II. ORIGINALITY OF THE ENCYCLICAL POPULORUM
PROGRESSIO
5. As soon as it appeared, the document of Pope Paul
VI captured the attention of public opinion by reason of its originality. In a
concrete manner and with great clarity, it was possible to identify the above
mentioned characteristics of continuity and renewal within the Church's social
doctrine. The intention of rediscovering numerous aspects of this teaching,
through a careful rereading of the Encyclical, will therefore; constitute the
main thread of the present reflections.
But first I wish to say a few words about the date of publication; the
year 1967. The very fact that Pope Paul VI chose to publish a social Encyclical
in that year invites us to consider the document in relationship to the Second
Vatican Ecumenical Council, which had ended on December 8, 1965.
6. We should see something more in this than simple
chronological proximity. The Encyclical Populorum Progressio presents
itself, in a certain way, as a document which applies the teachings of the
Council. It not only makes continual reference to the texts of the
Council,8 but it also flows from the same concern of the Church which
inspired the whole effort of the Council - and in a particular way the Pastoral
Constitution Gaudium et Spes - to coordinate and develop a number of
themes of her social teaching.
We can therefore affirm that the Encyclical Populorum Progressio
is a kind of response to the Council's appeal with which the Constitution Gaudium
et Spes begins: "The joys and the hopes. the griefs and the anxieties
of the people of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way
afflicted, these too are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the
followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo in
their hearts."9 These words express the fundamental motive
inspiring the great document of the Council, which begins by noting the
situation of poverty and of underdevelopment in which millions of human beings
live.
This poverty and underdevelopment are, under another name, the
"griefs and the anxieties" of today, of "especially those who
are poor." Before this vast panorama of pain and suffering, the Council
wished to suggest horizons of joy and hope. The Encyclical of Paul VI has the
same purpose, in full fidelity to the inspiration of the Council.
7. There is also the theme of the Encyclical which, in
keeping with the great tradition of the Church's social teaching, takes up
again in a direct manner the new exposition and rich synthesis which the
Council produced, notably in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.
With regard to the content and themes once again set forth by the
Encyclical, the following should be emphasized: the awareness of the duty of
the Church, as "an expert in humanity," "to scrutinize the signs
of the times and to interpret them in the light of the Gospel"10;
the awareness, equally profound, of her mission of "service," a
mission distinct from the function of the State, even when she is concerned
with people's concrete situation"11; the reference to the
notorious inequalities in the situations of those same people12; the
confirmation of the Council's teaching, a faithful echo of the centuries - old
tradition of the Church regarding the "universal purpose of
goods"13; the appreciation of the culture and the technological
civilization which contribute to human liberation,14 without failing to
recognize their limits's15; finally, on the specific theme of
development, which is precisely the theme of the Encyclical, the insistence on
the "most serious duty" incumbent on the more developed nations
"to help the developing countries."16 The same idea of
development proposed by the Encyclical flows directly from the approach which
the Pastoral Constitution takes to this problem.17
These and other explicit references to the Pastoral Constitution lead
one to conclude that the Encyclical presents itself as an application of the
Council's teaching in social matters to the specific problem of the development
and the underdevelopment of peoples.
8. This brief analysis helps us to appreciate better
the originality of the Encyclical, which can be stated in three points.
The first is constituted by the very fact of a document, issued by the
highest authority of the Catholic Church and addressed both to the Church
herself and "to all people of good will,"18 on a matter which
at first sight is solely economic and social: the development of peoples. The
term "development" is taken from the vocabulary of the social and
economic sciences. From this point of view, the Encyclical Populorum
Progressio follows directly in the line of the Encyclical Rerum Novarum,
which deals with the "condition of the workers."19 Considered
superficially, both themes could seem extraneous to the legitimate concern of
the Church seen as a religious institution - and "development" even
more so than the "condition of the workers."
In continuity with the Encyclical of Leo XIII, it must be recognized
that the document of Paul VI possesses the merit of having emphasized the
ethical and cultural character of the problems connected with development, and
likewise the legitimacy and necessity of the Church's intervention in this
field.
In addition, the social doctrine of the Church has once more
demonstrated its character as an application of the word of God to people's
lives and the life of society, as well as to the earthly realities connected
with them, offering "principles for reflection," "criteria of
judgment" and "directives for action."20 Here, in the
document of Paul VI, one finds these three elements with a prevalently
practical orientation, that is, directed towards moral conduct.
In consequence, when the Church concerns herself with the
"development of peoples," she cannot be accused of going outside her
own specific field of competence and, still less, outside the mandate received
from the Lord.
9. The second point of originality of Populorum
Progressio is shown by the breadth of outlook open to what is commonly called
the "social question."
In fact, the Encyclical Mater et Magistra of Pope John XXIII had
already entered into this wider outlook,21 and the Council had echoed
the same in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.22 However, the
social teaching of the Church had not yet reached the point of affirming with
such clarity that the social question has acquired a worldwide
dimension,23 nor had this affirmation and the accompanying analysis yet
been made into a "directive for action," as Paul VI did in his
Encyclical.
Such an explicit taking up of a position offers a great wealth of
content, which it is appropriate to point out.
In the first place a possible misunderstanding has to be eliminated.
Recognition that the "social question" has assumed a worldwide
dimension does not at all mean that it has lost its incisiveness or its
national and local importance. On the contrary, it means that the problems in
industrial enterprises or in the workers' and union movements of a particular
country or region are not to be considered as isolated cases with no
connection. On the contrary they depend more and more on the influence of
factors beyond regional boundaries and national frontiers.
Unfortunately, from the economic point of view, the developing countries
are much more numerous than the developed ones; the multitudes of human beings
who lack the goods and services offered by development are much more numerous
than those who possess them.
We are therefore faced with a serious problem of unequal distribution of
the means of subsistence originally meant for everybody, and thus also an
unequal distribution of the benefits deriving from them. And this happens not
through the fault of the needy people, and even less through a sort of
inevitability dependent on natural conditions or circumstances as a whole.
The Encyclical of Paul VI, in declaring that the social question has
acquired worldwide dimensions, first of all points out a moral fact, one which
has its foundation in an objective analysis of reality. In the words of the
Encyclical itself, "each one must be conscious" of this
fact,24 precisely because it directly concerns the conscience, which is
the source of moral decisions.
In this framework, the originality of the Encyclical consists not so
much in the affirmation, historical in character, of the universality of the
social question, but rather in the moral evaluation of this reality. Therefore
political leaders, and citizens of rich countries considered as individuals,
especially if they are Christians, have the moral obligation, according to the
degree of each one's responsibility, to take into consideration, in personal
decisions and decisions of government, this relationship of universality, this
interdependence which exists between their conduct and the poverty and
underdevelopment of so many millions of people. Pope Paul's Encyclical
translates more succinctly the moral obligation as the "duty of
solidarity"25; and this affirmation, even though many situations
have changed in the world, has the same force and validity today as when it was
written.
On the other hand, without departing from the lines of this moral
vision, the originality of the Encyclical also consists in the basic insight
that the very concept of development, if considered in the perspective of
universal interdependence, changes notably. True development cannot consist in
the simple accumulation of wealth and in the greater availability of goods and
services, if this is gained at the expense of the development of the masses,
and without due consideration for the social, cultural and spiritual dimensions
of the human being.26
10. As a third point, the Encyclical provides a very
original contribution to the social doctrine of the Church in its totality and
to the very concept of development. This originality is recognizable in a
phrase of the document's concluding paragraph, which can be considered as its
summary, as well as its historic label: "Development is the new name for
peace."27
In fact, if the social question has acquired a worldwide dimension, this
is because the demand for justice can only be satisfied on that level. To
ignore this demand could encourage the temptation among the victims of
injustice to respond with violence, as happens at the origin of many wars.
Peoples excluded from the fair distribution of the goods originally destined
for all could ask themselves: why not respond with violence to those who first
treat us with violence? And if the situation is examined in the light of the
division of the world into ideological blocs a division already existing in
1967 - and in the light of the subsequent economic and political repercussions
and dependencies, the danger is seen to be much greater.
The first consideration of the striking content of the Encyclical's
historic phrase may be supplemented by a second consideration to which the
document itself alludes28: how can one justify the fact that huge sums
of money, which could and should be used for increasing the development of
peoples, are instead utilized for the enrichment of individuals or groups, or
assigned to the increase of stockpiles of weapons, both in developed countries
and in the developing ones, thereby upsetting the real priorities? This is even
more serious given the difficulties which often hinder the direct transfer of
capital set aside for helping needy countries. If "development is the new
name for peace," war and military preparations are the major enemy of the
integral development of peoples.
In the light of this expression of Pope Paul VI, we are thus invited to
re-examine the concept of development. This of course is not limited to merely
satisfying material necessities through an increase of goods, while ignoring
the sufferings of the many and making the selfishness of individuals and
nations the principal motivation. As the Letter of St. James pointedly reminds
us: "What causes wars, and what causes fighting among you? Is it not your
passions that are at war in your members? You desire and do not have"
(Js
4:1-2).
On the contrary, in a different world, ruled by concern for the common
good of all humanity, or by concern for the "spiritual and human
development of all" instead of by the quest for individual profit, peace
would be possible as the result of a "more perfect justice among
people."29
Also this new element of the Encyclical has a permanent and contemporary
value, in view of the modern attitude which is so sensitive to the close link
between respect for justice and the establishment of real peace.
|