Since the advent of Socialism, various Popes have addressed the topic of private property in their encyclicals. The primary encyclicals dealing with the topic are:
The Popes have varied in their stances on the principals of Communism, some demonstrating explicit hostility, others explicit favor. This article will focus on one such explicit contradiction - certainly in sentiment, but also even in the exact language used.
In 1891, Pope Leo XIII issued Rerum Novarum, which directly attacked the Communist view on private property.
In it, he says:
Pope Leo XIII - Rerum Novarum (1891 AD)
5 Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life.
6 What is of far greater moment, however, is the fact that the remedy they propose is manifestly against justice. For, every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own.
15 Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal. The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property. This being established, we proceed to show where the remedy sought for must be found.
The message is clearly anti-Communist. He rejects the socialization of private property, and defines respect for private property as the "first and most fundamental" way to alleviate the suffering of the masses. "By nature", every man has "the right to possess property as his own".
However, we see an altogether different viewpoint on this topic in Fratelli Tutti (2020 AD), issued by Pope Francis.
In it, we read:
Pope Francis - Fratelli Tutti (2020 AD)
120 Once more, I would like to echo a statement of Saint John Paul II whose forcefulness has perhaps been insufficiently recognized: "God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone". For my part, I would observe that "the Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable, and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property". The principle of the common use of created goods is the "first principle of the whole ethical and social order"; it is a natural and inherent right that takes priority over others.
All other rights having to do with the goods necessary for the integral fulfilment of persons, including that of private property or any other type of property, should – in the words of Saint Paul VI – “in no way hinder [this right], but should actively facilitate its implementation”. The right to private property can only be considered a secondary natural right, derived from the principle of the universal destination of created goods.
The sentiment of this encyclical is opposed to the sentiment expressed in Rerum Novarum. Pay special attention to the bolded part of each quotation. Pope Leo XIII says "The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property". Pope Francis says "For my part, I would observe that the Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable". This is a direct contradiction. Even if the words are massaged, the sentiments of the encyclicals, and clearly, the beliefs of the men writing them, are irreconcilably different. Pope Leo XIII would be, in modern terms, a Conservative. Pope Francis is a Liberal.
Pope Leo XIII also says that the inviolability of private property must be "The first and most fundamental principle", whereas Pope Francis says "The right to private property can only be considered a secondary natural right". This is yet another direct contradiction, reflecting two opposing worldviews.
This also must be recognized as a contradiction between two Popes on "a matter of faith and morals", because one's views on private property definitely affect what one considers to be "moral" actions with regard to dealing with their property, and other's property. The Popes infallibly contradict each other, because they are fallible human beings.
This is but one example of how having an Infallible Pontiff does not create clarity. They contradict each other, and the fact remains that, just as Protestants must interpret the Bible, Catholics must interpret what the Popes are saying. The difference is, with the non-inspired words of the Pope, there is no guarantee of consistency or coherence, as there is in the Word of God.