Social Teaching of the
Church - I
CCC
Historical Emergence of the Social Teaching of the Gospel:
2421 The social doctrine
of the Church developed in the nineteenth century when the Gospel encountered
modern industrial society with its new structures for the production of
consumer goods, its new concept of society, the state and authority, and its
new forms of labor and ownership. the development of the doctrine of the Church
on economic and social matters attests the permanent value of the Church's
teaching at the same time as it attests the true meaning of her Tradition,
always living and active.200
2422 The Church's social
teaching comprises a body of doctrine, which is articulated as the Church interprets events in the
course of history, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, in the light of the whole of what has
been revealed by Jesus Christ.201 This teaching can be more easily accepted by men of good will, the
more the faithful let themselves be guided by it.
2423 The Church's social
teaching proposes principles for reflection; it provides criteria for judgment;
it gives guidelines for action:
Any system in which
social relationships are determined entirely by economic factors is contrary to
the nature of the human person and his acts.202
2424 A theory that makes
profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is morally
unacceptable. the disordered desire for money cannot but produce perverse
effects. It is one of the causes of the many conflicts which disturb the social
order.203
A system that "subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production" is contrary to human dignity.204Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. "You cannot serve God and mammon."205
A system that "subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production" is contrary to human dignity.204Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. "You cannot serve God and mammon."205
2425 The Church has
rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times
with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused
to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute
primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.206 Regulating the economy solely by centralized
planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of
the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs
which cannot be
satisfied by the
market."207 Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and
economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to
the common good, is to be commended.
The Absolute Starting Point to Understand the Image
and Likeness as Constitutively Relational: Trinitarian Life:
The prototype of
Communio is the revealed Trinity of
Persons where the Father is not the Father and then engenders the Son, but is
the very act of engendering the Son. Divine Person in this theological
elaboration discloses itself as pertaining to a radically distinct metaphysical
horizon, one in which Person is the very act of relationship.[1]
Person, then, as with us, is not substance who then relates accidentally as the
act of a subject, but the Subject is
the very act of relating or “being-for” the Other. To be is not to be in self,
but for other.
The dynamic that
flows from this is Gaudium et Spes #24. That is, being constitutively and ontologically
relational, the human person can only develop himself, becomes himself, and
therefore achieve his fulfillment by the self-transcendence of gift that is martyrdom
as Jesus Christ. Ultimately, one becomes self only by becoming Christ.
We have no
direct experience of this except as an enlightenment of the mysterious
relationship of spouses in conjugal union. The prime human experience of
communio is spousal union or “betrothed” love. The intellectual grasp of this
is not a “grasping” as in forming a concept or symbol of it in what we have
come to call “intentional knowing.” Rather it is an experience of the “I” that
has been disclosed by Karol Wojtyla to be a different kind of being than everything
that we have come to experience through sensation and abstract
conceptualization of that which is outside of us. It is the experience of the
“I,” or subject itself, as “Being,” not
as a kind of Cartesian consciousness or “thinking thing,” but as a consciousness
of self that is “pre-conceptual” that arises from the experience.
On my reading, the
first appearance of the terminology of the phrase “self-gift” occurred in “Love and Responsibility.” There, Wojtyla said: “Betrothed love differs from all the aspects or forms of love analysed
hitherto. Its decisive character is the giving of one’s own person (to
another). The essence of betrothed love is self-giving, the surrender of one’s
`I. ’ This is something different from and more
than attraction, desire or even goodwill. These are all ways by which one
person goes out toward another, but none of them can take him as far in his
quest for the good of the other as does betrothed love. `To give oneself to
another’ is something more than merely `desiring what is good’ for another –
even if as a result of this another `I’ becomes as it were my own, as it does
in friendship. Betrothed love is something different from and more than all the
forms of love so fast analysed, both as it affects the individual subject, the
person who loves, and as regards the interpersonal union which it creates. When
betrothed love enters into this interpersonal relationship something more than
friendship results: two people give themselves each to the other.”[2]
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the
Church
THE HUMAN PERSON AND HUMAN RIGHTS
105. The Church sees in men and women, in every person, the
living image of God himself.[3]
This image finds, and must always find anew, an ever deeper and fuller
unfolding of itself in the mystery of Christ, the Perfect Image of God, the One
who reveals God to man and man to himself. It is to these men and women, who have received an
incomparable and inalienable dignity from God himself, that the Church speaks,
rendering to them the highest and most singular service, constantly reminding
them of their lofty vocation so that they may always be mindful of it and
worthy of it. Christ, the Son of God, “by his incarnation has united himself in
some fashion with every person”[197]; for this reason the Church recognizes as
her fundamental duty the task of seeing that this union is continuously brought
about and renewed. In Christ the Lord, the Church indicates and strives to be
the first to embark upon the path of the human person[198], and she invites all
people to recognize in everyone — near and far, known and unknown, and above
all in the poor and the suffering — a brother or sister “for whom Christ died”
(1 Cor 8:11; Rom 14:15)[199].106. All of social life is an expression of its unmistakable protagonist: the human person. The Church has many times and in many ways been the authoritative advocate of this understanding, recognizing and affirming the centrality of the human person in every sector and expression of society: “Human society is therefore the object of the social teaching of the Church since she is neither outside nor over and above socially united men, but exists exclusively in them and, therefore, for them”[200]. This important awareness is expressed in the affirmation that “far from being the object or passive element of social life” the human person “is rather, and must always remain, its subject, foundation and goal”[201]. The origin of social life is therefore found in the human person, and society cannot refuse to recognize its active and responsible subject; every expression of society must be directed towards the human person.
107. Men and women, in the concrete circumstances of history, represent the heart and soul of Catholic social thought[202]. The whole of the Church's social doctrine, in fact, develops from the principle that affirms the inviolable dignity of the human person[203]. In her manifold expressions of this knowledge, the Church has striven above all to defend human dignity in the face of every attempt to redimension or distort its image; moreover she has often denounced the many violations of human dignity. History attests that it is from the fabric of social relationships that there arise some of the best possibilities for ennobling the human person, but it is also there that lie in wait the most loathsome rejections of human dignity.
II. THE HUMAN PERSON AS THE “IMAGO DEI”
a. Creatures
in the image of God108. The fundamental message of Sacred Scripture proclaims that the human person is a creature of God (cf. Ps 139:14-18), and sees in his being in the image of God the element that characterizes and distinguishes him: “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27). God places the human creature at the centre and summit of the created order. Man (in Hebrew, “adam”) is formed from the earth (“adamah”) and God blows into his nostrils the breath of life (cf. Gen 2:7). Therefore, “being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. Further, he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead”[204].
109. The likeness with God shows that the essence and existence of man are constitutively related to God in the most profound manner.[205] This is a relationship that exists in itself, it is therefore not something that comes afterwards and is not added from the outside. The whole of man's life is a quest and a search for God. This relationship with God can be ignored or even forgotten or dismissed, but it can never be eliminated. Indeed, among all the world's visible creatures, only man has a “capacity for God”[4] (“homo est Dei capax”).[206] The human being is a personal being created by God to be in relationship with him; man finds life and self-expression only in relationship, and tends naturally to God.[207 ]
110. The relationship between God and man is reflected in the relational and social dimension of human nature. Man, in fact, is not a solitary being, but “a social being, and unless he relates himself to others he can neither live nor develop his potential”[208]. In this regard the fact that God created human beings as man and woman (cf. Gen 1:27) is significant[209]: “How very significant is the dissatisfaction which marks man's life in Eden as long as his sole point of reference is the world of plants and animals (cf. Gen 2:20). Only the appearance of the woman, a being who is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones (cf. Gen2:23), and in whom the spirit of God the Creator is also alive, can satisfy the need for interpersonal dialogue, so vital for human existence. In one's neighbour, whether man or woman, there is a reflection of God himself, the definitive goal and fulfilment of every person”[210].
111. Man and woman have the same dignity and are of equal value[211], not only because they are both, in their differences, created in the image of God, but even more profoundly because the dynamic of reciprocity that gives life to the “we” in the human couple, is an image of God[212]. In a relationship of mutual communion, man and woman fulfil themselves in a profound way, rediscovering themselves as persons through the sincere gift of themselves[213]. Their covenant of union is presented in Sacred Scripture as an image of the Covenant of God with man (cf. Hos 1-3; Is 54; Eph 5:21-33) and, at the same time, as a service to life[214]. Indeed, the human couple can participate in God's act of creation: “God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it' “ (Gen 1:28).
112. Man and woman are in relationship with others above all as those to whom the lives of others have been entrusted[215]. “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning, ... I will require it ... of man [and] of every man's brother” (Gen 9:5), God tells Noah after the flood. In this perspective, the relationship with God requires that the life of man be considered sacred and inviolable[216]. The fifth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex20:13; Deut 5:17), has validity because God alone is Lord of life and death[217]. The respect owed to the inviolability and integrity of physical life finds its climax in the positive commandment: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Lev 19:18), by which Jesus enjoins the obligation to tend to the needs of one's neighbour (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:29-31;Lk 10:27-28).
113. With this specific vocation to life, man and woman find themselves also in the presence of all the other creatures. They can and are obliged to put them at their own service and to enjoy them, but their dominion over the world requires the exercise of responsibility, it is not a freedom of arbitrary and selfish exploitation. All of creation in fact has value and is “good” (cf. Gen 1:4,10,12,18,21,25) in the sight of God, who is its author. Man must discover and respect its value. This is a marvellous challenge to his intellect, which should lift him up as on wings [218] towards the contemplation of the truth of all God's creatures, that is, the contemplation of what God sees as good in them. The Book of Genesis teaches that human dominion over the world consists in naming things (cf. Gen 2:19-20). In giving things their names, man must recognize them for what they are and establish with each of them a relationship of responsibility[219].
114. Man is also in relationship with himself and is able to reflect on himself. Sacred Scripture speaks in this regard about the heart of man. The heart designates man's inner spirituality, what distinguishes him from every other creature. God “has made everything beautiful in its time; also he has put eternity into man's mind, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end” (Eccles 3:11). In the end, the heart indicates the spiritual faculties which most properly belong to man, which are his prerogatives insofar as he is created in the image of his Creator: reason, the discernment of good and evil, free will[220]. When he listens to the deep aspirations of his heart, no person can fail to make his own the words of truth expressed by Saint Augustine: “You have made us for yourself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you”[221].
This Teaching Develops:
Chapter
V of “Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation” [SCDF March 22, 1986,
#71-100].
The
Social Doctrine of the Church for a Christian Practice of Liberation
The
Christian practice of liberation
71.
The salvific dimension of liberation cannot be reduced to the socio-ethical
dimension, which is a consequence of it. By restoring man's true freedom, the
radical liberation brought about by Christ assigns to him a task: Christian
practice, which is the putting into practice of the great commandment of love.
The latter is the supreme principle of Christian social morality, founded upon
the Gospel and the whole of tradition since apostolic times and the age of the
Fathers of the Church up to and including the recent statements of the
Magisterium.
The
considerable challenges of our time constitute an urgent appeal to put into
practice this teaching on how to act.
I.
Nature of the Social Doctrine of the Church
The
Gospel message and social life
72.
The Church's social teaching is born of the encounter of the Gospel message and
of its demands summarized in the supreme commandment of love of God and
neighbor in justice[106] with the problem emanating from the life of society.
This social teaching has established itself as a doctrine by using the
resources of human wisdom and the sciences. It concerns the ethical aspect of
this life. It takes into account the technical aspects of problems but always
in order to judge them from the moral point of view.
Being
essentially oriented towards action, this teaching develops in accordance with
the changing circumstances of history. This is why, together with principles
that are always valid, it also involves contingent judgments. Far from
constituting a closed system, it remains constantly open to the new questions
which continually arise; it requires the contribution of all charisms,
experiences and skills.
As
an "expert in humanity," the Church offers by her social doctrine a
set of and [107]
and also [108] so that the profound changes
demanded by situations of poverty and injustice may be brought about, and this
in a way which serves the true good of humanity.
Fundamental
principles
73.
The supreme commandment of love leads to the full recognition of the dignity of
each individual, created in God's image. From this dignity flow natural rights
and duties. In the light of the image of God, freedom, which is the essential
prerogative of the human person, is manifested in all its depth. Persons are
the active and responsible subjects of social life.[109]
Intimately
linked to the , which is man's dignity, are the and the .
By
virtue of the first, man with his brothers is obliged to contribute to the
common good of society at all its levels.[110] Hence the Church's doctrine is
opposed to all forms of social or political individualism.
By
virtue of the second, neither the state nor any society must ever substitute
itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and of intermediate
communities at the level on which they can function, nor must they take away
the room necessary for their freedom.[111] Hence the Church's social doctrine
is opposed to all forms of collectivism.
Criteria
for judgment
74.
These principles are the basis of on
social and .
Thus
the Church does not hesitate to condemn of life which are
injurious to man's dignity and freedom.
These
criteria also make it possible to judge the value of . These
are the sets of institutions and practices which people find already existing
or which they create, on the national and international level, and which
orientate or organize economic, social and political life. Being necessary in
themselves, they often tend to become fixed and fossilized as mechanisms
relatively independent of the human will, thereby paralyzing or distorting
social development and causing injustice. However, they always depend on the
responsibility of man, who can alter them, and not upon an alleged determinism
of history.
Institutions
and laws, when they are in conformity with the natural law and ordered to the
common good, are the guarantees of people's freedom and of the promotion of
that freedom. One cannot condemn all the constraining aspects of law, nor the
stability of a lawful state worthy of the name. One can therefore speak of
structures marked by sin, but one cannot condemn structures as such.
The
criteria for judgment also concerns economic, social and political
. The social doctrine of the Church does not propose any
particular system; but, in the light of other fundamental principles, she makes
it possible at once to see to what extent existing systems conform or do not
conform to the demands of human dignity.
Primacy
of persons over structures
75.
The Church is of course aware of the complexity of the problems confronting
society and of the difficulties in finding adequate solutions to them.
Nevertheless she considers that the first thing to be done is to appeal to the
spiritual and moral capacities of the individual and to the permanent need for
inner conversion, if one is to achieve the economic and social changes that
will truly be at the service of man.
The
priority given to structures and technical organization over the person and the
requirements of his dignity is the expression of a materialistic anthropology
and is contrary to the construction of a just social order.[112]
On
the other hand, the recognized priority of freedom and of conversion of heart
in no way eliminates the need for unjust structures to be changed. It is
therefore perfectly legitimate that those who suffer oppression on the part of
the wealthy or the politically powerful should take action, through morally
licit means, in order to secure structures and institutions in which their
rights will be truly respected.
It
remains true however that structures established for people's good are of
themselves incapable of securing and guaranteeing that good. The corruption
which in certain countries affects the leaders and the state bureaucracy, and
which destroys all honest social life, is a proof of this. Moral integrity is a
necessary condition for the health of society. It is therefore necessary to
work simultaneously for the conversion of hearts and for the improvement of
structures. For the sin which is at the root of unjust systems is, in a true
and immediate sense, a voluntary act which has its source in the freedom of
individuals. Only in a derived and secondary sense is it applicable to
structures, and only in this sense can one speak of "social
sin."[113]
Moreover,
in the process of liberation, one cannot abstract from the historical situation
of the nation or attack the cultural identity of the people. Consequently, one
cannot passively accept—still less actively support—groups which by force or by
the manipulation of public opinion take over the state apparatus and unjustly
imposed on the collectivity an imported ideology contrary to the culture of the
people.[114] In this respect, mention should be made of the serious moral and
political responsibility of intellectuals.
Guidelines
for action
76.
Basic principles and criteria for judgment inspire . Since the common good of human society is at the service of people,
the means of action must be in conformity with human dignity and facilitate
education for freedom. A safe criterion for judgment and action is this: there
can be no true liberation if from the very beginning the rights of freedom are
not respected.
Systematic
recourse to violence put forward as the necessary path to liberation has to be
condemned as a destructive illusion and one that opens the way to new forms of
servitude. One must condemn with equal vigor violence exercised by the powerful
against the poor, arbitrary action by the police, and any form of violence
established as a system of government. In these areas one must learn the
lessons of tragic experiences which the history of the present century has
known and continues to know. Nor can one accept the culpable passivity of the
public powers in those democracies where the social situation of a large number
of men and women is far from corresponding to the demands of constitutionally
guaranteed individual and social rights.
A
struggle for justice
77.
When the Church encourages the creation and activity of associations such as
trade unions which fight for the defense of the rights and legitimate interests
of the workers and for social justice, she does not thereby admit the theory
that sees in the class struggle the structural dynamism of social life. The
action which she sanctions is not the struggle of one class against another in
order to eliminate the foe. She does not proceed from a mistaken acceptance of
an alleged law of history. This action is rather a noble and reasoned struggle
for justice and social solidarity.[115] The Christian will always prefer the
path of dialogue and joint action.
Christ
has command us to love our enemies.[116] Liberation in the spirit of the Gospel
is therefore incompatible with hatred of others, taken individually or
collectively, and this includes hatred of one's enemy.
The myth of revolution
78.
Situations of grave injustice require the courage to make far-reaching reforms
and to suppress unjustifiable privileges. But those who discredit the path of
reform and favor the myth of revolution not only foster the illusion that the
abolition of an evil situation is in itself sufficient to create a more human
society; they also encourage the setting up of totalitarian regimes.[117] The
fight against injustice is meaningless unless it is waged with a view to
establishing a new social and political order in conformity with the demands of
justice. Just must already mark each stage of the establishment of this new
order. There is a morality of means.[118]
A last
resort
79.
These principles must be especially applied in the extreme case where there is
recourse to armed struggle, which the Church's Magisterium admits as a last
resort to put an end to an obvious and prolonged tyranny which is gravely
damaging the fundamental rights of individuals and the common good.[119]
Nevertheless, the concrete application of this means cannot be contemplated
until there has been a very rigorous analysis of the situation. Indeed, because
of the continual development of the technology of violence and the increasingly
serious dangers implied in its recourse, that which today is termed
"passive resistance" shows a way more conformable to moral principles
and having no less prospects for success. One can never approve— whether
perpetrated by an established power or insurgents—crimes such as reprisals
against the general population, torture, or methods of terrorism and deliberate
provocation aimed at causing deaths during popular demonstrations. Equally
unacceptable are the detestable smear campaigns capable of destroying a person
psychologically or morally.
The
role of the laity
80.
It is not for the pastors of the Church to intervene directly in the political
construction and organization of social life. This task forms part of the
vocation of the laity acting on their own initiative with their fellow
citizens.[120] They must fulfill this task conscious of the fact that the purpose
of the Church is to spread the kingdom of Christ so that all men may be saved
and that through them the world may be effectively ordered to Christ.[121] The
work of salvation is thus seen to be indissolubly linked to the task of
improving and raising the conditions of human life in this world.
The
distinction between the supernatural order of salvation and the temporal order
of human life must be seen in the context of God's singular plan to
recapitulate all things in Christ. Hence in each of these spheres the lay
person, who is at one and the same time a member of the Church and a citizen of
his country, just allow himself to be constantly guided by his Christian
conscience.[122]
Social
action, which can involve a number of concrete means, will always be exercised
for the common good and in conformity with the Gospel message and the teaching
of the Church. It must be ensured that the variety of options does not harm a
sense of collaboration, or lead to a paralysis of efforts or produce confusion
among the Christian people.
The
orientation received from the social doctrine of the Church should stimulate an
acquisition of the essential technical and scientific skills. The social
doctrines of the Church will also stimulate the seeking of moral formation of character
and a deepening of the spiritual life. While it offers principles and wise
counsels, this doctrine does not dispense from education in the political
prudence needed for guiding and running human affairs.
[1] See
J. Ratzinger, “Introduction to Theology,” Ignatius (2004) 183-184.
[2]
Karol Wojtyla, “Love and Responsibility,” Farrar Straus Giroux, (1981) 96.
[3]
Cf. John Paul II, “The Theology of the Body,” DSP (1997) November 14, 1979:
“The function of the image is to reflect the one who is the model, to reproduce
its own prototype. Man becomes the image of God not so much in the moment of
solitude as in the moment of communion. Right ‘from the beginning,’ he is not
only an image in which the solitude of a person who rules the world is
reflected, but also, and essentially, an image of an inscrutable divine
communion of persons.
“In
this way, the second narrative could also be a preparation for understanding
the Trinitarian concept of the ‘image of God,’ even if the latter appears only
in the first narrative. Obviously, that is not without significance for the
theology of the body. Perhaps it even constitutes the deepest theological
aspect of all that can be said about man…” When Adam sees Eve, he says, “bone
of my bones and flesh of my flesh.” That is John Paul II says: “he was able to
identify and call by name what makes them visibly similar to each other, and at
the same time what manifests humanity.” That is, “the body reveals man. This
concise formula already contains everything that science could ever say about
the structure of the body as organism, about its vitality, and it particular
sexual physiology, etc. This first expression of the man, ‘flesh of my flesh,’
also contains a reference to what makes that body truly human. Therefore it
refer ed to what determines man as a person, that is, as aa being who, even in
all his cororality, is similar to God.
“We
find ourselves, therefore, almost at the very core of the anthropological
reality, the name of which is ‘body,’ the human body. However, as can easily be
seen, this core is not only anthropological, but also essentially theological.
Right from the beginning, the theology of the body is bound up with the
creation of man in the image of God. It becomes, in a way, also the theology of
sex, or rather the theology of masculinity and femininity, which has its starting
point here in Genesis…. (And) that unity [“and the two will be one flesh {Gen. 2,
24}] which is realized through the body, indicates not only the ‘body,’ but also
the ‘incarnate’ communion of persons – communion
personarum – and calls for this communion.”
It
is fitting to point out that as the Body of Christ is the revelation of His divine
Persona [“Feel me and see that a ghost does not have flesh and blood as I have…”
Lk. 24], so also the human body is the revelation of his/her persona as male and
female. The human body is the enfleshment and manifestation of the person. (Me:
this has much to do with the brain death dispute in that the death of the brain
does not eliminate the revelation of the person as person, i.e. a non-functioning
organism is still the organism of a person).
I.
The Desire for God
27 The desire for God is
written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God
never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and
happiness he never stops searching for:
The dignity of man rests
above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation
to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if
man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love
continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth
unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.1
28 In many ways,
throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to their
quest for God in their religious beliefs and behaviour: in their prayers,
sacrifices, rituals, meditations, and so forth. These forms of religious
expression, despite the ambiguities they often bring with them, are so
universal that one may well call man a religious being:
From one ancestor (God)
made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their
existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they
would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him - though indeed he
is not far from each one of us. For "in him we live and move and have our
being."
No comments:
Post a Comment