mechanized farms of the time. The experience offamilies on the farms was often difficult, because of lack of knowledgeof farming, and of money and equipment. However, they were an importantpart of the attempt to live out the principles of distributism.

It was not easy to finance the beginning of family farms or communalfarms. By the time Dorothy Day published The Long Loneliness, Peter haddied. She explained his ideas in her book (p. 225), always acknowledginghim as the theorist of the movement: "Peter's plan was that groupsshould borrow from mutual-aid credit unions in the parish to start whathe first liked to call agronomic universities, where the worker could becomea scholar and the scholar a worker. Or he wanted people to give the landand money. He always spoke of giving.

Those who had land and tools should give. Those who had capital shouldgive. Those who had labor should give that. 'Love is an exchange of gifts,'St. Ignatius had said."

Peter Maurin, who so often spoke of living according to Gospel simplicity,also spoke of a philosophy of work. He recommended this philosophy to youngmarried couples related to the Catholic Worker: "Man should earn hisliving by the sweat of his brow…and a gentleman, truly speaking, isone who does not live on the sweat of someone else's brow" (LL).For this reason, and because of teachings of the Bible and the Fathers ofthe Church, Peter was against usury and speculation.

As Dorothy said, "Peter was no dreamer, but knew men as they were.That is why he spoke so much of the need for a philosophy of work. Oncethey had that, once their desires were changed, half the battle was won(LL, p. 226).

The distribution of land today is not more just than when Dorothy andPeter wrote about it in the '30's. In fact, larger portions of land thanever are in the hands of the few. Enormous agribusinesses crowd out familyfarms.

The Catholic Bishops of Ohio and the Bishops of Nebraska have both recentlypublished statements about the crisis for small farmers. The PontificalCouncil for Justice and Peace document, Toward a Better Distributionof Land, addresses the extreme inequalities regarding ownership of landaround the world.

Archbishop Oscar Romero, martyred in El Salvador, where fourteen familiesown all the land, said one could discuss and reaggarne many things, butwhen one touches the land, it called forth its martyrs.

What is Capitalism?

Chesterton knew that when most people spoke of capitalism, they hadin mind something quite different than a few very wealthy people controllingeverything. To clarify for his readers what he was criticizing, he firstdescribed the situation where a few people hold the wealth and all othersstruggle: "When I say 'Capitalism,' I commonly mean something thatmay be stated thus: 'That economic condition in which there is a class ofcapitalists roughly recognizable and relatively small, in whose possessionso much of the capital is concentrated as to necessitate a very large majorityof the citizens serving those capitalists for a wage." He emphasizedthat others had something quite different in mind when they spoke of capitalism:"The word… is used by other people to mean quite other things.Some people seem to mean merely private property. Others suppose that capitalismmust mean anything involving the use of capital.

"If capitalism means private property, I am capitalist. If capitalismmeans capital, everybody is capitalist. But if capitalism means this particularcondition of capital, only paid out to the mass in the form of wages, thenit does mean something, even if it ought to mean something else.

"The truth is that what we call Capitalism ought to be called Proletarianism.The point of it is not that some people have capital, but that most peopleonly have wages because they do not have capital."

When Chesterton wrote about the enormous discrepancies in income andwealth of the haves and have nots, it sounded as if he were speaking oftoday's world:

"To say that I do not like the present state of wealth and povertyis merely to say that I am not the devil in human form. No one but Satanor Beelzebub could like the present state of wealth and poverty" (G.K.Chesterton, The Outline of Sanity, London, Methuen and Co., pp. 108,151, 148).

Dorothy Day also wrote about the discrepancy between what the averageperson believed capitalism meant and the reality. The average person hopedand believed "that the capitalist system, unlike Communism, meant thatall were free to own, none compelled by law to labor." Dorothy pointedout that "popular magazines like Time and Saturday EveningPost are filled with the illustrations of these principles, which alladmit are good, but unfortunately the stories told are not true. It is thereason why great trusts like the Standard Oil and General Motors have publicrelations men, why there is a propaganda machine for big business, to convertthe public to the belief that capitalism really is based on good principles,distributists' principles, really is working out for the benefit of all,so that men have homes and farms and tools and pride in the job. Unfortunately,in practice under capitalism the many had not the opportunity of obtainingland and capital in any useful amount and were compelled by physical necessityto labor for the fortunate few who possessed these things. But the theorywas all right. Distributists want to save the theory by bringing the practicein conformity with it." (Catholic Worker, June 1948).

Economic Democracy and Shared Ownership vs. "DemocraticCapitalism"

Businesses are bigger than ever in the global market, the owners arein many cases anonymous, and the person finds it more difficult to finda secure place. In fact, the enormous growth of income for corporationsand stockholders would seem to be directly related to worker insecurity.

As Randy Cohen wrote in the New York Times on June 20, 1999,"When a thief, having stolen your wallet, hands you back carfare, it'stough to mutter much of a thank you. Similarly, nice as it is that BillGates gives money to libraries, a decent country would tax Microsoft ata rate that lets cities buy their own books."

Contemporary writers like Wendell Berry voice the same concerns on economicsand life that Peter Maurin and Dorothy Day expressed, and follow the sameline of reasoning.

Berry, who appears to be a Catholic Worker at heart and who believesin economic democracy, says we are in trouble if we have an industrial economy--andhe believes we do--"which is firmly founded on the seven deadly sinsand the breaking of all ten of the Ten Commandments" (Sex, Economy,Freedom and Community, San Francisco: Pantheon Books, 1993).

The seven deadly or "capital" sins are pride, avarice, envy,wrath, lust, gluttony and sloth. The 10 Commandments you know, especiallythe sixth, which is used so much for advertisement to promote consumption.

Those who speak of and help to plan what they call "democraticcapitalism" on a global scale do not inform the world of the totalitarianmeasures which are needed to enforce this type of "democracy."They do not mention, as does Wendell Berry, that "If you are dependenton people who do not know you, who control the value of your necessities,you are not free, you are not safe." (Sex, Economy, Freedom andCommunity).

The term "democratic capitalism" has been used as a euphemismfor the global market. Those who speak of its glories do not mention theactual lack of freedom for local people and local governments in this market.The dictators who imposed these policies were propped up by soldiers trainedat the School of the Americas in Georgia throughout the '80's.

Daniel Krotz, of the American Chesterton Society, recently commented,"Distributists believe that widespread ownership of property is theonly guarantee democracy has against a dominant centralized state or unbridledmonopoly capitalism. Distributism supports local government, stable traditions,and permanent, self-sufficient communities united against servitude andalienation." (http://www.chesterton.org.

In The Ownership Solution, Jeff Gates advocates"shared ownership." He points out that while free market advocatestry to give the impression that their system is open to all, the realityis that the person who does not already have large quantities of capitalcannot buy into it: "Policymakers routinely claim that capitalism isan 'open' system because anyone can purchase shares. It's a free market-anyone(i.e., anyone with money) can buy those new equities.

"Expecting a broad base of wage earners to buy their way into significantownership (i.e., from their already stretched paychecks) is what I call'Marie Antoinette Capitalism,' only instead of urging "Let them eatcake,' the modern refrain is 'Let them buy shares'" (Jeff Gates, TheOwnership Solution, Addison-Wesley, 1998).

New Feudalism

Peter might have pointed out, as did R. H. Tawney in his books whichPeter recommended to the readers of the Catholic Worker, that the situationof industrial capitalism in the twenties and thirties, like that of today'sglobal market, was very like feudalism, in terms of the wealth of the fewand the hard labor of the many who serve them in factories around the world.This past spring, Business Week reported that even in the U.S. the averagetop executive is making 419 times the pay of the average manufacturing worker.

E. F. Schumacher, writing in the 1970's, thought that perhaps worldfinancial planners might be people of good will, who simply didn't understand.He hoped that the neocolonialism he saw growing throughout the developingworld was unwitting (Shumacher, Small is Beautiful, New York: HarperCollins, 1975, 1989, p. 213).

However, the structural adjustment programs imposed by the World Bankand the International Monetary Fund on developing countries during the '80'sraise issues about the possibility of good will, or at least a great lackof wisdom regarding loans and debt payments.

Structural adjustment pro-grams require developing countries to devaluetheir currency, open up to world markets and privatize government programs."Opening up to world markets" means they can no longer grow foodfor their people, but only for export, and then purchase imported food athigher prices. International agribusiness has been consistently favoredin this process, along with deforestation of land to plant crops for export.

The campaigns of the Vatican and non-profit groups to forgive the externaldebt built up in the '80's as a part of celebration of the Jubilee year2000 have brought the problems of neocolonialism to the public's attention.The debt forgiveness agreements to date unfortunately involve forgivenessof a small part of the debt for only certain countries and include continuedharsh structural adjustment measures to be imposed on the few countriesinvolved.

Multinational companies and the World Trade Organization are the mostpowerful forces in the world today. They are stronger than any country orcombination of countries, beholden to no one. There is no national conscienceor international conscience that can inhibit them.

Speaking against the adoption of the GATT trade agreements, which havesince been passed and converted into the World Trade Organization, WendellBerry wrote,

"What these proposals actually propose is a revolution as audacious,far-reaching and, as sudden as any the world has seen. Their purpose isto bypass all local, state, and national governments in order to subordinatethe interests of those governments and of the people they represent to theinterests of a global "free" market run by a few supranationalcorporations" (Sex, Economy, Freedom and Community, p. 48-50

The control of the WTO extends to such unheard-of areas as the robberyand patenting by neocolonial multinational companies of the plants and seedsdeveloped in poorer countries over centuries. This patenting through theWTO means that those who developed the seeds will no longer be able to usethem. (See An Introduction to the WTO Agreements, Mayaysia: ThirdWorld Network, 1998).

What is the GDP?

Statistics and figures are used to show that in spite of lack of participationof the people in decision-making, in spite of the destruction of small businessby international trade agreements, economies in various countries are stilldoing well. Much is attributed to a figure called the GDP, or the grossdomestic product… It is fascinating to read in The Ownership Solutionof the various statistics which enter into this mysterious figure of theGDP: "Nowadays, the implicit assumption is that people are better offwhen spending is on the rise. That makes for certain perverse measures ofprogress. The cleanup expense of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the costs ofthe O. J. Simpson murder trial, outlays for prison construction and risingfees paid divorce lawyers-each implies real progress. Working longer hoursmay require that parents shift childcare from the home to a paid day carecenter, suggesting a rise in GDP but possibly a lower quality of life forboth parent and child. Costs and benefits are given equal weight. Incomeand expense, even assets and liabilities-all are washed out by a measurethat translates any dollar-denominated exhange into an economic "good,"even if those exchanges reflect a weakening of the social glue that bindsthe nation together. It can even signal rising prosperity (because moremoney is changing hands) while much of the population is losing ground"(p. 321-322).

Dorothy Day Criticized

Dorothy explained why perhaps other Catholics would not understand theCatholic Workers and even reported them to the Bishop: "We were nottaking the position of the great mass of Catholics, who were quite contentwith the present in this world. They were quite willing to give to the poor,but they did not feel called upon to work for the things of this life forothers which they themselves esteemed so lightly. Our insistence on worker-ownership,on the right of private property, on the need to de-proletarize the worker,all points which had been emphasized by the Popes in their social encyclicals,made many Catholics think we were Communists in disguise, wolves in sheep'sclothing."

Dorothy continued, "The Vatican paper warned us recently of regardingAmericanism or Communism as the only two alternatives. It is hard to seewhy our criticism of capitalism should have aroused such protest" (WilliamMiller, Dorothy Day: a Biography, Harper and Row, 1982, p. 428).

Dorothy quoted Joseph T. Nolan from Orate Fratres on the support ofPopes for the CW position: "Too long has idle talk made out of Distributismas something medieval and myopic, as if four modern popes were somehow talkingnonsense when they said: the law should favor widespread ownership (LeoXIII); land is the most natural form of property (Leo XIII and Pius XII);wages should enable a man to purchase land (Leo XIII and Pius XI); the familyis most perfect when rooted in its own holding (Pius XII); agriculture isthe first and most important of all the arts and the tiller of the soilstill represents the natural order of things willed by God (Pius XII) (CatholicWorker, July-Aug. 1948).

Some tried to dismiss Peter Maurin. He, seeing all the problems of aneconomy based on consumerism and the accumulation of wealth by the few,made it clear that he did not support that system: "I told them I amthe son of a peasant and so pre-capitalistic. I don't like capitalism andI don't like socialism, which is the child of capitalism" (ArthurSheehan, Peter Maurin, Hanover House, p. 191).

Superstition of the "Invisible Hand

Since Adam Smith, the proponents of wealth creation have promised heavenon earth if their ideas were followed: Just believe religiously in the marketand allow it absolute freedom, then salvation will come. It is hard to imaginea heaven where one's creativity and destiny are squandered working on anassembly line or at MacDonald's.

Pope Pius XII went so far as to call the idea that the invisible handof the market will on its own rather like fate control the world, a "superstition.(Dorothy Day, "Distributism vs. Capitalism," Catholic Worker,October 1954).

Adam Smith vs. Centesimus Annus

The Catholic tradition has always taught the importance of working towardthe common good. Adam Smith, in opposition to this teaching, advocated self-interestas the motivation for one's life. He added the adjective, "enlightened,"to the phrase, (whatever that means). Unfortunately, economic developmentswhich today take place on the global level in the name of Adam Smith's philosophyhave excluded any idea of "enlightened." Peter Maurin, by contrast,"talked about Christ's technique, of working from the bottom and withthe few, of self-discipline and self-organization, of sacrifice rather thanenlightened self-interest…." (LL, p. 221).

Some neoconservatives have claimed that with the fall of communism/statesocialism, the capitalism of the global market is the only choice left.They apparently neglected to read #35, where the Holy Father writes thatthere are not just two alternatives: "We have seen that it is unacceptableto say that the defeat of so-called "Real Socialism" leaves capitalismas the only model of economic organization. It is necessary to break downthe barriers and monopolies which leave so many countries on the marginsof development, and to provide all individuals and nations with the basicconditions which will enable them to share in development."

Even Elephants Need Parents

It is impossible for most families to survive or to maintain their lifestylewithout two salaries in today's economy.

The authors recently saw a special program on public television aboutelephants and rhinos. The adult, parent elephants had all been taken awayfrom the group because of overpopulation. Only "child" elephantsremained. They grew up without role models.

When later these young, now "teenage" elephants went on arampage, killing twenty per cent of the neighboring rhinos (a bizarre behaviorfor elephants), the problem could only be solved by bringing in adult elephantsto live with the young ones.

Many children in 1999 do not have a parent at home to guide them, either,and many parents have little time to devote to sharing their wisdom.

What about the Children?

As Daniel Krotz says it, "to suggest that the economic system hasan impact on the culture brings out the "Capitalist as Victim"strategy: it's not the fault of the capitalist system that families arefalling apart, that small children are warehoused for 8 or more hours aday, or that the majority of high school students can't locate their statecapitals on a map: 'Hey, it's not my fault! It's the culture.'

As E. F. Schumacher said over 30 years ago, 'What is at stake is noteconomics but culture, not the standard of living, but the quality of life"(Small is Beautiful, p. 278).

Consumerism

Wendell Berry reminds us that we have the right to what we need andno more, and that that is why usury is outlawed in the Old Testament. Largeaccumulations of wealth and real estate are forbidden in the twenty-fifthchapter of Leviticus. Berry also reminds us that "The world is beingdestroyed, no doubt about it, by the greed of the rich and powerful. Itis also being destroyed by popular demand." (Sex, Economy, Freedomand Community, p. 96, 32).

For all practical purposes we have in place again atheistic materialism,even though lip-service may be paid to God and other concerns.

The acquisition of wealth and material things has become the highestgoal in the world, a world in which economics takes priority over all else.Economics is actually all that exists.

Dorothy Day objected strongly to the totally materialistic life styledominating our culture. She talked about the need for a revolution-a revolutionof the heart-to break away from the grip of materialism that tries to overthrowus and our values and take possession of our souls. She said: "We areall guilty of concupiscence (desires of the flesh), but newspapers, radio,TV and the battalion of advertising people (Woe to that generation!) deliberatelystimulate our desires."

For her, to tempt people constantly and to barrage them with advertisementis immoral and unethical. One of the greatest sins, she says, is "toinstill in the heart of the worker paltry desire, so compulsive that heor she is willing to sell liberty and honor to satisfy them."

Wendell Berry outlines the clear connection between the commandmentagainst adultery and advertisement:

"To make sex the preferred bait of commerce may seem merely theobvious thing to do, once greed is granted its now conventional priorityas a motive… Television is the greatest disrespecter and exploiterof sexuality that the world has ever seen; even if the network executivesdecide to promote" safe sex" and the use of condoms, they willnot cease to pimp for the exceedingly profitable "sexual revolution."(p. 124, 133).

Even our wars (as Dorothy Day pointed out years ago) have to do withpromoting our economics and consumer life styles and acquiring land richin resources (e.g., oil).

JPII Asks us to Change our Lifestyles

Pope John Paul II challenged us all to change our very lives when hewrote in Centesimus Annus: "Love for others, and in the first placelove for the poor, in whom the Church sees Christ himself, is made concretein the promotion of justice… It is not merely a matter of 'giving fromone's surplus,' but of helping entire peoples which are presently excludedor marginalized to enter into the sphere of economic and human development.For this to happen, it is not enough to draw on the surplus goods whichin fact our world abundantly produces, it requires above all a change oflife-styles, of models of production and consumption, and of the establishedstructures of power which today govern society" (#58).

Present-day Examples

Dorothy Day explained that while distributism had an agrarian emphasis,that "does not mean that everyone must be a farmer" (CatholicWorker, July-Aug. 1948).

The most famous example of worker-ownership and management in a successfulbusiness which is not agrarian is that of Mondragon in the Basque countryin Spain.

Mondragon

The inspiration for the Mondragon business(es) came from Don JoséMarķa Arizmendiarietta, a priest who put the personalist philosophyinto practice. Don José Marķa never actually directed or workedat Mondragon, but encouraged and advised those who did so.

In a recent book, Fr. Greg MacLeod wrote about the success of Mondragonand how it "flies in the face of the Hobbes-Smith tradition which holdsthat the 'rational' economic person acts out of pure self-interest"(Greg MacLeod, From Mondragon to America: Experiments in Community EconomicDevelopment, Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada: Univ. College of Cape BretonPr., 1997, p. 14).

The Mondragon business complex was set up in 1956 when five young engineers,inspired by the ideas of Don José Marķa, set up a small enterpriseto produce oil stoves. MacLeod's description of these early years is fascinating:"With the help of their former teacher and pastor, they borrowed somemoney and went into production following principles of democratic decisionmaking, profit sharing and community responsibility…. This enterprisebecame successful in a very short time. When they needed further capitalfor expansion they formed a bank following the same principles of cooperativeownership. As each enterprise became successful and grew, it divided andsub-divided to create a complex of inter-related worker-owned enterprisesthat is still growing" (From Mondragon, p. 19-20).

The vision of Mondragon is different at its foundation than most businesses.While Don José Marķa "promoted the technical formationof workers and the introduction of world-class technology in order to survivein the competitive world," he never lost sight of the priority of theworker as a human person (p. 88). The principle of solidarity is key atMondragon, requiring members to share in good times and bad, and to worktoward the common good of the whole society. Don José Marķabelieved that sale price could not be merely a question of commercial circumstances,but must take into account the common good. He also insisted that the roleof industrial corporations, remaining subordinated to the common good, beingsocially responsible, must not be political. As MacLeod says, "He sawthe danger that the corporation could become totalitarian, and try to controlall aspects of life." (From Mondragon, p. 89-90)

Distributism in Houston

Casa Juan Diego receives immigrants and refugees every day who havebeen unable to survive in their countries in this "free" globalmarket. Many risk all to have one person work in another country so thefamily can survive and children can go to school. The 1987 Immigration Law,which provided amnesty for some immigrants, introduced penalties-large fines-foremployers who hire the undocumented, but made a special provision for cooperatives.A cooperative hiring hall is in full operation at Casa Juan Diego, whereundocumented men are able to work legally through this special provision.The City of Houston pays the salaries of two men to work at the Centro SanJose Obrero.

Christ the Good Shepherd parish has a farm where vegetables are grownto help Casa Juan Diego CW. Andy Wright has a garden at Casa Juan Diegoand also raises chickens.

Recommendations

Race Mathews of Australia, in his G. K. Chesterton Memorial Lectureon May 27, 1999, made several recommendations on the implementation of theprinciples of distributism today:

1. Measures are needed to insure that small businesses are not crushedby larger ones, outlawing predatory pricing and other anti-competitive practicesas well as unfair retail leases in large shopping complexes

2. Acknowledgment by government that agribusiness and smallholder farming-theauthentic family farm--differ radically from one another and accordinglyhave different requirements in terms of public policy.

3. Every worker should own a share in the assets and control of the businessin which he works. This can be implemented through ESOP's, mutualism andcooperatives which should reinvent themselves for new needs.

Our Hope is in Grace and Conversion of Heart

Dorothy described Peter's vision: "Peter rejoiced to see men dogreat things and dream great dreams. He wanted them to stretch out theirarms to their brothers, because he knew that the surest way to find God,to find the good, was through one's brothers. Peter wanted this strivingto result in a better physical life in which all men would be able to fulfillthemselves, develop their capacities for love and worship, expressed inall the arts. He wanted them to be able to produce what was needed in theway of homes, food, clothing, so that there was enough of these necessitiesfor everyone.

"It was hard for me to understand what he meant, thinking as Ialways had in terms of cities and immediate need of men for their weeklypay check. Now I can see clearly what he was talking about, but I am facedwith the problem of making others see it. I can well recognize the factthat people remaining as they are, Peter's program is impossible. But itwould become actual, given a people changed in heart and mind, so that theywould observe the new commandment of love, or desired to" (LL,p. 171).

Rebuilding the social order, renewing the face of the earth, cannotbe done by human efforts alone. Dorothy often said that, "All is grace."

Centesimus Annus ends with the same theme: "…in orderthat the demands of justice may be met, and attempts to achieve this goalmay succeed, what is needed is the gift of grace, a gift which comes fromGod. Grace, in cooperation with human freedom, constitutes that mysteriouspresence of God in history which is Providence" (#59).

But after these beautiful lines, John Paul II addresses again the factthat too many people live, "not in the prosperity of the Western world,but in the poverty of the developing countries amid conditions which arestill 'a yoke little better than that of slavery itself' and challengesall of us to work to create a more just social order.

(Houston Catholic Worker, Sept.-Oct. 1999)