Catholic Faith
Legion of Mary
Sollicitudo rei socialis
To the Bishops, Priests
Religious Families, sons and daughters of the Church
and all people of good will
for the twentieth anniversary of
"Populorum Progressio"
1987.12.30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blessing
Venerable Brothers and dear Sons and Daughters,
Health and the Apostolic Blessing!
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The social concern of the Church, directed towards an authentic
development of man and society which would respect and promote all the
dimensions of the human person, has always expressed itself in the most
varied ways. In recent years, one of the special means of intervention
has been the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs which, beginning with
the Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII as a point of reference,1 has
frequently dealt with the question and has sometimes made the dates of
publication of the various social documents coincide with the
anniversaries of that first document.2
The Popes have not failed to throw fresh light by means of those
messages upon new aspects of the social doctrine of the Church. As a
result, this doctrine, beginning with the outstanding contribution of
Leo XIII and enriched by the successive contributions of the
Magisterium, has now become an updated doctrinal "corpus." It builds up
gradually, as the Church, in the fullness of the word revealed by
Christ Jesus3 and with the assistance of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 14:16,
26; 16:13-15), reads events as they unfold in the course of history.
She thus seeks to lead people to respond, with the support also of
rational reflection and of the human sciences, to their vocation as
responsible builders of earthly society.
2. Part of this large body of social teaching is the distinguished
Encyclical Populorum Progressio,4 which my esteemed predecessor Paul VI
published on March 26, 1967.
The enduring relevance of this Encyclical is easily recognized if we
note the series of commemorations which took place during 1987 in
various forms and in many parts of the ecclesiastical and civil world.
For this same purpose, the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax sent a
circular letter to the Synods of the Oriental Catholic Churches and to
the Episcopal Conferences, asking for ideas and suggestions on the best
way to celebrate the Encyclical's anniversary, to enrich its teachings
and, if need be, to update them. At the time of the twentieth
anniversary, the same Commission organized a solemn commemoration in
which I myself took part and gave the concluding address.5 And now,
also taking into account the replies to the above-mentioned circular
letter, I consider it appropriate, at the close of the year 1987, to
devote an Encyclical to the theme of Populorum Progressio.
3. In this way I wish principally to achieve two objectives of no
little importance: on the one hand, to pay homage to this historic
document of Paul VI and to its teaching; on the other hand, following
in the footsteps of my esteemed predecessors in the See of Peter, to
reaffirm the continuity of the social doctrine as well as its constant
renewal. In effect, continuity and renewal are a proof of the perennial
value of the teaching of the Church.
This twofold dimension is typical of her teaching in the social sphere.
On the one hand it is constant, for it remains identical in its
fundamental inspiration, in its "principles of reflection," in its
"criteria of judgment," in its basic "directives for action,"6 and
above all in its vital link with the Gospel of the Lord. On the other
hand, it is ever new, because it is subject to the necessary and
opportune adaptations suggested by the changes in historical conditions
and by the unceasing flow of the events which are the setting of the
life of people and society.
4. I am convinced that the teachings of the Encyclical Populorum
Progressio, addressed to the people and the society of the '60s, retain
all their force as an appeal to conscience today in the last part of
the '80s, in an effort to trace the major lines of the present world
always within the context of the aim and inspiration of the
"development of peoples," which are still very far from being
exhausted. I therefore propose to extend the impact of that message by
bringing it to bear, with its possible applications, upon the present
historical moment, which is no less dramatic than that of twenty years
ago.
As we well know, time maintains a constant and unchanging rhythm. Today
however we have the impression that it is passing ever more quickly,
especially by reason of the multiplication and complexity of the
phenomena in the midst of which we live. Consequently, the
configuration of the world in the course of the last twenty years,
while preserving certain fundamental constants, has undergone notable
changes and presents some totally new aspects.
The present period of time, on the eve of the third Christian
millennium, is characterized by a widespread expectancy, rather like a
new "Advent,"7 which to some extent touches everyone. It offers an
opportunity to study the teachings of the Encyclical in greater detail
and to see their possible future developments.
The aim of the present reflection is to emphasize, through a
theological investigation of the present world, the need for a fuller
and more nuanced concept of development, according to the suggestions
contained in the Encyclical. Its aim is also to indicate some ways of
putting it into effect.
II. ORIGINALITY OF THE ENCYCLICAL POPULORUM PROGRESSIO
5. As soon as it appeared, the document of Pope Paul VI captured the
attention of public opinion by reason of its originality. In a concrete
manner and with great clarity, it was possible to identify the above
mentioned characteristics of continuity and renewal within the Church's
social doctrine. The intention of rediscovering numerous aspects of
this teaching, through a careful rereading of the Encyclical, will
therefore; constitute the main thread of the present reflections.
But first I wish to say a few words about the date of publication; the
year 1967. The very fact that Pope Paul VI chose to publish a social
Encyclical in that year invites us to consider the document in
relationship to the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, which had ended
on December 8, 1965.
6. We should see something more in this than simple chronological
proximity. The Encyclical Populorum Progressio presents itself, in a
certain way, as a document which applies the teachings of the Council.
It not only makes continual reference to the texts of the Council,8 but
it also flows from the same concern of the Church which inspired the
whole effort of the Council-and in a particular way the Pastoral
Constitution Gaudium et Spes - to coordinate and develop a number of
themes of her social teaching.
We can therefore affirm that the Encyclical Populorum Progressio is a
kind of response to the Council's appeal with which the Constitution
Gaudium et Spes begins: "The joys and the hopes. the griefs and the
anxieties of the people of this age, especially those who are poor or
in any way afflicted, these too are the joys and hopes, the griefs and
anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human
fails to raise an echo in their hearts."9 These words express the
fundamental motive inspiring the great document of the Council, which
begins by noting the situation of poverty and of underdevelopment in
which millions of human beings live.
This poverty and underdevelopment are, under another name, the "griefs
and the anxieties" of today, of "especially those who are poor." Before
this vast panorama of pain and suffering, the Council wished to suggest
horizons of joy and hope. The Encyclical of Paul VI has the same
purpose, in full fidelity to the inspiration of the Council.
7. There is also the theme of the Encyclical which, in keeping with the
great tradition of the Church's social teaching, takes up again in a
direct manner the new exposition and rich synthesis which the Council
produced, notably in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.
With regard to the content and themes once again set forth by the
Encyclical, the following should be emphasized: the awareness of the
duty of the Church, as "an expert in humanity," "to scrutinize the
signs of the times and to interpret them in the light of the Gospel"10;
the awareness, equally profound, of her mission of "service," a mission
distinct from the function of the State, even when she is concerned
with people's concrete situation"11; the reference to the notorious
inequalities in the situations of those same people12; the confirmation
of the Council's teaching, a faithful echo of the centuries - old
tradition of the Church regarding the "universal purpose of goods"13;
the appreciation of the culture and the technological civilization
which contribute to human liberation,14 without failing to recognize
their limits's15; finally, on the specific theme of development, which
is precisely the theme of the Encyclical, the insistence on the "most
serious duty" incumbent on the more developed nations "to help the
developing countries."16 The same idea of development proposed by the
Encyclical flows directly from the approach which the Pastoral
Constitution takes to this problem.17
These and other explicit references to the Pastoral Constitution lead
one to conclude that the Encyclical presents itself as an application
of the Council's teaching in social matters to the specific problem of
the development and the underdevelopment of peoples.
8. This brief analysis helps us to appreciate better the originality of the Encyclical, which can be stated in three points.
The first is constituted by the very fact of a document, issued by the
highest authority of the Catholic Church and addressed both to the
Church herself and "to all people of good will,"18 on a matter which at
first sight is solely economic and social: the development of peoples.
The term "development" is taken from the vocabulary of the social and
economic sciences. From this point of view, the Encyclical Populorum
Progressio follows directly in the line of the Encyclical Rerum
Novarum, which deals with the "condition of the workers."19 Considered
superficially, both themes could seem extraneous to the legitimate
concern of the Church seen as a religious institution - and
"development" even more so than the "condition of the workers."
In continuity with the Encyclical of Leo XIII, it must be recognized
that the document of Paul VI possesses the merit of having emphasized
the ethical and cultural character of the problems connected with
development, and likewise the legitimacy and necessity of the Church's
intervention in this field.
In addition, the social doctrine of the Church has once more
demonstrated its character as an application of the word of God to
people's lives and the life of society, as well as to the earthly
realities connected with them, offering "principles for reflection,"
"criteria of judgment" and "directives for action."20 Here, in the
document of Paul VI, one finds these three elements with a prevalently
practical orientation, that is, directed towards moral conduct.
In consequence, when the Church concerns herself with the "development
of peoples," she cannot be accused of going outside her own specific
field of competence and, still less, outside the mandate received from
the Lord.
9. The second point of originality of Populorum Progressio is shown by
the breadth of outlook open to what is commonly called the "social
question."
In fact, the Encyclical Mater et Magistra of Pope John XXIII had
already entered into this wider outlook,21 and the Council had echoed
the same in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.22 However, the social
teaching of the Church had not yet reached the point of affirming with
such clarity that the social question has acquired a worldwide
dimension,23 nor had this affirmation and the accompanying analysis yet
been made into a "directive for action," as Paul VI did in his
Encyclical.
Such an explicit taking up of a position offers a great wealth of content, which it is appropriate to point out.
In the first place a possible misunderstanding has to be eliminated.
Recognition that the "social question" has assumed a worldwide
dimension does not at all mean that it has lost its incisiveness or its
national and local importance. On the contrary, it means that the
problems in industrial enterprises or in the workers' and union
movements of a particular country or region are not to be considered as
isolated cases with no connection. On the contrary they depend more and
more on the influence of factors beyond regional boundaries and
national frontiers.
Unfortunately, from the economic point of view, the developing
countries are much more numerous than the developed ones; the
multitudes of human beings who lack the goods and services offered by
development are much more numerous than those who possess them.
We are therefore faced with a serious problem of unequal distribution
of the means of subsistence originally meant for everybody, and thus
also an unequal distribution of the benefits deriving from them. And
this happens not through the fault of the needy people, and even less
through a sort of inevitability dependent on natural conditions or
circumstances as a whole.
The Encyclical of Paul VI, in declaring that the social question has
acquired worldwide dimensions, first of all points out a moral fact,
one which has its foundation in an objective analysis of reality. In
the words of the Encyclical itself, "each one must be conscious" of
this fact,24 precisely because it directly concerns the conscience,
which is the source of moral decisions.
In this framework, the originality of the Encyclical consists not so
much in the affirmation, historical in character, of the universality
of the social question, but rather in the moral evaluation of this
reality. Therefore political leaders, and citizens of rich countries
considered as individuals, especially if they are Christians, have the
moral obligation, according to the degree of each one's responsibility,
to take into consideration, in personal decisions and decisions of
government, this relationship of universality, this interdependence
which exists between their conduct and the poverty and underdevelopment
of so many millions of people. Pope Paul's Encyclical translates more
succinctly the moral obligation as the "duty of solidarity"25; and this
affirmation, even though many situations have changed in the world, has
the same force and validity today as when it was written.
On the other hand, without departing from the lines of this moral
vision, the originality of the Encyclical also consists in the basic
insight that the very concept of development, if considered in the
perspective of universal interdependence, changes notably. True
development cannot consist in the simple accumulation of wealth and in
the greater availability of goods and services, if this is gained at
the expense of the development of the masses, and without due
consideration for the social, cultural and spiritual dimensions of the
human being.26
10. As a third point, the Encyclical provides a very original
contribution to the social doctrine of the Church in its totality and
to the very concept of development. This originality is recognizable in
a phrase of the document's concluding paragraph, which can be
considered as its summary, as well as its historic label: "Development
is the new name for peace."27
In fact, if the social question has acquired a worldwide dimension,
this is because the demand for justice can only be satisfied on that
level. To ignore this demand could encourage the temptation among the
victims of injustice to respond with violence, as happens at the origin
of many wars. Peoples excluded from the fair distribution of the goods
originally destined for all could ask themselves: why not respond with
violence to those who first treat us with violence? And if the
situation is examined in the light of the division of the world into
ideological blocs a division already existing in 1967 - and in the
light of the subsequent economic and political repercussions and
dependencies, the danger is seen to be much greater.
The first consideration of the striking content of the Encyclical's
historic phrase may be supplemented by a second consideration to which
the document itself alludes28: how can one justify the fact that huge
sums of money, which could and should be used for increasing the
development of peoples, are instead utilized for the enrichment of
individuals or groups, or assigned to the increase of stockpiles of
weapons, both in developed countries and in the developing ones,
thereby upsetting the real priorities? This is even more serious given
the difficulties which often hinder the direct transfer of capital set
aside for helping needy countries. If "development is the new name for
peace," war and military preparations are the major enemy of the
integral development of peoples.
In the light of this expression of Pope Paul VI, we are thus invited to
re-examine the concept of development. This of course is not limited to
merely satisfying material necessities through an increase of goods,
while ignoring the sufferings of the many and making the selfishness of
individuals and nations the principal motivation. As the Letter of St.
James pointedly reminds us: "What causes wars, and what causes fighting
among you? Is it not your passions that are at war in your members? You
desire and do not have" (Js 4:1-2).
On the contrary, in a different world, ruled by concern for the common
good of all humanity, or by concern for the "spiritual and human
development of all" instead of by the quest for individual profit,
peace would be possible as the result of a "more perfect justice among
people."29
Also this new element of the Encyclical has a permanent and
contemporary value, in view of the modern attitude which is so
sensitive to the close link between respect for justice and the
establishment of real peace.
III. SURVEY OF THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD
11. In its own time the fundamental teaching of the Encyclical
Populorum Progressio received great acclaim for its novel character.
The social context in which we live today cannot be said to be
completely identical to that of twenty years ago. For this reason, I
now wish to conduct a brief review of some of the characteristics of
today's world, in order to develop the teaching of Paul VI's
Encyclical, once again from the point of view of the "development of
peoples."
12. The first fact to note is that the hopes for development, at that time so lively, today appear very far from being realized.
In this regard, the Encyclical had no illusions. Its language, grave
and at times dramatic, limited itself to stressing the seriousness of
the situation and to bringing before the conscience of all the urgent
obligation of contributing to its solution. In those years there was a
certain widespread optimism about the possibility of overcoming,
without excessive efforts, the economic backwardness of the poorer
peoples, of providing them with infrastructures and assisting them in
the process of industrialization.
In that historical context, over and above the efforts of each country,
the United Nations Organization promoted consecutively two decades of
development.30 In fact, some measures, bilateral and multilateral, were
taken with the aim of helping many nations, some of which had already
been independent for some time, and others - the majority - being
States just born from the process of decolonization. For her part, the
Church felt the duty to deepen her understanding of the problems posed
by the new situation, in the hope of supporting these efforts with her
religious and human inspiration in order to give them a "soul" and an
effective impulse.
13. It cannot be said that these various religious, human, economic and
technical initiatives have been in vain, for they have succeeded in
achieving certain results. But in general, taking into account the
various factors, one cannot deny that the present situation of the
world, from the point of view of development, offers a rather negative
impression.
For this reason, I wish to call attention to a number of general
indicators, without excluding other specific ones. Without going into
an analysis of figures and statistics, it is sufficient to face
squarely the reality of an innumerable multitude of people - children,
adults and the elderly - in other words, real and unique human persons,
who are suffering under the intolerable burden of poverty. There are
many millions who are deprived of hope due to the fact that, in many
parts of the world, their situation has noticeably worsened. Before
these tragedies of total indigence and need, in which so many of our
brothers and sisters are living, it is the Lord Jesus himself who comes
to question us (cf. Mt 25:31-46).
14. The first negative observation to make is the persistence and often
the widening of the gap between the areas of the so-called developed
North and the developing South. This geographical terminology is only
indicative, since one cannot ignore the fact that the frontiers of
wealth and poverty intersect within the societies themselves, whether
developed or developing. In fact, Just as social inequalities down to
the level of poverty exist in rich countries, so, in parallel fashion,
in the less developed countries one often sees manifestations of
selfishness and a flaunting of wealth which is as disconcerting, as it
is scandalous.
The abundance of goods and services available in some parts of the
world, particularly in the developed North, is matched in the South by
an unacceptable delay, and it is precisely in this geopolitical area
that the major part of the human race lives.
Looking at all the various sectors - the production and distribution of
foodstuffs, hygiene, health and housing, availability of drinking
water, working conditions (especially for women), life expectancy and
other economic and social indicators - the general picture is a
disappointing one, both considered in itself and in relation to the
corresponding data of the more developed countries. The word "gap"
returns spontaneously to mind.
Perhaps this is not the appropriate word for indicating the true
reality, since it could give the impression of a stationary phenomenon.
This is not the case. The pace of progress in the developed and
developing countries in recent years has differed, and this serves to
widen the distances. Thus the developing countries, especially the
poorest of them, find themselves in a situation of very serious delay.
We must also add the differences of culture and value systems between
the various population groups, differences which do not always match
the degree of economic development, but which help to create distances.
These are elements and aspects which render the social question much
more complex, precisely because this question has assumed a universal
dimension.
As we observe the various parts of the world separated by this widening
gap, and note that each of these parts seems to follow its own path
with its own achievements, we can understand the current usage which
speaks of different worlds within our one world: the First World, the
Second World, the Third World and at times the Fourth World.31 Such
expressions, which obviously do not claim to classify exhaustively all
countries, are significant: they are a sign of a widespread sense that
the unity of the world, that is, the unity of the human race, is
seriously compromised. Such phraseology, beyond its more or less
objective value, undoubtedly conceals a moral content, before which the
Church, which is a "sacrament or sign and instrument...of the unity of
the whole human race 32 cannot remain indifference.
15. However, the picture just given would be incomplete if one failed
to add to the "economic and social indices" of underdevelopment other
indices which are equally negative and indeed even more disturbing,
beginning with the cultural level. These are illiteracy, the difficulty
or impossibility of obtaining higher education, the inability to share
in the building of one's own nation, the various forms of exploitation
and of economic, social, political and even religious oppression of the
individual and his or her rights, discrimination of every type,
especially the exceptionally odious form based on difference of race.
If some of these scourges are noted with regret in areas of the more
developed North, they are undoubtedly more frequent, more lasting and
more difficult to root out in the developing and less advanced
countries.
It should be noted that in today's world, among other rights, the right
of economic initiative is often suppressed. Yet it is a right which is
important not only for the individual but also for the common good.
Experience shows us that the denial of this right, or its limitation in
the name of an alleged "equality" of everyone in society, diminishes,
or in practice absolutely destroys the spirit of initiative, that is to
say the creative subjectivity of the citizen. As a consequence, there
arises, not so much a true equality as a "leveling down." In the place
of creative initiative there appears passivity, dependence and
submission to the bureaucratic apparatus which, as the only "ordering"
and "decision-making" body - if not also the "owner"- of the entire
totality of goods and the means of production, puts everyone in a
position of almost absolute dependence, which is similar to the
traditional dependence of the worker-proletarian in capitalism. This
provokes a sense of frustration or desperation and predisposes people
to opt out of national life, impelling many to emigrate and also
favoring a form of "psychological" emigration.
Such a situation has its consequences also from the point of view of
the "rights of the individual nations." In fact, it often happens that
a nation is deprived of its subjectivity, that is to say the
"sovereignty" which is its right, in its economic, political-social and
in a certain way cultural significance, since in a national community
all these dimensions of life are bound together.
It must also be restated that no social group, for example a political
party, has the right to usurp the role of sole leader, since this
brings about the destruction of the true subjectivity of society and of
the individual citizens, as happens in every form of totalitarianism.
In this situation the individual and the people become "objects," in
spite of all declarations to the contrary and verbal assurances.
We should add here that in today's world there are many other forms of
poverty. For are there not certain privations or deprivations which
deserve this name? The denial or the limitation of human rights - as
for example the right to religious freedom, the right to share in the
building of society, the freedom to organize and to form unions, or to
take initiatives in economic matters - do these not impoverish the
human person as much as, if not more than, the deprivation of material
goods? And is development which does not take into account the full
affirmation of these rights really development on the human level?
In brief, modern underdevelopment is not only economic but also
cultural, political and simply human, as was indicated twenty years ago
by the Encyclical Populorum Progressio. Hence at this point we have to
ask ourselves if the sad reality of today might not be, at least in
part, the result of a too narrow idea of development, that is, a mainly
economic one.
16. It should be noted that in spite of the praiseworthy efforts made
in the last two decades by the more developed or developing nations and
the international organizations to find a way out of the situation, or
at least to remedy some of its symptoms, the conditions have become
notably worse.
Responsibility for this deterioration is due to various causes. Notable
among them are undoubtedly grave instances of omissions on the part of
the developing nations themselves, and especially on the part of those
holding economic and political power. Nor can we pretend not to see the
responsibility of the developed nations, which have not always, at
least in due measure, felt the duty to help countries separated from
the affluent world to which they themselves belong.
Moreover, one must denounce the existence of economic, financial and
social mechanisms which, although they are manipulated by people, often
function almost automatically, thus accentuating the situation of
wealth for some and poverty for the rest. These mechanisms, which are
maneuvered directly or indirectly by the more developed countries, by
their very functioning favor the interests of the people manipulating
them at in the end they suffocate or condition the economies of the
less developed countries. Later on these mechanisms will have to be
subjected to a careful analysis under the ethical-moral aspect.
Populorum Progressio already foresaw the possibility that under such
systems the wealth of the rich would increase and the poverty of the
poor would remain.33 A proof of this forecast has been the appearance
of the so-called Fourth World.
17. However much society worldwide shows signs of fragmentation,
expressed in the conventional names First, Second, Third and even
Fourth World, their interdependence remains close. When this
interdependence is separated from its ethical requirements, it has
disastrous consequences for the weakest. Indeed, as a result of a sort
of internal dynamic and under the impulse of mechanisms which can only
be called perverse, this interdependence triggers negative effects even
in the rich countries. It is precisely within these countries that one
encounters, though on a lesser scale, the more specific manifestations
of under development. Thus it should be obvious that development either
becomes shared in common by every part of the world or it undergoes a
process of regression even in zones marked by constant progress. This
tells us a great deal about the nature of authentic development: either
all the nations of the world participate, or it will not be true
development.
Among the specific signs of underdevelopment which increasingly affect
the developed countries also, there are two in particular that reveal a
tragic situation. The first is the housing crisis. During this
International Year of the Home less proclaimed by the United Nations.
attention is focused on the millions of human beings lacking adequate
housing or with no housing at all, in order to awaken everyone's
conscience and to find a solution to this serious problem with its
negative consequences for the individual, the family and society.34
The lack of housing is being experienced universally and is due in
large measure to the growing phenomenon of urbanization.35 Even the
most highly developed peoples present the sad spectacle of individuals
and families literally struggling to survive, without a roof over their
heads or with a roof so inadequate as to constitute no roof at all.
The lack of housing, an extremely serious problem in itself, should be
seen as a sign and summing-up of a whole series of shortcomings:
economic, social, cultural or simply human in nature. Given the extent
of the problem, we should need little convincing of how far we are from
an authentic development of peoples.
18. Another indicator common to the vast majority of nations is the phenomenon of unemployment and underemployment.
Everyone recognizes the reality and growing seriousness of this problem
in the industrialized countries.36 While it is alarming in the
developing countries, with their high rate of population growth and
their large numbers of young people, in the countries of high economic
development the sources of work seem to be shrinking, and thus the
opportunities for employment are decreasing rather than increasing.
This phenomenon too, with its series of negative consequences for
individuals and for society, ranging from humiliation to the loss of
that self respect which every man and woman should have, prompts us to
question seriously the type of development which has been followed over
the past twenty years. Here the words of the Encyclical Laborem
Exercens are extremely appropriate: "It must be stressed that the
constitutive element in this progress and also the most adequate way to
verify it in a spirit of justice and peace, which the Church proclaims
and for which she does not cease to pray...is the continual reappraisal
of man's work, both in the aspect of its objective finality and in the
aspect of the dignity of the subject of all work, that is to say, man."
On the other hand, "we cannot fail to be struck by a disconcerting fact
of immense proportions: the fact that...there are huge numbers of
people who are unemployed...a fact that without any doubt demonstrates
that both within the individual political communities and in their
relationships on the continental and world level there is something
wrong with the organization of work and employment, precisely at the
most critical and socially most important points."37
This second phenomenon, like the previous one, because it is universal
in character and tends to proliferate, is a very telling negative sign
of the state and the quality of the development of peoples which we see
today.
19. A third phenomenon, likewise characteristic of the most recent
period, even though it is not met with everywhere, is without doubt
equally indicative of the interdependence between developed and less
developed countries. It is the question of the international debt,
concerning which the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax has issued a
document.38
At this point one cannot ignore the close connection between a problem
of this kind - the growing seriousness of which was already foreseen in
Populorum Progressio39 - and the question of the development of peoples.
The reason which prompted the developing peoples to accept the offer of
abundantly available capital was the hope of being able to invest it in
development projects. Thus the availability of capital and the fact of
accepting it as a loan can be considered a contribution to development,
something desirable and legitimate in itself, even though perhaps
imprudent and occasionally hasty.
Circumstances have changed, both within the debtor nations and in the
international financial market; the instrument chosen to make a
contribution to development has turned into a counterproductive
mechanism. This is because the debtor nations, in order to service
their debt, find themselves obliged to export the capital needed for
improving or at least maintaining their standard of living. It is also
because, for the same reason, they are unable to obtain new and equally
essential financing.
Through this mechanism, the means intended for the development of
peoples has turned into a brake upon development instead, and indeed in
some cases has even aggravated underdevelopment.
As the recent document of the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax
states,40 these observations should make us reflect on the ethical
character of the interdependence of peoples. And along similar lines,
they should make us reflect on the requirements and conditions, equally
inspired by ethical principles, for cooperation in development.
20. If at this point we examine the reasons for this serious delay in
the process of development, a delay which has occurred contrary to the
indications of the Encyclical Populorum Progressio, which had raised
such great hopes, our attention is especially drawn to the political
causes of today's situation.
Faced with a combination of factors which are undoubtedly complex, we
cannot hope to achieve a comprehensive analysis here. However, we
cannot ignore a striking fact about the political picture since the
Second World War, a fact which has considerable impact on the forward
movement of the development of peoples.
I am referring to the existence of two opposing blocs, commonly known
as the East and the West. The reason for this description is not purely
political but is also, as the expression goes, geopolitical. Each of
the two blocs tends to assimilate or gather around it other countries
or groups of countries, to different degrees of adherence or
participation.
The opposition is first of all political, inasmuch as each bloc
identifies itself with a system of organizing society and exercising
power which presents itself as an alternative to the other. The
political opposition, in turn, takes its origin from a deeper
Opposition which is ideological in nature.
In the West there exists a system which is historically inspired by the
principles of the liberal capitalism which developed with
industrialization during the last century. In the East there exists a
system inspired by the Marxist collectivism which sprang from an
interpretation of the condition of the proletarian classes made in the
light of a particular reading of history. Each of the two ideologies,
on the basis of two very different visions of man and of his freedom
and social role, has proposed and still promotes, on the economic
level, antithetical forms of the organization of labor and of the
structures of ownership, especially with regard to the so-called means
of production.
It was inevitable that by developing antagonistic systems and centers
of power, each with its own forms of propaganda and indoctrination, the
ideological opposition should evolve into a growing military opposition
and give rise to two blocs of armed forces, each suspicious and fearful
of the other's domination.
International relations, in turn, could not fail to feel the effects of
this "logic of blocs" and of the respective "spheres of influence." The
tension between the two blocs which began at the end of the Second
World War has dominated the whole of the subsequent forty years.
Sometimes it has taken the form of "cold war," sometimes of "wars by
proxy," through the manipulation of local conflicts, and sometimes it
has kept people's minds in suspense and anguish by the threat of an
open and total war.
Although at the present time this danger seems to have receded, yet
without completely disappearing, and even though an initial agreement
has been reached on the destruction of one type of nuclear weapon, the
existence and opposition of the blocs continue to be a real and
worrying fact which still colors the world picture.
21. This happens with particularly negative effects in the
international relations which concern the developing countries. For as
we know the tension between East and West is not in itself an
opposition between two different levels of development but rather
between two concepts of the development of individuals and peoples both
concepts being imperfect and in need of radical correction. This
opposition is transferred to the developing countries themselves, and
thus helps to widen the gap already existing on the economic level
between North and South and which results from the distance between the
two worlds: the more developed one and the less developed one.
This is one of the reasons why the Church's social doctrine adopts a
critical attitude towards both liberal capitalism and Marxist
collectivism. For from the point of view of development the question
naturally arises: in what way and to what extent are these two systems
capable of changes and updatings such as to favor or promote a true and
integral development of individuals and peoples in modern society? In
fact, these changes and updatings are urgent and essential for the
cause of a development common to all.
Countries which have recently achieved independence, and which are
trying to establish a cultural and political identity of their own, and
need effective and impartial aid from all the richer and more developed
countries, find themselves involved in, and sometimes overwhelmed by,
ideological conflicts, which inevitably create internal divisions, to
the extent in some cases of provoking full civil war. This is also
because investments and aid for development are often diverted from
their proper purpose and used to sustain conflicts, apart from and in
opposition to the interests of the countries which ought to benefit
from them. Many of these countries are becoming more and more aware of
the danger of falling victim to a form of neocolonialism and are trying
to escape from it. It is this awareness which in spite of difficulties,
uncertainties and at times contradictions gave rise to the
International Movement of Non-Aligned Nations, which, in its positive
aspect, would like to affirm in an effective way the right of every
people to its own identity, independence and security, as well as the
right to share, on a basis of equality and solidarity, in the goods
intended for all.
22. In the light of these considerations, we easily arrive at a clearer
picture of the last twenty years and a better understanding of the
conflicts in the northern hemisphere, namely between East and West, as
an important cause of the retardation or stagnation of the South.
The developing countries, instead of becoming autonomous nations
concerned with their own progress towards a just sharing in the goods
and services meant for all, become parts of a machine, cogs on a
gigantic wheel. This is often true also in the field of social
communications, which, being run by centers mostly in the northern
hemisphere, do not always give due consideration to the priorities and
problems of such countries or respect their cultural make-up. They
frequently impose a distorted vision of life and of man and thus fail
to respond to the demands of true development.
Each of the two blocs harbors in its own way a tendency towards
imperialism, as it is usually called, or towards forms of new-
colonialism: an easy temptation to which they frequently succumb, as
history, including recent history, teaches.
It is this abnormal situation, the result of a war and of an
unacceptably exaggerated concern for security, which deadens the
impulse towards united cooperation by all for the common good of the
human race, to the detriment especially of peaceful peoples who are
impeded from their rightful access to the goods meant for all.
Seen in this way, the present division of the world is a direct
obstacle to the real transformation of the conditions of
underdevelopment in the developing and less advanced countries.
However, peoples do not always resign themselves to their fate.
Furthermore, the very needs of an economy stifled by military
expenditure and by bureaucracy and intrinsic inefficiency now seem to
favor processes which might mitigate the existing opposition and make
it easier to begin a fruitful dialogue and genuine collaboration for
peace.
23. The statement in the Encyclical Populorum Progressio that the
resources and investments devoted to arms production ought to be used
to alleviate the misery of impoverished peoples41 makes more urgent the
appeal to overcome the opposition between the two blocs.
Today, the reality is that these resources are used to enable each of
the two blocs to overtake the other and thus guarantee its own
security. Nations which historically, economically and politically have
the possibility of playing a leadership role are prevented by this
fundamentally flawed distortion from adequately fulfilling their duty
of solidarity for the benefit of peoples which aspire to full
development.
It is timely to mention - and it is no exaggeration - the a leadership
role among nations can only be justified by the possibility and
willingness to contribute widely and generously to the common good.
If a nation were to succumb more or less deliberately to the temptation
to close in upon itself and failed to meet the responsibilities
following from its superior position in the community of nations, it
would fall seriously short of its clear ethical duty. This is readily
apparent in the circumstances of history, where believers discern the
dispositions of Divine Providence, ready to make use of the nations for
the realization of its plans, so as to render "vain the designs of the
peoples" (cf. Ps 33[32]: 10).
When the West gives the impression of abandoning itself to forms of
growing and selfish isolation, and the East in its turn seems to ignore
for questionable reasons its duty to cooperate in the task of
alleviating human misery, then we are up against not only a betrayal of
humanity's legitimate expectations - a betrayal that is a harbinger of
unforeseeable consequences - but also a real desertion of a moral
obligation.
24. If arms production is a serious disorder in the present world with
regard to true human needs and the employment of the means capable of
satisfying those needs, the arms trade is equally to blame. Indeed,
with reference to the latter it must be added that the moral judgment
is even more severe. As we all know, this is a trade without frontiers
capable of crossing even the barriers of the blocs. It knows how to
overcome the division between East and West, and above all the one
between North and South, to the point - and this is more serious - of
pushing its way into the different sections which make up the southern
hemisphere. We are thus confronted with a strange phenomenon: while
economic aid and development plans meet with the obstacle of
insuperable ideological barriers, and with tariff and trade barriers,
arms of whatever origin circulate with almost total freedom all over
the world And as the recent document of the Pontifical Commission
Iustitia et Pax on the international debt points out,42 everyone knows
that in certain cases the capital lent by the developed world has been
used in the underdeveloped world to buy weapons.
If to all this we add the tremendous and universally acknowledged
danger represented by atomic weapons stockpiled on an incredible scale,
the logical conclusion seems to be this: in today's world, including
the world of economics, the prevailing picture is one destined to lead
us more quickly towards death rather than one of concern for true
development which would lead all towards a "more human" life, as
envisaged by the Encyclical Populorum Progressio.43
The consequences of this state of affairs are to be seen in the
festering of a wound which typifies and reveals the imbalances and
conflicts of the modern world: the millions of refugees whom war,
natural calamities, persecution and discrimination of every kind have
deprived of home, employment, family and homeland. The tragedy of these
multitudes is reflected in the hopeless faces of men, women and
children who can no longer find a home in a divided and inhospitable
world.
Nor may we close our eyes to another painful wound in today's world:
the phenomenon of terrorism, understood as the intention to kill people
and destroy property indiscriminately, and to create a climate of
terror and insecurity, often including the taking of hostages. Even
when some ideology or the desire to create a better society is adduced
as the motivation for this inhuman behavior, acts of terrorism are
never justifiable. Even less so when, as happens today, such decisions
and such actions, which at times lead to real massacres, and to the
abduction of innocent people who have nothing to do with the conflicts,
claim to have a propaganda purpose for furthering a cause. It is still
worse when they are an end in themselves, so that murder is committed
merely for the sake of killing. In the face of such horror and
suffering, the words I spoke some years ago are still true, and I wish
to repeat them again: "What Christianity forbids is to seek
solutions...by the ways of hatred, by the murdering of defenseless
people, by the methods of terrorism."44
25. At this point something must be said about the demographic problem
and the way it is spoken of today, following what Paul VI said in his
Encyclicals45 and what I myself stated at length in the Apostolic
Exhortation Familiaris Consortio.46
One cannot deny the existence, especially in the southern hemisphere,
of a demographic problem which creates difficulties for development.
One must immediately add that in the northern hemisphere the nature of
this problem is reversed: here, the cause for concern is the drop in
the birthrate, with repercussions on the aging of the population,
unable even to renew itself biologically. In itself, this is a
phenomenon capable of hindering development. Just as it is incorrect to
say that such difficulties stem solely from demo graphic growth,
neither is it proved that all demo graphic growth is incompatible with
orderly development.
On the other hand, it is very alarming to see governments in many
countries launching systematic campaigns against birth, contrary not
only to the cultural and religious identity of the countries themselves
but also contrary to the nature of true development. It often happens
that these campaigns are the result of pressure and financing coming
from abroad, and in some cases they are made a condition for the
granting of financial and economic aid and assistance. In any event,
there is an absolute lack of respect for the freedom of choice of the
parties involved, men and women often subjected to intolerable
pressures, including economic ones, in order to force them to submit to
this new form of oppression. It is the poorest populations which suffer
such mistreatment, and this sometimes leads to a tendency towards a
form of racism, or the promotion of certain equally racist forms of
eugenics.
This fact too, which deserves the most forceful condemnation, is a sign
of an erroneous and perverse idea of true human development.
26. This mainly negative overview of the actual situation of
development in the contemporary world would be incomplete without a
mention of the coexistence of positive aspects.
The first positive note is the full awareness among large numbers of
men and women of their own dignity and of that of every human being.
This awareness is expressed, for example, in the more lively concern
that human rights should be respected, and in the more vigorous
rejection of their violation. One sign of this is the number of
recently established private associations, some worldwide in
membership, almost all of them devoted to monitoring with great care
and commendable objectivity what is happening internationally in this
sensitive field.
At this level one must acknowledge the influence exercised by the
Declaration of Human Rights, promulgated some forty years ago by the
United Nations Organization. Its very existence and gradual acceptance
by the international community are signs of a growing awareness. The
same is to be said, still in the field of human rights, of other
juridical instruments issued by the United Nations Organization or
other international organizations.47
The awareness under discussion applies not only to individuals but also
to nations and peoples, which, as entities having a specific cultural
identity, are particularly sensitive to the preservation, free exercise
and promotion of their precious heritage.
At the same time, in a world divided and beset by every type of
conflict, the conviction is growing of a radical interdependence and
consequently of the need for a solidarity which will take up
interdependence and transfer it to the moral plane. Today perhaps more
than in the past, people are realizing that they are linked together by
a common destiny, which is to be constructed together, if catastrophe
for all is to be avoided. From the depth of anguish, fear and escapist
phenomena like drugs, typical of the contemporary world, the idea is
slowly emerging that the good to which we are all called and the
happiness to which we aspire cannot be obtained without an effort and
commitment on the part of all, nobody excluded, and the consequent
renouncing of personal selfishness.
Also to be mentioned here, as a sign of respect for life - despite all
the temptations to destroy it by abortion and euthanasia - is a
concomitant concern for peace, together with an awareness that peace is
indivisible. It is either for all or for none. It demands an ever
greater degree of rigorous respect for justice and consequently a fair
distribution of the results of true development.48
Among today's positive signs we must also mention a greater realization
of the limits of avail able resources, and of the need to respect the
integrity and the cycles of nature and to take them into account when
planning for development, rather than sacrificing them to certain
demagogic ideas about the latter. Today this is called ecological
concern.
It is also right to acknowledge the generous commitment of statesmen,
politicians, economists, trade unionists, people of science and
international officials - many of them inspired by religious faith -
who at no small personal sacrifice try to resolve the world's ills and
who give of themselves in every way so as to ensure that an ever
increasing number of people may enjoy the benefits of peace and a
quality of life worthy of the name.
The great international organizations, and a number of the regional
organizations, contribute to this in no small measure. Their united
efforts make possible more effective action.
It is also through these contributions that some Third World countries,
despite the burden of many negative factors, have succeeded in reaching
a certain self-sufficiency in food, or a degree of industrialization
which makes it possible to survive with dignity and to guarantee
sources of employment for the active population.
Thus, all is not negative in the contemporary world, nor could it be,
for the Heavenly Father's providence lovingly watches over even our
daily cares (cf. Mt 6:25-32; 10:23-31; Lk 12:6-7, 22- 30). Indeed, the
positive values which we have mentioned testify to a new moral concern,
particularly with respect to the great human problems such as
development and peace.
This fact prompts me to turn my thoughts to the true nature of the
development of peoples, along the lines of the Encyclical which we are
commemorating, and as a mark of respect for its teaching.
IV. AUTHENTIC HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
27. The examination which the Encyclical invites us to make of the
contemporary world leads us to note in the first place that development
is not a straightforward process, as it were automatic and in itself
limitless, as though, given certain conditions, the human race were
able to progress rapidly towards an undefined perfection of some kind.49
Such an idea - linked to a notion of "progress" with philosophical
connotations deriving from the Enlightenment, rather than to the notion
of "development"50 which is used in a specifically economic and social
sense - now seems to be seriously called into doubt, particularly since
the tragic experience of the two world wars, the planned and partly
achieved destruction of whole peoples, and the looming atomic peril. A
naive mechanistic optimism has been replaced by a well founded anxiety
for the fate of humanity.
28. At the same time, however, the "economic" concept itself, linked to
the word development, has entered into crisis. In fact there is a
better understanding today that the mere accumulation of goods and
services, even for the benefit of the majority, is not enough for the
realization of human happiness. Nor, in consequence, does the
availability of the many real benefits provided in recent times by
science and technology, including the computer sciences, bring freedom
from every form of slavery. On the contrary, the experience of recent
years shows that unless all the considerable body of resources and
potential at man's disposal is guided by a moral understanding and by
an orientation towards the true good of the human race, it easily turns
against man to oppress him.
A disconcerting conclusion about the most recent period should serve to
enlighten us: side-by-side with the miseries of underdevelopment,
themselves unacceptable, we find ourselves up against a form of
superdevelopment, equally inadmissible. because like the former it is
contrary to what is good and to true happiness. This super-development,
which consists in an excessive availability of every kind of material
goods for the benefit of certain social groups, easily makes people
slaves of "possession" and of immediate gratification, with no other
horizon than the multiplication or continual replacement of the things
already owned with others still better. This is the so-called
civilization of "consumption" or " consumerism ," which involves so
much "throwing-away" and "waste." An object already owned but now
superseded by something better is discarded, with no thought of its
possible lasting value in itself, nor of some other human being who is
poorer.
All of us experience firsthand the sad effects of this blind submission
to pure consumerism: in the first place a crass materialism, and at the
same time a radical dissatisfaction, because one quickly learns -
unless one is shielded from the flood of publicity and the ceaseless
and tempting offers of products - that the more one possesses the more
one wants, while deeper aspirations remain unsatisfied and perhaps even
stifled.
The Encyclical of Pope Paul VI pointed out the difference, so often
emphasized today, between "having" and "being,"51 which had been
expressed earlier in precise words by the Second Vatican Council.52 To
"have" objects and goods does not in itself perfect the human subject,
unless it contributes to the maturing and enrichment of that subject's
"being," that is to say unless it contributes to the realization of the
human vocation as such.
Of course, the difference between "being" and "having," the danger
inherent in a mere multiplication or replacement of things possessed
compared to the value of "being," need not turn into a contradiction.
One of the greatest injustices in the contemporary world consists
precisely in this: that the ones who possess much are relatively few
and those who possess almost nothing are many. It is the injustice of
the poor distribution of the goods and services originally intended for
all.
This then is the picture: there are some people - the few who possess
much - who do not really succeed in "being" because, through a reversal
of the hierarchy of values, they are hindered by the cult of "having";
and there are others - the many who have little or nothing - who do not
succeed in realizing their basic human vocation because they are
deprived of essential goods.
The evil does not consist in "having" as such, but in possessing
without regard for the quality and the ordered hierarchy of the goods
one has. Quality and hierarchy arise from the subordination of goods
and their availability to man's "being" and his true vocation.
This shows that although development has a necessary economic
dimension, since it must supply the greatest possible number of the
world's inhabitants with an availability of goods essential for them
"to be," it is not limited to that dimension. If it is limited to this,
then it turns against those whom it is meant to benefit.
The characteristics of full development, one which is "more human" and
able to sustain itself at the level of the true vocation of men and
women without denying economic requirements, were described by Paul
VI.53
29. Development which is not only economic must be measured and
oriented according to the reality and vocation of man seen in his
totality, namely, according to his interior dimension. There is no
doubt that he needs created goods and the products of industry, which
is constantly being enriched by scientific and technological progress.
And the ever greater availability of material goods not only meets
needs but also opens new horizons. The danger of the misuse of material
goods and the appearance of artificial needs should in no way hinder
the regard we have for the new goods and resources placed at our
disposal and the use we make of them. On the contrary, we must see them
as a gift from God and as a response to the human vocation, which is
fully realized in Christ.
However, in trying to achieve true development we must never lose sight
of that dimension which is in the specific nature of man, who has been
created by God in his image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:26). It is a bodily
and a spiritual nature, symbolized in the second creation account by
the two elements: the earth, from which God forms man's body, and the
breath of life which he breathes into man's nostrils (cf. Gen 2:7).
Thus man comes to have a certain affinity with other creatures: he is
called to use them, and to be involved with them. As the Genesis
account says (cf. Gen 2:15), he is placed in the garden with the duty
of cultivating and watching over it, being superior to the other
creatures placed by God under his dominion (cf. Gen 1:25-26). But at
the same time man must remain subject to the will of God, who imposes
limits upon his use and dominion over things (cf. Gen 2:16-17), just as
he promises his mortality (cf. Gen 2:9; Wis 2:23). Thus man, being the
image of God, has a true affinity with him too. On the basis of this
teaching, development cannot consist only in the use, dominion over and
indiscriminate possession of created things and the products of human
industry, but rather in subordinating the possession, dominion and use
to man's divine likeness and to his vocation to immortality. This is
the transcendent reality of the human being, a reality which is seen to
be shared from the beginning by a couple, a man and a woman (cf. Gen
1:27), and is therefore fundamentally social.
30. According to Sacred Scripture therefore, the notion of development
is not only "lay" or "profane," but it is also seen to be, while having
a socio-economic dimension of its own, the modern expression of an
essential dimension of man's vocation.
The fact is that man was not created, so to speak, immobile and static.
The first portrayal of him, as given in the Bible, certainly presents
him as a creature and image, defined in his deepest reality by the
origin and affinity that constitute him. But all this plants within the
human being - man and woman - the seed and the requirement of a special
task to be accomplished by each individually and by them as a couple.
The task is "to have dominion" over the other created beings, "to
cultivate the garden." This is to be accomplished within the framework
of obedience to the divine law and therefore with respect for the image
received, the image which is the clear foundation of the power of
dominion recognized as belonging to man as the means to his perfection
(cf. Gen 1:26-30; 2:15-16; Wis 9:2-3).
When man disobeys God and refuses to submit to his rule, nature rebels
against him and no longer recognizes him as its "master," for he has
tarnished the divine image in himself. The claim to ownership and use
of created things remains still valid, but after sin its exercise
becomes difficult and full of suffering (cf. Gen 3:17-19).
In fact, the following chapter of Genesis shows us that the descendants
of Cain build "a city," engage in sheep farming, practice the arts
(music) and technical skills (metallurgy); while at the same time
people began to "call upon the name of the Lord" (cf. Gen 4:17-26).
The story of the human race described by Sacred Scripture is, even
after the fall into sin, a story of constant achievements, which,
although always called into question and threatened by sin, are
nonetheless repeated, increased and extended in response to the divine
vocation given from the beginning to man and to woman (cf. Gen 1:26-28)
and inscribed in the image which they received.
It is logical to conclude, at least on the part of those who believe in
the word of God, that today's "development" is to be seen as a moment
in the story which began at creation, a story which is constantly
endangered by reason of infidelity to the Creator's will, and
especially by the temptation to idolatry. But this "development"
fundamentally corresponds to the first premises. Anyone wishing to
renounce the difficult yet noble task of improving the lot of man in
his totality, and of all people, with the excuse that the struggle is
difficult and that constant effort is required, or simply because of
the experience of defeat and the need to begin again, that person would
be betraying the will of God the Creator. In this regard, in the
Encyclical Laborem Exercens I referred to man's vocation to work, in
order to emphasize the idea that it is always man who is the
protagonist of development.54
Indeed, the Lord Jesus himself, in the parable of the talents,
emphasizes the severe treatment given to the man who dared to hide the
gift received: "You wicked slothful servant! You knew that I reap where
I have not sowed and gather where I have not winnowed? ...So take the
talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten talents" (Mt
25:26-28). It falls to us, who receive the gifts of God in order to
make them fruitful, to "sow" and "reap." If we do not, even what we
have will be taken away from us.
A deeper study of these harsh words will make us commit ourselves more
resolutely to the duty, which is urgent for everyone today, to work
together for the full development of others: "development of the whole
human being and of all people."55
31. Faith in Christ the Redeemer, while it illuminates from within the
nature of development, also guides us in the task of collaboration. In
the Letter of St. Paul to the Colossians, we read that Christ is "the
first-born of all creation," and that "all things were created through
him" and for him (1:15-16). In fact, "all things hold together in him,"
since "in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through
him to reconcile to himself all things" (v. 20).
A part of this divine plan, which begins from eternity in Christ, the
perfect "image" of the Father, and which culminates in him, "the
firstborn from the dead" (v. 18), is our own history, marked by our
personal and collective effort to raise up the human condition and to
overcome the obstacles which are continually arising along our way. It
thus prepares us to share in the fullness which "dwells in the Lord"
and which he communicates "to his body, which is the Church" (v. 18;
cf. Eph 1:22-23). At the same time sin, which is always attempting to
trap us and which jeopardizes our human achievements, is conquered and
redeemed by the "reconciliation" accomplished by Christ (cf. Col 1:20).
Here the perspectives widen. The dream of "unlimited progress"
reappears, radically transformed by the new outlook created by
Christian faith, assuring us that progress is possible only because God
the Father has decided from the beginning to make man a sharer of his
glory in Jesus Christ risen from the dead, in whom "we have redemption
through his blood...the forgiveness of our trespasses" (Eph 1:7). In
him God wished to conquer sin and make it serve our greater good,56
which infinitely surpasses what progress could achieve.
We can say therefore - as we struggle amidst the obscurities and
deficiencies of underdevelopment and superdevelopment - that one day
this corruptible body will put on incorruptibility, this mortal body
immortality (cf. 1 Cor 15:54), when the Lord "delivers the Kingdom to
God the Father" (v. 24) and all the works and actions that are worthy
of man will be redeemed.
Furthermore, the concept of faith makes quite clear the reasons which
impel the Church to concern herself with the problems of development,
to consider them a duty of her pastoral ministry, and to urge all to
think about the nature and characteristics of authentic human
development. Through her commitment she desires, on the one hand, to
place herself at the service of the divine plan which is meant to order
all things to the fullness which dwells in Christ (cf. Col 1:19) and
which he communicated to his body; and on the other hand she desires to
respond to her fundamental vocation of being a "sacrament," that is to
say "a sign and instrument of intimate union with God and of the unity
of the whole human race."57
Some Fathers of the Church were inspired by this idea to develop in
original ways a concept of the meaning of history and of human work,
directed towards a goal which surpasses this meaning and which is
always defined by its relationship to the work of Christ. In other
words, one can find in the teaching of the Fathers an optimistic vision
of history and work, that is to say of the perennial value of authentic
human achievements, inasmuch as they are redeemed by Christ and
destined for the promised Kingdom.58
Thus, part of the teaching and most ancient practice of the Church is
her conviction that she is obliged by her vocation - she herself, her
ministers and each of her members - to relieve the misery of the
suffering, both far and near, not only out of her "abundance" but also
out of her "necessities." Faced by cases of need, one cannot ignore
them in favor of superfluous church ornaments and costly furnishings
for divine worship; on the contrary it could be obligatory to sell
these goods in order to provide food, drink, clothing and shelter for
those who lack these things.59 As has been already noted, here we are
shown a "hierarchy of values" - in the framework of the right to
property - between"having" and "being," especially when the "having" of
a few can be to the detriment of the "being" of many others.
In his Encyclical Pope Paul VI stands in the line of this teaching,
taking his inspiration from the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
Spes.60 For my own part, I wish to insist once more on the seriousness
and urgency of that teaching, and I ask the Lord to give all Christians
the strength to put it faithfully into practice.
32. The obligation to commit oneself to the development of peoples is
not just an individual duty, and still less an individualistic one, as
if it were possible to achieve this development through the isolated
efforts of each individual. It is an imperative which obliges each and
every man and woman, as well as societies and nations. In particular,
it obliges the Catholic Church and the other Churches and Ecclesial
Communities, with which we are completely willing to collaborate in
this field. In this sense, just as we Catholics invite our Christian
brethren to share in our initiatives, so too we declare that we are
ready to collaborate in theirs, and we welcome the invitations
presented to us. In this pursuit of integral human development we can
also do much with the members of other religions, as in fact is being
done in various places.
Collaboration in the development of the whole person and of every human
being is in fact a duty of all towards all, and must be shared by the
four parts of the world: East and West, North and South; or, as we say
today, by the different "worlds." If, on the contrary, people try to
achieve it in only one part, or in only one world, they do so at the
expense of the others; and, precisely because the others are ignored,
their own development becomes exaggerated and misdirected.
Peoples or nations too have a right to their own full development,
which while including - as already said - the economic and social
aspects, should also include individual cultural identity and openness
to the transcendent. Not even the need for development can be used as
an excuse for imposing on others one's own way of life or own religious
belief.
33. Nor would a type of development which did not respect and promote
human rights - personal and social, economic and political, including
the rights of nations and of peoples - be really worthy of man.
Today, perhaps more than in the past, the intrinsic contradiction of a
development limited only to its economic element is seen more clearly.
Such development easily subjects the human person and his deepest needs
to the demands of economic planning and selfish profit.
The intrinsic connection between authentic development and respect for
human rights once again reveals the moral character of development: the
true elevation of man, in conformity with the natural and historical
vocation of each individual, is not attained only by exploiting the
abundance of goods and services, or by having available perfect
infrastructures.
When individuals and communities do not see a rigorous respect for the
moral, cultural and spiritual requirements, based on the dignity of the
person and on the proper identity of each community, beginning with the
family and religious societies, then all the rest - availability of
goods, abundance of technical resources applied to daily life, a
certain level of material well-being - will prove unsatisfying and in
the end contemptible. The Lord clearly says this in the Gospel, when he
calls the attention of all to the true hierarchy of values: "For what
will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his
life?" (Mt 16:26)
True development, in keeping with the specific needs of the human
being-man or woman, child, adult or old person-implies, especially for
those who actively share in this process and are responsible for it, a
lively awareness of the value of the rights of all and of each person.
It likewise implies a lively awareness of the need to respect the right
of every individual to the full use of the benefits offered by science
and technology.
On the internal level of every nation, respect for all rights takes on
great importance, especially: the right to life at every stage of its
existence; the rights of the family, as the basic social community, or
"cell of society"; justice in employment relationships; the rights
inherent in the life of the political community as such; the rights
based on the transcendent vocation of the human being, beginning with
the right of freedom to profess and practice one's own religious belief.
On the international level, that is, the level of relations between
States or, in present-day usage, between the different "worlds," there
must be complete respect for the identity of each people, with its own
historical and cultural characteristics. It is likewise essential, as
the Encyclical Populorum Progressio already asked, to recognize each
people's equal right "to be seated at the table of the common
banquet,"61 instead of lying outside the door like Lazarus, while "the
dogs come and lick his sores" (cf. Lk 16:21). Both peoples and
individual must enjoy the fundamental equality62 which is the basis,
for example, of the Charter of the United Nations Organization: the
equality which is the basis of the right of all to share in the process
of full development.
In order to be genuine, development must be achieved within the
framework of solidarity and freedom, without ever sacrificing either of
them under whatever pretext. The moral character of development and its
necessary promotion are emphasized when the most rigorous respect is
given to all the demands deriving from the order of truth and good
proper to the human person. Furthermore the Christian who is taught to
see that man is the image of God, called to share in the truth and the
good which is God himself, does not understand a commitment to
development and its application which excludes regard and respect for
the unique dignity of this "image." In other words, true development
must be based on the love of God and neighbor, and must help to promote
the relationships between individuals and society. This is the
"civilization of love" of which Paul VI often spoke.
34. Nor can the moral character of development exclude respect for the
beings which constitute the natural world, which the ancient Greeks -
alluding precisely to the order which distinguishes it - called the
"cosmos." Such realities also demand respect, by virtue of a threefold
consideration which it is useful to reflect upon carefully.
The first consideration is the appropriateness of acquiring a growing
awareness of the fact that one cannot use with impunity the different
categories of beings, whether living or inanimate - animals, plants,
the natural elements - simply as one wishes, according to one s own
economic needs. On the contrary, one must take into account the nature
of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system, which
is precisely the cosmos."
The second consideration is based on the realization - which is perhaps
more urgent - that natural resources are limited; some are not, as it
is said, renewable. Using them as if they were inexhaustible, with
absolute dominion, seriously endangers their availability not only for
the present generation but above all for generations to come.
The third consideration refers directly to the consequences of a
certain type of development on the quality of life in the
industrialized zones. We all know that the direct or indirect result of
industrialization is, ever more frequently, the pollution of the
environment, with serious consequences for the health of the population.
Once again it is evident that development, the planning which governs
it, and the way in which resources are used must include respect for
moral demands. One of the latter undoubtedly imposes limits on the use
of the natural world. The dominion granted to man by the Creator is not
an absolute power, nor can one speak of a freedom to "use and misuse,"
or to dispose of things as one pleases. The limitation imposed from the
beginning by the Creator himself and expressed symbolically by the
prohibition not to "eat of the fruit of the tree" (cf. Gen 2:16-17)
shows clearly enough that, when it comes to the natural world, we are
subject not only to biological laws but also to moral ones, which
cannot be violated with impunity.
A true concept of development cannot ignore the use of the elements of
nature, the renewability of resources and the consequences of haphazard
industrialization - three considerations which alert our consciences to
the moral dimension of development.63
V. A THEOLOGICAL READING OF MODERN PROBLEMS
35. Precisely because of the essentially moral character of
development, it is clear that the obstacles to development likewise
have a moral character. If in the years since the publication of Pope
Paul's Encyclical there has been no development - or very little,
irregular, or even contradictory development - the reasons are not only
economic. As has already been said, political motives also enter in.
For the decisions which either accelerate or slow down the development
of peoples are really political in character. In order to overcome the
misguided mechanisms mentioned earlier and to replace them with new
ones which will be more just and in conformity with the common good of
humanity, an effective political will is needed. Unfortunately, after
analyzing the situation we have to conclude that this political will
has been insufficient.
In a document of a pastoral nature such as this, an analysis limited
exclusively to the economic and political causes of underdevelopment
(and, mutatis mutandis, of so-called superdevelopment) would be
incomplete. It is therefore necessary to single out the moral causes
which, with respect to the behavior of individuals considered as
responsible persons, interfere in such a way as to slow down the course
of development and hinder its full achievement.
Similarly, when the scientific and technical resources are available
which, with the necessary concrete political decisions, ought to help
lead peoples to true development, the main obstacles to development
will be overcome only by means of essentially moral decisions. For
believers, and especially for Christians, these decisions will take
their inspiration from the principles of faith, with the help of divine
grace.
36. It is important to note therefore that a world which is divided
into blocs, sustained by rigid ideologies, and in which instead of
interdependence and solidarity different forms of imperialism hold
sway, can only be a world subject to structures of sin. The sum total
of the negative factors working against a true awareness of the
universal common good, and the need to further it, gives the impression
of creating, in persons and institutions, an obstacle which is
difficult to overcome.64
If the present situation can be attributed to difficulties of various
kinds, it is not out of place to speak of "structures of sin," which,
as I stated in my Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia,
are rooted in personal sin, and thus always linked to the concrete acts
of individuals who introduce these structures, consolidate them and
make them difficult to remove.65 And thus they grow stronger, spread,
and become the source of other sins, and so influence people's behavior.
"Sin" and "structures of sin" are categories which are seldom applied
to the situation of the contemporary world. However, one cannot easily
gain a profound understanding of the reality that confronts us unless
we give a name to the root of the evils which afflict us.
One can certainly speak of "selfishness" and of "shortsightedness," of
"mistaken political calculations" and "imprudent economic decisions."
And in each of these evaluations one hears an echo of an ethical and
moral nature. Man's condition is such that a more profound analysis of
individuals' actions and omissions cannot be achieved without implying,
in one way or another, judgments or references of an ethical nature.
This evaluation is in itself positive, especially if it is completely
consistent and if it is based on faith in God and on his law, which
commands what is good and forbids evil.
In this consists the difference between sociopolitical analysis and
formal reference to "sin" and the "structures of sin." According to
this latter viewpoint, there enter in the will of the Triune God, his
plan for humanity, his justice and his mercy. The God who is rich in
mercy, the Redeemer of man, the Lord and giver of life, requires from
people clear cut attitudes which express themselves also in actions or
omissions toward one's neighbor. We have here a reference to the
"second tablet" of the Ten Commandments (cf. Ex 20:12-17; Dt 5:16-21).
Not to observe these is to offend God and hurt one's neighbor, and to
introduce into the world influences and obstacles which go far beyond
the actions and brief life span of an individual. This also involves
interference in the process of the development of peoples, the delay or
slowness of which must be judged also in this light.
37. This general analysis, which is religious in nature, can be
supplemented by a number of particular considerations to demonstrate
that among the actions and attitudes opposed to the will of God, the
good of neighbor and the "structures" created by them, two are very
typical: on the one hand, the all-consuming desire for profit, and on
the other, the thirst for power, with the intention of imposing one's
will upon others. In order to characterize better each of these
attitudes, one can add the expression: "at any price." In other words,
we are faced with the absolutizing of human attitudes with all its
possible consequences.
Since these attitudes can exist independently of each other, they can
be separated; however in today's world both are indissolubly united,
with one or the other predominating.
Obviously, not only individuals fall victim to this double attitude of
sin; nations and blocs can do so too. And this favors even more the
introduction of the "structures of sin" of which I have spoken. If
certain forms of modern "imperialism" were considered in the light of
these moral criteria, we would see that hidden behind certain
decisions, apparently inspired only by economics or politics, are real
forms of idolatry: of money, ideology, class, technology.
I have wished to introduce this type of analysis above all in order to
point out the true nature of the evil which faces us with respect to
the development of peoples: it is a question of a moral evil, the fruit
of many sins which lead to "structures of sin." To diagnose the evil in
this way is to identify precisely, on the level of human conduct, the
path to be followed in order to overcome it.
38. This path is long and complex, and what is more it is constantly
threatened because of the intrinsic frailty of human resolutions and
achievements, and because of the mutability of very unpredictable and
external circumstances. Nevertheless, one must have the courage to set
out on this path, and, where some steps have been taken or a part of
the journey made, the courage to go on to the end.
In the context of these reflections, the decision to set out or to
continue the journey involves, above all, a moral value which men and
women of faith recognize as a demand of God's will, the only true
foundation of an absolutely binding ethic.
One would hope that also men and women without an explicit faith would
be convinced that the obstacles to integral development are not only
economic but rest on more profound attitudes which human beings can
make into absolute values. Thus one would hope that all those who, to
some degree or other, are responsible for ensuring a "more human life"
for their fellow human beings, whether or not they are inspired by a
religious faith, will become fully aware of the urgent need to change
the spiritual attitudes which define each individual's relationship
with self, with neighbor, with even the remotest human communities, and
with nature itself; and all of this in view of higher values such as
the common good or, to quote the felicitous expression of the
Encyclical Populorum Progressio, the full development "of the whole
individual and of all people."66
For Christians, as for all who recognize the precise theological
meaning of the word "sin," a change of behavior or mentality or mode of
existence is called "conversion," to use the language of the Rihle (cf.
Mk 13:3, 5, Is 30:15). This conversion specifically entails a
relationship to God, to the sin committed, to its consequences and
hence to one's neighbor, either an individual or a community. It is
God, in "whose hands are the hearts of the powerful"67 and the hearts
of all, who according his own promise and by the power of his Spirit
can transform "hearts of stone" into "hearts of flesh" (cf. Ezek 36:26).
On the path toward the desired conversion, toward the overcoming of the
moral obstacles to development, it is already possible to point to the
positive and moral value of the growing awareness of interdependence
among individuals and nations. The fact that men and women in various
parts of the world feel personally affected by the injustices and
violations of human rights committed in distant countries, countries
which perhaps they will never visit, is a further sign of a reality
transformed into awareness, thus acquiring a moral connotation.
It is above all a question of interdependence, sensed as a system
determining relationships in the contemporary world, in its economic,
cultural, political and religious elements, and accepted as a moral
category. When interdependence becomes recognized in this way, the
correlative response as a moral and social attitude, as a "virtue," is
solidarity. This then is not a feeling of vague compassion or shallow
distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far. On
the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit
oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of
each individual, because we are all really responsible for all. This
determination is based on the solid conviction that what is hindering
full development is that desire for profit and that thirst for power
already mentioned. These attitudes and "structures of sin" are only
conquered - presupposing the help of divine grace - by a diametrically
opposed attitude: a commitment to the good of one's neighbor with the
readiness, in the gospel sense, to "lose oneself" for the sake of the
other instead of exploiting him, and to "serve him" instead of
oppressing him for one's own advantage (cf. Mt 10:40-42; 20:25; Mk
10:42-45; Lk 22:25-27).
39. The exercise of solidarity within each society is valid when its
members recognize one another as persons. Those who are more
influential, because they have a greater share of goods and common
services, should feel responsible for the weaker and be ready to share
with them all they possess. Those who are weaker, for their part, in
the same spirit of solidarity, should not adopt a purely passive
attitude or one that is destructive of the social fabric, but, while
claiming their legitimate rights, should do what they can for the good
of all. The intermediate groups, in their turn, should not selfishly
insist on their particular interests, but respect the interests of
others.
Positive signs in the contemporary world are the growing awareness of
the solidarity of the poor among themselves, their efforts to support
one another, and their public demonstrations on the social scene which,
without recourse to violence, present their own needs and rights in the
face of the inefficiency or corruption of the public authorities. By
virtue of her own evangelical duty the Church feels called to take her
stand beside the poor, to discern the justice of their requests, and to
help satisfy them, without losing sight of the good of groups in the
context of the common good.
The same criterion is applied by analogy in international
relationships. Interdependence must be transformed into solidarity,
based upon the principle that the goods of creation are meant for all.
That which human industry produces through the processing of raw
materials, with the contribution of work, must serve equally for the
good of all.
Surmounting every type of imperialism and determination to preserve
their own hegemony, the stronger and richer nations must have a sense
of moral responsibility for the other nations, so that a real
international system may be established which will rest on the
foundation of the equality of all peoples and on the necessary respect
for their legitimate differences. The economically weaker countries, or
those still at subsistence level, must be enabled, with the assistance
of other peoples and of the international community, to make a
contribution of their own to the common good with their treasures of
humanity and culture, which otherwise would be lost for ever.
Solidarity helps us to see the "other"-whether a person, people or
nation-not just as some kind of instrument, with a work capacity and
physical strength to be exploited at low cost and then discarded when
no longer useful, but as our "neighbor," a "helper" (cf. Gen 2:18-20),
to be made a sharer, on a par with ourselves, in the banquet of life to
which all are equally invited by God. Hence the importance of
reawakening the religious awareness of individuals and peoples. Thus
the exploitation, oppression and annihilation of others are excluded.
These facts, in the present division of the world into opposing blocs,
combine to produce the danger of war and an excessive preoccupation
with personal security, often to the detriment of the autonomy, freedom
of decision, and even the territorial integrity of the weaker nations
situated within the so-called "areas of influence" or "safety belts."
The "structures of sin" and the sins which they produce are likewise
radically opposed to peace and development, for development, in the
familiar expression Pope Paul's Encyclical, is "the new name for
peace."68
In this way, the solidarity which we propose is the path to peace and
at the same time to development. For world peace is inconceivable
unless the world's leaders come to recognize that interdependence in
itself demands the abandonment of the politics of blocs, the sacrifice
of all forms of economic, military or political imperialism, and the
transformation of mutual distrust into collaboration. This is precisely
the act proper to solidarity among individuals and nations.
The motto of the pontificate of my esteemed predecessor Pius XII was
Opus iustitiae pax, peace as the fruit of justice. Today one could say,
with the same exactness and the same power of biblical inspiration (cf.
Is 32:17; Jas 3:18): Opus solidaritatis pax, peace as the fruit of
solidarity.
The goal of peace, so desired by everyone, will certainly be achieved
through the putting into effect of social and international justice,
but also through the practice of the virtues which favor togetherness,
and which teach us to live in unity, so as to build in unity, by giving
and receiving, a new society and a better world.
40. Solidarity is undoubtedly a Christian virtue. In what has been said
so far it has been possible to identify many points of contact between
solidarity and charity, which is the distinguishing mark of Christ's
disciples (cf. Jn 13:35). In the light of faith, solidarity seeks to go
beyond itself, to take on the specifically Christian dimension of total
gratuity, forgiveness and reconciliation. One's neighbor is then not
only a human being with his or her own rights and a fundamental
equality with everyone else, but becomes the living image of God the
Father, redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ and placed under the
permanent action of the Holy Spirit. One's neighbor must therefore be
loved, even if an enemy, with the same love with which the Lord loves
him or her; and for that person's sake one must be ready for sacrifice,
even the ultimate one: to lay down one's life for the brethren (cf. 1
Jn 3:16).
At that point, awareness of the common fatherhood of God, of the
brotherhood of all in Christ - "children in the Son" - and of the
presence and life-giving action of the Holy Spirit will bring to our
vision of the world a new criterion for interpreting it. Beyond human
and natural bonds, already so close and strong, there is discerned in
the light of faith a new model of the unity of the human race, which
must ultimately inspire our solidarity. This supreme model of unity,
which is a reflection of the intimate life of God, one God in three
Persons, is what we Christians mean by the word "communion." This
specifically Christian communion, jealously preserved, extended and
enriched with the Lord's help, is the soul of the Church's vocation to
be a "sacrament," in the sense already indicated.
Solidarity therefore must play its part in the realization of this
divine plan, both on the level of individuals and on the level of
national and international society. The "evil mechanisms" and
"structures of sin" of which we have spoken can be overcome only
through the exercise of the human and Christian solidarity to which the
Church calls us and which she tirelessly promotes. Only in this way can
such positive energies be fully released for the benefit of development
and peace. Many of the Church's canonized saints offer a wonderful
witness of such solidarity and can serve as examples in the present
difficult circumstances. Among them I wish to recall St. Peter Claver
and his service to the slaves at Cartagena de Indias, and St.
Maximilian Maria Kolbe who offered his life in place of a prisoner
unknown to him in the concentration camp at Auschwitz.
VI. SOME PARTICULAR GUIDELINES
41. The Church does not have technical revolutions to offer for the
problem of underdevelopment as such, as Pope Paul VI already affirmed
in his Encyclical.69 For the Church does not propose economic and
political systems or programs, nor does she show preference for one or
the other, provided that human dignity is properly respected and
promoted, and provided she herself is allowed the room she needs to
exercise her ministry in the world.
But the Church is an "expert in humanity,"70 and this leads her
necessarily to extend her religious mission to the various fields in
which men and women expend their efforts in search of the always
relative happiness which is possible in this world, in line with their
dignity as persons.
Following the example of my predecessors, I must repeat that whatever
affects the dignity of individuals and peoples, such as authentic
development, cannot be reduced to a "technical" problem. If reduced in
this way, development would be emptied of its true content, and this
would be an act of betrayal of the individuals and peoples whom
development is meant to serve.
This is why the Church has something to say today, just as twenty years
ago, and also in the future, about the nature, conditions, requirements
and aims of authentic development, and also about the obstacles which
stand in its way. In doing so the Church fulfills her mission to
evangelize, for she offers her first contribution to the solution of
the urgent problem of development when she proclaims the truth about
Christ, about herself and about man, applying this truth to a concrete
situation.71
As her instrument for reaching this goal, the Church uses her social
doctrine. In today's difficult situation, a more exact awareness and a
wider diffusion of the "set of principles for reflection, criteria for
judgment and directives for action" proposed by the Church's teaching72
would be of great help in promoting both the correct definition of the
problems being faced and the best solution to them.
It will thus be seen at once that the questions facing us are above all
moral questions; and that neither the analysis of the problem of
development as such nor the means to overcome the present difficulties
can ignore this essential dimension.
The Church's social doctrine is not a "third way" between liberal
capitalism and Marxist collectivism, nor even a possible alternative to
other solutions less radically opposed to one another: rather, it
constitutes a category of its own. Nor is it an ideology, but rather
the accurate formulation of the results of a careful reflection on the
complex realities of human existence, in society and in the
international order, in the light of faith and of the Church's
tradition. Its main aim is to interpret these realities, determining
their conformity with or divergence from the lines of the Gospel
teaching on man and his vocation, a vocation which is at once earthly
and transcendent; its aim is thus to guide Christian behavior. It
therefore belongs to the field, not of ideology, but of theology and
particularly of moral theology.
The teaching and spreading of her social doctrine are part of the
Church's evangelizing mission. And since it is a doctrine aimed at
guiding people's behavior, it consequently gives rise to a "commitment
to justice," according to each individual's role, vocation and
circumstances.
The condemnation of evils and injustices is also part of that ministry
of evangelization in the social field which is an aspect of the
Church's prophetic role. But it should be made clear that proclamation
is always more important than condemnation, and the latter cannot
ignore the former, which gives it true solidity and the force of higher
motivation.
42. Today more than in the past, the Church's social doctrine must be
open to an international outlook, in line with the Second Vatican
Council,73 the most recent Encyclicals,74 and particularly in line with
the Encyclical which we are commemorating.75 It will not be superfluous
therefore to reexamine and further clarify in this light the
characteristic themes and guidelines dealt with by the Magisterium in
recent years.
Here I would like to indicate one of them: the option or love of
preference for the poor. This is an option, or a special form of
primacy in the exercise of Christian charity, to which the whole
tradition of the Church bears witness. It affects the life of each
Christian inasmuch as he or she seeks to imitate the life of Christ,
but it applies equally to our social responsibilities and hence to our
manner of living, and to the logical decisions to be made concerning
the ownership and use of goods.
Today, furthermore, given the worldwide dimension which the social
question has assumed,76 this love of preference for the poor, and the
decisions which it inspires in us, cannot but embrace the immense
multitudes of the hungry, the needy, the homeless, those without
medical care and, above all, those without hope of a better future. It
is impossible not to take account of the existence of these realities.
To ignore them would mean becoming like the "rich man" who pretended
not to know the beggar Lazarus lying at his gate (cf. Lk 16:19-31).77
Our daily life as well as our decisions in the political and economic
fields must be marked by these realities. Likewise the leaders of
nations and the heads of international bodies, while they are obliged
always to keep in mind the true human dimension as a priority in their
development plans, should not forget to give precedence to the
phenomenon of growing poverty. Unfortunately, instead of becoming fewer
the poor are becoming more numerous, not only in less developed
countries but-and this seems no less scandalous-in the more developed
ones too.
It is necessary to state once more the characteristic principle of
Christian social doctrine: the goods of this world are originally meant
for all.78 The right to private property is valid and necessary, but it
does not nullify the value of this principle. Private property, in
fact, is under a "social mortgage,"79 which means that it has an
intrinsically social function, based upon and justified precisely by
the principle of the universal destination of goods. Likewise, in this
concern for the poor, one must not overlook that special form of
poverty which consists in being deprived of fundamental human rights,
in particular the right to religious freedom and also the right to
freedom of economic initiative.
43. The motivating concern for the poor - who are, in the very
meaningful term, "the Lord's poor"80 - must be translated at all levels
into concrete actions, until it decisively attains a series of
necessary reforms. Each local situation will show what reforms are most
urgent and how they can be achieved. But those demanded by the
situation of international imbalance, as already described, must not be
forgotten.
In this respect I wish to mention specifically: the reform of the
international trade system, which is mortgaged to protectionism and
increasing bilateralism; the reform of the world monetary and financial
system, today recognized as inadequate; the question of technological
exchanges and their proper use; the need for a review of the structure
of the existing international organizations, in the framework of an
international juridical order.
The international trade system today frequently discriminates against
the products of the young industries of the developing countries and
discourages the producers of raw materials. There exists, too, a kind
of international division of labor, whereby the low-cost products of
certain countries which lack effective labor laws or which are too weak
to apply them are sold in other parts of the world at considerable
profit for the companies engaged in this form of production, which
knows no frontiers.
The world monetary and financial system is marked by an excessive
fluctuation of exchange rates and interest rates, to the detriment of
the balance of payments and the debt situation of the poorer countries.
Forms of technology and their transfer constitute today one of the
major problems of international exchange and of the grave damage
deriving therefrom. There are quite frequent cases of developing
countries being denied needed forms of technology or sent useless ones.
In the opinion of many, the international organizations seem to be at a
stage of their existence when their operating methods, operating costs
and effectiveness need careful review and possible correction.
Obviously, such a delicate process cannot be put into effect without
the collaboration of all. This presupposes the overcoming of political
rivalries and the renouncing of all desire to manipulate these
organizations, which exist solely for the common good.
The existing institutions and organizations have worked well for the
benefit of peoples. Nevertheless, humanity today is in a new and more
difficult phase of its genuine development. It needs a greater degree
of international ordering, at the service of the societies, economies
and cultures of the whole world.
44. Development demands above all a spirit of initiative on the part of
the countries which need it.81 Each of them must act in accordance with
its own responsibilities, not expecting everything from the more
favored countries, and acting in collaboration with others in the same
situation. Each must discover and use to the best advantage its own
area of freedom. Each must make itself capable of initiatives
responding to its own needs as a society. Each must likewise realize
its true needs, as well as the rights and duties which oblige it to
respond to them. The development of peoples begins and is most
appropriately accomplished in the dedication of each people to its own
development, in collaboration with others.
It is important then that as far as possible the developing nations
themselves should favor the self-affirmation of each citizen, through
access to a wider culture and a free flow of information. Whatever
promotes literacy and the basic education which completes and deepens
it is a direct contribution to true development, as the Encyclical
Populorum Progressio proposed.82 These goals are still far from being
reached in so many parts of the world.
In order to take this path, the nations themselves will have to
identify their own priorities and clearly recognize their own needs,
according to the particular conditions of their people, their
geographical setting and their cultural traditions.
Some nations will have to increase food production, in order to have
always available what is needed for subsistence and daily life. In the
modern world - where starvation claims so many victims, especially
among the very young - there are examples of not particularly developed
nations which have nevertheless achieved the goal of food
self-sufficiency and have even become food exporters.
Other nations need to reform certain unjust structures, and in
particular their political institutions, in order to replace corrupt,
dictatorial and authoritarian forms of government by democratic and
participatory ones. This is a process which we hope will spread and
grow stronger. For the "health" of a political community - as expressed
in the free and responsible participation of all citizens in public
affairs, in the rule of law and in respect for the promotion of human
rights - is the necessary condition and sure guarantee of the
development of "the whole individual and of all people."
45. None of what has been said can be achieved without the
collaboration of all - especially the international community - in the
framework of a solidarity which includes everyone, beginning with the
most neglected. But the developing nations themselves have the duty to
practice solidarity among themselves and with the neediest countries of
the world.
It is desirable, for example, that nations of the some geographical
area should establish forms of cooperation which will make them less
dependent on more powerful producers; they should open their frontiers
to the products of the area; they should examine how their products
might complement one another; they should combine in order to set up
those services which each one separately is incapable of providing;
they should extend cooperation to the monetary and financial sector.
Interdependence is already a reality in many of these countries. To
acknowledge it, in such a way as to make it more operative, represents
an alternative to excessive dependence on richer and more powerful
nations, as part of the hoped-for development, without opposing anyone,
but discovering and making best use of the country's own potential. The
developing countries belonging to one geographical area, especially
those included in the term "South," can and ought to set up new
regional organizations inspired by criteria of equality, freedom and
participation in the comity of nations- as is already happening with
promising results.
An essential condition for global solidarity is autonomy and free
self-determination, also within associations such as those indicated.
But at the same time solidarity demands a readiness to accept the
sacrifices necessary for the good of the whole world community.
VII. CONCLUSION
46. Peoples and individuals aspire to be free: their search for full
development signals their desire to overcome the many obstacles
preventing them from enjoying a "more human life."
Recently, in the period following the publication of the encyclical
Populorum Progressio, a new way of confronting the problems of poverty
and underdevelopment has spread in some areas of the world, especially
in Latin America. This approach makes liberation the fundamental
category and the first principle of action. The positive values, as
well as the deviations and risks of deviation, which are damaging to
the faith and are connected with this form of theological reflection
and method, have been appropriately pointed out by the Church's
Magisterium.83
It is fitting to add that the aspiration to freedom from all forms of
slavery affecting the individual and society is something noble and
legitimate. This in fact is the purpose of development, or rather
liberation and development, taking into account the intimate connection
between the two.
Development which is merely economic is incapable of setting man free,
on the contrary, it will end by enslaving him further. Development that
does not include the cultural, transcendent and religious dimensions of
man and society, to the extent that it does not recognize the existence
of such dimensions and does not endeavor to direct its goals and
priorities toward the same, is even less conducive to authentic
liberation. Human beings are totally free only when they are completely
themselves, in the fullness of their rights and duties. The same can be
said about society as a whole.
The principal obstacle to be overcome on the way to authentic
liberation is sin and the structures produced by sin as it multiplies
and spreads.84
The freedom with which Christ has set us free (cf. Gal 5:1) encourages
us to become the servants of all. Thus the process of development and
liberation takes concrete shape in the exercise of solidarity, that is
to say in the love and service of neighbor, especially of the poorest:
"For where truth and love are missing, the process of liberation
results in the death of a freedom which will have lost all support."85
47. In the context of the sad experiences of recent years and of the
mainly negative picture of the present moment, the Church must strongly
affirm the possibility of overcoming the obstacles which, by excess or
by defect, stand in the way of development. And she must affirm her
confidence in a true liberation. Ultimately, this confidence and this
possibility are based on the Church's awareness of the divine promise
guaranteeing that our present history does not remain closed in upon
itself but is open to the Kingdom of God.
The Church has confidence also in man, though she knows the evil of
which he is capable. For she well knows that - in spite of the heritage
of sin, and the sin which each one is capable of committing -
there exist in the human person sufficient qualities and energies, a
fundamental "goodness" (cf. Gen 1:31), because he is the image of the
Creator, placed under the redemptive influence of Christ, who "united
himself in some fashion with every man,"86 and because the efficacious
action of the Holy Spirit "fills the earth" (Wis 1:7).
There is no justification then for despair or pessimism or inertia.
Though it be with sorrow, it must be said that just as one may sin
through selfishness and the desire for excessive profit and power, one
may also be found wanting with regard to the urgent needs of multitudes
of human beings submerged in conditions of underdevelopment, through
fear, indecision and, basically, through cowardice. We are all called,
indeed obliged, to face the tremendous challenge of the last decade of
the second Millennium, also because the present dangers threaten
everyone: a world economic crisis, a war without frontiers, without
winners or losers. In the face of such a threat, the distinction
between rich individuals and countries and poor individuals and
countries will have little value, except that a greater responsibility
rests on those who have more and can do more.
This is not however the sole motive or even the most important one. At
stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion
have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women
at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt. As
many people are already more or less clearly aware, the present
situation does not seem to correspond to this dignity. Every individual
is called upon to play his or her part in this peaceful campaign, a
campaign to be conducted by peaceful means, in order to secure
development in peace, in order to safeguard nature itself and the world
about us. The Church too feels profoundly involved in this enterprise,
and she hopes for its ultimate success.
Consequently, following the example of Pope Paul VI with his Encyclical
Populorum Progressio,87 I wish to appeal with simplicity and humility
to everyone, to all men and women without exception. I wish to ask them
to be convinced of the seriousness of the present moment and of each
one's individual responsibility, and to implement - by the way they
live as individuals and as families, by the use of their resources, by
their civic activity, by contributing to economic and political
decisions and by personal commitment to national and international
undertakings - the measures inspired by solidarity and love of
preference for the poor. This is what is demanded by the present moment
and above all by the very dignity of the human person, the
indestructible image of God the Creator, which is identical in each one
of us.
In this commitment, the sons and daughters of the Church must serve as
examples and guides, for they are called upon, in conformity with the
program announced by Jesus himself in the synagogue at Nazareth, to
"preach good news to the poor...to proclaim release to the captives and
recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are
oppressed, to proclaim the accept able year of the Lord" (Lk 4:18-19).
It is appropriate to emphasize the preeminent role that belongs to the
laity, both men and women, as was reaffirmed in the recent Assembly of
the Synod. It is their task to animate temporal realities with
Christian commitment, by which they show that they are witnesses and
agents of peace and justice. I wish to address especially those who,
through the sacrament of Baptism and the profession of the same Creed,
share a real, though imperfect, communion with us. I am certain that
the concern expressed in this Encyclical as well as the motives
inspiring it will be familiar to them, for these motives are inspired
by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We can find here a new invitation to
bear witness together to our common convictions concerning the dignity
of man, created by God, redeemed by Christ, made holy by the Spirit and
called upon in this world to live a life in conformity with this
dignity. I likewise address this appeal to the Jewish people, who share
with us the inheritance of Abraham, "our father in faith" (cf. Rm
4:11f.)88 and the tradition of the Old Testament, as well as to the
Muslims who, like us, believe in a just and merciful God. And I extend
it to all the followers of the world's great religions.
The meeting held last October 27 in Assisi the city of St. Francis, in
order to pray for and commit ourselves to peace - each one in fidelity
to his own religious profession - showed how much peace and, as its
necessary condition, the development of the whole person and of all
peoples, are also a matter of religion, and how the full achievement of
both the one and the other depends on our fidelity to our vocation as
men and women of faith. For it depends, above all, on God.
48. The Church well knows that no temporal achievement is to be
identified with the Kingdom of God, but that all such achievements
simply reflect and in a sense anticipate the glory of the Kingdom, the
Kingdom which we await at the end of history, when the Lord will come
again. But that expectation can never be an excuse for lack of concern
for people in their concrete personal situations and in their social,
national and international life, since the former is conditioned by the
latter, especially today.
However imperfect and temporary are all the things that can and ought
to be done through the combined efforts of everyone and through divine
grace, at a given moment of history, in order to make people's lives
"more human," nothing will be lost or will have been in vain. This is
the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, in an enlightening passage
of the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes: "When we have spread on
earth the fruits of our nature and our enterprise - human dignity,
fraternal communion, and freedom - according to the command of the Lord
and in his Spirit, we will find them once again, cleansed this time
from the stain of sin, illumined and transfigured, when Christ presents
to his Father an eternal and universal kingdom...here on earth that
kingdom is already present in mystery."89
The Kingdom of God becomes present above all in the celebration of the
sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the Lord's Sacrifice. In that
celebration the fruits of the earth and the work of human hands - the
bread and wine - are transformed mysteriously, but really and
substantially, through the power of the Holy Spirit and the words of
the minister, into the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son
of God and Son of Mary, through whom the Kingdom of the Father has been
made present in our midst.
The goods of this world and the work of our hands-the bread and
wine-serve for the coming of the definitive Kingdom, since the Lord,
through his Spirit, takes them up into himself in order to offer
himself to the Father and to offer us with himself in the renewal of
his one Sacrifice, which anticipates God's Kingdom and proclaims its
final coming.
Thus the Lord unites us with himself through the Eucharist- Sacrament
and Sacrifice-and he unites us with himself and with one another by a
bond stronger than any natural union; and thus united, he sends us into
the whole world to bear witness, through faith and works, to God's
love, preparing the coming of his Kingdom and anticipating it, though
in the obscurity of the present time.
All of us who take part in the Eucharist are called to discover,
through this sacrament, the profound meaning of our actions in the
world in favor of development and peace; and to receive from it the
strength to commit ourselves ever more generously, following the
example of Christ, who in this sacrament lays down his life for his
friends (cf. Jn 15:13). Our personal commitment, like Christ's and in
union with his, will-not be in vain but certainly fruitful.
49. I have called the current Marian Year in order that the Catholic
faithful may look more and more to Mary, who goes before us on the
pilgrimage of faith90 and with maternal care intercedes for us before
her Son, our Redeemer. I wish to entrust to her and to her intercession
this difficult moment of the modern world, and the efforts that are
being made and will be made, often with great suffering, in order to
contribute to the true development of peoples proposed and proclaimed
by my predecessor Paul VI.
In keeping with Christian piety through the ages, we present to the
Blessed Virgin difficult individual situations, so that she may place
them before her Son, asking that he alleviate and change them. But we
also present to her social situations and the international crisis
itself, in their worrying aspects of poverty, unemployment, shortage of
food, the arms race, contempt for human rights, and situations or
dangers of conflict, partial or total. In a filial spirit we wish to
place all this before her "eyes of mercy," repeating once more with
faith and hope the ancient antiphon: "Holy Mother of God, despise not
our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us always from all
dangers, O glorious and blessed Virgin."
Mary most holy, our Mother and Queen, is the one who turns to her Son
and says: "They have no more wine" (Jn 2:3). She is also the one who
praises God the Father, because "he has put down the mighty from their
thrones and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with
good things, and the rich he has sent empty away" (Lk 1:52-53). Her
maternal concern extends to the personal and social aspects of people's
life on earth.91
Before the Most Blessed Trinity, I entrust to Mary all that I have
written in this Encyclical, and I invite all to reflect and actively
commit themselves to promoting the true development of peoples, as the
prayer of the Mass for this intention states so well: "Father, you have
given all peoples one common origin, and your will is to gather them as
one family in yourself. Fill the hearts of all with the fire of your
love, and the desire to ensure justice for all their brothers and
sisters. By sharing the good things you give us, may we secure justice
and equality for every human being, an end to all division and a human
society built on love and peace."92 This, in conclusion, is what I ask
in the name of all my brothers and sisters, to whom I send a special
blessing as a sign of greeting and good wishes.
Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, on December 30 of the year 1987, the tenth of my Pontificate.
JOHN PAUL II
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Leo XIII, Encyclical Rerum Novarum (May 15, 1891): Leonis XIII P. M. Acta, XI, Romae 1892, pp. 97-144.
2. Pius XI, Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (May 15, 1931): AAS 23 (1931),
pp. 177-J28; John XXIII, Mater et Magistra (May 15, 1961); AAS 53
(1961), pp. 401-464; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens
(May 14, 1971): AAS 63 (1971), pp. 401- 441; John Paul II, Encyclical
Laborem Exercens (September 14, 1981): AAS 73 (1981), pp. 577-647. Also
Pius XII delivered a radio message (June 1, 1941) for the fiftieth
anniversary of the Encyclical of Leo XIII: AAS 33 (1941), pp. 195-205.
3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, n. 4.
4. Paul VI, Encyclical Populorum Progressio (March 26, 1967): AAS 59 (1967), pp. 257-299.
5. Cf. L'Osservatore Romano, May 25, 1987.
6. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on
Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22,
1986), 72: AAS 79 (1987), p. 586; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima
Adveniens (May 14, 1971), n. 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403f.
7. Cf. Encyclical Redemptoris Mater (March 25, 1987), n. 3: AAS 79
(1987), pp. 363f.; Homily at the Mass of January 1, 1987: L'Osservatore
Romano, January 2, 1987.
8. The Encyclical Populorum Progressio cites the documents of the
Second Vatican Ecumenical Council nineteen times, and sixteen of the
references are to the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern
World, Gaudium et Spes.
9. Gaudium et Spes, n. 1.
10. Ibid., n. 4; cf. Populorum Progressio, n. 13: loc. cit., pp. 263, 264.
11. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 3; Populorum Progressio, n. 13: loc. cit., p. 264.
12. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 63; Populorum Progressio, n. 9: loc. cit., p. 269.
13. Cf Gaudium et Spes. n. 69; Populorum Progressio, n. 22: loc. cit., p. 269.
14. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 57; Populorum Progressio, n. 41: loc. cit., p. 277.
15. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 19; Populorum Progressio, n. 41: loc. cit., pp. 277f.
16. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 86; Populorum Progressio, n. 48: loc.cit., p. 281.
17. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 69; Populorum Progressio, nn. 14- 21: loc. cit., pp. 264-268.
18. Cf. the Inscriptio of the Encyclical Populorum Progressio: loc. cit., p. 257.
19. The Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII has as its principal
subject "the condition of the workers" Leonis XIII P. M. Acta, XI,
Romae 1892, p. 97.
20. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on
Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22,
1986), n. 72: AAS 79 (1987), p. 586; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter
Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971); n. 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403f.
21. Cf. Encyclical Mater et Magistra (May 15, 1961): AAS 53 (1961), p. 440.
22. Gaudium et Spes, n. 63.
23. Cf. Encyclical Populorum Progressio, n. 3: loc. cit., p. 258: cf. also ibid., n. 9: loc. cit., p. 261.
24. Cf. ibid., n. 3: loc. cit., p. 258.
25. Ibid., n. 48: loc. cit., p. 281.
26. Cf. ibid., n. 14: loc. cit., p. 264: "Development cannot be limited
to mere economic growth. In order to be authentic, it must be complete:
integral, that is, it has to promote the good of every man and of the
whole man."
27. Ibid., n. 87: loc. cit., p. 299.
28. Cf. ibid., n. 53: loc. cit., p. 283.
29. Cf. ibid., n. 76: loc. cit., p. 295.
30. The decades referred to are the years 1960-1970 and 1970-1980, the present decade is the third (1980-1990).
31. The expression "Fourth World" is used not just occasionally for the
so-called less advanced countries, but also and especially for the
bands of great or extreme poverty in countries of medium and high
income.
32. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 1.
33. Encyclical Populorum Progressio, n. 33: loc. cit., p. 273.
34. It should be noted that the Holy See associated itself with the
celebration of this International Year with a special Document issued
by the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax entitled: "What Have You
Done to Your Homeless Brother?" The Church and the Housing Problem
(December 27, 1987).
35 Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971), nn. 8-9: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 406-408.
36. A recent United Nations publication entitled World Economic Survey
1987 provides the most recent data (cf. pp. 8-9). The percentage of
unemployed in the developed countries with a market economy jumped from
3% of the work force in 1970 to 8% in 1986. It now amounts to 29
million people.
37. Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (September 14, 1981), n. 18: AAS 73 (1981), pp. 624-625.
38. At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical Approach to the International Debt Question (December 27, 1986).
39. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 54: loc. cit., pp.
283f.: "Developing countries will thus no longer risk being overwhelmed
by debts whose repayment swallows up the greater part of their gains.
Rates of interest and time for repayment of the loan could be so
arranged as not to be too great a burden on either party, taking into
account free gifts, interest-free or low-interest loans, and the time
needed for liquidating the debts."
40. Cf. "Presentation" of the document At the Service of the Human
Community: An Ethical Approach to the International Debt Question
(December 27, 1986).
41. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 53; loc. cit., p. 283.
42. At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical Approach to the International Debt Question (December 27, 986), III, 2, 1.
43. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, nn. 20-21: loc. cit., pp. 267f.
44. Address at Drogheda, Ireland (September 29, 1979), n. 5: AAS 71 (1979), II, p. 1079.
45. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 37: loc. cit., pp. 275f.
46. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (November 22, 1981), especially in n. 30: AAS 74 (1982), pp. 115-117.
47. Cf. Human Rights: Collection of International Instruments, United
Nations, New York, 1983; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor
Hominis (March 4, 1979), n. 17: AAS 71 (1979), p. 296.
48. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the
Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 78; Paul VI, Encyclical
Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 76: loc. cit., pp. 294f.: "To wage war
on misery and to struggle against injustice is to promote, along with
improved conditions, the human and spiritual progress of all men, and
therefore the common good of humanity...peace is something that is
built up day after day, in the pursuit of an order intended by God,
which implies a more perfect form of justice among men."
49. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiarls Consortio (November 22, 1981),
n. 6: AAS 74 (1982), p. 88: "...history is not simply a fixed
progression toward what is better, but rather an event of freedom, and
even a struggle between freedoms...."
50. For this reason the word "development" was used in the Encyclical
rather than the word "progress," but with an attempt to give the word
"development" its fullest meaning.
51. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 19: loc. cit., pp.
266f.: "Increased possession is not the ultimate goal of nations or of
individuals. All growth is ambivalent.... The exclusive pursuit of
possessions thus becomes an obstacle to individual fulfillment and to
man's true greatness...both for nations and for individual men, avarice
is the most evident form of moral underdevelopment"; cf. also Paul VI,
Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971), n. 9: AAS 63
(1971), pp. 407f.
52. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World,
Gaudium et Spes, n. 35: Paul VI, Address to the Diplomatic Corps
(January 7, 1965): AAS 57 (1965), p. 232.
53. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, nn. 20-21: loc. cit., pp. 267f.
54. C f. Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (September 14, 1981), n. 4:
AAS 73 (1981), pp. 584f., Paul VI Encyclical Letter Populorum
Progressio, n. 15: loc. cit., p. 265.
55. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 42: loc. cit., p. 278.
56. Cf. Praeconium Paschale, Missale Romanum, ed. typ. altera, 1975, p.
272: "O certe necessarium Adae peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum
est! O felix culpa, quae talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!"
57. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 1.
58. Cf. for example, St. Basil the Great, Regulae Fusius Tractatae,
Interrogatio XXXVII, nn. 1-2: PG 31, 1009-1012 Theodoret of Cyr, De
Providentia, Oratio VII: PG 83, 665-686; St. Augustine, De Civitate
Dei, XIX, n. 17: CCL 48 683-685.
59. Cf. for example, St. John Chrysostom, In Evang. S. Matthaei, Hom.
50, 3-4: PG 58, 508-510, St. Ambrose De Officiis Ministrorum, lib. II,
XXVIII, 136-140: PL 16 139-141; St. Possidius, Vita S. Augustini
Episcopi, XXIV: PL 32, 53f.
60. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 23: loc. cit., p. 268:
"If someone who has the riches of this world sees his brother in need
and closes his heart to him, how does the love of God abide in him?"(1
Jn 3:17) It is well known how strong were the words used by the Fathers
of the Church to describe the proper attitude of persons who possess
any thing toward persons in need." In the previous number, the Pope had
cited n. 69 of the Pastoral Constitution, Gaudium et Spes, of the
Second Vatican Ecumenical Council.
61. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 47: "...a world
where freedom is not an empty word and where the poor man Lazarus can
sit down at the same table with the rich man."
62. Cf. ibid., n. 47: "It is a question, rather, of building a world
where every man, no matter what his race, religion or nationality, can
live a fully human life, freed from servitude imposed on him by other
men..."; cf. also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 29.
Such fundamental equality is one of the basic reasons why the Church
has always been opposed to every form of racism.
63. Cf. Homily at Val Visdende (July 12, 1987), n. 5: L'Osservatore
Romano, July 13-14, 1987; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima
Adveniens (May 14, 1971), n. 21: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 416f.
64. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 25.
65. Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (December 2,
1984), n. 16: "Whenever the Church speaks of situations of sin, or when
she condemns as social sins certain situations or the collective
behavior of certain social groups, big or small, or even of whole
nations and blocs of nations, she knows and she proclaims that such
cases of social sin are the result of the accumulation and
concentration of many personal sins. It is a case of the very personal
sins of those who cause or support evil or who exploit it; of those who
are in a position to avoid, eliminate or at least limit certain social
evils but who fail to do so out of laziness, fear or the conspiracy of
silence, through secret complicity or indifference; of those who take
refuge in the supposed impossibility of changing the world, and also of
those who sidestep the effort and sacrifice required, producing
specious reasons of a higher order. The real responsibility, then, lies
with individuals. A situation - or likewise an institution, a
structure, society itself - is not in itself the subject of moral acts.
Hence a situation cannot in itself be good or bad": AAS 77 (1985), p.
217.
66. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 42: loc. cit., p. 278.
67. Cf. Liturgia Horarum, Feria III hebdomadae IIIae Temporis per annum, Preces ad Vesperas.
68. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 87: loc. cit., p. 299.
69. Cf. ibid., n. 13; loc. cit., pp. 263f., 296f.
70. Cf. ibid., n. 13: loc. cit., p. 263.
71. Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Conference of the
Latin-American Bishops (January 28, 1979): AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196.
72. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on
Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22,
1986), n. 72: AAS 79 (1987), p. 586; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter
Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 971), n. 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403f.
73. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World,
Gaudium et Spes, Part II, Ch. V, Section 2: "Building Up the
International Community," nn. 83-90.
74. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (May 15, 1961):
AAS 53 (1961), p. 440; Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris (April 11,
1963), Part IV: AAS 55 (1963), pp. 291-296; Paul VI Apostolic Letter
Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971), nn 2-4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 402-404.
75. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, nn. 3, 9: loc. cit., pp. 258, 261.
76. Ibid., n. 3: loc. cit., p. 258.
77. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 47: loc. cit., p. 280;
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian
Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 68:
AAS 79 (1987), pp. 583f.
78. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the
Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 69; Paul VI, Encyclical
Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 22: loc. cit., p. 268; Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and
Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 90: AAS 79
(1987), p. 594; St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theol. IIa IIae, q. 66, art.
2.
79. Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Conference of the
Latin-American Bishops (January 28, 1979): AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196;
Ad Limina Address to a group of Polish Bishops, (December 17, 1987), n.
6: L'Osservatore Romano, December 18, 1987.
80. Because the Lord wished to identify himself with them (Mt 25:31-46)
and takes special care of them (cf. Ps 12[11]:6; Lk 1:52f.).
81. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 55: loc. cit., p. 284:
"These are the men and women that need to be helped, that need to be
convinced to take into their own hands their development, gradually
acquiring the means"; cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the
Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 86.
82. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 35: loc. cit., p. 274:
"Basic education is the first objective of a plan of development."
83. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on
Certain Aspects of the "Theology of Liberation" Libertatis Nuntius
(August 6, 1984), Introduction: AAS 76 (1984), pp. 876f.
84. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (December 2,
1984), n. 16: AAS 77 (1985), pp. 213-217; Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation,
Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986, nn. 38, 42: AAS 79 (1987), pp.
569, 571.
85. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on
Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22,
1986), n. 24: AAS 79 (1987), p. 564.
86. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World,
Gaudium et Spes, n. 22; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor
Hominis (March 4, 1979), n. 8: AAS 71 (1979), p. 272.
87. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 5: loc. cit., p. 259:
"We believe that all men of good will, together with our Catholic sons
and daughters and our Christian brethren, can and should agree on this
program"; cf. also nn. 81-83, 87: loc. cit., pp. 296-298, 299.
88. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration on the
Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate,
n. 4.
89. Gaudium et Spes, n. 39.
90. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the
Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 58; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Redemptoris Mater (March 25, 1987) nn. 5-6: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 365-367.
91. Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Marialis Cultus (February 2,
1974), n. 37: AAS 66 (1974), pp. 148f.; John Paul II, Homily at the
Shrine of Our Lady of Zapopan, Mexico (January 30, 1979), n. 4: AAS 71
(1979), p. 230.
92. Collect of the Mass "For the Development of Peoples": Missale Romanum, ed. typ. altera, 1975, p. 820.