Encyclical letter Sollicitudo rei socialis of the supreme pontiff, John Paul II, to the bishops, pri


ON SOCIAL CONCERN
SOLLICITUDO REI SOCIALIS

ENCYCLICAL LETTER
DECEMBER 30, 1987

JOHN

PAUL

II



Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/encyclicallettercath_19



ENCYCLICAL LETTER

SOLLICITUDO REI SOCIALIS

OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF

JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS

PRIESTS

RELIGIOUS FAMILIES

SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF THE CHURCH

AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL
FOR THE TWENTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF

POPULORUM PROGRESSIO



CONTENTS

I. Introduction 3

II. Originality of the Encyclical Popu-

lorum Progressio 8

III. Survey of the contemporary world . 19

IV. Authentic human development . . 47

V. A theological reading of modern
problems 67

VI . Some particular guidelines . . .81

VII. Conclusion 92



Venerable Brothers

and dear Sons and Daughters,

Health and the Apostolic Blessing!

I

INTRODUCTION

1. rriHE SOCIAL CONCERN of the Church,

X directed towards an authentic devel-
opment of man and society which would respect

and promote all the dimensions of the human

person, has always expressed itself in the most

varied ways. In recent years, one of the special

means of intervention has been the Magiste-

rium of the Roman Pontiffs which, beginning

with the Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII

as a point of reference,^ has frequently dealt

with the question and has sometimes made the

dates of publication of the various social docu-

‘ Leo XIII, Encyclical Rerum 'Hovarum (15 May 1891):
Leonis XIII P.M. Acta, XI, Romae 1892, pp. 97-144.

3



ments coincide with the anniversaries of that

first document.^

The Popes have not failed to throw fresh

light by means of those messages upon new

aspects of the social doctrine of the Church.

As a result, this doctrine, beginning with the out-

standing contribution of Leo XIII and enriched

by the successive contributions of the Magiste-

rium, has now become an updated doctrinal

“corpus”. It builds up gradually, as the Church,

in the fullness of the word revealed by Christ

Jesus ^ and with the assistance of the Holy Spirit

(cf. Jn 14: 16, 26; 16: 13-15), reads events as

they unfold in the course of history. She thus

seeks to lead people to respond, with the support

also of rational reflection and of the human

sciences, to their vocation as responsible builders

of earthly society.

2. Part of this large body of social teaching

is the distinguished Encyclical Populorum Pro-

gressio
^
which my esteemed predecessor Paul VI

published on 26 March 1967.

^ Pius XI, Encyclical Quadragestmo Anno (15 May 1931):
AAS 23 (1931), pp. 177-228; John XXIII, Encyclical Mater et
Magistra (15 May 1961): AAS 53 (1961), pp. 401-464; Paul VI,
Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May 1971): AAS 63
(1971), pp. 401-441; John Paul II, Encyclical Laborem Exercens
(14 September 1981): AAS 73 (1981), pp. 577-647. Also Pius
XII delivered a radio message (1 June 1941) for the fiftieth

anniversary of the Encyclical of Leo XIII: AAS 33 (1941),
pp. 195-205.

^ C. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic
Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verhum, 4.

* Paul VI, Encyclical Populorum Progressio (26 March
1967): AAS 59 (1967), pp. 257-299.

4



The enduring relevance of this Encyclical is

easily recognized if we note the series of com-

memorations which took place during 1987 in

various forms and in many parts of the ecclesi-

astical and civil world. For this same purpose,

the Pontifical Commission lustitia et Pax sent

a circular letter to the Synods of the Oriental

Catholic Churches and to the Episcopal Con-

ferences, asking for ideas and suggestions on

the best way to celebrate the Encyclical’s anni-

versary, to enrich its teachings and, if need be,

to update them. At the time of the twentieth

anniversary, the same Commission organized a

solemn commemoration in which I myself took

part and gave the concluding address.^ And now,
also taking into account the replies to the above-

mentioned circular letter, I consider it appro-

priate, at the close of the year 1987, to devote

an Encyclical to the theme of Populorum Pro-

gressio.

3. In this way I wish principally to achieve

two objectives of no little importance: on the

one hand, to pay homage to this historic docu-

ment of Paul VI and to its teaching; on the

other hand, following in the footsteps of my
esteemed predecessors in the See of Peter, to

reaffirm the continuity of the social doctrine as

well as its constant renewal. In effect, continuity

and renewal are a proof of the perennial value

of the teaching of the Church.

* Cf. L'Osservatore Romano, 25 May 1987.

5



This twofold dimension is typical of her

teaching in the social sphere. On the one hand
it is constant, for it remains identical in its

fundamental inspiration, in its “principles of

reflection”, in its “criteria of judgment”, in its

basic “directives for action”,^ and above all in

its vital link with the Gospel of the Lord. On
the other hand, it is ever new, because it is sub-

ject to the necessary and opportune adaptations

suggested by the changes in historical conditions

and by the unceasing flow of the events which

are the setting of the life of people and society.

4. I am convinced that the teachings of the

Encyclical Populorum Progressio, addressed to

the people and the society of the sixties, retain

all their force as an appeal to conscience today

in the last part of the eighties, in an effort

to trace the major lines of the present world

always within the context of the aim and inspira-

tion of the “development of peoples”, which are

still very far from being exhausted. I therefore

propose to extend the impact of that message

by bringing it to bear, with its possible applica-

tions, upon the present historical moment, which

is no less dramatic than that of twenty years ago.

As we well know, time maintains a constant
and unchanging rhythm. Today however we

* Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation Libertatis
Conscientia (22 March 1986), 72; AAS 79 (1987), p. 586;
Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May
1971), 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403 f.

6



have the impression that it is passing ever more

quickly, especially by reason of the multiplication

and complexity of the phenomena in the midst

of which we live. Consequently, the configura-

tion of the world in the course of the last

twenty years, while preserving certain funda-

mental constants, has undergone notable changes

and presents some totally new aspects.

The present period of time, on the eve of

the third Christian millennium, is characterized

by a widespread expectancy, rather like a new

“Advent”,^ which to some extent touches every-

one. It offers an opportunity to study the

teachings of the Encyclical in greater detail and

to see their possible future developments.

The aim of the present reflection is to empha-

size, through a theological investigation of the

present world, the need for a fuller and more

nuanced concept of development, according to

the suggestions contained in the Encyclical. Its

aim is also to indicate some ways of putting it

into effect.

’ Cf. Encyclical Redemptoris Mater (25 March 1987), 3:
AAS 79 (1987), pp. 363 Homily at the Mass of 1 January
1987: VOsservatore Romano, 2 January 1987.

7



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 re-reading of the Encyclical, will there-

fore 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 8 December 1965.

6. We should see something more in this than
simple chronological proximity. The Encyclical

8



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,® 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 Consti-
tution 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”.’ These

words express the fundamental motive inspiring

the great document of the Council, which begins

by noting the situation of poverty and of under-

development in which millions of human beings

live.

This poverty and underdevelopment are,

under another name, the “griefs and the anxie-

ties” of today, of “especially those who are

* The Encyclical Populorum Progressio cites the docu-
ments of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council nineteen

times, and sixteen of the references are to the Pastoral Con-

stitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et
Spes.

’ Gaudium et Spes, 1.

9



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 inspira-

tion 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”;

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; " the reference to the

notorious inequalities in the situations of those

same people; the confirmation of the Council’s

teaching, a faithful echo of the centuries-old

tradition of the Church, regarding the “universal

Ibid., 4; cf. Vopulorum Progressio 13: loc. cit., p. 263,

264.

" Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 3; Populorum Progressio, 13: loc.

cit., p. 264.

Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 63; Populorum Progressio, 9:
loc. cit., p. 269.

10



purpose of goods”; the appreciation of the

culture and the technological civilization which

contribute to human liberation/'* without failing

to recognize their limits;*^ 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 coun-

tries”/^ The same idea of development proposed

by the Encyclical flows directly from the ap-

proach which the Pastoral Constitution takes to

this problem/^

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

Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 69; Populorum Progressio, 22:
loc. cit., p. 269.

Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 51 \ Populorum Progressio, 41:
loc. cit., p. 277.

Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 19; Populorum Progressio, 41:
loc. cit., pp. 277 f.

“ Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 86; Populorum Progressio, 48:
loc. cit., p. 281.

Cf. Gaudium et Spes, 69; Populorum Progressio, 14-21:
loc. cit., pp. 264-268.

11



the Catholic Church and addressed both to the

Church herself and “ to all people of good will
”

on a matter which at first sight is solely eco-

nomic and social: the development of peoples.

The term “development” is taken from the vo-

cabulary of the social and economic sciences.

From this point of view, the Encyclical Popu-

lorum Progressio follows directly in the line of

the Encyclical Rerum Novarum, which deals

with the “condition of the workers Consid-

ered superficially, both themes could seem extra-

neous to the legitimate concern of the Church

seen as a religious institution—and “develop-
ment” 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 empha-

sized the ethical and cultural character of the

problems connected with development, and like-

wise 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 “princi-

Cf. The Inscriptio of the Encyclical Populorum Pro-
gressio: loc. cit., p. 251.

” The Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII has as
its principal subject “the condition of the workers”: Leonis XIII
P.M. Acta, XI, Romae 1892, p. 97.

12



pies for reflection”, “criteria of judgment” and

“directives for action Here, in the document

of Paul VI, one finds these three elements with

a prevalently practical orientation, that is, di-

rected 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, out-

side the mandate received from the Lord.

9. The second point of originality of Popu-

lorum Progressio is shown by the breadth of out-

look 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 and the Council had echoed

the same in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes}^

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 nor had this affirmation

and the accompanying analysis yet been made

“ Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation Libertatis
Conscientia (22 March 1986), 72: AAS 79 (1987), p. 586;
Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May
1971), 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403 f.

Cf. Encyclical Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961): AAS
53 (1961), p. 440.

Gaudium et Spes, 63.
“ Cf. Encyclical Populorum Progressio, 3: loc. cit., p. 258;

cf. also ibid., 9: loc. cit., p. 261.

13



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 misunderstand-

ing has to be eliminated. Recognition that the

“social question” has assumed a worldwide di-

mension does not at all mean that it has lost

its incisiveness or its national and local impor-

tance. On the contrary, it means that the prob-
lems 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 multi-

tudes 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 prob-
lem of unequal distribution of the means of

subsistence originally meant for everybody, and

thus also an unequal distribution of the bene-

fits 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.

14



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 Encyc-

lical itself, “each one must be conscious” of

this fact,^'^ 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 affirma-

tion, 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 deci-

sions of government, this relationship of univer-

sality, this interdependence which exists be-

tween their conduct and the poverty and under-

development of so many millions of people.

Pope Paul’s Encyclical translates more succinctly

the moral obligation as the “duty of solidarity

and this affirmation, even though many situa-

tions 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

Cf. ibid., 3: loc. cit., p. 258.

“ Ibid., 48: loc. cit., p. 281.

15



the Encyclical also consists in the basic insight

that the very concept of development, if consid-

ered in the perspective of universal interdepen-

dence, 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

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 re-

cognizable in a phrase of the document’s con-

cluding paragraph and which can be considered

as its summary, as well as its historic label:

“Development is the new name for peace

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 en-
courage 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

“ Cf. ibid., 14: loc. cit., p. 264: “Development cannot

be limited to mere economic growth. In order to be authentic,

it must be complete: integral, that is, it has to promote the

good of every man and of the whole man”.
” Ibid., 87: loc. cit., p. 299.

16



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 sub-
sequent economic and political repercussions

and dependencies, the danger is seen to be much

greater.

The first consideration of the striking con-

tent of the Encyclical’s historic phrase may

be supplemented by a second consideration to

which the document itself alludes: 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 develop-

ing 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 “de-

velopment 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

“ Cf. ibid., 53: loc. cit., p. 283.

17



through an increase of goods, while ignoring the

sufferings of the many and making the selfish-

ness of individuals and nations the principal

motivation. As the Letter of Saint James

pointedly reminds us: “What causes wars, and

what causes fightings 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 de-

velopment of all” instead of by the quest for

individual profit, peace would be possible as

the result of a “more perfect justice among

people
”

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.

” Cf. ibid., 76: loc. cit., p. 295.

18



Ill

SURVEY

OF THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD

11. In its own time the fundamental teaching

of the Encyclical Populorum Progressio received

great acclaim for its novel character. The social

context in which we live today cannot be said

to be completely identical to that of twenty

years ago. For this reason, I now wish to con-

duct a brief review of some of the characteristics

of today’s world, in order to develop the teaching

of Paul Vi’s Encyclical, once again from the

point of view of the “development of peoples”.

12. The first fact to note is that the hopes

for development, at that time so lively, today

appear very far from being realized.

In this regard, the Encyclical had no illusions.

Its language, grave and at times dramatic, limited

itself to stressing the seriousness of the situation

and to bringing before the conscience of all

the urgent obligation of contributing to its

solution. In those years there was a certain

widespread optimism about the possibility of

overcoming, without excessive efforts, the

19



economic backwardness of the poorer peoples,

of providing them with infrastructures and as-

sisting them in the process of industrialization.

In that historical context, over and above

the efforts of each country, the United Nations

Organization promoted consecutively two decades

of development.^^ In fact, some measures, bi-

lateral and multilateral, were taken with the

aim of helping many nations, some of which

had already been independent for some time,

and others—the majority—being States just
born from the process of decolonization. For

her part, the Church felt the duty to deepen her

understanding of the problems posed by the

new situation, in the hope of supporting these

efforts with her religious and human inspiration,

in order to give them a “soul” and an effective

impulse.

13. It cannot be said that these various re-

ligious, human, economic and technical initia-

tives have been in vain, for they have succeeded

in achieving certain results. But in general, tak-

ing into account the various factors, one cannot

deny that the present situation of the world,

from the point of view of development, offers

a rather negative impression.

For this reason, I wish to call attention to a

number of general indicators, without excluding

other specific ones. Without going into an analy-

The decades referred to are the years 1960-1970 and
1970-1980; the present decade is the third (1980-1990),

20



sis of figures and statistics, it is sufficient to

face squarely the reality of an innumerable mul-

titude of people—children, adults and the eld-
erly—in other words, real and unique human
persons, who are suffering under the intolerable

burden of poverty. There are many millions

who are deprived of hope due to the fact that,

in many parts of the world, their situation has

noticeably worsened. Before these tragedies of

total indigence and need, in which so many of

our brothers and sisters are living, it is the Lord

Jesus himself who comes to question us (cf. Mt
25:31-46).

14. The first negative observation to make is

the persistence and often the widening of the

gap between the areas of the so-called developed

North and the developing South. This geo-

graphical terminology is only indicative, since

one cannot ignore the fact that the frontiers of

wealth and poverty intersect within the societies

themselves, whether developed or developing.

In fact, just as social inequalities down to the

level of poverty exist in rich countries, so, in

parallel fashion, in the less developed countries

one often sees manifestations of selfishness and

a flaunting of wealth which is as disconcerting

as it is scandalous.

The abundance of goods and services avail-

able in some parts of the world, particularly in

the developed North, is matched in the South

by an unacceptable delay, and it is precisely in

21



this geopolitical area that the major part of the

human race lives.

Looking at all the various sectors—the pro-
duction and distribution of foodstuffs, hygiene,

health and housing, availability of drinking

water, working conditions (especially for

women), life expectancy and other economic and

social indicators—the general picture is a disap-
pointing one, both considered in itself and in

relation to the corresponding data of the more

developed countries. The word “gap” returns

spontaneously to mind.

Perhaps this is not the appropriate word for

indicating the true reality, since it could give

the impression of a stationary phenomenon. This

is not the case. The pace of progress in the

developed and developing countries in recent

years has differed, and this serves to widen the

distances. Thus the developing countries, es-

pecially the poorest of them, find themselves in

a situation of very serious delay.

We must also add the diferences of culture
and value systems between the various popu-

lation groups, differences which do not always

match the degree of economic development, but

which help to create distances. These are ele-

ments and aspects which render the social

question much more complex, precisely because

this question has assumed a universal dimension.

As we observe the various parts of the world
separated by this widening gap, and note that

each of these parts seems to follow its own path

22



with its own achievements, we can understand

the current usage which speaks of different

worlds within our one world: the First World,

the Second World, the Third World and at times

the Fourth World/^ Such expressions, which

obviously do not claim to classify exhaustively

all countries, are significant: they are a sign of

a widespread sense that the unity of the world,

that is, the unity of the human race, is seriously

compromised. Such phraseology, beyond its

more or less objective value, undoubtedly con-

ceals a moral content, before which the Church,

which is a “sacrament or sign and instrument ...

of the unity of the whole human race”,^^ cannot

remain indifferent.

15. However, the picture just given would

be incomplete if one failed to add to the “eco-

nomic and social indices” of underdevelopment

other indices which are equally negative and

indeed even more disturbing, beginning with the

cultural level. These are illiteracy, the difficulty

or impossibility of obtaining higher education,

the inability to share in the building of one's

own nation, the various forms of exploitation

and of economic, social, political and even re-

ligious oppression of the individual and his or

The expression “Fourth World” is used not just oc-
casionally for the so-called less advanced countries, but also
and especially for the bands of great or extreme poverty in
countries of medium and high income.

Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Con-
stitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, 1.

23



her rights, discrimination of every type, es-

pecially the exceptionally odious form based on

difference of race. If some of these scourges are

noted with regret in areas of the more developed

North, they are undoubtedly more frequent,

more lasting and more difficult to root out in

the developing and less advanced countries.

It should be noted that in today’s world,

among other rights, the right of economic in-

itiative is often suppressed. Yet it is a right

which is important not only for the individual

but also for the common good. Experience

shows us that the denial of this right, or its limi-

tation in the name of an alleged “equality” of

everyone in society, diminishes, or in practice

absolutely destroys the spirit of initiative, that

is to say the creative subjectivity of the citizen.

As a consequence, there arises, not so much a

true equality as a “levelling down”. In the

place of creative initiative there appears pas-

sivity, dependence and submission to the bureau-

cratic apparatus which, as the only “ordering”

and “ decision-making ” body—if not also the
“ owner ”—of the entire totality of goods and
the means of production, puts everyone in a

position of almost absolute dependence, which

is similar to the traditional dependence of the

worker-proletarian in capitalism. This provokes

a sense of frustration or desperation and predis-

poses people to opt out of national life, impelling

many to emigrate and also favouring a form of
“ psychological ” emigration

.

24



Such a situation has its consequences also

from the point of view of the “rights of indi-

vidual nations”. In fact, it often happens that

a nation is deprived of its subjectivity, that is

to say the “sovereignty” which is its right, in

its economic, political-social and in a certain way

cultural significance, since in a national commu-

nity all these dimensions of life are bound

together.

It must also be restated that no social group,

for example a political party, has the right to

usurp the role of sole leader, since this brings

about the destruction of the true subjectivity of

society and of the individual citizens, as happens

in every form of totalitarianism. In this situation

the individual and the people become “objects”,

in spite of all declarations to the contrary and

verbal assurances.

We should add here that in today’s world
there are many other forms of poverty. For are

there not certain privations or deprivations which

deserve this name? The denial or the limitation

of human rights—as for example the right to
religious freedom, the right to share in the

building of society, the freedom to organize and

to form unions, or to take initiatives in eco-

nomic matters—do these not impoverish the
human person as much as, if not more than, the

deprivation of material goods? And is develop-
ment which does not take into account the full

affirmation of these rights really development on

the human level?

25



In brief, modern underdevelopment is not

only economic but also cultural, political and

simply human, as was indicated twenty years ago

by the Encyclical Populorum Progressio. Hence

at this point we have to ask ourselves if the

sad reality of today might not be, at least in

part, the result of a too narrow idea of develop-

ment, that is, a mainly economic one.

16 . It should be noted that in spite of the

praiseworthy efforts made in the last two decades

by the more developed or developing nations

and the International Organizations to find a

way out of the situation, or at least to remedy

some of its symptoms, the conditions have be-

come notably worse.

Responsibility for this deterioration is due

to various causes. Notable among them are

undoubtedly grave instances of omissions on

the part of the developing nations themselves,

and especially on the part of those holding

economic and political power. Nor can we

pretend not to see the responsibility of the de-

veloped nations, which have not always, at least

in due measure, felt the duty to help countries

separated from the affluent world to which they

themselves belong.

Moreover, one must denounce the existence

of economic, financial and social mechanisms

which, although they are manipulated by people,

often function almost automatically, thus ac-

centuating the situation of wealth for some and

26



poverty for the rest. These mechanisms, which

are manoeuvred directly or indirectly by the

more developed countries, by their very function-

ing favour the interests of the people manipula-

ting them. But in the end they suffocate or con-

dition the economies of the less developed coun-

tries. Later on these mechanisms will have to

be subjected to a careful analysis under the

ethical-moral aspect.

Popularurn Progressio already foresaw the

possibility that under such systems the wealth

of the rich would increase and the poverty of

the poor would remain A proof of this forecast
has been the appearance of the so-called Fourth

World.

17. However much society worldwide shows

signs of fragmentation, expressed in the conven-

tional names First, Second, Third and even

Fourth World, their interdependence remains

close. When this interdependence is separated
from its ethical requirements, it has disastrous

consequences for the weakest. Indeed, as a

result of a sort of internal dynamic and under

the impulse of mechanisms which can only be

called perverse, this interdependence triggers

negative effects even in the rich countries. It

is precisely within these countries that one

encounters, though on a lesser scale, the more

specific manifestations of underdevelopment.

“ Encyclical Populorum Progressio, 33; loc. cit., p. 273.

27



Thus it should be obvious that development

either becomes shared in common by every part

of the world or it undergoes a process of regres-

sion even in zones marked by constant progress.

This tells us a great deal about the nature of

authentic development: either all the nations

of the world participate, or it will not be true

development.

Among the specific signs of underdevelop-
ment which increasingly affect the developed coun-

tries also, there are two in particular that reveal

a tragic situation. The first is the housing crisis.

During this International Year of the Home-

less proclaimed by the United Nations, attention

is focused on the millions of human beings

lacking adequate housing or with no housing

at all, in order to awaken everyone’s conscience

and to find a solution to this serious problem

with its negative consequences for the individual,

the family and society.^

The lack of housing is being experienced

universally and is due in large measure to the

growing phenomenon of urbanization.^^ Even

the most highly developed peoples present the

sad spectacle of individuals and families literally

struggling to survive, without a roof over their

It should be noted that the Holy See associated itself
with the celebration of this International Year with a special

Document issued by the Pontifical Commission “lustitia et
Pax” entitled “What Have You Done to Your Homeless
Brother?” - The Church and the Housing Problem {21 De-
cember 1987).

Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens
(14 May 1971), 8-9: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 406-408.

28



heads or with a roof so inadequate as to consti-

tute no roof at all.

The lack of housing, an extremely serious

problem in itself, should be seen as a sign and

summing-up of a whole series of shortcomings,

economic, social, cultural or simply human in

nature. Given the extent of the problem, we

should need little convincing of how far we are

from an authentic development of peoples.

18 . Another indicator common to the vast

majority of nations is the phenomenon of un-

employment and underemployment.

Everyone recognizes the reality and growing

seriousness of this problem in the industrialized

countries While it is alarming in the develop-

ing countries, with their high rate of population

growth and their large numbers of young people,

in the countries of high economic development

the sources of work seem to be shrinking, and

thus the opportunities for employment are de-

creasing rather than increasing.

This phenomenon too, with its series of

negative consequences for individuals and for

society, ranging from humiliation to the loss of

that self-respect which every man and woman
should have, prompts us to question seriously

A recent United Nations publication entitled World
Economic Survey 1987 provides the most recent data (cf.

pp. 8-9). The percentage of unemployed in the developed
countries with a market economy jumped from 3% of the
work force in 1970 to 8% in 1986. It now amounts to 29
million people.

29



the type of development which has been fol-

lowed over the past twenty years. Here the

words of the Encyclical Laborem Exercens are

extremely appropriate: “It must be stressed that

the constitutive element in this progress and

also the most adequate way to verify it in a spirit

of justice and peace, which the Church pro-

claims and for which she does not cease to pray...

is the continual reappraisal of man’s work, both

in the aspect of its objective finality and in the

aspect of the dignity of the subject of all work,

that is to say, man”. On the other hand, “we
cannot fail to be struck by a disconcerting fact

of immense proportions: the fact that ... there

are huge numbers of people who are unem-

ployed ... a fact that without any doubt de-

monstrates that both within the individual poli-

tical communities and in their relationships on

the continental and world level there is some-

thing wrong with the organization of work and

employment, precisely at the most critical and

socially most important points

This second phenomenon, like the previous

one, because it is universal in character and

tends to proliferate, is a very telling negative

sign of the state and the quality of the develop-

ment of peoples which we see today.

19. A third phenomenon, likewise character-
istic of the most recent period, even though it

Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981),
18: AAS 73 (1981), pp. 624-625.

30



is not met with everywhere, is without doubt

equally indicative of the interdependence be-

tween developed and less developed countries.

It is the question of the international debt, con-

cerning which the Pontifical Commission “lusti-

tia et Pax” has issued a document.^®

At this point one cannot ignore the close

connection between a problem of this kind—the
growing seriousness of which was already fore-

seen in Fopulorum Progressio —and the ques-
tion of the development of peoples.

The reason which prompted the developing

peoples to accept the offer of abundantly avail-

able capital was the hope of being able to invest

it in development projects. Thus the availability

of capital and the fact of accepting it as a loan

can be considered a contribution to develop-

ment, something desirable and legitimate in it-

self, even though perhaps imprudent and occa-

sionally hasty.

Circumstances having changed, both within

the debtor nations and in the international

financial market, the instrument chosen to make

a contribution to development has turned into

At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical
Approach to the International Debt Question (27 December

1986).

” Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 54: loc. cit.,

pp. 283 f: “Developing countries will thus no longer risk being

overwhelmed by debts whose repayment swallows up the
greater part of their gains. Rates of interest and time for

repayment of the loan could be so arranged as not to be too

great a burden on either party, taking into account free gifts,

interest-free or low-interest loans, and the time needed for

liquidating the debts”.

31



a counter-productive mechanism. This is be-

cause the debtor nations, in order to service

their debt, find themselves obliged to export the

capital needed for improving or at least main-

taining their standard of living. It is also be-

cause, for the same reason, they are unable to

obtain new and equally essential financing.

Through this mechanism, the means in-

tended for the development of peoples has

turned into a brake upon development instead,

and indeed in some cases has even aggravated

underdevelopment.

As the recent document of the Pontifical

Commission “lustitia et Pax” states these ob-

servations should make us reflect on the ethical

character of the interdependence of peoples.

And along similar lines, they should make us
reflect on the requirements and conditions,

equally inspired by ethical principles, for cooper-

ation in development.

20. If at this point we examine the reasons

for this serious delay in the process of develop-

ment, a delay which has occurred contrary to

the indications of the Encyclical Populorum Pro-

gression which had raised such great hopes, our

attention is especially drawn to the political

causes of today’s situation.

Cf. “Presentation” of the document At the Service of
the Human Community: An Ethical Approach to the Interna-
tional Debt Question {21 December 1986).

32



Faced with a combination of factors which

are undoubtedly complex, we cannot hope to

achieve a comprehensive analysis here. How-

ever, we cannot ignore a striking fact about the

political picture since the Second World War,

a fact which has considerable impact on the for-

ward movement of the development of peoples.

I am referring to the existence of two op-

posing blocs, commonly known as the East and

the West. The reason for this description is

not purely political but is also, as the expression

goes, geopolitical. Each of the two blocs tends

to assimilate or gather around it other countries

or groups of countries, to different degrees of

adherence or participation.

The opposition is first of all political, inas-

much as each bloc identifies itself with a system

of organizing society and exercising power

which presents itself as an alternative to the

other. The political opposition, in turn, takes

its origin from a deeper opposition which is

ideological in nature.

In the West there exists a system which is

historically inspired by the principles of the

liberal capitalism which developed with indus-

trialization during the last century. In the East

there exists a system inspired by the Marxist

collectivism which sprang from an interpreta-

tion of the condition of the proletarian classes

made in the light of a particular reading of

history. Each of the two ideologies, on the

basis of two very different visions of man and of

33



his freedom and social role, has proposed and

still promotes, on the economic level, antithet-

ical forms of the organization of labour and of

the structures of ownership, especially with

regard to the so-called means of production.

It was inevitable that by developing antag-

onistic systems and centres of power, each with

its own forms of propaganda and indoctrination,

the ideological opposition should evolve into a

growing military opposition and give rise to two

blocs of armed forces, each suspicious and fear-

ful of the other’s domination.

International relations, in turn, could not

fail to feel the effects of this “logic of blocs”

and of the respective “spheres of influence”.

The tension between the two blocs which began

at the end of the Second World War has domi-
nated the whole of the subsequent forty years.

Sometimes it has taken the form of ''cold war'\

sometimes of "wars by proxy”, through the

manipulation of local conflicts, and sometimes

it has kept people’s minds in suspense and

anguish by the threat of an open and total

war.

Although at the present time this danger

seems to have receded, yet without completely

disappearing, and even though an initial agree-

ment has been reached on the destruction of one

type of nuclear weapon, the existence and op-

position of the blocs continue to be a real and

worrying fact which still colours the world

picture.

34



21. This happens with particularly negative

effects in the international relations which con-

cern the developing countries. For as we know

the tension between East and West is not in

itself an opposition between two different levels

of development but rather between two concepts

of the development of individuals and peoples,

both concepts being imperfect and in need of

radical correction. This opposition is transferred

to the developing countries themselves, and thus

helps to widen the gap already existing on the

economic level between North and South and

which results from the distance between the two

worlds: the more developed one and the less

developed one.

This is one of the reasons why the Church’s

social doctrine adopts a critical attitude towards

both liberal capitalism and Marxist collectivism.

For from the point of view of development the

question naturally arises: in what way and to

what extent are these two systems capable of

changes and updatings such as to favour or pro-

mote a true and integral development of indi-

viduals and peoples in modern society? In fact,

these changes and updatings are urgent and es-

sential for the cause of a development common

to all.

Countries which have recently achieved inde-

pendence, and which are trying to establish a cul-

tural and political identity of their own, and need

effective and impartial aid from all the richer

and more developed countries, find themselves

35



involved in, and sometimes overwhelmed by,

ideological conflicts, which inevitably create in-

ternal divisions, to the extent in some cases of

provoking full civil war. This is also because

investments and aid for development are often

diverted from their proper purpose and used to

sustain conflicts, apart from and in opposition to

the interests of the countries which ought to

benefit from them. Many of these countries are

becoming more and more aware of the danger

of falling victim to a form of neo-colonialism

and are trying to escape from it. It is this

awareness which in spite of difficulties, un-

certainties and at times contradictions gave rise

to the International Movement of Non-Aligned

Nations, which, in its positive aspect, would like

to affirm in an effective way the right of every

people to its own identity, independence and se-
curity, as well as the right to share, on a basis of

equality and solidarity, in the goods intended

for all.

22. In the light of these considerations, we

easily arrive at a clearer picture of the last twenty

years and a better understanding of the conflicts

in the northern hemisphere, namely between East

and West, as an important cause of the retarda-

tion or stagnation of the South.

The developing countries, instead of becom-

ing autonomous nations concerned with their

own progress towards a just sharing in the goods
and services meant for all, become parts of a

36



machine, cogs on a gigantic wheel. This is often

true also in the field of social communications,

which, being run by centres mostly in the northern

hemisphere, do not always give due consider-

ation to the priorities and problems of such

countries or respect their cultural make-up. They

frequently impose a distorted vision of life and

of man, and thus fail to respond to the demands

of true development.

Each of the two blocs harbours in its own

way a tendency towards imperialism, as it is

usually called, or towards forms of neo-col-

onalism: an easy temptation to which they fre-

quently succumb, as history, including recent his-

tory, teaches.

It is this abnormal situation, the result of a

war and of an unacceptably exaggerated concern

for security, which deadens the impulse towards

united cooperation by all for the common good

of the human race, to the detriment especially of

peaceful peoples who are impeded from their

rightful access to the goods meant for all.

Seen in this way, the present division of the

world is a direct obstacle to the real transfor-

mation of the conditions of underdevelopment in

the developing and less advanced countries.

However, peoples do not always resign them-

selves to their fate. Furthermore, the very needs

of an economy stifled by military expenditure

and by bureaucracy and intrinsic inefficiency now

seem to favour processes which might mitigate

the existing opposition and make it easier to

37



begin a fruitful dialogue and genuine col-

laboration for peace.

23. The statement in the Encyclical Populo-

rum Progressio that the resources and invest-

ments devoted to arms production ought to be

used to alleviate the misery of impoverished

peoples makes more urgent the appeal to over-

come the opposition between the two blocs.

Today, the reality is that these resources are

used to enable each of the two blocs to overtake

the other and thus guarantee its own security.

Nations which historically, economically and po-

litically have the possibility of playing a leader-

ship role are prevented by this fundamentally

flawed distortion from adequately fulfilling their

duty of solidarity for the benefit of peoples

which aspire to full development.

It is timely to mention—and it is no exag-
geration—that a leadership role among nations
can only be justified by the possibility and will-

ingness to contribute widely and generously to

the common good.
If a nation were to succumb more or less de-

liberately to the temptation to close in upon it-

self and failed to meet the responsibilities fol-

lowing from its superior position in the commun-

ity of nations, it would fall seriously short of

its clear ethical duty. This is readily apparent in

the circumstances of history, where believers

Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 53; loc.

cit., p. 283.

38



discern the dispositions of Divine Providence,

ready to make use of the nations for the re-

alization of its plans, so as to render “vain the

designs of the peoples” (cf. Ps 33l32:l0).

When the West gives the impression of aban-
doning itself to forms of growing and selfish

isolation, and the East in its turn seems to ignore

for questionable reasons its duty to cooperate in

the task of alleviating human misery, then we

are up against not only a betrayal of humanity's

legitimate expectations—a betrayal that is a har-
binger of unforeseeable consequences—but also
a real desertion of a moral obligation.

24. If arms production is a serious disorder in

the present world with regard to true human

needs and the employment of the means capable

of satisfying those needs, the arms trade is

equally to blame. Indeed, with reference to the

latter it must be added that the moral judgment

is even more severe. As we all know, this is

a trade without frontiers, capable of crossing

even the barriers of the blocs. It knows how to

overcome the division between East and West,

and above all the one between North and South,

to the point—and this is more serious—of push-
ing its way into the different sections which make

up the southern hemisphere. We are thus con-
fronted with a strange phenomenon: while eco-

nomic aid and development plans meet with the

obstacle of insuperable ideological barriers, and

with tariff and trade barriers, arms of whatever

39



origin circulate with almost total freedom all

over the world. And as the recent document of

the Pontifical Commission “lustitia et Pax” on

the international debt points out/^ everyone

knows that in certain cases the capital lent by the

developed world has been used in the under-

developed world to buy weapons.

If to all this we add the tremendous and

universally acknowledged danger represented by

atomic weapons stockpiled on an incredible

scale, the logical conclusion seems to be this:

in today’s world, including the world of econo-

mics, the prevailing picture is one destined to

lead us more quickly towards death rather than

one of concern for true development which would

lead all towards a “more human” life, as en-

visaged by the Encyclical Populorum Progressio!'^

The consequences of this state of affairs are

to be seen in the festering of a wound which

typifies and reveals the imbalances and conflicts

of the modern world: the millions of refugees

whom war, natural calamities, persecution and
discrimination of every kind have deprived of

home, employment, family and homeland. The

tragedy of these multitudes is reflected in the

hopeless faces of men, women and children who
can no longer find a home in a divided and

inhospitable world.

At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical
Approach to the International Debt Question (27 December
1986), III, 2, 1.

Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 20-21: loc.
cit., pp. 267 f.

40



Nor may we close our eyes to another painful

wound in today’s world: the phenomenon of

terrorism, understood as the intention to kill

people and destroy property indiscriminately,

and to create a climate of terror and insecurity,

often including the taking of hostages. Even

when some ideology or the desire to create a

better society is adduced as the motivation for

this inhuman behaviour, acts of terrorism are

never justifiable. Even less so when, as happens

today, such decisions and such actions, which at

times lead to real massacres, and to the abduction

of innocent people who have nothing to do with

the conflicts, claim to have a propaganda purpose

for furthering a cause. It is still worse when they

are an end in themselves, so that murder is com-

mitted merely for the sake of killing. In the

face of such horror and suffering, the words

I spoke some years ago are still true, and I wish

to repeat them again: “What Christianity forbids

is to seek solutions ... by the ways of hatred,

by the murdering of defenceless people, by the

methods of terrorism”."^

25. At this point something must be said

about the demographic problem and the way it

is spoken of today, following what Paul VI said
in his Encyclical and what I myself stated at

Address at Drogheda, Ireland (29 September 1979), 5;

AAS 71 (1979), II, p. 1079.
Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 37: loc.

cit., pp. 275 f.

41



length in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris

Consortio!^

One cannot deny the existence, especially in

the southern hemisphere, of a demographic

problem which creates difficulties for develop-

ment. One must immediately add that in the

northern hemisphere the nature of this problem

is reversed: here, the cause for concern is the

drop in the birthrate, with repercussions on the

aging of the population, unable even to renew

itself biologically. In itself, this is a phenomenon

capable of hindering development. Just as it is

incorrect to say that such difficulties stem solely

from demographic growth, neither is it proved

that all demographic growth is incompatible with

orderly development.

On the other hand, it is very alarming to
see governments in many countries launching

systematic campaigns against birth, contrary not

only to the cultural and religious identity of the

countries themselves but also contrary to the

nature of true development. It often happens

that these campaigns are the result of pressure

and financing coming from abroad, and in some

cases they are made a condition for the granting

of financial and economic aid and assistance.

In any event, there is an absolute lack of respect

for the freedom of choice of the parties involved,

men and women often subjected to intolerable

Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (22 No-

vember 1981), especially in 30; AAS 74 (1982), pp. 115-117.

42



pressures, including economic ones, in order to

force them to submit to this new form of oppres-

sion. It is the poorest populations which suffer

such mistreatment, and this sometimes leads to

a tendency towards a form of racism, or the

promotion of certain equally racist forms of

eugenics.

This fact too, which deserves the most force-

ful condemnation, is a sign of an erroneous and

perverse idea of true human development.

26 . This mainly negative overview of the

actual situation of development in the contem-

porary world would be incomplete without a

mention of the coexistence of positive aspects.

The first positive note is the full awareness

among large numbers of men and women of their

own dignity and of that of every human being.

This awareness is expressed, for example, in the

more lively concern that human rights should

be respected, and in the more vigorous rejection

of their violation. One sign of this is the

number of recently established private associa-

tions, some worldwide in membership, almost

all of them devoted to monitoring with great

care and commendable objectivity what is hap-

pening internationally in this sensitive field.

At this level one must acknowledge the

influence exercised by the Declaration of Human
Rights, promulgated some forty years ago by the

United Nations Organization. Its very existence

and gradual acceptance by the international com-

43



munity are signs of a growing awareness. The

same is to be said, still in the field of human

rights, of other juridical instruments issued by

the United Nations Organization or other Inter-

national Organizations.

The awareness under discussion applies not

only to individuals but also to nations and

peoples, which, as entities having a specific

cultural identity, are particularly sensitive to the

preservation, free exercise and promotion of their

precious heritage.

At the same time, in a world divided and

beset by every type of conflict, the conviction

is growing of a radical interdependence and con-

sequently of the need for a solidarity which will

take up interdependence and transfer it to the

moral plane. Today perhaps more than in the

past, people are realizing that they are linked

together by a common destiny, which is to be

constructed together, if catastrophe for all is to

be avoided. From the depth of anguish, fear

and escapist phenomena like drugs, typical of

the contemporary world, the idea is slowly

emerging that the good to which we are all called
and the happiness to which we aspire cannot
be obtained without an effort and commitment

on the part of all, nobody excluded, and the con-

sequent renouncing of personal selfishness.

Cf. Human Rights. Collection of International Instru-
ments, United Nations, New York 1983; John Paul II, En-
cyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), 17: AAS
71 (1979), p. 296.

44



Also to be mentioned here, as a sign of

respect for life—despite all the temptations to
destroy it by abortion and euthanasia—is a
concomitant concern for peace, together with

an awareness that peace is indivisible. It is either

for all or for none. It demands an ever greater

degree of rigorous respect for justice and con-

sequently a fair distribution of the results of true

development/^

Among today’s positive signs we must also

mention a greater realization of the limits of

available resources, and of the need to respect

the integrity and the cycles of nature and to take

them into account when planning for develop-

ment, rather than sacrificing them to certain

demagogic ideas about the latter. Today this is

called ecological concern.

It is also right to acknowledge the generous

commitment of statesmen, politicians, econo-

mists, trade unionists, people of science and inter-

national officials—many of them inspired by
religious faith—who at no small personal sacrifice
try to resolve the world’s ills and who give of

themselves in every way so as to ensure that an

Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium
et Spes, 78; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progres-
sio, 76: loc. cit., pp. 294 f.: “To wage war on misery and to

struggle against injustice is to promote, along with improved

conditions, the human and spiritual progress of all men, and
therefore the common good of humanity ... peace is something
that is built up day after day, in the pursuit of an order

intended by God, which implies a more perfect form of justice

among men”.

45



ever increasing number of people may enjoy the

benefits of peace and a quality of life worthy

of the name.

The great International Organizations, and

a number of the Regional Organizations, con-

tribute to this in no small measure. Their united

efforts make possible more effective action.

It is also through these contributions that

some Third World countries, despite the burden

of many negative factors, have succeeded in

reaching a certain self-sufficiency in food, or a

degree of industrialization which makes it pos-

sible to survive with dignity and to guarantee

sources of employment for the active population.

Thus, all is not negative in the contemporary

world, nor could it be, for the Heavenly Father’s

Providence lovingly watches over even our

daily cares (cf. M/ 6:25-32; 10:23-31; Lk

12:6-7; 22-30). Indeed, the positive values

which we have mentioned testify to a new moral

concern, particularly with respect to the great

human problems such as development and peace.

This fact prompts me to turn my thoughts
to the true nature of the development of peoples,

along the lines of the Encyclical which we are

commemorating, and as a mark of respect for

its teaching.

46



IV

AUTHENTIC HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

21. The examination which the Encyclical

invites us to make of the contemporary world

leads us to note in the first place that develop-

men is not a straightforward process, as it were

automatic and in itself limitless, as though, given

certain conditions, the human race were able to

progress rapidly towards an undefined perfection

of some kind.'^^

Such an idea — linked to a notion of “prog-
ress ” with philosophical connotations deriving

from the Enlightenment, rather than to the

notion of “development” which is used in

a specifically economic and social sense — now
seems to be seriously called into doubt, partic-

ularly since the tragic experience of the two

world wars, the planned and partly achieved

destruction of whole peoples, and the looming

Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (22 No-
vember 1981), 6: AAS 74 (1982), p. 88: “...history is not
simply a fixed progression towards what is better, but rather
an event of freedom, and even a struggle between freedoms ...”.

^ For this reason the word “development” was used in
the Encyclical rather than the word “progress”, but with an
attempt to give the word “development” its fullest meaning.

47



atomic peril. A naive mechanistic optimism has
been replaced by a well-founded anxiety for the

fate of humanity.

28 . At the same time, however, the ''eco-

nomic” concept itself, linked to the word de-

velopment, has entered into crisis. In fact there

is a better understanding today that the mere

accumulation of goods and services, even for

the benefit of the majority, is not enough for

the realization of human happiness. Nor, in

consequence, does the availability of the many

real benefits provided in recent times by science

and technology, including the computer sciences,

bring freedom from every form of slavery. On
the contrary, the experience of recent years

shows that unless all the considerable body of

resources and potential at man’s disposal is

guided by a moral understanding and by an

orientation towards the true good of the human

race, it easily turns against man to oppress

him.

A disconcerting conclusion about the most
recent period should serve to enlighten us: side-

by-side with the miseries of underdevelopment,

themselves unacceptable, we find ourselves up

against a form of superdevelopment, equally

inadmissible, because like the former it is contra-

ry to what is good and to true happiness. This

superdevelopment, which consists in an exces-

sive availability of every kind of material goods

for the benefit of certain social groups, easily

48



makes people slaves of “possession” and of

immediate gratification, with no other horizon

than the multiplication or continual replacement

of the things already owned with others still

better. This is the so-called civilization of “con-

sumption” or “consumerism”, which involves so

much “ throwing-away ” and “waste”. An object

already owned but now superseded by something

better is discarded, with no thought of its pos-

sible lasting value in itself, nor of some other

human being who is poorer.

All of us experience firsthand the sad effects

of this blind submission to pure consumerism:

in the first place a crass materialism, and at the

same time a radical dissatisfaction, because one

quickly learns—unless one is shielded from the
flood of publicity and the ceaseless and tempting

offers of products—that the more one possesses
the more one wants, while deeper aspirations

remain unsatisfied and perhaps even stifled.

The Encyclical of Pope Paul VI pointed out

the difference, so often emphasized today, bet-

ween “having” and “being which had been

expressed earlier in precise words by the Second

Encyclical Letter Populorum Progression 19, loc. cit.,

pp. 266 f.: “Increased possession is not the ultimate goal of

nations or of individuals. All growth is ambivalent ... The
exclusive pursuit of possessions thus becomes an obstacle to

individual fulfilment and to man’s true greatness ... both for

nations and for individual men, avarice is the most evident

form of moral underdevelopment”; cf. also Paul VI, Apostolic
Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May 1971), 9: AAS 63
(1971), pp. 407 f.

49



Vatican Council, To “have” objects and goods

does not in itself perfect the human subject,

unless it contributes to the maturing and enrich-

ment of that subject’s “being”, that is to say

unless it contributes to the realization of the

human vocation as such.

Of course, the difference between “being”

and “having”, the danger inherent in a mere

multiplication or replacement of things possessed

compared to the value of “being”, need not

turn into a contradiction. One of the greatest

injustices in the contemporary world consists

precisely in this: that the ones who possess much

are relatively jew and those who possess almost

nothing are many. It is the injustice of the poor

distribution of the goods and services originally

intended for all.

This then is the picture: there are some

people—the few who possess much—who do
not really succeed in “being” because, through

a reversal of the hierarchy of values, they are

hindered by the cult of “having”; and there are

others—the many who have little or nothing

—

who do not succeed in realizing their basic human

vocation because they are deprived of essential

goods.

The evil does not consist in “having” as

such, but in possessing without regard for the

quality and the ordered hierarchy of the goods

Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern
World Gaudium et Spes, 35; Paul VI, Address to the Diplo-
matic Corps (7 January 1965): AAS 51 (1965), p. 232.

50



one has. Quality and hierarchy arise from the

subordination of goods and their availability to

man’s “being” and his true vocation.

This shows that although development has

a necessary economic dimension, since it must

supply the greatest possible number of the

world’s inhabitants with an availability of goods

essential for them “to be”, it is not limited to

that dimension. If it is limited to this, then it

turns against those whom it is meant to benefit.
The characteristics of full development, one

which is “ more human ” and able to sustain itself

at the level of the true vocation of men and

women without denying economic requirements,

were described by Paul VI

29. Development which is not only economic

must be measured and oriented according to the

reality and vocation of man seen in his totality,

namely, according to his interior dimension. There

is no doubt that he needs created goods and the

products of industry, which is constantly being

enriched by scientific and technological progress.

And the ever greater availability of material goods
not only meets needs but also opens new hori-

zons. The danger of the misuse of material

goods and the appearance of artificial needs

should in no way hinder the regard we have for
the new goods and resources placed at our dis-

posal and the use we make of them. On the

Cf. Encyclical Letter Fopulorum Progressio, 20-21: loc.
cit., pp. 267 f.

51



contrary, we must see them as a gift from God
and as a response to the human vocation, which

is fully realized in Christ.

However, in trying to achieve true develop-

ment we must never lose sight of that dimension

which is in the specific nature of man, who has

been created by God in his image and likeness
(cf. Gen 1:26). It is a bodily and a spiritual

nature, symbolized in the second creation account

by the two elements: the earth, from which God
forms man’s body, and the breath of life which

he breathes into man’s nostrils (cf. Gen 2:7).

Thus man comes to have a certain affinity

with other creatures: he is called to use them,

and to be involved with them. As the Genesis

account says (cf. Gen 2: 15), he is placed in the

garden with the duty of cultivating and watching

over it, being superior to the other creatures

placed by God under his dominion (cf. Gen 1:25-

26). But at the same time man must remain

subject to the will of God, who imposes limits

upon his use and dominion over things (cf. Gen

2:16-17), just as he promises him immortality

(cf. Gen 2:9; Wis 2:23). Thus man, being the

image of God, has a true affinity with him too.

On the basis of this teaching, development
cannot consist only in the use, dominion over

and indiscriminate possession of created things

and the products of human industry, but rather

in subordinating the possession, dominion and

use to man’s divine likeness and to his voca-

tion to immortality. This is the transcendent

52



reality of the human being, a reality which is

seen to be shared from the beginning by a

couple, a man and a woman (cf. Gen 1:27),
and is therefore fundamentally social.

30. According to Sacred Scripture therefore,

the notion of development is not only “lay”

or “profane”, but is also seen to be, while

having a socio-economic dimension of its own,

the modern expression of an essential dimension

of man’s vocation.

The fact is that man was not created, so

to speak, immobile and static. The first por-

trayal of him, as given in the Bible, certainly

presents him as a creature and image, defined

in his deepest reality by the origin and affinity

that constitute him. But all this plants within

the human being—man and woman—the seed
and the requirement of a special task to be accom-

plished by each individually and by them as

a couple. The task is “to have dominion”

over the other created beings, “to cultivate

the garden ” . This is to be accomplished

within the framework of obedience to the divine

law and therefore with respect for the image

received, the image which is the clear founda-

tion of the power of dominion recognized as

belonging to man as the means to his perfection

(cf. Gen 1:26-30; 2:15-16; Wis 9:2-3).

When man disobeys God and refuses to
submit to his rule, nature rebels against him

and no longer recognizes him as its “master”.

53



for he has tarnished the divine image in himself.

The claim to ownership and use of created things

remains still valid, but after sin its exercise

becomes difficult and full of suffering (cf. Gen

3:17-19).

In fact, the following chapter of Genesis

shows us that the descendants of Cain build

“a city”, engage in sheep farming, practise the

arts (music) and technical skills (metallurgy);

while at the same time people began to "call

upon the name of the Lord” (cf. Gen 4:17-26).

The story of the human race described by

Sacred Scripture is, even after the fall into sin,

a story of constant achievements, which, although

always called into question and threatened by

sin, are nonetheless repeated, increased and

extended in response to the divine vocation

given from the beginning to man and to woman
(cf. Gen 1:26-28) and inscribed in the image

which they received.

It is logical to conclude, at least on the

part of those who believe in the word of God,

that today’s "development” is to be seen as a

moment in the story which began at creation,

a story which is constantly endangered by reason

of infidelity to the Creator’s will, and especially

by the temptation to idolatry. But this "develop-

ment ” fundamentally corresponds to the first

premises. Anyone wishing to renounce the

difficult yet noble task of improving the lot

of man in his totality, and of all people, with

the excuse that the struggle is difficult and

54



that constant effort is required, or simply because

of the experience of defeat and the need to

begin again, that person would be betraying the

will of God the Creator. In this regard, in the

Encyclical Lahorem Exercens I referred to man’s

vocation to work, in order to emphasize the idea

that it is always man who is the protagonist of

development.

Indeed, the Lord Jesus himself, in the par-

able of the talents, emphasizes the severe treat-

ment given to the man who dared to hide the

gift received: “You wicked and slothful servant!

You knew that I reap where I have not sowed

and gather where I have not winnowed? ... So

take the talent from him, and give it to him

who has the ten talents” [Mt 25:26-28). It

falls to us, who receive the gifts of God in

order to make them fruitful, to “sow” and

“reap”. If we do not, even what we have will

be taken away from us.

A deeper study of these harsh words will
make us commit ourselves more resolutely to

the duty, which is urgent for everyone today,

to work together for the full development of

others: “development of the whole human being

and of all people

Cf. Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September

1981), 4: AAS 73 (1981), pp. 584 f.; Paul VI, Encyclical
Letter Populorum Progressio, 15: loc. cit., p. 265.

” Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 42: loc. cit.,

p. 278.

55



31. Faith in Christ the Redeemer, while it

illuminates from within the nature of develop-

ment, also guides us in the task of collaboration.

In the Letter of Saint Paul to the Colossians,

we read that Christ is “the firstborn of all crea-

tion”, and that “all things were created through

him” and for him (1:15-16). In fact, “all

things hold together in him”, since “in him all

the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and
through him to reconcile to himself all things

(v. 20).

A part of this divine plan, which begins
from eternity in Christ, the perfect “image” of

the Father, and which culminates in him, “the

firstborn from the dead” (v. 18), is our own his-

tory, marked by our personal and collective

effort to raise up the human condition and to

overcome the obstacles which are continually

arising along our way. It thus prepares us to

share in the fullness which “dwells in the Lord”

and which he communicates “to his body, which

is the Church” (v. 18; cf. Eph 1:22-23). At

the same time sin, which is always attempting

to trap us and which jeopardizes our human

achievements, is conquered and redeemed by the

“reconciliation” accomplished by Christ (cf. Col.

1:20).

Here the perspectives widen. The dream

of “unlimited progress” reappears, radically

transformed by the new outlook created by

Christian faith, assuring us that progress is

possible only because God the Father has decided

56



from the beginning to make man a sharer of

his glory in Jesus Christ risen from the dead,

in whom “ we have redemption through his
blood ... the forgiveness of our trespasses” {Eph

1:7). In him God wished to conquer sin
and make it serve our greater good,^^ which

infinitely surpasses what progress could achieve.

We can say therefore—as we struggle amidst
the obscurities and deficiencies of underdevelop-

ment and superdevelopment—that one day this
corruptible body will put on incorruptibility,

this mortal body immortality (cf. 1 Cor 15:54),

when the Lord “delivers the Kingdom to God
the Father” (v. 24) and all the works and actions

that are worthy of man will be redeemed.

Furthermore, the concept of faith makes

quite clear the reasons which impel the Church

to concern herself with the problems of develop-

ment, to consider them a duty of her pastoral

ministry, and to urge all to think about the

nature and characteristics of authentic human

development. Through her commitment she

desires, on the one hand, to place herself at

the service of the divine plan which is meant

to order all things to the fullness which dwells

in Christ (cf. Col 1:19) and which he com-

municated to his body; and on the other hand

she desires to respond to her fundamental voca-

Cf. Praeconium Paschale, Missale Komanum, ed. typ.
altera, 1975, p. 272: “O certe necessarium Adae peccatum,
quod Christ! morte deletum est! O felix culpa, quae talem ac
tanturn meruit habere Redemptorem!

57



tion of being a “sacrament”, that is to say “a

sign and instrument of intimate union with

God and of the unity of the whole human
race”.^'

Some Fathers of the Church were inspired

by this idea to develop in original ways a

concept of the meaning of history and of human

work, directed towards a goal which surpasses

this meaning and which is always defined by

its relationship to the work of Christ. In other

words, one can find in the teaching of the

Fathers an optimistic vision of history and work,

that is to say of the perennial value of authentic

human achievements, inasmuch as they are

redeemed by Christ and destined for the pro-

mised Kingdom.^*

Thus, part of the teaching and most ancient

practice of the Church is her conviction that

she is obliged by her vocation—she herself, her
ministers and each of her members—to relieve
the misery of the suffering, both far and near,

not only out of her “abundance” but also out

of her “necessities”. Faced by cases of need,

one cannot ignore them in favour of superfluous

church ornaments and costly furnishings for

divine worship; on the contrary it could be

obligatory to sell these goods in order to provide

” Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Con-
stitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, 1.

Cf. for example, St Basil the Great, Regulae fusius

tractatae, interrogatio XXXVII, 1-2; PG 31, 1009-1012; Theo-
doret of Cyr, De Providentia, Oratio VII: PG 83, 665-686;
St Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 17; CCL 48, 683-685.

58



food, drink, clothing and shelter for those who

lack these things As has been already noted,

here we are shown a ''hierarchy of values
''—in

the framework of the right to property—be-
tween “having” and “being”, especially when

the “having” of a few can be to the detriment

of the “being” of many others.

In his Encyclical Pope Paul VI stands in

the line of this teaching, taking his inspiration

from the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et

Spes.^ For my own part, I wish to insist once
more on the seriousness and urgency of that

teaching, and I ask the Lord to give all Chris-

tians the strength to put it faithfully into

practice.

32 . The obligation to commit oneself to the

development of peoples is not just an individual

duty, and still less an individualistic one, as if

it were possible to achieve this development

through the isolated efforts of each individual.

C£. for example, St John Chrysostom, In Evang. S.
Matthaei, horn. 50, 3-4; PG 58, 508-510; St Ambrose, De
Officiis Ministrorum, lib. II, XXVIII, 136-140: PL 16, 139-
141; St Possidius, Vita S. Augustini Episcopi, XXIV: PL 32,
53 f.

^ Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 23: loc. cit.,
p. 268:

“
‘If someone who has the riches of this world sees

his brother in need and closes his heart to him, how does the
love of God abide in him?’ (1 Jn 3:17). It is well known how
strong were the words used by the Fathers of the Church

to describe the proper attitude of persons who possess anything
towards persons in need”. In the previous number, the Pope
had cited No. 69 of the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et
Spes of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council.

59



It is an imperative which obliges each and every

man and woman, as well as societies and na-

tions. In particular, it obliges the Catholic

Church and the other Churches and Ecclesial

Communities, with which we are completely

willing to collaborate in this field. In this sense,

just as we Catholics invite our Christian brethren

to share in our initiatives, so too we declare

that we are ready to collaborate in theirs, and

we welcome the invitations presented to us. In

this pursuit of integral human development we

can also do much with the members of other

religions, as in fact is being done in various

places.

Collaboration in the development of the

whole person and of every human being is in

fact a duty of all towards all, and must be shared

by the four parts of the world: East and West,

North and South; or, as we say today, by the

different “worlds”. If, on the contrary, people

try to achieve it in only one part, or in only

one world, they do so at the expense of the

others; and, precisely because the others are

ignored, their own development becomes exag-
gerated and misdirected.

Peoples or nations too have a right to their

own full development, which while including

—as already said—the economic and social
aspects should also include individual cultural

identity and openness to the transcendent. Not

even the need for development can be used as

60



an excuse for imposing on others one’s own

way of life or own religious belief.

33. Nor would a type of development which

did not respect and promote human rights—per-
sonal and social, economic and political, includ-

ing the rights of nations and of peoples—be
really worthy of man.

Today, perhaps more than in the past, the

intrinsic contradiction of a development limited

only to its economic element is seen more clearly.

Such development easily subjects the human

person and his deepest needs to the demands

of economic planning and selfish profit.

The intrinsic connection between authentic

development and respect for human rights once

again reveals the moral character of development:

the true elevation of man, in conformity with

the natural and historical vocation of each in-

dividual, is not attained only by exploiting the

abundance of goods and services, or by having

available perfect infrastructures.

When individuals and communities do not
see a rigorous respect for the moral, cultural

and spiritual requirements, based on the dignity

of the person and on the proper identity of each

community, beginning with the family and reli-

gious societies, then all the rest—availability of
goods, abundance of technical resources applied

to daily life, a certain level of material well-

being—will prove unsatisfying and in the end
contemptible. The Lord clearly says this in the

61



Gospel, when he calls the attention of all to the

true hierarchy of values: “For what will it profit

a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits

his life?” (Af/ 16:26).

True development, in keeping with the

specific needs of the human being—man or
woman, child, adult or old person—implies,
especially for those who actively share in this

process and are responsible for it, a lively aware-

ness of the value of the rights of all and of each

person. It likewise implies a lively awareness

of the need to respect the right of every indi-

vidual to the full use of the benefits offered by

science and technology.

On the internal level of every nation, respect
for all rights takes on great importance, especial-

ly: the right to life at every stage of its exis-

tence; the rights of the family, as the basic social

community, or “cell of society”; justice in em-

ployment relationships; the rights inherent in

the life of the political community as such; the

rights based on the transcendent vocation of the

human being, beginning with the right of free-

dom to profess and practise one’s own religious
belief.

On the international level, that is, the level
of relations between States or, in present-day

usage, between the different “worlds”, there

must be complete respect for the identity of

each people, with its own historical and cultural

characteristics. It is likewise essential, as the

62



Encyclical Popularurn Progressio already asked,

to recognize each people’s equal right “to be

seated at the table of the common banquet”,^*

instead of lying outside the door like Lazarus,

while “the dogs come and lick his sores” (cf.

Lk 16 : 21 ). Both peoples and individuals must

enjoy the fundamental equality which is the

basis, for example, of the Charter of the United

Nations Organization: the equality which is the

basis of the right of all to share in the process

of full development.

In order to be genuine, development must

be achieved within the framework of solidarity

and freedom, without ever sacrificing either of

them under whatever pretext. The moral char-

acter of development and its necessary promo-

tion are emphasized when the most rigorous

respect is given to all the demands deriving from

the order of truth and good proper to the human

person. Furthermore the Christian who is

taught to see that man is the image of God,

called to share in the truth and the good which

Cf. Encyclical Letter Vopulorum Progressio, 47: “...a
world where freedom is not an empty word and where the
poor man Lazarus can sit down at the same table with the
rich man”.

Cf. ibid., 47: “It is a question, rather, of building a

world where every man, no matter what his race, religion or
nationality, can live a fully human life, freed from servitude
imposed on him by other men ...”; cf. also Second Vatican
Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in
the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, 29. Such fundamental
equality is one of the basic reasons why the Church has always
been opposed to every form of racism.

63



is God himself, does not understand a commit-

ment to development and its application which

excludes regard and respect for the unique dignity

of this “image”. In other words, true develop-

ment must be based on the love of God and

neighbour, and must help to promote the relation-

ships between individuals and society. This is

the “civilization of love” of which Paul VI often

spoke.

34. Nor can the moral character of develop-

ment exclude respect for the beings which con-

stitute the natural world, which the ancient

Greeks—alluding precisely to the order which
distinguishes it—called the “ cosmos ” . Such reali-
ties also demand respect, by virtue of a three-

fold consideration which it is useful to reflect

upon carefully.

The first consideration is the appropriateness

of acquiring a growing awareness of the fact that

one cannot use with impunity the different cat-

egories of beings, whether living or inanimate

—animals, plants, the natural elements—simply
as one wishes, according to one’s own economic

needs. On the contrary, one must take into
account the nature of each being and of its

mutual connection in an ordered system, which

is precisely the “cosmos”.

The second consideration is based on the

realization—which is perhaps more urgent

—

that natural resources are limited; some are

64



not, as it is said, renewable. Using them as if

they were inexhaustible, with absolute dominion,

seriously endangers their availability not only

for the present generation but above all for

generations to come.

The third consideration refers directly to the

consequences of a certain type of development

on the quality of life in the industrialized

zones. We all know that the direct or indirect
result of industrialization is, ever more fre-

quently, the pollution of the environment,

with serious consequences for the health of the

population.

Once again it is evident that development,

the planning which governs it, and the way in

which resources are used must include respect

for moral demands. One of the latter undoubtedly

imposes limits on the use of the natural world.

The dominion granted to man by the Creator

is not an absolute power, nor can one speak of

a freedom to “use and misuse”, or to dispose of

things as one pleases. The limitation imposed

from the beginning by the Creator himself and

expressed symbolically by the prohibition not to

“eat of the fruit of the tree” (cf. Gen 2:16-17)

shows clearly enough that, when it comes to

the natural world, we are subject not only to

biological laws but also to moral ones, which

cannot be violated with impunity.

A true concept of development cannot ignore
the use of the elements of nature, the renew-

65



ability of resources and the consequences of

haphazard industrialization—three considerations
which alert our consciences to the moral dimen-

sion of development.^^

Cf. Homily at Val Visdende (12 July 1987), 5: L’Os-
servatore Romano, 13-14 July 1987; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter
Octogesima Adveniens (14 May 1971), 21: AAS 63 (1971),
pp. 416 f.

66



V

A THEOLOGICAL READING
OF MODERN PROBLEMS

35. Precisely because of the essentially moral

character of development, it is clear that the

obstacles to development likewise have a moral

character. If in the years since the publication of

Pope PauPs Encyclical there has been no develop-

ment—or very little, irregular, or even contra-
dictory development—the reasons are not only
economic. As has already been said, political

motives also enter in. For the decisions which

either accelerate or slows down the development

of peoples are really political in character.

In order to overcome the misguided mechanisms

mentioned earlier and to replace them with new

ones which will be more just and in conformity

with the common good of humanity, an effective

political will is needed. Unfortunately, after

analyzing the situation we have to conclude that

this political will has been insufficient.

In a document of a pastoral nature such

as this, an analysis limited exclusively to the

economic and political causes of underdevelop-

67



merit (and, mutatis mutandis, of so-called super-

development) would be incomplete. It is there-

fore necessary to single out the moral causes

which, with respect to the behaviour of indi-

viduals considered as responsible persons, inter-

fere in such a way as to slow down the course

of development and hinder its full achievement.

Similarly, when the scientific and technical

resources are available which, with the necessary

concrete political decisions, ought to help lead

peoples to true development, the main obstacles

to development will be overcome only by means

of essentially moral decisions. For believers, and

especially for Christians, these decisions will take

their inspiration from the principles of faith, with

the help of divine grace.

36. It is important to note therefore that a

world which is divided into blocs, sustained by

rigid ideologies, and in which instead of inter-

dependence and solidarity different forms of

imperialism hold sway, can only be a world

subject to structures of sin. The sum total of

the negative factors working against a true

awareness of the universal common good, and

the need to further it, gives the impression of

creating, in persons and institutions, an obstacle

which is difficult to overcome.^

Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium
el Spes, 25.

68



If the present situation can be attributed

to difficulties of various kinds, it is not out of

place to speak of “structures of sin”, which, as

I stated in my Apostolic Exhortation Keconciliatio

et Faenitentia, are rooted in personal sin, and

thus always linked to the concrete acts of in-

dividuals who introduce these structures, con-

solidate them and make them difficult to remove

And thus they grow stronger, spread, and become

the source of other sins, and so influence people’s

behaviour.

“Sin” and “structures of sin” are categories

which are seldom applied to the situation of the

contemporary world. However, one cannot easily

gain a profound understanding of the reality that

confronts us unless we give a name to the root

of the evils which afflict us.

Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (2

December 1984), 16: “Whenever the Church speaks of situations
of sin, or when she condemns as social sins certain situations
or the collective behaviour of certain social groups, big or

small, or even of whole nations and blocs of nations, she

knows and she proclaims that such cases of social sin are the
result of the accumulation and concentration of many personal
sins. It is a case of the very personal sins of those who
cause or support evil or who exploit it; of those who are in
a position to avoid, eliminate or at least limit certain social

evils but who fail to do so out of laziness, fear or the con-
spiracy of silence, through secret complicity or indifference;

of those who take refuge in the supposed impossibility of
changing the world, and also of those who sidestep the effort
and sacrifice required, producing specious reasons of a higher

order. The real responsibility, then, lies with individuals. A
situation— or likewise an institution, a structure, society
itself — is not in itself the subject of moral acts. Hence a
situation cannot in itself be good or bad”; AAS 11 (1985),
p. 217.

69



One can certainly speak of “selfishness” and

of “shortsightedness”, of “mistaken political

calculations” and “imprudent economic de-

cisions”. And in each of these evaluations one
hears an echo of an ethical and moral nature.

Man’s condition is such that a more profound

analysis of individuals’ actions and omissions

cannot be achieved without implying, in one way

or another, judgments or references of an ethical

nature.

This evaluation is in itself positive, especially

if it is completely consistent and if it is based

on faith in God and on his law, which commands
what is good and forbids evil.

In this consists the difference between

socio-political analysis and formal reference

to “sin” and the “structures of sin”. Accord-

ing to this latter viewpoint, there enter in the

will of the Triune God, his plan for humanity,

his justice and his mercy. The God who is rich

in mercy, the Redeemer of man, the Lord and

giver of life, requires from people clearcut atti-

tudes which express themselves also in actions

or omissions towards one’s neighbour. We have
here a reference to the “second tablet” of the

Ten Commandments (cf. Ex 20:12-17; Dt 5:

16-21). Not to observe these is to offend God

and hurt one’s neighbour, and to introduce into

the world influences and obstacles which go far

beyond the actions and the brief lifespan of an

individual. This also involves interference in

the process of the development of peoples, the

70



delay or slowness of which must be judged also

in this light.

37. This general analysis, which is religious in

nature, can be supplemented by a number of par-

ticular considerations to demonstrate that among

the actions and attitudes opposed to the will of

God, the good of neighbour and the “structures”

created by them, two are very typical: on the one

hand, the all-consuming desire for profit, and on

the other, the thirst for power, with the intention

of imposing one’s will upon others. In order to

characterize better each of these attitudes, one

can add the expression: “at any price”. In other

words, we are faced with the absolutizing
of human attitudes with all its possible con-

sequences.

Since these attitudes can exist independently

of each other, they can be separated; however

in today’s world both are indissolubly united,

with one or the other predominating.

Obviously, not only individuals fall victim

to this double attitude of sin; nations and blocs

can do so too. And this favours even more the

introduction of the “structures of sin” of which

I have spoken. If certain forms of modern

“imperialism” were considered in the light of

these moral criteria, we would see that hidden

behind certain decisions, apparently inspired

only by economics or politics, are real forms of

idolatry: of money, ideology, class, technology.

I have wished to introduce this type of

71



analysis above all in order to point out the true

nature of the evil which faces us with respect to

the development of peoples: it is a question

of a moral evil, the fruit of many sins which lead

to “structures of sin”. To diagnose the evil in

this way is to identify precisely, on the level of

human conduct, the path to he followed in order

to overcome it.

38. This path is long and complex, and what

is more it is constantly threatened because of the

intrinsic frailty of human resolutions and achieve-

ments, and because of the mutability of very

unpredictable external circumstances. Never-

theless, one must have the courage to set out on

this path, and, where some steps have been taken

or a part of the journey made, the courage to go

on to the end.

In the context of these reflections, the de-

cision to set out or to continue the journey in-

volves, above all, a moral value which men and

women of faith recognize as a demand of God’s
will, the only true foundation of an absolutely

binding ethic.

One would hope that also men and women
without an explicit faith would be convinced that

the obstacles to integral development are not

only economic but rest on more profound atti-

tudes which human beings can make into abso-

lute values. Thus one would hope that all those

who, to some degree or other, are responsible for

ensuring a “more human life” for their fellow

72



human beings, whether or not they are inspired

by a religious faith, will become fully aware of

the urgent need to change the spiritual attitudes

which define each individual’s relationship with

self, with neighbour, with even the remotest

human communities, and with nature itself; and

all of this in view of higher values such as

the common good or, to quote the felicitous
expression of the Encyclical Populorum Progres-

sion the full development “of the whole indi-

vidual and of all people

For Christians, as for all who recognize the
precise theological meaning of the word “sin”, a

change of behaviour or mentality or mode of

existence is called “conversion”, to use the lan-

guage of the Bible (cf. Mk 13:3, 5; Is 30: 13).
This conversion specifically entails a relationship

to God, to the sin committed, to its consequences

and hence to one’s neighbour, either an individual

or a community. It is God, in “whose hands

are the hearts of the powerful ” and the hearts

of all, who according to his own promise and by
the power of his Spirit can transform “hearts of

stone” into “hearts of flesh” (cf. Ezek 36:26).

On the path towards the desired conversion,
towards the overcoming of the moral obstacles

to development, it is already possible to point to

the positive and moral value of the growing

“ Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 42: loc. cit.,
p. 278.

Cf. Liturgia Horarum, Feria III Hebdomadae IIP'*
Temporis per annum, Preces ad Vesperas.

73



awareness of interdependence among individuals

and nations. The fact that men and women in
various parts of the world feel personally affected

by the injustices and violations of human rights

committed in distant countries, countries which

perhaps they will never visit, is a further sign of

a reality transformed into awareness, thus acquir-

ing a moral connotation.

It is above all a question of interdependence,

sensed as a system determining relationships in

the contemporary world, in its economic, cul-

tural, political and religious elements, and ac-

cepted as a moral category. When interdepen-
dence becomes recognized in this way, the cor-

relative response as a moral and social attitude,

as a “virtue”, is solidarity. This then is not a

feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress

at the misfortunes of so many people, both near

and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and per-
severing determination to commit oneself to the

common good; that is to say to the good of all

and of each individual, because we are all really

responsible for all. This determination is based

on the solid conviction that what is hindering

full development is that desire for profit and

that thirst for power already mentioned. These

attitudes and “structures of sin” are only con-

quered—presupposing the help of divine grace

—

by a diametrically opposed attitude: a commit-

ment to the good of one’s neighbour with the

readiness, in the Gospel sense, to “lose oneself”

for the sake of the other instead of exploiting

74



him, and to “serve him” instead of oppressing

him for one’s own advantage (cf. lAt 10:40-42;

20:25; Mk 10:42-45; Lk 22:25-27).

39. The exercise of solidarity within each

society is valid when its members recognize one

another as persons. Those who are more in-

fluential, because they have a greater share of

goods and common services, should feel re-

sponsible for the weaker and be ready to share

with them all they possess. Those who are

weaker, for their part, in the same spirit of

solidarity, should not adopt a purely passive at-

titude or one that is destructive of the social

fabric, but, while claiming their legitimate

rights, should do what they can for the good

of all. The intermediate groups, in their turn,

should not selfishly insist on their particular

interests, but respect the interests of others.

Positive signs in the contemporary world are

the growing awareness of the solidarity of the

poor among themselves, their efforts to support

one another, and their public demonstrations on

the social scene which, without recourse to viol-

ence, present their own needs and rights in the

face of the inefiBciency or corruption of the public

authorities. By virtue of her own evangelical

duty the Church feels called to take her stand

beside the poor, to discern the justice of their

requests, and to help satisfy them, without losing

sight of the good of groups in the context of

the common good.

75



The same criterion is applied by analogy in

international relationships. Interdependence must

be transformed into solidarity, based upon the

principle that the goods of creation are meant

for all. That which human industry produces

through the processing of raw materials, with

the contribution of work, must serve equally for

the good of all.

Surmounting every type of imperialism and

determination to preserve their own hegemony,

the stronger and richer nations must have a

sense of moral responsibility for the other na-

tions, so that a real international system may

be established which will rest on the foundation

of the equality of all peoples and on the neces-

sary respect for their legitimate differences. The

economically weaker countries, or those still at

subsistence level, must be enabled, with the as-

sistance of other peoples and of the international

community, to make a contribution of their own

to the common good with their treasures of
humanity and culture, which otherwise would be

lost for ever.

Solidarity helps us to see the “other”

—

whether a person, people or nation—not just as
some kind of instrument, with a work capacity

and physical strength to be exploited at low cost

and then discarded when no longer useful, but as

our “neighbour”, a “helper” (cf. Gen 2 : 18 -20 ),
to be made a sharer, on a par with ourselves, in

the banquet of life to which all are equally in-

vited by God. Hence the importance of re-

76



awakening the religious awareness of individuals

and peoples.

Thus the exploitation, oppression and an-

nihilation of others are excluded. These facts, in

the present division of the world into opposing

blocs, combine to produce the danger of war and

an excessive preoccupation with personal security,

often to the detriment of the autonomy, freedom

of decision, and even the territorial integrity of

the weaker nations situated within the so-called

“areas of influence” or “safety belts”.

The “structures of sin” and the sins which

they produce are likewise radically opposed to

peace and development, for development, in the

familiar expression of Pope Paul’s Encyclical, is

“the new name for peace

In this way, the solidarity which we propose

is the path to peace and at the same time to

development. For world peace is inconceivable

unless the world’s leaders come to recognize that

interdependence in itself demands the abandon-

ment of the politics of blocs, the sacrifice of all

forms of economic, military or political imperial-

ism, and the transformation of mutual distrust

into collaboration. This is precisely the act

proper to solidarity among individuals and nations.

The motto of the pontificate of my esteemed
predecessor Pius XII was Opus iustitiae pax,

peace as the fruit of justice. Today one could

say, with the same exactness and the same power

Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 87: loc. at.,

p. 299.

77



of biblical inspiration (cf. Is 32:17; Jas 3:18):

Opus solidaritatis pax, peace as the fruit of

solidarity.

The goal of peace, so desired by everyone,

will certainly be achieved through the putting

into effect of social and international justice, but

also through the practice of the virtues which

favour togetherness, and which teach us to live

in unity, so as to build in unity, by giving and

receiving, a new society and a better world.

40. Solidarity is undoubtedly a Christian vir-

tue. In what has been said so far it has been

possible to identify many points of contact be-

tween solidarity and charity, which is the dis-

tinguishing mark of Christ’s disciples (cf. ]n

13:35).

In the light of faith, solidarity seeks to go

beyond itself, to take on the specifically Christian

dimensions of total gratuity, forgiveness and

reconciliation. One’s neighbour is then not only

a human being with his or her own rights and

a fundamental equality with everyone else, but

becomes the living image of God the Father,
redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ and placed

under the permanent action of the Holy Spirit.

One’s neighbour must therefore be loved, even

if an enemy, with the same love with which

the Lord loves him or her; and for that person’s

sake one must be ready for sacrifice, even the

ultimate one: to lay down one’s life for the

brethren (cf. 1 Jn 3:16).

78



At that point, awareness of the common

fatherhood of God, of the brotherhood of all in

Christ
—

“children in the Son”—and of the pre-
sence and life-giving action of the Holy Spirit

will bring to our vision of the world a new

criterion for interpreting it. Beyond human and

natural bonds, already so close and strong, there

is discerned in the light of faith a new model of

the unity of the human race, which must ul-

timately inspire our solidarity. This supreme

model of unity, which is a reflection of the inti-

mate life of God, one God in three Persons, is
what we Christians mean by the word ''commu-

nion''. This specifically Christian communion,

jealously preserved, extended and enriched with

the Lord’s help, is the soul of the Church’s

vocation to be a “sacrament”, in the sense al-

ready indicated.

Solidarity therefore must play its part in the

realization of this divine plan, both on the level

of individuals and on the level of national and

international society. The “evil mechanisms”

and “structures of sin” of which we have spoken

can be overcome only through the exercise of the

human and Christian solidarity to which the

Church calls us and which she tirelessly promotes.

Only in this way can such positive energies be

fully released for the benefit of development and

peace.

Many of the Church’s canonized saints offer

a wonderful witness of such solidarity and can

serve as examples in the present difficult cir-

79



cumstances. Among them I wish to recall
Saint Peter Claver and his service to the slaves

at Cartagena de Indias, and Saint Maximilian

Maria Kolbe who offered his life in place of a

prisoner unknown to him in the concentration

camp at Auschwitz.

80



VI

SOME PARTICULAR GUIDELINES

41. The Church does not have technical

solutions to offer for the problem of under-

development as such, as Pope Paul VI already af-

firmed in his Encyclical. For the Church does

not propose economic and political systems or

programmes, nor does she show preference for

one or the other, provided that human dignity is

properly respected and promoted, and provided

she herself is allowed the room she needs to

exercise her ministry in the world.

But the Church is an “expert in humanity”,™

and this leads her necessarily to extend her

religious mission to the various fields in which

men and women expend their efforts in search

of the always relative happiness which is possible

in this world, in line with their dignity as

persons.

Following the example of my predecessors,
I must repeat that whatever affects the dignity of

individuals and peoples, such as authentic devel-

opment, cannot be reduced to a “technical”

Cf. ibid., 13; 81: loc. cit., pp. 263 f.; 296 f.

Cf. ibid., 13; loc. cit., p. 263.

81



problem. If reduced in this way, development

would be emptied of its true content, and this

would be an act of betrayal of the individuals

and peoples whom development is meant to
serve.

This is why the Church has something to
say today, just as twenty years ago, and also

in the future, about the nature, conditions,

requirements and aims of authentic development,

and also about the obstacles which stand in its

way. In doing so the Church fulfils her mission

to evangelize, for she offers her jirst contribution

to the solution of the urgent problem of develop-

ment when she proclaims the truth about Christ,

about herself and about man, applying this truth

to a concrete situation

As her instrument for reaching this goal, the

Church uses her social doctrine. In today’s

difficult situation, a more exact awareness and

a wider diffusion of the “set of principles for

reflection, criteria for judgment and directives

for action” proposed by the Church’s teaching

would be of great help in promoting both the

correct definition of the problems being faced

and the best solution to them.

It will thus be seen at once that the questions

Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Con-

ference of the Latin American Bishops (28 January 1979):

AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruc-

tion on Christian Freedom and Liberation Libertatis Conscientia

(22 March 1986), 72: AAS 79 (1987) p. 586; Paul VI,
Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May 1971), 4: AAS
63 (1971) pp. 403 f.

82



facing us are above all moral questions; and that

neither the analysis of the problem of develop-

ment as such nor the means to overcome the

present difficulties can ignore this essential

dimension.

The Church’s social doctrine is not a “third

way” between liberal capitalism and Marxist col-

lectivism, nor even a possible alternative to other

solutions less radically opposed to one another:

rather, it constitutes a category of its own. Nor

is it an ideology, but rather the accurate formula-

tion of the results of a careful reflection on the

complex realities of human existence, in society

and in the international order, in the light of

faith and of the Church’s tradition. Its main

aim is to interpret these realities, determining

their conformity with or divergence from the

lines of the Gospel teaching on man and his

vocation, a vocation which is at once earthly and

transcendent; its aim is thus to guide Christian

behaviour. It therefore belongs to the field, not

of ideology, but of theology and particularly of

moral theology.

The teaching and spreading of her social

doctrine are part of the Church’s evangelizing

mission. And since it is a doctrine aimed at
guiding people's behaviour, it consequently gives

rise to a “commitment to justice”, according to

each individual’s role, vocation and circum-

stances.

The condemnation of evils and injustices is

also part of that ministry of evangelization in the

83



social field which is an aspect of the Church’s

prophetic role. But it should be made clear

that proclamation is always more important than

condemnation, and the latter cannot ignore the

former, which gives it true solidity and the force

of higher motivation.

42 . Today more than in the past, the

Church’s social doctrine must be open to an

international outlook, in line with the Second

Vatican Council,’^ the most recent Encyclicals,

and particularly in line with the Encyclical which

we are commemorating.’^ It will not be super-

fluous therefore to re-examine and further clarify

in this light the characteristic themes and guide-

lines dealt with by the Magisterium in recent

years.

Here I would like to indicate one of them:

the option or love of preference for the poor.

This is an option, or a special form of primacy

in the exercise of Christian charity, to which the

whole tradition of the Church bears witness.

It affects the life of each Christian inasmuch as

he or she seeks to imitate the life of Christ, but

it applies equally to our social responsibilities

Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern
World Gaudium et Spes, Part II, Ch. V, Section 2; “Building
up the International Community”, 83-90.

Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra

(15 May 1961); AAS 53 (1961), p. 440; Encyclical Letter
Pacem in Terris (11 April 1963), Part IV; AAS 35 (1963)
pp. 291-296; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens

(14 May 1971), 2-4; AAS 63 (1971), pp. 402-404.
Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 3; 9; loc.

cit,., pp. 258; 261.

84



and hence to our manner of living, and to the

logical decisions to be made concerning the

ownership and use of goods.

Today, furthermore, given the worldwide

dimension which the social question has as-

sumed this love of preference for the poor, and

the decisions which it inspires in us, cannot but

embrace the immense multitudes of the hungry,

the needy, the homeless, those without medical

care and, above all, those without hope of a

better future. It is impossible not to take ac-

count of the existence of these realities. To

ignore them would mean becoming like the
“ rich man ” who pretended not to know the

beggar Lazarus lying at his gate (cf. Lk 16:

19-31).’^

Our daily life as well as our decisions in the

political and economic fields must be marked

by these realities. Likewise the leaders of nations

and the heads of International Bodies, while

they are obliged always to keep in mind the

true human dimension as a priority in their de-

velopment plans, should not forget to give pre-

cedence to the phenomenon of growing poverty.

Unfortunately, instead of becoming fewer the

poor are becoming more numerous, not only in

less developed countries but—and this seems no

Ibid., 3; loc. cit., p. 258.

” Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 47: loc. cit.,

p. 280; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruc-

tion on Christian Freedom and Liberation Libertatis Conscientia

(22 March 1986), 68: AAS 79 (1987) pp. 583 f.

85



less scandalous—in the more developed ones too.
It is necessary to state once more the charac-

teristic principle of Christian social doctrine:

the goods of this world are originally meant for

alV^ The right to private property is valid and

necessary, but it does not nullify the value of

this principle. Private property, in fact, is

under a “social mortgage which means that

it has an intrinsically social function, based

upon and justified precisely by the principle

of the universal destination of goods. Like-

wise, in this concern for the poor, one must

not overlook that special form of poverty which

consists in being deprived of fundamental human

rights, in particular the right to religious free-

dom and also the right to freedom of economic
initiative.

43. The motivating concern for the poor

—who are, in the very meaningful term, “the
Lord’s poor” ^—must be translated at all levels

Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium
et Spes, 69; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progres-
sio, 22: loc. cit., p. 268; Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation Liber-

tatis Conscientia (22 March 1986), 90: AAS 79 (1987), p. 594;
St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theol. IP IP®, q. 66, art. 2.

” Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Con-

ference of the Latin American Bishops (28 January 1979):

AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196; Ad Limina Address to a group
of Polish Bishops, (17 December 1987), 6: L’Osservatore Ro-

mano, 18 December 1987.
Because the Lord wished to identify himself with them

{Mt 25:31-46) and takes special care of them (cf. Ps 12 [11]:

6; Lk I:52f.).

86



into concrete actions, until it decisively attains

a series of necessary reforms. Each local situation

will show what reforms are most urgent and

how they can be achieved. But those demanded
by the situation of international imbalance, as

already described, must not be forgotten.

In this respect I wish to mention specifically:

the reform of the international trade system,

which is mortgaged to protectionism and increas-

ing bilateralism; the reform of the world mone-

tary and financial system, today recognized as

inadequate; the question of technological ex-

changes and their proper use; the need for a

review of the structure of the existing Interna-

tional Organizations, in the framework of an

international juridical order.

The international trade system today fre-

quently discriminates against the products of

the young industries of the developing coun-

tries and discourages the producers of raw

materials. There exists, too, a kind of interna-

tional division of labour, whereby the low-cost

products of certain countries which lack effec-

tive labour laws or which are too weak to apply

them are sold in other parts of the world at consi-

derable profit for the companies engaged in this

form of production, which knows no frontiers.

The world monetary and financial system is

marked by an excessive fluctuation of exchange

rates and interest rates, to the detriment of the

balance of payments and the debt situation of

the poorer countries.

87



Forms of technology and their transfer con-

stitute today one of the major problems of

international exchange and of the grave damage

deriving therefrom. There are quite frequent

cases of developing countries being denied needed

forms of technology or sent useless ones.

In the opinion of many, the International

Organizations seem to be at a stage of their

existence when their operating methods, oper-

ating costs and effectiveness need careful review

and possible correction. Obviously, such a

delicate process cannot be put into effect without

the collaboration of all. This presupposes the

overcoming of political rivalries and the renounc-

ing of all desire to manipulate these Organiza-

tions, which exist solely for the common good.

The existing Institutions and Organizations

have worked well for the benefit of peoples.

Nevertheless, humanity today is in a new and

more difficult phase of its genuine development.

It needs a greater degree of international order-

ing, at the service of the societies, economies

and cultures of the whole world.

44. Development demands above all a spirit

of initiative on the part of the countries which

need it.®^ Each of them must act in accordance

Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressto, 55: loc. cit.,

p. 284: “these are the men and women that need to be
helped, that need to be convinced to take into their own
hands their development, gradually acquiring the means”;

cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World
Gaudium et Spes, 86.

88



with its own responsibilities, not expecting every-

thing from the more favoured countries, and

acting in collaboration with others in the same

situation. Each must discover and use to the

best advantage its own area of freedom. Each

must make itself capable of initiatives respond-

ing to its own needs as a society. Each must like-

wise realize its true needs as well as the rights

and duties which oblige it to respond to them.

The development of peoples begins and is most

appropriately accomplished in the dedication of

each people to its own development, in col-

laboration with others.

It is important then that as far as possible

the developing nations themselves should favour

the self-affirmation of each citizen, through

access to a wider culture and a free flow of

information. Whatever promotes literacy and

the basic education which completes and deepens

it is a direct contribution to true development,

as the Encyclical Populorum Progressio pro-

posed.®^ These goals are still far from being

reached in so many parts of the world.

In order to take this path, the nations them-

selves will have to identify their own priorities

and clearly recognize their own needs, according

to the particular conditions of their people, their

geographical setting and their cultural traditions.

” Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 35: loc. cit.,

p. 274: “Basic education is the first objective of a plan of

development”.

89



Some nations will have to increase food

production, in order to have always available

what is needed for subsistence and daily life.

In the modern world—where starvation claims
so many victims, especially among the very

young—there are examples of not particularly
developed nations which have nevertheless

achieved the goal of food self-sufficiency and

have even become food exporters.

Other nations need to reform certain unjust

structures, and in particular their political institu-

tions, in order to replace corrupt, dictatorial

and authoritarian forms of government by

democratic and participatory ones. This is a

process which we hope will spread and grow

stronger. For the “health” of a political com-

munity—as expressed in the free and responsible
participation of all citizens in public affairs,

in the rule of law and in respect for and pro-

motion of human rights—is the necessary con-
dition and sure guarantee of the development of

“the whole individual and of all people”.

45. None of what has been said can be

achieved without the collaboration of all—es-
pecially the international community—in the
framework of a solidarity which includes every-

one, beginning with the most neglected. But

the developing nations themselves have the

duty to practice solidarity among themselves and

with the neediest countries of the world.

90



It is desirable, for example, that nations of

the same geographical area should establish

forms of cooperation which will make them less

dependent on more powerful producers; they

should open their frontiers to the products of

the area; they should examine how their pro-

ducts might complement one another; they

should combine in order to set up those services

which each one separately is incapable of pro-

viding; they should extend cooperation to the

monetary and financial sector.

Interdependence is already a reality in many

of these countries. To acknowledge it, in such

a way as to make it more operative, represents

an alternative to excessive dependence on richer

and more powerful nations, as part of the hoped-

for development, without opposing anyone, but

discovering and making best use of the coun-

try’s own potential. The developing countries

belonging to one geographical area, especially

those included in the term “South”, can and

ought to set up new regional organizations in-

spired by criteria of equality, freedom and par-

ticipation in the comity of nations—as is already
happening with promising results.

An essential condition for global solidarity
is autonomy and free self-determination, also

within associations such as those indicated. But

at the same time solidarity demands a readiness

to accept the sacrifices necessary for the good of

the whole world community.

91



VII

CONCLUSION

46. Peoples and individuals aspire to be free:

their search for full development signals their

desire to overcome the many obstacles preventing

them from enjoying a “more human life”.

Recently, in the period following the publica-

tion of the Encyclical Populorum Frogressio, a

new way of confronting the problems of poverty

and underdevelopment has spread in some areas

of the world, especially in Latin America. This

approach makes liberation the fundamental cate-

gory and the first principle of action. The posi-

tive values, as well as the deviations and risks

of deviation, which are damaging to the faith

and are connected with this form of theological

reflection and method, have been appropriately

pointed out by the Church’s Magisterium.*^

It is fitting to add that the aspiration to

freedom from all forms of slavery affecting the

Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruc-

tion on Certain Aspects of the “Theology of Liberation” Liber-

tatis Conscientia (6 August 1984), Introduction: AAS 76 (1984),
pp. 876 f.

92



individual and society is something noble and

legitimate. This in fact is the purpose of devel-

opment, or rather liberation and development,

taking into account the intimate connection be-

tween the two.

Development which is merely economic is

incapable of setting man free; on the contrary,

it will end by enslaving him further. Develop-

ment that does not include the cultural, tran-

scendent and religious dimensions of man and

society, to the extent that it does not recognize

the existence of such dimensions and does not

endeavour to direct its goals and priorities to-

wards the same, is even less conducive to authen-

tic liberation. Human beings are totally free
only when they are completely themselves, in

the fullness of their rights and duties. The same

can be said about society as a whole.

The principal obstacle to be overcome on

the way to authentic liberation is sin and the

structures produced by sin as it multiplies and

spreads

The freedom with which Christ has set us

free (cf. Gal 5:1) encourages us to become the

servants of all. Thus the process of development

and liberation takes concrete shape in the exer-

cise of solidarity, that is to say in the love and

service of neighbour, especially of the poorest:

Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Raenitentia (2

December 1984), 16: AAS 11 (1985), pp. 213-217; Congrega-
tion FOR THE Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian
Freedom and Liberation Lihertath Conscientia {22 March 1986),

38; 42: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 569; 571.

93



“For where truth and love are missing, the

process of liberation results in the death of a

freedom which will have lost all support”.®^

47. In the context of the sad experiences of

recent years and of the mainly negative picture

of the present moment, the Church must strongly

alErm the possibility of overcoming the obstacles

which, by excess or by defect, stand in the way

of development. And she must affirm her con-

fidence in a true liberation. Ultimately, this con-

fidence and this possibility are based on the

Church’s awareness of the divine promise guaran-

teeing that our present history does not remain

closed in upon itself but is open to the Kingdom

of God.

The Church has confidence also in man,

though she knows the evil of which he is

capable. For she well knows that—in spite of
the heritage of sin, and the sin which each one

is capable of committing—there exist in the
human person sufficient qualities and energies,

a fundamental “goodness” (cf. Gen 1:31), be-

cause he is the image of the creator, placed under

the redemptive influence of Christ, who “united
himself in some fashion with every man”,^^ and

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruc-

tion on Christian Freedom and Liberation Lihertatis Conscientia

(22 March 1986), 24: AAS 79 (1987), p. 564.
Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern

World Gaudturn et Spes, 22; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), 8; AAS 71 (1979), p. 272.

94



because the efficacious action of the Holy Spirit

“fills the earth” {Wis 1:7).

There is no justification then for despair or

pessimism or inertia. Though it be with sorrow,

it must be said that just as one may sin through

selfishness and the desire for excessive profit

and power, one may also be found wanting with

regard to the urgent needs of multitudes of

human beings submerged in conditions of under-

development, through fear, indecision and, ba-

sically, through cowardice. We are all called,
indeed obliged, to face the tremendous challenge

of the last decade of the second Millennium, also

because the present dangers threaten everyone:

a world economic crisis, a war without frontiers,

without winners or losers. In the face of such

a threat, the distinction between rich individuals

and countries and poor individuals and coun-

tries will have little value, except that a greater

responsibility rests on those who have more and
can do more.

This is not however the sole motive or even

the most important one. At stake is the dignity

of the human person, whose defence and promo-

tion have been entrusted to us by the Creator,

and to whom the men and women at every
moment of history are strictly and responsibly

in debt. As many people are already more or less

clearly aware, the present situation does not seem

to correspond to this dignity. Every individual is

called upon to play his or her part in this peace-

ful campaign, a campaign to be conducted by

95



peaceful means, in order to secure development

in peace, in order to safeguard nature itself and

the world about us. The Church too feels pro-

foundly involved in this enterprise, and she

hopes for its ultimate success.

Consequently, following the example of

Pope Paul VI with his Encyclical Populorum

Progression^ I wish to appeal with simplicity

and humility to everyone, to all men and women
without exception. I wish to ask them to be

convinced of the seriousness of the present

moment and of each one’s individual respon-

sibility, and to implement—by the way they live
as individuals and as families, by the use of their

resources, by their civic activity, by contributing

to economic and political decisions and by per-

sonal commitment to national and international

undertakings—the measures inspired by solida-
rity and love of preference for the poor. This

is what is demanded by the present moment and

above all by the very dignity of the human per-

son, the indestructible image of God the Creator,
which is identical in each one of us.

In this commitment, the sons and daughters

of the Church must serve as examples and

guides, for they are called upon, in conformity

with the programme announced by Jesus him-

self in the synagogue at Nazareth, to “preach

Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, 5: loc. cit.,

p. 259: “We believe that all men of good will, together with
our Catholic sons and daughters and our Christian brethren,

can and should agree on this programme”; cf. also 81-83, 87:

loc. cit., pp. 296-298; 299.

96



good news to the poor ... to proclaim release

to the captives and recovering of sight to the

blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,

to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord”

(Lk 4:18-19). It is appropriate to emphasize

the preeminent role that belongs to the laity,

both men and women, as was reaf&rmed in the

recent Assembly of the Synod. It is their task

to animate temporal realities with Christian

commitment, by which they show that they are

witnesses and agents of peace and justice.

I wish to address especially those who,

through the Sacrament of Baptism and the pro-

fession of the same Creed, share a real, though

imperfect, communion with us. I am certain

that the concern expressed in this Encyclical as

well as the motives inspiring it will be familiar

to them, for these motives are inspired by the

Gospel of Jesus Christ. We can find here a new
invitation to hear witness together to our com-

mon convictions concerning the dignity of man,

created by God, redeemed by Christ, made holy

by the Spirit and called upon in this world to

live a life in conformity with this dignity.

I likewise address this appeal to the Jewish

people, who share with us the inheritance of

Abraham, “our father in faith” (cf. Rm 4:11 f.) **

and the tradition of the Old Testament, as

well as to the Muslims who, like us, believe

** Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration
on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions,

Nostra Aetate, 4.

97



in the just and merciful God. And I extend it
to all the followers of the world's great religions.

The meeting held on 27 October last in

Assisi, the city of Saint Francis, in order to pray

for and commit ourselves to peace—each one
in fidelity to his own religious profession

—

showed how much peace and, as its necessary

condition, the development of the whole person

and of all peoples, are also a matter of religion,

and how the full achievement of both the one
and the other depends on our fidelity to our

vocation as men and women of faith. For it
depends, above all, on God.

48. The Church well knows that no temporal

achievement is to be identified with the Kingdom

of God, but that all such achievements simply

reflect and in a sense anticipate the glory of the

Kingdom, the Kingdom which we await at the

end of history, when the Lord will come again.

But that expectation can never be an excuse for

lack of concern for people in their concrete

personal situations and in their social, national

and international life, since the former is con-

ditioned by the latter, especially today.

However imperfect and temporary are all the

things that can and ought to be done through the

combined efforts of everyone and through divine

grace, at a given moment of history, in order to

make people’s lives “more human”, nothing will

be lost or will have been in vain. This is the teach-

98



ing of the Second Vatican Council, in an enlight-

ening passage of the Pastoral Constitution Gau-

dium et Spes: “When we have spread on earth the
fruits of our nature and our enterprise—human
dignity, fraternal communion, and freedom—ac-
cording to the command of the Lord and in his

Spirit, we will find them once again, cleansed this

time from the stain of sin, illumined and trans-

figured, when Christ presents to his Father an

eternal and universal kingdom ... here on earth

that kingdom is already present in mystery”.*^

The Kingdom of God becomes present above
all in the celebration of the Sacrament of the

Eucharist, which is the Lord’s Sacrifice. In that

celebration the fruits of the earth and the work of

human hands—the bread and wine—are trans-
formed mysteriously, but really and substantially,

through the power of the Holy Spirit and the

words of the minister, into the Body and Blood

of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God and

Son of Mary, through whom the Kingdom of the
Father has been made present in our midst.

The goods of this world and the work of our

hands—the bread and wine—serve for the com-
ing of the definitive Kingdom, since the Lord,

through his Spirit, takes them up into himself

in order to offer himself to the Father and to

offer us with himself in the renewal of his one

Sacrifice, which anticipates God’s Kingdom and

proclaims its final coming.

Gaudium et Spes, 39 .

99



Thus the Lord unites us with himself through

the Eucharist—Sacrament and Sacrifice—and he
unites us with himself and with one another by a

bond stronger than any natural union; and thus

united, he sends us into the whole world to bear

witness, through faith and works, to God’s love,

preparing the coming of his Kingdom and

anticipating it, though in the obscurity of the

present time.

All of us who take part in the Eucharist are

called to discover, through this Sacrament, the

profound meaning of our actions in the world

in favour of development and peace; and to

receive from it the strength to commit ourselves

ever more generously, following the example of

Christ, who in this Sacrament lays down his life

for his friends (cf. ]n 15:13). Our personal

commitment, like Christ’s and in union with his,

will not be in vain but certainly fruitful.

49. I have called the current Marian Year in

order that the Catholic faithful may look more

and more to Mary who goes before us on the pil-

grimage of faith ^ and with maternal care inter-

cedes for us before her Son, our Redeemer. I

wish to entrust to her and to her intercession

this difficult moment of the modern world, and

the efforts that are being made and will be made,

often with great suffering, in order to contribute

^
Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic

Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, 58; John Paul II,
Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Mater (25 March 1987), 5-6:

AAS 79 (1987), pp. 365-367.

100



to the true development of peoples proposed and

proclaimed by my predecessor Paul VI.
In keeping with Christian piety through the

ages, we present to the Blessed Virgin difficult

individual situations, so that she may place them

before her Son, asking that he alleviate and

change them. But we also present to her

social situations and the international crisis

itself, in their worrying aspects of poverty,

unemployment, shortage of food, the arms race,

contempt for human rights, and situations or

dangers of conflict, partial or total. In a filial

spirit we wish to place all this before her “eyes

of mercy”, repeating once more with faith and

hope the ancient antiphon: “Holy Mother of God,

despise not our petitions in our necessities, but

deliver us always from all dangers, O glorious
and blessed Virgin”.

Mary most holy, our Mother and Queen,

is the one who turns to her Son and says: “They

have no more wine” (Jn 2:3). She is also the

one who praises God the Father, because “he
has put down the mighty from their thrones

and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the

hungry with good things, and the rich he has

sent empty away” (Lk 1:52-53). Her maternal

concern extends to the personal and social aspects

of people’s life on earth

Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Marialis Cultus (2
February 1974), 37: AAS 66 (1974), pp. 148 f.; John Paul II,
Homily at the Shrine of Our Lady of Zapopan, Mexico (30
January 1979), 4: AAS 71 (1979), p. 230.

101



Before the Most Blessed Trinity, I entrust

to Mary all that I have written in this Encyclical,

and I invite all to reflect and actively commit

themselves to promoting the true development

of peoples, as the prayer of the Mass for this

intention states so well: “Father, you have given

all peoples one common origin, and your will

is to gather them as one family in yourself.

Fill the hearts of all with the fire of your love,

and the desire to ensure justice for all their

brothers and sisters. By sharing the good things

you give us may we secure justice and equality

for every human being, an end to all division

and a human society built on love and peace

This, in conclusion, is what I ask in the name

of all my brothers and sisters, to whom I send
a special blessing as a sign of greeting and good

wishes.

Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 30

December of the year 1987, the tenth of my
Pontificate.

” Collect of the Mass “For the Development of Peoples”:

Missale Romanum, ed. typ. altera, 1975, p. 820.

102





1





THE HAMMES

NOTRE DAME BOOKSTORE

Publication No. 205-5

Office of Publishing anc

United States Catholic (

Washington, D.C.

ISBN 1-55586-205-5

9781555862053

ON SOCIAL CONCERN
JOHN PAUL II

$3.95
USCATH

LflH 606B 91 /02/07