Subsidiarity, Participation, and the Common Good
Mr. Joe Cady
Maria Montessori, the Italian physician and educator responsible for developing the method of instruction that bears her name, once said, “Any unnecessary assistance is a hindrance to development.” While she was speaking primarily within an educational framework, I think the statement rings true within a much broader context. Consider, for example, the process of raising children. As a parent, I (along with my wife) have the responsibility of being the direct agent of care for my children in their early stages of development: feeding them, getting them dressed, brushing their teeth, etc. However, if this assistance were to continue into their teenage years, not only would such help be unnecessary, it would in fact be counter-effective in their growth into responsible, independent adults (not to mention likely hinder any chances of ever attracting a future spouse). The forms of help and support that I provide for my children, which are indeed important and necessary at times, should have as their end their growth and development into adults, thus enabling them to eventually fulfill their responsibilities to themselves and others on their own. To unnecessarily interfere at every stage and do for them what they could do for themselves would both arrest their development and violate their dignity as unique and responsible members of society.
There are, of course, times and circumstances when it is not only acceptable but obligatory that I step in as a parent to aid and support my children, even once they reach adulthood — consider, for example, times of illness or the loss of employment which may require my help. Such activity, however, is never intended to absorb the responsibilities of my children, but rather to temporarily support and empower them to achieve, or return to, a state of free, responsible activity. This posture of parents toward their children, while not perfectly analogous to life in civil society, in many ways reflects the relationship that ought to exist between the various institutions of social life. The guiding principle in play here is called subsidiarity.
Derived from the Latin – subsidum – subsidiarity is essentially concerned with help, aid, and support. In fact, one embodiment of the term relates to troops held in reserve, ready to step in and support soldiers engaged on the front lines and supplement their efforts. Applying this notion of help and support to the various social bodies found in civil society, the principle of subsidiarity requires that organizations of a higher order (such as the State) assume a posture of support in relation to lower/smaller organizations. The purpose of these higher organizations is to stand in reserve, so to speak, in relation to the smaller bodies of society, ready to supplement and aid the smaller bodies when circumstances require them to do so.
The principle of subsidiarity requires that organizations of a higher order (such as the State) assume a posture of support in relation to lower/smaller organizations.
While the principle of subsidiarity (in its negative aspect) maintains that nothing should be done to hinder the freedom, initiative, and responsibility of a lower institution, such an aim is not ultimately concerned with maintaining freedom for freedom’s sake. 
There is a necessary connection between subsidiarity and participation in the life of society. The freedom safeguarded by the principle of subsidiarity is meant to provide opportunities for individuals, families, and intermediate groups to make unique and constructive contributions to the larger community. This call to participation by the various members and sectors of society has as its aim nothing other than the common good, which is understood as the conditions of society that are most conducive to human flourishing and fulfillment.
It is with a view to the common good that the positive aspect of subsidiarity finds its truest form and deepest purpose. The exercise of public authority should always be ordered to the dignity of the human person and the common good of society, and so should foster greater engagement and participation in the social order on the part of its individual members. Thus, the ability of the various organizations and institutions of society to participate in and contribute to the common good should always be the primary criteria for decisions concerning how the principle of subsidiarity ought to be applied.
The exercise of public authority should always be ordered to the dignity of the human person and the common good of society....
I was first exposed to the principle of subsidiarity through my study of Catholic social thought as articulated in what is formally known as the Social Doctrine of the Church, a collection of papal teachings on Christian engagement in the life of society beginning with Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum in 1891 and continuing to the current writings of Pope Francis. It was Pope Pius XI who first introduced subsidiarity as an official teaching through his publication of Quadragesimo Anno in 1931. Writing within a post-depression and post-World War I context, Pius XI was faced with a social environment in need of balance and stability. 
The primary aim of Quadragesimo Anno was to guide humanity toward the construction of a social order built upon “the principles of sound philosophy and the sublime precepts of the Gospel.” Pius XI was especially concerned with the increasingly centralized form of authority and decision making taking shape in some areas of Europe, embodied uniquely in the movements of fascism and communism. While acknowledging that changes in modern society required the State to assume some tasks previously accomplished by smaller social bodies, Pius XI insisted that the exercise of authority must always be guided by the principle of subsidiarity.
In our present day it can often be difficult to apply subsidiarity in concrete situations, but, given our current political and social environment, it is more important than ever that we strive to do so. It is not always clear what higher institutions ought to do and not do in relation to smaller bodies, but history and experience have shown that decisions are often most effectively made by those closest to the situation. In most cases, vision diminishes and the potential for error increases with distance. Returning to my initial example — as their parents, my wife and I have privileged access to and knowledge of our children, which makes us best suited to decide what is best for them regarding their education (as compared, for example, to their grandparents who live out of state). Likewise, a teacher in a classroom is in a better position than the administrators at the district office to make decisions on how to run the day to day activities of her classroom. Of course, this does not mean that the ideas and directives of those beyond the local level are to be dismissed out of hand, or that they are necessarily flawed. It simply means that their distance from the situation may result in an inadequate assessment of the needs and challenges present, and so lead to a less effective response.
We are faced today with numerous challenges that require the creative response and engagement of the individual members and institutions of society. Effective solutions to social problems require participation from every sector of society: individuals and families, local religious and community organizations, small businesses and large corporations, and local and federal governments. It is only when each of these sectors of society is engaged in a collaborative response that the common good of society will be achieved, or at least approximated. The purpose of this brief article is not to provide a blueprint of how to respond to every particular issue; that would require far more space and the collaboration of those working directly with the issues at hand. Rather, I have the modest aim of placing our current social situation in dialogue with the important principle of subsidiarity, which seeks to guide the interaction of the various institutions of society in a way that promotes human freedom and dignity, fosters participation in civil society, and serves the common good.
