Why does the Pope criticize the "high salaries" of some managers?

The exorbitant salaries of managers and elite athletes have been a recurring theme in public debate. The recent declarations of Pope Leo XIV, in his first official interview, reactivate interest in this issue.

Asked about the polarization in our societies, Leo XIV stated: "I consider the growing gap between the income levels of the working class and the money received by the richest to be very significant. For example, CEOs who 60 years ago might have earned four to six times more than what workers receive, the latest figure I saw is 600 times more than what the average worker receives. Yesterday it came out that Elon Musk will be the world's first billionaire - what does that mean and what's it all about? If that's the only thing that still has value, then we're in serious trouble....".  

Leo XIV does not make an explicit condemnation of capitalism or liberalism, but he does underline how gigantic inequalities are problematic. It does not seem that the Pope intends to criticize personal success, but he does question the values that society prioritizes.

Why is the Church meddling in the salary debate?

The Catholic Church has a say on disproportionate wages not because of an intrusion into purely economic matters, but as a matter of moral principle. The Social Doctrine of the Church holds that capitalism and liberalism cannot be systems without limits. One of the fundamental principles of this doctrine is the universal destination of human goods.

This principle, which goes back to the Fathers of the Church, states that the earth and its resources are meant to be used by all humanity. Therefore, as long as a large number of human beings are in serious material need, the excessive accumulation of wealth by others is problematic.

Although the Church recognizes and defends the right to private property as a means of guaranteeing autonomy and personal development, this right is not absolute. In a world where inequality has skyrocketed, the Church considers the excessive accumulation of wealth by a minority to be contrary to the universal destination of goods.

Global inequality: data that validate the criticism

The Church's criticism is supported by data showing growing economic inequality. As the reports of numerous organizations unanimously point out (UNESCO, OSXFAM, Credit Suisse), the world's richest 1% possess an amount of wealth that exceeds that of the majority of the world's population. For example, the richest 10% of the world's population hold 76% of the total wealth, while the poorest 50% hold only 2% of the global wealth.

This disparity is not just a statistical problem, but a moral injustice that has serious social and civic consequences. The problem with our economic system is not that it allows people to be very rich, but that this happens while millions of people struggle to access the basics of a dignified life. The Church does not seek the abolition of private property or economic equality among all human beings, but an economy that provides a minimum of material dignity for all people.

The echo of Michael Sandel's critique

The Pope's words resonate with the ideas of the American philosopher Michael Sandel, Princess of Asturias Award winner and famous former Harvard professor, who has been one of the most famous critics of wage inequality. If the only indicator of value is the accumulation of wealth, the importance of solidarity and the common good is dismissed. By decoupling the value of work from its real contribution to society, it erodes the dignity of those jobs that, although essential, are poorly paid.

Sandel argues that the idea that success is based solely on individual effort is a fallacy. Luck, social environment and circumstances of birth play a crucial role, yet meritocratic society tends to ignore these factors. The data show that the social elevator does not work and, therefore, one is not as responsible for one's success (or failure) as the American dream would have us believe. 

For Sandel, the astronomical salaries of managers and athletes are the product of a society that confuses market value with moral value. This distinction is crucial: an investment fund manager may generate a fortune, but is his or her contribution really more valuable to society than that of a teacher or a nurse? Sandel's critique, like that which the Pope seems to make in his statements, does not seek to nullify success, but to redefine what should be valued by society.

In a world where inequality is growing and social polarization is increasing, Leo XIV's words invite a review of our values. By questioning wage disproportionality, Leo XIV raises the debate about what society we are building and who is really being rewarded.