actions? If the principal theme of the matrimonial institution is consent to
an indissoluble union, and to a one-flesh act of unity open to new life, he
would investigate the question of the nature of the human body and how it
can be a gift to be given and received. If the main interest of economics is
production and distribution of goods, hefirst wanted to understand the
problem of how work can be fully human, as something more than toil
directed to external results.
In effect, John Paul took the social-institutional questions back to the
prologue ofsecunda pars, which is to say back to the premise: the image
bearer as capable of efficacious rule in being provident for himself and for
others. It would be another thirteen years until he crafted an encyclical on
political authority, and this of course wasCentesimus annus, issued in 1991 on
the centennial anniversary ofRerum novarum.^17
Here, I can only make a gesture in the direction of this theme of the image
bearer who is summoned to the dignity and virtue of sharing in the divine
government both for himself and for others. InRedemptor hominis(1979), he
proposes to discern thesigna temporis. The most important signs, he con-
tended, are not the external works of modern man—the organization of the
state, science, and technology—but man inflight from himself, in fear of
the very works of his own dominion.‘This gives rise to a question. Why is it that
the power given to man from the beginning by which he was to subdue the
earth turns against himself?’^18 John Paul set out to answer the question,first,
in Genesis, and then in the light of Christ, the new Adam, who is the image of
the invisible God and who not only reveals the Father to man, but also man to
himself. If‘participation’signifies what God and man can do together, the
incarnate and resurrected Christ is the epitome.
InDives in misericordia(1980), John Paul discusses God’s rule made visible
in the creature. Once again, he studied the question by going back to Genesis
to see how human dominion makes visible the rule of the Father; and then to
the Gospels to expound the relationship between justice and mercy in divine
(^17) This orientation towards theological anthropology was already evident in his decision, after
becoming pope, to retain the coat of arms he had borne as Archbishop of Krakow. Msgr Jacques
Martin, the Prefect of the papal household in 1978, several years later reported that John Paul
was pressured to adopt a conventional coat of arms. Critics apparently objected to the papal
blazon. Completely missing are the typical symbols of his predecessors: thefleur-de-lis, the
castles, the stars and shooting comets, the eagles—all representing princely and familial, in any
case, human symbols of authority to rule. In their place wefind a blue shield, with a slightly
off-centred gold Latin cross; and under this cross is the letter M, for Mary, who represents the
church at the foot of the cross. In answer to the questionQuid est homo, the armorial shield
answers,Ecce homo—Behold the Man. Jacques Martin,Heraldry in the Vatican(Gerrards Cross,
Buckinghamshire: Van Duren, 1987), 257ff. See Wojtyla’s 1976 Lenten conference on the third
sorrowful mystery:‘Here we have before us the Christ in truth of his kingship. Pilate says“Here is
the man”. Precisely.... Jesus came in order to reveal the kingliness of man.’Sign of Contradiction
IX.3 (New York: Seabury Press, 1979), 77.
(^18) Redemptor hominis§15.
Christian Humanism and the Crisis of Modern Times 247