The Catholic Church has evolved in its understanding of the political life of people. While it is true that, from its origins, many aspects of the Gospel have had a social nature and a critical impact on various instances of power, it is necessary to recognize that an integrative view has emerged only gradually.
Thanks to the contributions of courageous men who have realized the importance of caring for both the afterlife of the soul and the dignified life of the person here on earth, the “Social Doctrine of the Church” has emerged and has entered into the social debate of the contemporary world.
I immediately think of Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Francisco de Vitoria, Wilhelm Emmanuel von Ketteler, or Albert de Mun. Without them, Leo XIII would never have published his Encyclical “Rerum Novarum” on the labor question in 1891.
Within the broad thematic spectrum of this social doctrine, it is worth recognizing that the division between executive, legislative and judicial powers has been appreciated by the Church since the 19th century, in order to avoid the authoritarian concentration of power.
Among the various texts that should be reviewed in this regard, I like to recall one, written by St. John Paul II: Leo XIII was not unaware that a sound theory of the State was necessary to ensure the normal development of human activities: spiritual and material, both of which are indispensable.
For this reason, in a passage of Rerum Novarum the Pope presents the organization of society structured into three powers – legislative, executive and judicial – which was then a novelty in the teachings of the Church.
Such an order reflects a realistic vision of the social nature of man, which demands adequate legislation to protect the freedom of all. In this regard, it is preferable that one power be balanced by other powers and other spheres of competence, which keep it within its proper limits.
This is the principle of the “rule of law,” in which the law and not the arbitrary will of men is sovereign. This conception has been opposed in modern times by totalitarianism… (Centesimus annus, n. 44).
Indeed, the main reason for the “division of powers” is to prevent power from being concentrated in a single authority. Secondly, by having an authentic separation of powers, there are mechanisms to correct errors or abuses, which reinforces the protection of fundamental rights.
Thirdly, thanks to the division of powers, each branch of the State has the capacity to control or supervise the others, which creates a system of mutual surveillance. Fourthly, the division of powers encourages pluralism and the inclusion of different points of view in decision-making.
And finally, by maintaining a system of checks and balances, greater political stability is ensured, preventing a single group from being able to impose its will without limits. In short, the division of powers is crucial to guarantee a democratic State of Law, because it preserves the balance between institutions, protects the rights of individuals and ensures that power is not exercised in an arbitrary or abusive manner.
Of course, all this requires that each power preserve its specific nature and ensure its independence. This is the way to ensure that single thought is not imposed and the legitimate plurality of our societies is authentically protected.
