For example (29) may not be the articulation of “just war” teaching we would have wished for, but in German it stridently “chides” in unambiguous language:
“Gier” is strongly negative – in the sense of coveting with a rapacious voracity for Herrschaft (subordination, oppression) and Reichtum (oppulent affluence) while _desire_ is at best ‘neutral’ with regards to _domination_ and _wealth_ (for dominating evil could be seen as virtuous conduct, and sustaining a common’wealth’ a good thing, right, the neocon mind could turn this argument on the immorality of conflict on its head and make a case for ‘just war’ in almost any circumstance?)

Terms one might use to describe a car accident _grief_; _destruction_ and _death_ are all weaker than the dramatic nouns written with capital letters in German:
‘Leid’ = suffering, harm, affliction
“Verwuestung’ = havoc, depradation, devastation, desolation
‘Tod’ = killing

Indeed lingo worthy of a traffic cop is also applied to conflicts in foreign affairs:
_diverts_ for “abzieht” (a much more violently active, as in ripping a sticking plaster off)
_resources_ for “Geldmittel” (a candid referral to real personal funds accrued in taxes or reparation fees or — as in the case of US Fed funding for the permanent warfare state we find ourselves in — FIAT paper)

The Pope seems to be saying that the West has lost any moral authority to wage a ‘just war’ as the “State promotes, teaches or actually imposes forms of practical atheism . . it deprives its citizens . . and impedes them from moving forward with renewed dynamism as they strive to offer a ore generous human response to divine love”
concluding with this rather dire warning to those encirced by hubris:
“Das ist das Schaden den die “Ueberentwicklung” der echten Entwicklung anfuegt wenn sie von der >>moralischen Unterentwicklung<< begleitet ist.”
which I may humbly colloquialize so:
Such is the harm that ‘Superman’ing associates with real development once it is accompanied by >>moral immaturity<<
where ‘ueber’ from an earthbound perspective echoes Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophical ideas about the “Übermensch” (“Superman”) he who would be God himself…

Transferring the social teaching “IN OUR TIME” would almost seem to imply that the world has turned on its head from 40 years ago, when the Vatican could trust the good guys to set the bad guys straight, now (28) we good guys export the bad stuff (abortion, 28 food insecurity, 27) like corruption (22) and bloc hegemony (23, where the third world was rid of the hegemony of Soviet blocs but ceded it to China, given a “pass” to exploit the African, Indian and South American continents in the name of “commercial progress”) culminating in our current global “crisis” (used 19 times in total, at least half a dozen times in this chapter alone) where the State (24) is limited in its sovereignty by international trade and finance, changing the context of the public authorities political power.

Chapter 2 would indicate we’re all adrift at see, on an odyssey confronting our sirens, seeking answers to challenges of metaphysical magnitude (30) requiring a commitment to foster the interaction of different levels of human knowledge (post-modernity’s polycentrisms — yet another weak translation, where the clarity of “polyzentrisch” (22) becomes obscured in _overlapping layers_) as “progress of a merely economic and technological kind is insufficient” (23) since the “primary capital to be safeguarded is man, the human person in his or her integrity” (25) and our re-exposure to jeopardy from serfdom (26, “run risks of enslavement” the poorly articulated conclusion lacking the heft of the original “Horigkeit” the kind of term one would use to describe the expected submission of a Nazi call to attention “ACHTUNG! ACHTUNG!” )

Yet the concluding paras 30 thru 33 indicate that the “social doctrine” plant still has roots and we can yet direct its growth towards the light to bear fruit, in due season: seasoned by the salt of charity (love of neighbor) which animates our thirst for knowledge (belaboring the “salt of the earth” metaphor, I know, and yet biblical chastisement has been know to involve “salting the earth” of ones foes, so there is a fine line to tread, where the tyranny of good intentions must be calibrated against the divine endowment of liberty to each and every man, lest we reap what we sow. The sense I get of the thrust of this chapter is that the human condition is a more deeply entangled one than 40 years ago and we must entertain a more comprehensive comprehension of perspective before arriving at policy prescriptions (continuing in the vein of fuzzy logic (31) _lack of thinking capable of formulating a guiding synthesis_ cut to the quick in German as “an einem Denken fehlt, das imstande ist, eine richtungsweisenende Synthese aufzustellen” (colloquilized as “deficient in an intelligence capable of constructing a synthesis that points the way forward”) in the spirit of John Henry Newman

“. . . The human mind … may be regarded from two principal points of view, as intellectual and as moral. … The perfection of the intellect is called ability and talent; the perfection of our moral nature is virtue. And it is our great misfortune here, and our trial, that, as things are found in the world, the two are separated, and independent of each other; that, where power of intellect is, there need not be virtue; and that where right, and goodness, and moral greatness are, there need not be talent.”

From the sermon ‘Intellect, the Instrument of Religious Training ‘ (1856) here
http://www.newmancause.co.uk/thought/thought-for-the-day-27-july-2009.html

Insufficient (or plain incompetent) intellect is the problem —
so how may we yield a greater harvest for the Commonwealth of Man?
Sow wisdom and water with Grace. Speak as logically as the Logos, and act as lovingly as the Imago dei.

(*) prescind: to separate or divide in thought; consider individually.
in the sense of “to be prescient”, to “foresee”, “predict”, “determine by calcule” or “dictate” as in the “dictatorship of relativism”
but in the German rendered, “absehen von” means
to disregard, neglect, overlook, repudiate, disown
colloquialized for (21) as “increasingly impact the autonomy of the human person himself, who for that matter cannot disregard/neglect/disown his own nature” or for (30) as “to drive progress further must never mean to disregard/neglect/overlook/disown/repudiate rational conclusions or to contradict their outcomes”

Perhaps the Holy Father thinks that Catholic teachings on warfare (whether military or economic) are so clear that a specific encyclical on these matters is not needed. IMHO, it is badly needed.