Tuesday, December 24, 2013
PATRIARCHAL AND SYNODAL ENCYCLICAL ON THE 1700th ANNIVERSARY SINCE THE EDICT OF MILAN
+ BARTHOLOMEW
“Blessed is our God, who so deemed” and orders all things for all people, who has led us to “this day of the Resurrection” when “all has been filled with light, heaven and earth alike.” This year marks the 1700th anniversary since the issue of the Edict of Milan about religious freedom. Therefore, we are communicating to the Church in all places and times in order to address a message of hope, love, peace and optimism from the most holy Apostolic and Patriarchal Ecumenical Throne in as much as the Church is the continual presence of God. “Whoever has seen the Son has seen the Father” (John 4:9), and whoever has seen the institution of the Church has seen the divine-human Lord and the Holy Spirit, who are with us. The Church is precisely such an institution in freedom. “Such is Christianity: it grants freedom to those in slavery.” (St. John Chrysostom, Homily IX on 1 Corinthians 193). As a result of the Edict of Milan, the persecutions against Church and religion, previously licit, ceased; and for the first time in human form, freedom of religious conscience was instituted in the world. However, the freedom that Christ granted us (see Gal. 5:1) is not mere “form” and “letter”. It is genuine freedom, which we are always seeking in order that all things may become “new.” Otherwise, how can we possibly expect a new heaven and a new earth? Until the time of Constantine the Great, the history of the world, namely the period of “Old Israel” before Christ, and after the divinely incarnate presence of the “New Israel,” the free expression of conscious faith is replete with problems and persecutions to the point of martyrdom by blood for the sake of truth. History recounts the persecution of individuals who shared a different perspective and faith about God from that proclaimed by the worldly authorities or the society, which they inhabited. The Old Testament refers to the world leader, King Nebuchadnezzar and the creation of a large image of his person, which he demanded that all of his subjects should worship by bowing down before it. “The three holy children” were cast into the fiery pit because they refused to worship the idle of Nebuchadnezzar. They refused to render the status of divinity to a secular ruler, which he claimed for himself. St. Solomone and the Seven Maccabean children were persecuted with martyrdom alongside their teacher Eleazar. The fiery pit publicly rejected the authority of Nebuchadnezzar and foreshadowed the mystery of our all-holy Theotokos, by rejuvenating and preserving the three children unharmed, just as the fire of divinity preserved the Virgin Theotokos. The captive children, who refused to worship the irrational and arrogant human ruler claiming the features of God, cried out aloud in the pit: “let all God’s works praise the Lord.” In so doing, they prefigured the freedom brought by the Lord, “who became as one under the law so that he might win those under the law.” (see 1 Cor. 9:20) In ancient Athens, the Philosopher Socrates was condemned to death on the charge that he accepted the gods worshipped by the city. Similarly, there are many individual persecutions recorded by the classical Greek authors about those who supported different beliefs, such as the example of the persecution of Anaxagoras of Clazomene, who claimed that the sun is a fiery rock, or Diagoras of Milos, who criticized the ancient idolatrous mysteries and discouraged citizens in these. There is not doubt that physical or ideological persecutions through the centuries, which sometimes led and continued to lead to death by martyrdom, nevertheless did not abolish religious tolerance among people, as this was formally proclaimed in the Edict of Milan. The Roman emperors had an absolutist mentality, rendering themselves leaders even of religion. Indeed, they reached the point of demanding recognition for their divine status, which required equivalent honor. The rejection of Christians of such imperial demands provoked anger in as much as it questioned imperial authority. The result anthropocentric worldview was the well-known merciless persecutions, which filled many shrines with martyrs who “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the lamb.” (Rev. 7:14) Ultimately, the persecutions against religion affirmed the words of St. John Chrysostom: “One who fights against God can never destroy good to the end; instead, such a person may perhaps not feel that he is doing something terrible at the outset of his daring act. However, if he persists in his madness he can never lay a warring hand on God, because he will never avoid the hand of the invincible God.” (To those Opposed to the Monastic Life 1, PG 47.319) Emperors Constantine the Great in the East and Licinius in the West accepted the fact that, after three centuries of harsh persecution against the Christians, religious hatred and constant oppression resulted in no benefit for the empire. Therefore, they decided to allow Christians the freedom to practice their faith and worship of God. The content of the ever-relevant Edict of Milan in the 313 AD, which reflects the will of Constantine the Great, “who understood the craft of bitter warfare,” constituted the basis of the freedom of religious conscience that was recognized many centuries later. The Edict of Milan contains advanced positions on religious freedom, expressed in thirteen sections. It institutes principles which are foreign for that period of the fourth century but which still remain principles and signposts, even if some claim that these principles can also be fully applied in a world that lies in evil and in justice, where darkness prevails instead of righteousness and light. The Edict confesses and declares: respect for the thought and will of every person to care for the divine affairs as he wills; regard and respect for the divine and freedom of choice in religious matters to Christians and all people without discrimination; the return without delay to the community of Christians, the Church and the Synod of places of worship and other assets which were seized and taken from them; and all these things in order that “the divine care, which protects us and which we have already experienced in many situations, may remain securely with us forever.” This Edict and the consequent reformations of Constantine the Great introduced to the world the concept of human rights. For the first time the above-mentioned values were established: respect of religious tolerance, freedom of expression of religious conscience – values of human life – and all such values, which comprise the basis of the relevant legislation that is valid today and the various contents of occasional declarations by international organizations and state bodies. Constantine the Great, who received his vocation from above, embraced all people, citizens and faithful, believers and unbelievers, thereby becoming a servant of the peaceful welfare and the salvation of all humanity. From his time onward, the Church of Christ transfigures institutions and regenerates the world, precisely as the burning bush on Mt. Sinai that was not consumed, the Womb that contained the uncontainable, namely Life in order that we may have life. (see John 10:10) If we carefully observe the history of the world since that time, especially today, after 1700 years from the declaration of the Edict of Milan by Constantine the Great, we sadly ascertain that the various regulations about religious freedom have unfortunately been violated on numerous occasions in the past, not only against Christians, but sometimes even by Christians themselves against their fellow Christians and against the adherence of other religions. Regretfully, when Christians became the majority within society, there were some instances of overzealous tendencies. One of the more contemptible instances of such spiteful conduct among Christians was the great schism and division of the One Church, which ignored in later generations that “Christ is not divided” (1 Cor. 1:13) and that we humans are “earth and ashes.” (Sir. 10:9) We overlooked and continue to overlook the aguish of the division of the seamless garment of the Lord, the Church, both locally and in every parish as One, Catholic, and Apostolic. Thus, as another “furnace of evil” (Prov. 16:30), we no longer enjoy love, peace, and tolerance; nor do we ask ourselves and one another the crucial question: “shall not the judge of all the earth do what is just” (Gen. 18:25) for us as well? Last century, the Orthodox Church in particular was persecuted relentlessly by the atheist regime and other states, which depended on this regime ideologically, especially in the countries of Eastern Europe. In some countries, Christians are still, to this day, treated with great disfavor, despite the fact that many international treaties have now been universally recognize the right to religious freedom. The relevant reports on religious oppressions by the appropriate international organizations are replete with specific examples of religious oppression against Christian religious minorities in particular as well as individual Christians. To this very day, unfortunately, we must emphasize that religious tolerance and freedom of worship are an achievement of civilization. There are vast regions of the world that are inhabited by people, who do not tolerate a different religious faith from theirs. Religious persecutions continue to exist, even if they do not assume the same form as persecutions of the early Christians. Various unfavorable discriminations against adherents of several religious faiths still persist and are sometimes intensely oppressive. In many cases, religious fanaticism and fundamentalism prevail, so that the Edict of Milan is still relevant in our times and addresses those people, who, despite the passing of 1700 years since its declaration, have yet to apply it completely. As we observe the journey of humanity from this sacred Center of Orthodoxy, we can freely admit that, despite the rapid progress of science and human discoveries, unfortunately the world has as a whole has not yet reached the noble concept and perception of religious freedom and that we still need a collaborative effort to achieve this goal. Nonetheless, contemporary religious persecutions against Christians once again reveal the power of faith and the grace of sanctity. Fathers, Brothers, and Children in the Risen Lord, The anniversary that we celebrate is a crucial sign. It signifies that, when man loses his unity with the Church, whose constitution lies in the Trinitarian unity, he also loses his freedom. For one loses oneself when one loses all others. Everything in the Church is illumined by the Trinitarian unity, particularly the Eucharistic sacrament, which comprises the very heart of the Church as a gift from the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit. If man preserves the Trinitarian unity, man is preserved as person and communion. If we preserve and experience this unity, the divine – human unity, then we preserve the unconfused and undivided unity of the two natures in Christ, which are extended to us as a blessing in the unity of truth and life, institution and grace, law and freedom. Those things that appear antithetical in fact interpenetrate without change and without alteration in accordance with the model of the Theotokos, who brought the opposites into the same. At the same time, this interpenetration reveals the constant presence at all times and in all places of Christ, divine and human, who continues to journey in the field of history with another form. He journeys with every person who struggles searches and despairs not in order to grant “magical solutions” as some sensory narcotic but in order to open his eyes, grant new senses and lift him toward heaven, while bringing down to earth the Holy Spirit which enters our earthly knead as a Trinitarian leaven. No human institution, even if labeled ecclesiastical, can contain, tolerate, and satisfy the man, who breathe God within and desires what lies beyond, namely ongoing perfection in Christ. Nor is it possible for such a man to be satisfied with any promise or worldly perspective when he thirsts for the inconceivable and humanly inaccessible. All human existence cries “No!” to every secular institution, which supposedly claims that it leads to the mystery of life and salvation. Every mechanical and seemingly “good” spiritual institution is “only” ready is frail, dissolved and non-existent. Therefore, the Lord, who knows all things and guides human hearts, came to shatter these “prisons” so he was persecuted and continues to be persecuted. However, in the end He was victorious in His Resurrection. He destroyed deceit. He overthrew the bankers’ tables and the merchants’ benches, namely those who had converted God’s temple into “a house of commerce.” (John 2:17) He liberated humanity from the “curse” of the law. (Gal. 3:13) Through His descent into hades, “chains were broken, gates were shattered, tombs were open, and the dead were brought to life.” (Aposticha, Great Vespers, Holy Friday) Thus, all those who were “dead” from love, freedom, human rights, faith, hope, expectation, light, righteousness, truth, life, passed over into light: “and none was left dead and buried.” (Catechetical Homily of St. John Chrysostom) And thus was constituted the holy Church, which through the ages, the martyrs, the ascetics and the righteous, despite persecutions and human temptations, is no “prison,” but freedom and, like death, powerful love. As the herald of this truth through the centuries, the Church is the continuation and consequence of the womb of another Mother, “wider than the heavens,” which gives birth to freedom. Thanks to the Church, all of us are children of the free woman (Gal. 4:31), children of freedom, which is acquired through obedience to the divine truth and love. If human institutions are afraid of human freedom, either dispelling, or disregarding, or even abolishing it, the institution of the Church, generates free persons in the Holy Spirit. And the Spirit constitutes the entire institution of the Church in as much as it “breathes where it wills but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (John 3:8) The indefinable nature of freedom is the rock of our faith. The Wisdom of God, the Lady Theotokos our Pammakaristos and Conciliation, St. Demetrios Kanavis, St. George the Trophy-bearer of the Phanar, and all the saints of our Church are not keepers of the law but legislators according to St. Symeon the New Theologian. The institution of the Church is charismatic, and the charismata of the saints function as institutional signposts for the faithful of the Church. One can truly and experientially say that charismatics do not exist but in fact become and are continually born for charisma is not granted as a static quality, but as a blessing, which is granted perpetually. Charismatics are those who are truly free because they are aware of the ultimate weakness of humanity and goodness of God. Such is the teaching that has trickled down to us from the Edict of Saint Constantine. Those who see everyone else good and pure, regarding themselves as being “beneath all creation,” possess the grace of compunction and humility. They recognize the gifts of inner rest and illumination, they regard nothing as their own achievement, nor do they exploit any opportunity to expand their “authority” by “undermining” others, namely by limiting the freedom of others. The saints marvel at God’s ineffable love and spontaneously return this love directly to the Giver of al gifts. This is precisely what renders the saints worthy of continually receiving gifts that are new, greater, spotless, spiritual, a blessing for all creation, general achievements. In turn, they continue to reserve to have no high regard for themselves. Their highest regard is God. As soon as they become aware that the world honors them, the saints are surprised, worry, and withdraw. They retire behind the curtain of feigned foolishness or ignorance, which in fact is true freedom. They are comfortable because they live, follow, and contribute to the flow of divine blood and grace within the body of the Church community. Brothers and Sisters in the Lord, Human rights and the freedom of religious conscience are gifts which were “once given to the saints” (Jude 1:3), but which are constantly acquired along the journey of life. They are acquired through the experience of communion in Christ within the harmonious cosmic liturgy. We have been talking for 1700 years about the freedom of human conscience. However, the Orthodox Church always – and particularly in the recent years of global changes within the last tragic century – foresees and discerns in its entirety the “prevalence in the world of peace, righteousness, freedom, fraternity and love among all peoples, and the elimination of all racial and other distinctions,” as would be decided by the coming Holy and Great Synod. These sacred gifts are experienced through grace in the Divine Liturgy, where the creation of the world is revealed. It is humanly impossible to comprehend the magnitude of our freedom because we do not respect human beings as the image of God. And if we do not love our neighbor, we do not truly love God. In this world, people naively imagine that “all things are fluid and nothing is permanent and it is not possible to cross the same river twice” (Heraclitus), namely that all things come and go and are forgotten, while human stones and graves cover them. The Lord granted us the mystery of memory in freedom, when he proclaimed that “nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered” (Luke 12:2) and that all things culminate in the truth of freedom in Him and in the sense of doxological gratitude “for all that we know and do not know.”
Sunday, December 22, 2013
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS PRIESTS AND DEACONS MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS THE LAY FAITHFUL AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL ON INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHARITY AND TRUTH
78. Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who
he is. In the face of the enormous problems surrounding the development of
peoples, which almost make us yield to discouragement, we find solace in the
sayings of our Lord Jesus Christ, who teaches us: “Apart from me you can do
nothing” (Jn 15:5) and then encourages us: “I am with you always, to the
close of the age” (Mt 28:20). As we contemplate the vast amount of work
to be done, we are sustained by our faith that God is present alongside those
who come together in his name to work for justice. Paul VI recalled in
Populorum Progressio that man cannot bring about his own progress unaided,
because by himself he cannot establish an authentic humanism. Only if we are
aware of our calling, as individuals and as a community, to be part of God's
family as his sons and daughters, will we be able to generate a new vision and
muster new energy in the service of a truly integral humanism. The greatest
service to development, then, is a Christian humanism[157] that
enkindles charity and takes its lead from truth, accepting both as a lasting
gift from God. Openness to God makes us open towards our brothers and sisters
and towards an understanding of life as a joyful task to be accomplished in a
spirit of solidarity. On the other hand, ideological rejection of God and an
atheism of indifference, oblivious to the Creator and at risk of becoming
equally oblivious to human values, constitute some of the chief obstacles to
development today. A humanism which excludes God is an inhuman humanism.
Only a humanism open to the Absolute can guide us in the promotion and building
of forms of social and civic life — structures, institutions, culture and
ethos — without exposing us to the risk of becoming ensnared by the fashions
of the moment. Awareness of God's undying love sustains us in our laborious and
stimulating work for justice and the development of peoples, amid successes and
failures, in the ceaseless pursuit of a just ordering of human affairs. God's
love calls us to move beyond the limited and the ephemeral, it gives us the
courage to continue seeking and working for the benefit of all, even if this
cannot be achieved immediately and if what we are able to achieve, alongside
political authorities and those working in the field of economics, is always
less than we might wish[158]. God gives us the strength to fight and to
suffer for love of the common good, because he is our All, our greatest hope.
79. Development needs Christians with their arms raised towards God in
prayer, Christians moved by the knowledge that truth-filled love, caritas in
veritate, from which authentic development proceeds, is not produced by us,
but given to us. For this reason, even in the most difficult and complex times,
besides recognizing what is happening, we must above all else turn to God's
love. Development requires attention to the spiritual life, a serious
consideration of the experiences of trust in God, spiritual fellowship in
Christ, reliance upon God's providence and mercy, love and forgiveness,
self-denial, acceptance of others, justice and peace. All this is essential if
“hearts of stone” are to be transformed into “hearts of flesh” (Ezek
36:26), rendering life on earth “divine” and thus more worthy of humanity. All
this is of man, because man is the subject of his own existence; and at
the same time it is of God, because God is at the beginning and end of
all that is good, all that leads to salvation: “the world or life or death or
the present or the future, all are yours; and you are Christ's; and Christ is
God's” (1 Cor 3:22-23). Christians long for the entire human family to
call upon God as “Our Father!” In union with the only-begotten Son, may all
people learn to pray to the Father and to ask him, in the words that Jesus
himself taught us, for the grace to glorify him by living according to his will,
to receive the daily bread that we need, to be understanding and generous
towards our debtors, not to be tempted beyond our limits, and to be delivered
from evil (cf. Mt 6:9-13).
At the conclusion of the Pauline Year, I gladly express this hope in
the Apostle's own words, taken from the Letter to the Romans: “Let love
be genuine; hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good; love one another with
brotherly affection; outdo one another in showing honour” (Rom 12:9-10).
May the Virgin Mary — proclaimed Mater Ecclesiae by Paul VI and honoured
by Christians as Speculum Iustitiae and Regina Pacis — protect us
and obtain for us, through her heavenly intercession, the strength, hope and joy
necessary to continue to dedicate ourselves with generosity to the task of
bringing about the “development of the whole man and of all men”[159].
Given in Rome, at Saint Peter's, on 29 June, the Solemnity of the Holy
Apostles Peter and Paul, in the year 2009, the fifth of my Pontificate.
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS PRIESTS AND DEACONS MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS THE LAY FAITHFUL AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL ON INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHARITY AND TRUTH
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PEOPLES
AND TECHNOLOGY
AND TECHNOLOGY
68. The development of peoples is intimately linked to the development of
individuals. The human person by nature is actively involved in his own
development. The development in question is not simply the result of natural
mechanisms, since as everybody knows, we are all capable of making free and
responsible choices. Nor is it merely at the mercy of our caprice, since we all
know that we are a gift, not something self-generated. Our freedom is profoundly
shaped by our being, and by its limits. No one shapes his own conscience
arbitrarily, but we all build our own “I” on the basis of a “self” which is
given to us. Not only are other persons outside our control, but each one of us
is outside his or her own control. A person's development is compromised, if
he claims to be solely responsible for producing what he becomes. By
analogy, the development of peoples goes awry if humanity thinks it can
re-create itself through the “wonders” of technology, just as economic
development is exposed as a destructive sham if it relies on the “wonders” of
finance in order to sustain unnatural and consumerist growth. In the face of
such Promethean presumption, we must fortify our love for a freedom that is not
merely arbitrary, but is rendered truly human by acknowledgment of the good that
underlies it. To this end, man needs to look inside himself in order to
recognize the fundamental norms of the natural moral law which God has written
on our hearts.
69. The challenge of development today is closely linked to technological
progress, with its astounding applications in the field of biology.
Technology — it is worth emphasizing — is a profoundly human reality, linked to
the autonomy and freedom of man. In technology we express and confirm the
hegemony of the spirit over matter. “The human spirit, ‘increasingly free of its
bondage to creatures, can be more easily drawn to the worship and contemplation
of the Creator'”[150]. Technology enables us to exercise dominion over
matter, to reduce risks, to save labour, to improve our conditions of life. It
touches the heart of the vocation of human labour: in technology, seen as the
product of his genius, man recognizes himself and forges his own humanity.
Technology is the objective side of human action[151] whose origin and
raison d'etre is found in the subjective element: the worker himself. For
this reason, technology is never merely technology. It reveals man and his
aspirations towards development, it expresses the inner tension that impels him
gradually to overcome material limitations. Technology, in this sense, is a
response to God's command to till and to keep the land (cf. Gen 2:15)
that he has entrusted to humanity, and it must serve to reinforce the covenant
between human beings and the environment, a covenant that should mirror God's
creative love.
70. Technological development can give rise to the idea that technology is
self-sufficient when too much attention is given to the “how” questions,
and not enough to the many “why” questions underlying human activity. For
this reason technology can appear ambivalent. Produced through human creativity
as a tool of personal freedom, technology can be understood as a manifestation
of absolute freedom, the freedom that seeks to prescind from the limits inherent
in things. The process of globalization could replace ideologies with
technology[152], allowing the latter to become an ideological power
that threatens to confine us within an a priori that holds us back from
encountering being and truth. Were that to happen, we would all know, evaluate
and make decisions about our life situations from within a technocratic cultural
perspective to which we would belong structurally, without ever being able to
discover a meaning that is not of our own making. The “technical” worldview that
follows from this vision is now so dominant that truth has come to be seen as
coinciding with the possible. But when the sole criterion of truth is efficiency
and utility, development is automatically denied. True development does not
consist primarily in “doing”. The key to development is a mind capable of
thinking in technological terms and grasping the fully human meaning of human
activities, within the context of the holistic meaning of the individual's
being. Even when we work through satellites or through remote electronic
impulses, our actions always remain human, an expression of our responsible
freedom. Technology is highly attractive because it draws us out of our physical
limitations and broadens our horizon. But human freedom is authentic only
when it responds to the fascination of technology with decisions that are the
fruit of moral responsibility. Hence the pressing need for formation in an
ethically responsible use of technology. Moving beyond the fascination that
technology exerts, we must reappropriate the true meaning of freedom, which is
not an intoxication with total autonomy, but a response to the call of being,
beginning with our own personal being.
71. This deviation from solid humanistic principles that a technical mindset
can produce is seen today in certain technological applications in the fields of
development and peace. Often the development of peoples is considered a matter
of financial engineering, the freeing up of markets, the removal of tariffs,
investment in production, and institutional reforms — in other words, a purely
technical matter. All these factors are of great importance, but we have to ask
why technical choices made thus far have yielded rather mixed results. We need
to think hard about the cause. Development will never be fully guaranteed
through automatic or impersonal forces, whether they derive from the market or
from international politics. Development is impossible without upright men
and women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely
attuned to the requirements of the common good. Both professional competence
and moral consistency are necessary. When technology is allowed to take over,
the result is confusion between ends and means, such that the sole criterion for
action in business is thought to be the maximization of profit, in politics the
consolidation of power, and in science the findings of research. Often,
underneath the intricacies of economic, financial and political
interconnections, there remain misunderstandings, hardships and injustice. The
flow of technological know-how increases, but it is those in possession of it
who benefit, while the situation on the ground for the peoples who live in its
shadow remains unchanged: for them there is little chance of emancipation.
72. Even peace can run the risk of being considered a technical product,
merely the outcome of agreements between governments or of initiatives aimed at
ensuring effective economic aid. It is true that peace-building requires
the constant interplay of diplomatic contacts, economic, technological and
cultural exchanges, agreements on common projects, as well as joint strategies
to curb the threat of military conflict and to root out the underlying causes of
terrorism. Nevertheless, if such efforts are to have lasting effects, they must
be based on values rooted in the truth of human life. That is, the voice of the
peoples affected must be heard and their situation must be taken into
consideration, if their expectations are to be correctly interpreted. One must
align oneself, so to speak, with the unsung efforts of so many individuals
deeply committed to bringing peoples together and to facilitating development on
the basis of love and mutual understanding. Among them are members of the
Christian faithful, involved in the great task of upholding the fully human
dimension of development and peace.
73. Linked to technological development is the increasingly pervasive
presence of the means of social communications. It is almost impossible
today to imagine the life of the human family without them. For better or for
worse, they are so integral a part of life today that it seems quite absurd to
maintain that they are neutral — and hence unaffected by any moral
considerations concerning people. Often such views, stressing the strictly
technical nature of the media, effectively support their subordination to
economic interests intent on dominating the market and, not least, to attempts
to impose cultural models that serve ideological and political agendas. Given
the media's fundamental importance in engineering changes in attitude towards
reality and the human person, we must reflect carefully on their influence,
especially in regard to the ethical-cultural dimension of globalization and the
development of peoples in solidarity. Mirroring what is required for an ethical
approach to globalization and development, so too the meaning and purpose of
the media must be sought within an anthropological perspective. This means
that they can have a civilizing effect not only when, thanks to
technological development, they increase the possibilities of communicating
information, but above all when they are geared towards a vision of the person
and the common good that reflects truly universal values. Just because social
communications increase the possibilities of interconnection and the
dissemination of ideas, it does not follow that they promote freedom or
internationalize development and democracy for all. To achieve goals of this
kind, they need to focus on promoting the dignity of persons and peoples, they
need to be clearly inspired by charity and placed at the service of truth, of
the good, and of natural and supernatural fraternity. In fact, human freedom is
intrinsically linked with these higher values. The media can make an important
contribution towards the growth in communion of the human family and the
ethos of society when they are used to promote universal participation in
the common search for what is just.
74. A particularly crucial battleground in today's cultural struggle between
the supremacy of technology and human moral responsibility is the field of
bioethics, where the very possibility of integral human development is
radically called into question. In this most delicate and critical area, the
fundamental question asserts itself force-fully: is man the product of his own
labours or does he depend on God? Scientific discoveries in this field and the
possibilities of technological intervention seem so advanced as to force a
choice between two types of reasoning: reason open to transcendence or reason
closed within immanence. We are presented with a clear either/ or. Yet
the rationality of a self-centred use of technology proves to be irrational
because it implies a decisive rejection of meaning and value. It is no
coincidence that closing the door to transcendence brings one up short against a
difficulty: how could being emerge from nothing, how could intelligence be born
from chance?[153] Faced with these dramatic questions, reason and faith
can come to each other's assistance. Only together will they save man.
Entranced by an exclusive reliance on technology, reason without faith is doomed
to flounder in an illusion of its own omnipotence. Faith without reason risks
being cut off from everyday life[154].
75. Paul VI had already recognized and drawn attention to the global
dimension of the social question[155]. Following his lead, we need to
affirm today that the social question has become a radically anthropological
question, in the sense that it concerns not just how life is conceived but
also how it is manipulated, as bio-technology places it increasingly under man's
control. In vitro fertilization, embryo research, the possibility of
manufacturing clones and human hybrids: all this is now emerging and being
promoted in today's highly disillusioned culture, which believes it has mastered
every mystery, because the origin of life is now within our grasp. Here we see
the clearest expression of technology's supremacy. In this type of culture, the
conscience is simply invited to take note of technological possibilities. Yet we
must not underestimate the disturbing scenarios that threaten our future, or the
powerful new instruments that the “culture of death” has at its disposal. To the
tragic and widespread scourge of abortion we may well have to add in the future
— indeed it is already surreptiously present — the systematic eugenic
programming of births. At the other end of the spectrum, a pro-euthanasia
mindset is making inroads as an equally damaging assertion of control over life
that under certain circumstances is deemed no longer worth living. Underlying
these scenarios are cultural viewpoints that deny human dignity. These practices
in turn foster a materialistic and mechanistic understanding of human life. Who
could measure the negative effects of this kind of mentality for development?
How can we be surprised by the indifference shown towards situations of human
degradation, when such indifference extends even to our attitude towards what is
and is not human? What is astonishing is the arbitrary and selective
determination of what to put forward today as worthy of respect. Insignificant
matters are considered shocking, yet unprecedented injustices seem to be widely
tolerated. While the poor of the world continue knocking on the doors of the
rich, the world of affluence runs the risk of no longer hearing those knocks, on
account of a conscience that can no longer distinguish what is human. God
reveals man to himself; reason and faith work hand in hand to demonstrate to us
what is good, provided we want to see it; the natural law, in which creative
Reason shines forth, reveals our greatness, but also our wretchedness insofar as
we fail to recognize the call to moral truth.
76. One aspect of the contemporary technological mindset is the tendency to
consider the problems and emotions of the interior life from a purely
psychological point of view, even to the point of neurological reductionism. In
this way man's interiority is emptied of its meaning and gradually our awareness
of the human soul's ontological depths, as probed by the saints, is lost. The
question of development is closely bound up with our understanding of the human
soul, insofar as we often reduce the self to the psyche and confuse the
soul's health with emotional well-being. These over-simplifications stem from a
profound failure to understand the spiritual life, and they obscure the fact
that the development of individuals and peoples depends partly on the resolution
of problems of a spiritual nature. Development must include not just material
growth but also spiritual growth, since the human person is a “unity of body
and soul”[156], born of God's creative love and destined for eternal
life. The human being develops when he grows in the spirit, when his soul comes
to know itself and the truths that God has implanted deep within, when he enters
into dialogue with himself and his Creator. When he is far away from God, man is
unsettled and ill at ease. Social and psychological alienation and the many
neuroses that afflict affluent societies are attributable in part to spiritual
factors. A prosperous society, highly developed in material terms but weighing
heavily on the soul, is not of itself conducive to authentic development. The
new forms of slavery to drugs and the lack of hope into which so many people
fall can be explained not only in sociological and psychological terms but also
in essentially spiritual terms. The emptiness in which the soul feels abandoned,
despite the availability of countless therapies for body and psyche, leads to
suffering. There cannot be holistic development and universal common good
unless people's spiritual and moral welfare is taken into account,
considered in their totality as body and soul.
77. The supremacy of technology tends to prevent people from recognizing
anything that cannot be explained in terms of matter alone. Yet everyone
experiences the many immaterial and spiritual dimensions of life. Knowing is not
simply a material act, since the object that is known always conceals something
beyond the empirical datum. All our knowledge, even the most simple, is always a
minor miracle, since it can never be fully explained by the material instruments
that we apply to it. In every truth there is something more than we would have
expected, in the love that we receive there is always an element that surprises
us. We should never cease to marvel at these things. In all knowledge and in
every act of love the human soul experiences something “over and above”, which
seems very much like a gift that we receive, or a height to which we are raised.
The development of individuals and peoples is likewise located on a height, if
we consider the spiritual dimension that must be present if such
development is to be authentic. It requires new eyes and a new heart, capable of
rising above a materialistic vision of human events, capable of glimpsing
in development the “beyond” that technology cannot give. By following this path,
it is possible to pursue the integral human development that takes its direction
from the driving force of charity in truth.
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS PRIESTS AND DEACONS MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS THE LAY FAITHFUL AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL ON INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHARITY AND TRUTH
THE COOPERATION
OF THE HUMAN FAMILY
OF THE HUMAN FAMILY
53. One of the deepest forms of poverty a person can experience is isolation.
If we look closely at other kinds of poverty, including material forms, we see
that they are born from isolation, from not being loved or from difficulties in
being able to love. Poverty is often produced by a rejection of God's love, by
man's basic and tragic tendency to close in on himself, thinking himself to be
self-sufficient or merely an insignificant and ephemeral fact, a “stranger” in a
random universe. Man is alienated when he is alone, when he is detached from
reality, when he stops thinking and believing in a foundation[125]. All
of humanity is alienated when too much trust is placed in merely human projects,
ideologies and false utopias[126]. Today humanity appears much more
interactive than in the past: this shared sense of being close to one another
must be transformed into true communion. The development of peoples depends,
above all, on a recognition that the human race is a single family working
together in true communion, not simply a group of subjects who happen to live
side by side[127].
Pope Paul VI noted that “the world is in trouble because of the lack of
thinking”[128]. He was making an observation, but also expressing a
wish: a new trajectory of thinking is needed in order to arrive at a better
understanding of the implications of our being one family; interaction among the
peoples of the world calls us to embark upon this new trajectory, so that
integration can signify solidarity[129] rather than marginalization.
Thinking of this kind requires a deeper critical evaluation of the category
of relation. This is a task that cannot be undertaken by the social sciences
alone, insofar as the contribution of disciplines such as metaphysics and
theology is needed if man's transcendent dignity is to be properly understood.
As a spiritual being, the human creature is defined through interpersonal
relations. The more authentically he or she lives these relations, the more his
or her own personal identity matures. It is not by isolation that man
establishes his worth, but by placing himself in relation with others and with
God. Hence these relations take on fundamental importance. The same holds true
for peoples as well. A metaphysical understanding of the relations between
persons is therefore of great benefit for their development. In this regard,
reason finds inspiration and direction in Christian revelation, according to
which the human community does not absorb the individual, annihilating his
autonomy, as happens in the various forms of totalitarianism, but rather values
him all the more because the relation between individual and community is a
relation between one totality and another[130]. Just as a family does
not submerge the identities of its individual members, just as the Church
rejoices in each “new creation” (Gal 6:15; 2 Cor 5:17)
incorporated by Baptism into her living Body, so too the unity of the human
family does not submerge the identities of individuals, peoples and cultures,
but makes them more transparent to each other and links them more closely in
their legitimate diversity.
54. The theme of development can be identified with the inclusion-in-relation
of all individuals and peoples within the one community of the human family,
built in solidarity on the basis of the fundamental values of justice and peace.
This perspective is illuminated in a striking way by the relationship between
the Persons of the Trinity within the one divine Substance. The Trinity is
absolute unity insofar as the three divine Persons are pure relationality. The
reciprocal transparency among the divine Persons is total and the bond between
each of them complete, since they constitute a unique and absolute unity. God
desires to incorporate us into this reality of communion as well: “that they may
be one even as we are one” (Jn 17:22). The Church is a sign and
instrument of this unity[131]. Relationships between human beings
throughout history cannot but be enriched by reference to this divine model. In
particular, in the light of the revealed mystery of the Trinity, we
understand that true openness does not mean loss of individual identity but
profound interpenetration. This also emerges from the common human experiences
of love and truth. Just as the sacramental love of spouses unites them
spiritually in “one flesh” (Gen 2:24; Mt 19:5; Eph 5:31)
and makes out of the two a real and relational unity, so in an analogous way
truth unites spirits and causes them to think in unison, attracting them as a
unity to itself.
55. The Christian revelation of the unity of the human race presupposes a
metaphysical interpretation of the “humanum” in which relationality is an
essential element. Other cultures and religions teach brotherhood and peace
and are therefore of enormous importance to integral human development. Some
religious and cultural attitudes, however, do not fully embrace the principle of
love and truth and therefore end up retarding or even obstructing authentic
human development. There are certain religious cultures in the world today that
do not oblige men and women to live in communion but rather cut them off from
one other in a search for individual well-being, limited to the gratification of
psychological desires. Furthermore, a certain proliferation of different
religious “paths”, attracting small groups or even single individuals, together
with religious syncretism, can give rise to separation and disengagement. One
possible negative effect of the process of globalization is the tendency to
favour this kind of syncretism[132] by encouraging forms of “religion”
that, instead of bringing people together, alienate them from one another and
distance them from reality. At the same time, some religious and cultural
traditions persist which ossify society in rigid social groupings, in magical
beliefs that fail to respect the dignity of the person, and in attitudes of
subjugation to occult powers. In these contexts, love and truth have difficulty
asserting themselves, and authentic development is impeded.
For this reason, while it may be true that development needs the religions
and cultures of different peoples, it is equally true that adequate discernment
is needed. Religious freedom does not mean religious indifferentism, nor does it
imply that all religions are equal[133]. Discernment is needed
regarding the contribution of cultures and religions, especially on the part of
those who wield political power, if the social community is to be built up in a
spirit of respect for the common good. Such discernment has to be based on the
criterion of charity and truth. Since the development of persons and peoples is
at stake, this discernment will have to take account of the need for
emancipation and inclusivity, in the context of a truly universal human
community. “The whole man and all men” is also the criterion for evaluating
cultures and religions. Christianity, the religion of the “God who has a human
face”[134], contains this very criterion within itself.
56. The Christian religion and other religions can offer their contribution
to development only if God has a place in the public realm, specifically
in regard to its cultural, social, economic, and particularly its political
dimensions. The Church's social doctrine came into being in order to claim
“citizenship status” for the Christian religion[135]. Denying the right
to profess one's religion in public and the right to bring the truths of faith
to bear upon public life has negative consequences for true development. The
exclusion of religion from the public square — and, at the other extreme,
religious fundamentalism — hinders an encounter between persons and their
collaboration for the progress of humanity. Public life is sapped of its
motivation and politics takes on a domineering and aggressive character. Human
rights risk being ignored either because they are robbed of their transcendent
foundation or because personal freedom is not acknowledged. Secularism and
fundamentalism exclude the possibility of fruitful dialogue and effective
cooperation between reason and religious faith. Reason always stands in need
of being purified by faith: this also holds true for political reason, which
must not consider itself omnipotent. For its part, religion always needs to
be purified by reason in order to show its authentically human face. Any
breach in this dialogue comes only at an enormous price to human development.
57. Fruitful dialogue between faith and reason cannot but render the work of
charity more effective within society, and it constitutes the most appropriate
framework for promoting fraternal collaboration between believers and
non-believers in their shared commitment to working for justice and the
peace of the human family. In the Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes,
the Council fathers asserted that “believers and unbelievers agree almost
unanimously that all things on earth should be ordered towards man as to their
centre and summit”[136]. For believers, the world derives neither from
blind chance nor from strict necessity, but from God's plan. This is what gives
rise to the duty of believers to unite their efforts with those of all men and
women of good will, with the followers of other religions and with
non-believers, so that this world of ours may effectively correspond to the
divine plan: living as a family under the Creator's watchful eye. A particular
manifestation of charity and a guiding criterion for fraternal cooperation
between believers and non-believers is undoubtedly the principle of
subsidiarity[137], an expression of inalienable human freedom.
Subsidiarity is first and foremost a form of assistance to the human person via
the autonomy of intermediate bodies. Such assistance is offered when individuals
or groups are unable to accomplish something on their own, and it is always
designed to achieve their emancipation, because it fosters freedom and
participation through assumption of responsibility. Subsidiarity respects
personal dignity by recognizing in the person a subject who is always capable of
giving something to others. By considering reciprocity as the heart of what it
is to be a human being, subsidiarity is the most effective antidote against any
form of all-encompassing welfare state. It is able to take account both of the
manifold articulation of plans — and therefore of the plurality of subjects — as
well as the coordination of those plans. Hence the principle of subsidiarity is
particularly well-suited to managing globalization and directing it towards
authentic human development. In order not to produce a dangerous universal power
of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by
subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels
that can work together. Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as
it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This
authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way[138],
if it is not to infringe upon freedom and if it is to yield effective results in
practice.
58. The principle of subsidiarity must remain closely linked to the
principle of solidarity and vice versa, since the former without the latter
gives way to social privatism, while the latter without the former gives way to
paternalist social assistance that is demeaning to those in need. This general
rule must also be taken broadly into consideration when addressing issues
concerning international development aid. Such aid, whatever the donors'
intentions, can sometimes lock people into a state of dependence and even foster
situations of localized oppression and exploitation in the receiving country.
Economic aid, in order to be true to its purpose, must not pursue secondary
objectives. It must be distributed with the involvement not only of the
governments of receiving countries, but also local economic agents and the
bearers of culture within civil society, including local Churches. Aid
programmes must increasingly acquire the characteristics of participation and
completion from the grass roots. Indeed, the most valuable resources in
countries receiving development aid are human resources: herein lies the real
capital that needs to accumulate in order to guarantee a truly autonomous future
for the poorest countries. It should also be remembered that, in the economic
sphere, the principal form of assistance needed by developing countries is that
of allowing and encouraging the gradual penetration of their products into
international markets, thus making it possible for these countries to
participate fully in international economic life. Too often in the past, aid has
served to create only fringe markets for the products of these donor countries.
This was often due to a lack of genuine demand for the products in question: it
is therefore necessary to help such countries improve their products and adapt
them more effectively to existing demand. Furthermore, there are those who fear
the effects of competition through the importation of products — normally
agricultural products — from economically poor countries. Nevertheless, it
should be remembered that for such countries, the possibility of marketing their
products is very often what guarantees their survival in both the short and long
term. Just and equitable international trade in agricultural goods can be
beneficial to everyone, both to suppliers and to customers. For this reason, not
only is commercial orientation needed for production of this kind, but also the
establishment of international trade regulations to support it and stronger
financing for development in order to increase the productivity of these
economies.
59. Cooperation for development must not be concerned exclusively with
the economic dimension: it offers a wonderful opportunity for encounter
between cultures and peoples. If the parties to cooperation on the side of
economically developed countries — as occasionally happens — fail to take
account of their own or others' cultural identity, or the human values that
shape it, they cannot enter into meaningful dialogue with the citizens of poor
countries. If the latter, in their turn, are uncritically and indiscriminately
open to every cultural proposal, they will not be in a position to assume
responsibility for their own authentic development[139].
Technologically advanced societies must not confuse their own technological
development with a presumed cultural superiority, but must rather rediscover
within themselves the oft-forgotten virtues which made it possible for them to
flourish throughout their history. Evolving societies must remain faithful to
all that is truly human in their traditions, avoiding the temptation to overlay
them automatically with the mechanisms of a globalized technological
civilization. In all cultures there are examples of ethical convergence, some
isolated, some interrelated, as an expression of the one human nature, willed by
the Creator; the tradition of ethical wisdom knows this as the natural law[140].
This universal moral law provides a sound basis for all cultural, religious and
political dialogue, and it ensures that the multi-faceted pluralism of cultural
diversity does not detach itself from the common quest for truth, goodness and
God. Thus adherence to the law etched on human hearts is the precondition for
all constructive social cooperation. Every culture has burdens from which it
must be freed and shadows from which it must emerge. The Christian faith, by
becoming incarnate in cultures and at the same time transcending them, can help
them grow in universal brotherhood and solidarity, for the advancement of global
and community development.
60. In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis,
development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating
wealth for all. What aid programme is there that can hold out such
significant growth prospects — even from the point of view of the world economy
— as the support of populations that are still in the initial or early phases of
economic development? From this perspective, more economically developed nations
should do all they can to allocate larger portions of their gross domestic
product to development aid, thus respecting the obligations that the
international community has undertaken in this regard. One way of doing so is by
reviewing their internal social assistance and welfare policies, applying the
principle of subsidiarity and creating better integrated welfare systems, with
the active participation of private individuals and civil society. In this way,
it is actually possible to improve social services and welfare programmes, and
at the same time to save resources — by eliminating waste and rejecting
fraudulent claims — which could then be allocated to international solidarity. A
more devolved and organic system of social solidarity, less bureaucratic but no
less coordinated, would make it possible to harness much dormant energy, for the
benefit of solidarity between peoples.
One possible approach to development aid would be to apply effectively what
is known as fiscal subsidiarity, allowing citizens to decide how to allocate a
portion of the taxes they pay to the State. Provided it does not degenerate into
the promotion of special interests, this can help to stimulate forms of welfare
solidarity from below, with obvious benefits in the area of solidarity for
development as well.
61. Greater solidarity at the international level is seen especially in the
ongoing promotion — even in the midst of economic crisis — of greater access
to education, which is at the same time an essential precondition for
effective international cooperation. The term “education” refers not only to
classroom teaching and vocational training — both of which are important factors
in development — but to the complete formation of the person. In this regard,
there is a problem that should be highlighted: in order to educate, it is
necessary to know the nature of the human person, to know who he or she is. The
increasing prominence of a relativistic understanding of that nature presents
serious problems for education, especially moral education, jeopardizing its
universal extension. Yielding to this kind of relativism makes everyone poorer
and has a negative impact on the effectiveness of aid to the most needy
populations, who lack not only economic and technical means, but also
educational methods and resources to assist people in realizing their full human
potential.
An illustration of the significance of this problem is offered by the
phenomenon of international tourism[141], which can be a major
factor in economic development and cultural growth, but can also become an
occasion for exploitation and moral degradation. The current situation offers
unique opportunities for the economic aspects of development — that is to say
the flow of money and the emergence of a significant amount of local enterprise
— to be combined with the cultural aspects, chief among which is education. In
many cases this is what happens, but in other cases international tourism has a
negative educational impact both for the tourist and the local populace. The
latter are often exposed to immoral or even perverted forms of conduct, as in
the case of so-called sex tourism, to which many human beings are sacrificed
even at a tender age. It is sad to note that this activity often takes place
with the support of local governments, with silence from those in the tourists'
countries of origin, and with the complicity of many of the tour operators. Even
in less extreme cases, international tourism often follows a consumerist and
hedonistic pattern, as a form of escapism planned in a manner typical of the
countries of origin, and therefore not conducive to authentic encounter between
persons and cultures. We need, therefore, to develop a different type of tourism
that has the ability to promote genuine mutual understanding, without taking
away from the element of rest and healthy recreation. Tourism of this type needs
to increase, partly through closer coordination with the experience gained from
international cooperation and enterprise for development.
62. Another aspect of integral human development that is worthy of attention
is the phenomenon of migration. This is a striking phenomenon because of
the sheer numbers of people involved, the social, economic, political, cultural
and religious problems it raises, and the dramatic challenges it poses to
nations and the international community. We can say that we are facing a social
phenomenon of epoch-making proportions that requires bold, forward-looking
policies of international cooperation if it is to be handled effectively. Such
policies should set out from close collaboration between the migrants' countries
of origin and their countries of destination; it should be accompanied by
adequate international norms able to coordinate different legislative systems
with a view to safeguarding the needs and rights of individual migrants and
their families, and at the same time, those of the host countries. No country
can be expected to address today's problems of migration by itself. We are all
witnesses of the burden of suffering, the dislocation and the aspirations that
accompany the flow of migrants. The phenomenon, as everyone knows, is difficult
to manage; but there is no doubt that foreign workers, despite any difficulties
concerning integration, make a significant contribution to the economic
development of the host country through their labour, besides that which they
make to their country of origin through the money they send home. Obviously,
these labourers cannot be considered as a commodity or a mere workforce. They
must not, therefore, be treated like any other factor of production. Every
migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable
rights that must be respected by everyone and in every circumstance[142].
63. No consideration of the problems associated with development could fail
to highlight the direct link between poverty and unemployment. In many
cases, poverty results from a violation of the dignity of human work,
either because work opportunities are limited (through unemployment or
underemployment), or “because a low value is put on work and the rights that
flow from it, especially the right to a just wage and to the personal security
of the worker and his or her family”[143]. For this reason, on 1 May
2000 on the occasion of the Jubilee of Workers, my venerable predecessor Pope
John Paul II issued an appeal for “a global coalition in favour of ‘decent
work”'[144], supporting the strategy of the International Labour
Organization. In this way, he gave a strong moral impetus to this objective,
seeing it as an aspiration of families in every country of the world. What is
meant by the word “decent” in regard to work? It means work that expresses the
essential dignity of every man and woman in the context of their particular
society: work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men
and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker
to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it
possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their
children, without the children themselves being forced into labour; work that
permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices
heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one's roots at a personal,
familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a
decent standard of living.
64. While reflecting on the theme of work, it is appropriate to recall how
important it is that labour unions — which have always been encouraged
and supported by the Church — should be open to the new perspectives that are
emerging in the world of work. Looking to wider concerns than the specific
category of labour for which they were formed, union organizations are called to
address some of the new questions arising in our society: I am thinking, for
example, of the complex of issues that social scientists describe in terms of a
conflict between worker and consumer. Without necessarily endorsing the thesis
that the central focus on the worker has given way to a central focus on the
consumer, this would still appear to constitute new ground for unions to explore
creatively. The global context in which work takes place also demands that
national labour unions, which tend to limit themselves to defending the
interests of their registered members, should turn their attention to those
outside their membership, and in particular to workers in developing countries
where social rights are often violated. The protection of these workers, partly
achieved through appropriate initiatives aimed at their countries of origin,
will enable trade unions to demonstrate the authentic ethical and cultural
motivations that made it possible for them, in a different social and labour
context, to play a decisive role in development. The Church's traditional
teaching makes a valid distinction between the respective roles and functions of
trade unions and politics. This distinction allows unions to identify civil
society as the proper setting for their necessary activity of defending and
promoting labour, especially on behalf of exploited and unrepresented workers,
whose woeful condition is often ignored by the distracted eye of society.
65. Finance, therefore — through the renewed structures and operating
methods that have to be designed after its misuse, which wreaked such havoc on
the real economy — now needs to go back to being an instrument directed
towards improved wealth creation and development. Insofar as they are
instruments, the entire economy and finance, not just certain sectors, must be
used in an ethical way so as to create suitable conditions for human development
and for the development of peoples. It is certainly useful, and in some
circumstances imperative, to launch financial initiatives in which the
humanitarian dimension predominates. However, this must not obscure the fact
that the entire financial system has to be aimed at sustaining true development.
Above all, the intention to do good must not be considered incompatible with the
effective capacity to produce goods. Financiers must rediscover the genuinely
ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated
instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers. Right intention,
transparency, and the search for positive results are mutually compatible and
must never be detached from one another. If love is wise, it can find ways of
working in accordance with provident and just expediency, as is illustrated in a
significant way by much of the experience of credit unions.
Both the regulation of the financial sector, so as to safeguard weaker
parties and discourage scandalous speculation, and experimentation with new
forms of finance, designed to support development projects, are positive
experiences that should be further explored and encouraged, highlighting the
responsibility of the investor. Furthermore, the experience of
micro-finance, which has its roots in the thinking and activity of the civil
humanists — I am thinking especially of the birth of pawnbroking — should be
strengthened and fine-tuned. This is all the more necessary in these days when
financial difficulties can become severe for many of the more vulnerable sectors
of the population, who should be protected from the risk of usury and from
despair. The weakest members of society should be helped to defend themselves
against usury, just as poor peoples should be helped to derive real benefit from
micro-credit, in order to discourage the exploitation that is possible in these
two areas. Since rich countries are also experiencing new forms of poverty,
micro-finance can give practical assistance by launching new initiatives and
opening up new sectors for the benefit of the weaker elements in society, even
at a time of general economic downturn.
66. Global interconnectedness has led to the emergence of a new political
power, that of consumers and their associations. This is a phenomenon
that needs to be further explored, as it contains positive elements to be
encouraged as well as excesses to be avoided. It is good for people to realize
that purchasing is always a moral — and not simply economic — act. Hence the
consumer has a specific social responsibility, which goes hand-in- hand with
the social responsibility of the enterprise. Consumers should be continually
educated[145] regarding their daily role, which can be exercised with
respect for moral principles without diminishing the intrinsic economic
rationality of the act of purchasing. In the retail industry, particularly at
times like the present when purchasing power has diminished and people must live
more frugally, it is necessary to explore other paths: for example, forms of
cooperative purchasing like the consumer cooperatives that have been in
operation since the nineteenth century, partly through the initiative of
Catholics. In addition, it can be helpful to promote new ways of marketing
products from deprived areas of the world, so as to guarantee their producers a
decent return. However, certain conditions need to be met: the market should be
genuinely transparent; the producers, as well as increasing their profit
margins, should also receive improved formation in professional skills and
technology; and finally, trade of this kind must not become hostage to partisan
ideologies. A more incisive role for consumers, as long as they themselves are
not manipulated by associations that do not truly represent them, is a desirable
element for building economic democracy.
67. In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is
a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of
the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions
and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can
acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of
implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect[146]
and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This
seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order
which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the
development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to
revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present
crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and
timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the
environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a
true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII
indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law,
to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek
to establish the common good[147], and to make a commitment to
securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity
in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally
recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all,
regard for justice, and respect for rights[148]. Obviously it would
have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all
parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international
forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various
sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power
among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and
international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of
international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of
globalization[149]. They also require the construction of a social
order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between
moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and
civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations.
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS PRIESTS AND DEACONS MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS THE LAY FAITHFUL AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL ON INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHARITY AND TRUTH
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PEOPLE
RIGHTS AND DUTIES
THE ENVIRONMENT
RIGHTS AND DUTIES
THE ENVIRONMENT
43. “The reality of human solidarity, which is a benefit for us, also imposes
a duty”[105]. Many people today would claim that they owe nothing to
anyone, except to themselves. They are concerned only with their rights, and
they often have great difficulty in taking responsibility for their own and
other people's integral development. Hence it is important to call for a renewed
reflection on how rights presuppose duties, if they are not to become mere
licence[106]. Nowadays we are witnessing a grave inconsistency. On
the one hand, appeals are made to alleged rights, arbitrary and non-essential in
nature, accompanied by the demand that they be recognized and promoted by public
structures, while, on the other hand, elementary and basic rights remain
unacknowledged and are violated in much of the world[107]. A link has
often been noted between claims to a “right to excess”, and even to
transgression and vice, within affluent societies, and the lack of food,
drinkable water, basic instruction and elementary health care in areas of the
underdeveloped world and on the outskirts of large metropolitan centres. The
link consists in this: individual rights, when detached from a framework of
duties which grants them their full meaning, can run wild, leading to an
escalation of demands which is effectively unlimited and indiscriminate. An
overemphasis on rights leads to a disregard for duties. Duties set a limit on
rights because they point to the anthropological and ethical framework of which
rights are a part, in this way ensuring that they do not become licence. Duties
thereby reinforce rights and call for their defence and promotion as a task to
be undertaken in the service of the common good. Otherwise, if the only basis of
human rights is to be found in the deliberations of an assembly of citizens,
those rights can be changed at any time, and so the duty to respect and pursue
them fades from the common consciousness. Governments and international bodies
can then lose sight of the objectivity and “inviolability” of rights. When this
happens, the authentic development of peoples is endangered[108]. Such
a way of thinking and acting compromises the authority of international bodies,
especially in the eyes of those countries most in need of development. Indeed,
the latter demand that the international community take up the duty of helping
them to be “artisans of their own destiny”[109], that is, to take up
duties of their own. The sharing of reciprocal duties is a more powerful
incentive to action than the mere assertion of rights.
44. The notion of rights and duties in development must also take account of
the problems associated with population growth. This is a very important
aspect of authentic development, since it concerns the inalienable values of
life and the family[110]. To consider population increase as the
primary cause of underdevelopment is mistaken, even from an economic point of
view. Suffice it to consider, on the one hand, the significant reduction in
infant mortality and the rise in average life expectancy found in economically
developed countries, and on the other hand, the signs of crisis observable in
societies that are registering an alarming decline in their birth rate. Due
attention must obviously be given to responsible procreation, which among other
things has a positive contribution to make to integral human development. The
Church, in her concern for man's authentic development, urges him to have full
respect for human values in the exercise of his sexuality. It cannot be reduced
merely to pleasure or entertainment, nor can sex education be reduced to
technical instruction aimed solely at protecting the interested parties from
possible disease or the “risk” of procreation. This would be to impoverish and
disregard the deeper meaning of sexuality, a meaning which needs to be
acknowledged and responsibly appropriated not only by individuals but also by
the community. It is irresponsible to view sexuality merely as a source of
pleasure, and likewise to regulate it through strategies of mandatory birth
control. In either case materialistic ideas and policies are at work, and
individuals are ultimately subjected to various forms of violence. Against such
policies, there is a need to defend the primary competence of the family in the
area of sexuality[111], as opposed to the State and its restrictive
policies, and to ensure that parents are suitably prepared to undertake their
responsibilities.
Morally responsible openness to life represents a rich social and economic
resource. Populous nations have been able to emerge from poverty thanks not
least to the size of their population and the talents of their people. On the
other hand, formerly prosperous nations are presently passing through a phase of
uncertainty and in some cases decline, precisely because of their falling birth
rates; this has become a crucial problem for highly affluent societies. The
decline in births, falling at times beneath the so-called “replacement level”,
also puts a strain on social welfare systems, increases their cost, eats into
savings and hence the financial resources needed for investment, reduces the
availability of qualified labourers, and narrows the “brain pool” upon which
nations can draw for their needs. Furthermore, smaller and at times miniscule
families run the risk of impoverishing social relations, and failing to ensure
effective forms of solidarity. These situations are symptomatic of scant
confidence in the future and moral weariness. It is thus becoming a social and
even economic necessity once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of
marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the
deepest needs and dignity of the person. In view of this, States are called to
enact policies promoting the centrality and the integrity of the family
founded on marriage between a man and a woman, the primary vital cell of
society[112], and to assume responsibility for its economic and fiscal
needs, while respecting its essentially relational character.
45. Striving to meet the deepest moral needs of the person also has important
and beneficial repercussions at the level of economics. The economy needs
ethics in order to function correctly — not any ethics whatsoever, but an
ethics which is people-centred. Today we hear much talk of ethics in the world
of economy, finance and business. Research centres and seminars in business
ethics are on the rise; the system of ethical certification is spreading
throughout the developed world as part of the movement of ideas associated with
the responsibilities of business towards society. Banks are proposing “ethical”
accounts and investment funds. “Ethical financing” is being developed,
especially through micro-credit and, more generally, micro-finance. These
processes are praiseworthy and deserve much support. Their positive effects are
also being felt in the less developed areas of the world. It would be advisable,
however, to develop a sound criterion of discernment, since the adjective
“ethical” can be abused. When the word is used generically, it can lend itself
to any number of interpretations, even to the point where it includes decisions
and choices contrary to justice and authentic human welfare.
Much in fact depends on the underlying system of morality. On this subject
the Church's social doctrine can make a specific contribution, since it is based
on man's creation “in the image of God” (Gen 1:27), a datum which gives
rise to the inviolable dignity of the human person and the transcendent value of
natural moral norms. When business ethics prescinds from these two pillars, it
inevitably risks losing its distinctive nature and it falls prey to forms of
exploitation; more specifically, it risks becoming subservient to existing
economic and financial systems rather than correcting their dysfunctional
aspects. Among other things, it risks being used to justify the financing of
projects that are in reality unethical. The word “ethical”, then, should not be
used to make ideological distinctions, as if to suggest that initiatives not
formally so designated would not be ethical. Efforts are needed — and it is
essential to say this — not only to create “ethical” sectors or segments of the
economy or the world of finance, but to ensure that the whole economy — the
whole of finance — is ethical, not merely by virtue of an external label, but by
its respect for requirements intrinsic to its very nature. The Church's social
teaching is quite clear on the subject, recalling that the economy, in all its
branches, constitutes a sector of human activity[113].
46. When we consider the issues involved in the relationship between
business and ethics, as well as the evolution currently taking place in
methods of production, it would appear that the traditionally valid distinction
between profit-based companies and non-profit organizations can no longer do
full justice to reality, or offer practical direction for the future. In recent
decades a broad intermediate area has emerged between the two types of
enterprise. It is made up of traditional companies which nonetheless subscribe
to social aid agreements in support of underdeveloped countries, charitable
foundations associated with individual companies, groups of companies oriented
towards social welfare, and the diversified world of the so-called “civil
economy” and the “economy of communion”. This is not merely a matter of a “third
sector”, but of a broad new composite reality embracing the private and public
spheres, one which does not exclude profit, but instead considers it a means for
achieving human and social ends. Whether such companies distribute dividends or
not, whether their juridical structure corresponds to one or other of the
established forms, becomes secondary in relation to their willingness to view
profit as a means of achieving the goal of a more humane market and society. It
is to be hoped that these new kinds of enterprise will succeed in finding a
suitable juridical and fiscal structure in every country. Without prejudice to
the importance and the economic and social benefits of the more traditional
forms of business, they steer the system towards a clearer and more complete
assumption of duties on the part of economic subjects. And not only that. The
very plurality of institutional forms of business gives rise to a market which
is not only more civilized but also more competitive.
47. The strengthening of different types of businesses, especially those
capable of viewing profit as a means for achieving the goal of a more humane
market and society, must also be pursued in those countries that are excluded or
marginalized from the influential circles of the global economy. In these
countries it is very important to move ahead with projects based on subsidiarity,
suitably planned and managed, aimed at affirming rights yet also providing for
the assumption of corresponding responsibilities. In development programmes,
the principle of the centrality of the human person, as the subject
primarily responsible for development, must be preserved. The principal concern
must be to improve the actual living conditions of the people in a given region,
thus enabling them to carry out those duties which their poverty does not
presently allow them to fulfil. Social concern must never be an abstract
attitude. Development programmes, if they are to be adapted to individual
situations, need to be flexible; and the people who benefit from them ought to
be directly involved in their planning and implementation. The criteria to be
applied should aspire towards incremental development in a context of solidarity
— with careful monitoring of results — inasmuch as there are no universally
valid solutions. Much depends on the way programmes are managed in practice.
“The peoples themselves have the prime responsibility to work for their own
development. But they will not bring this about in isolation”[114].
These words of Paul VI are all the more timely nowadays, as our world becomes
progressively more integrated. The dynamics of inclusion are hardly automatic.
Solutions need to be carefully designed to correspond to people's concrete lives,
based on a prudential evaluation of each situation. Alongside macro-projects,
there is a place for micro-projects, and above all there is need for the active
mobilization of all the subjects of civil society, both juridical and physical
persons.
International cooperation requires people who can be part of the
process of economic and human development through the solidarity of their
presence, supervision, training and respect. From this standpoint, international
organizations might question the actual effectiveness of their bureaucratic and
administrative machinery, which is often excessively costly. At times it happens
that those who receive aid become subordinate to the aid-givers, and the poor
serve to perpetuate expensive bureaucracies which consume an excessively high
percentage of funds intended for development. Hence it is to be hoped that all
international agencies and non-governmental organizations will commit themselves
to complete transparency, informing donors and the public of the percentage of
their income allocated to programmes of cooperation, the actual content of those
programmes and, finally, the detailed expenditure of the institution itself.
48. Today the subject of development is also closely related to the duties
arising from our relationship to the natural environment. The environment
is God's gift to everyone, and in our use of it we have a responsibility towards
the poor, towards future generations and towards humanity as a whole. When
nature, including the human being, is viewed as the result of mere chance or
evolutionary determinism, our sense of responsibility wanes. In nature, the
believer recognizes the wonderful result of God's creative activity, which we
may use responsibly to satisfy our legitimate needs, material or otherwise,
while respecting the intrinsic balance of creation. If this vision is lost, we
end up either considering nature an untouchable taboo or, on the contrary,
abusing it. Neither attitude is consonant with the Christian vision of nature as
the fruit of God's creation.
Nature expresses a design of love and truth. It is prior to us, and it
has been given to us by God as the setting for our life. Nature speaks to us of
the Creator (cf. Rom 1:20) and his love for humanity. It is destined to
be “recapitulated” in Christ at the end of time (cf. Eph 1:9-10; Col 1:19-20).
Thus it too is a “vocation”[115]. Nature is at our disposal not as “a
heap of scattered refuse”[116], but as a gift of the Creator who has
given it an inbuilt order, enabling man to draw from it the principles needed in
order “to till it and keep it” (Gen 2:15). But it should also be stressed
that it is contrary to authentic development to view nature as something more
important than the human person. This position leads to attitudes of
neo-paganism or a new pantheism — human salvation cannot come from nature alone,
understood in a purely naturalistic sense. This having been said, it is also
necessary to reject the opposite position, which aims at total technical
dominion over nature, because the natural environment is more than raw material
to be manipulated at our pleasure; it is a wondrous work of the Creator
containing a “grammar” which sets forth ends and criteria for its wise use, not
its reckless exploitation. Today much harm is done to development precisely as a
result of these distorted notions. Reducing nature merely to a collection of
contingent data ends up doing violence to the environment and even encouraging
activity that fails to respect human nature itself. Our nature, constituted not
only by matter but also by spirit, and as such, endowed with transcendent
meaning and aspirations, is also normative for culture. Human beings interpret
and shape the natural environment through culture, which in turn is given
direction by the responsible use of freedom, in accordance with the dictates of
the moral law. Consequently, projects for integral human development cannot
ignore coming generations, but need to be marked by solidarity and
inter-generational justice, while taking into account a variety of contexts:
ecological, juridical, economic, political and cultural[117].
49. Questions linked to the care and preservation of the environment today
need to give due consideration to the energy problem. The fact that some
States, power groups and companies hoard non-renewable energy resources
represents a grave obstacle to development in poor countries. Those countries
lack the economic means either to gain access to existing sources of
non-renewable energy or to finance research into new alternatives. The
stockpiling of natural resources, which in many cases are found in the poor
countries themselves, gives rise to exploitation and frequent conflicts between
and within nations. These conflicts are often fought on the soil of those same
countries, with a heavy toll of death, destruction and further decay. The
international community has an urgent duty to find institutional means of
regulating the exploitation of non-renewable resources, involving poor countries
in the process, in order to plan together for the future.
On this front too, there is a pressing moral need for renewed solidarity,
especially in relationships between developing countries and those that are
highly industrialized[118]. The technologically advanced societies can
and must lower their domestic energy consumption, either through an evolution in
manufacturing methods or through greater ecological sensitivity among their
citizens. It should be added that at present it is possible to achieve improved
energy efficiency while at the same time encouraging research into alternative
forms of energy. What is also needed, though, is a worldwide redistribution of
energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to
them. The fate of those countries cannot be left in the hands of whoever is
first to claim the spoils, or whoever is able to prevail over the rest. Here we
are dealing with major issues; if they are to be faced adequately, then everyone
must responsibly recognize the impact they will have on future generations,
particularly on the many young people in the poorer nations, who “ask to assume
their active part in the construction of a better world”[119].
50. This responsibility is a global one, for it is concerned not just with
energy but with the whole of creation, which must not be bequeathed to future
generations depleted of its resources. Human beings legitimately exercise a
responsible stewardship over nature, in order to protect it, to enjoy its
fruits and to cultivate it in new ways, with the assistance of advanced
technologies, so that it can worthily accommodate and feed the world's
population. On this earth there is room for everyone: here the entire human
family must find the resources to live with dignity, through the help of nature
itself — God's gift to his children — and through hard work and creativity. At
the same time we must recognize our grave duty to hand the earth on to future
generations in such a condition that they too can worthily inhabit it and
continue to cultivate it. This means being committed to making joint decisions
“after pondering responsibly the road to be taken, decisions aimed at
strengthening that covenant between human beings and the environment,
which should mirror the creative love of God, from whom we come and towards whom
we are journeying”[120]. Let us hope that the international community
and individual governments will succeed in countering harmful ways of treating
the environment. It is likewise incumbent upon the competent authorities to make
every effort to ensure that the economic and social costs of using up shared
environmental resources are recognized with transparency and fully borne by
those who incur them, not by other peoples or future generations: the protection
of the environment, of resources and of the climate obliges all international
leaders to act jointly and to show a readiness to work in good faith, respecting
the law and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the planet[121].
One of the greatest challenges facing the economy is to achieve the most
efficient use — not abuse — of natural resources, based on a realization that
the notion of “efficiency” is not value-free.
51. The way humanity treats the environment influences the way it treats
itself, and vice versa. This invites contemporary society to a serious
review of its life-style, which, in many parts of the world, is prone to
hedonism and consumerism, regardless of their harmful consequences[122].
What is needed is an effective shift in mentality which can lead to the adoption
of new life-styles “in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and
communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which
determine consumer choices, savings and investments”[123]. Every
violation of solidarity and civic friendship harms the environment, just as
environmental deterioration in turn upsets relations in society. Nature,
especially in our time, is so integrated into the dynamics of society and
culture that by now it hardly constitutes an independent variable.
Desertification and the decline in productivity in some agricultural areas are
also the result of impoverishment and underdevelopment among their inhabitants.
When incentives are offered for their economic and cultural development, nature
itself is protected. Moreover, how many natural resources are squandered by
wars! Peace in and among peoples would also provide greater protection for
nature. The hoarding of resources, especially water, can generate serious
conflicts among the peoples involved. Peaceful agreement about the use of
resources can protect nature and, at the same time, the well-being of the
societies concerned.
The Church has a responsibility towards creation and she must assert
this responsibility in the public sphere. In so doing, she must defend not only
earth, water and air as gifts of creation that belong to everyone. She must
above all protect mankind from self-destruction. There is need for what might be
called a human ecology, correctly understood. The deterioration of nature is in
fact closely connected to the culture that shapes human coexistence: when
“human ecology”[124] is respected within society, environmental
ecology also benefits. Just as human virtues are interrelated, such that the
weakening of one places others at risk, so the ecological system is based on
respect for a plan that affects both the health of society and its good
relationship with nature.
In order to protect nature, it is not enough to intervene with economic
incentives or deterrents; not even an apposite education is sufficient. These
are important steps, but the decisive issue is the overall moral tenor of
society. If there is a lack of respect for the right to life and to a
natural death, if human conception, gestation and birth are made artificial, if
human embryos are sacrificed to research, the conscience of society ends up
losing the concept of human ecology and, along with it, that of environmental
ecology. It is contradictory to insist that future generations respect the
natural environment when our educational systems and laws do not help them to
respect themselves. The book of nature is one and indivisible: it takes in not
only the environment but also life, sexuality, marriage, the family, social
relations: in a word, integral human development. Our duties towards the
environment are linked to our duties towards the human person, considered in
himself and in relation to others. It would be wrong to uphold one set of duties
while trampling on the other. Herein lies a grave contradiction in our mentality
and practice today: one which demeans the person, disrupts the environment and
damages society.
52. Truth, and the love which it reveals, cannot be produced: they can only
be received as a gift. Their ultimate source is not, and cannot be, mankind, but
only God, who is himself Truth and Love. This principle is extremely important
for society and for development, since neither can be a purely human product;
the vocation to development on the part of individuals and peoples is not based
simply on human choice, but is an intrinsic part of a plan that is prior to us
and constitutes for all of us a duty to be freely accepted. That which is prior
to us and constitutes us — subsistent Love and Truth — shows us what goodness
is, and in what our true happiness consists. It shows us the road to true
development.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
LinkWithin
