Card.
Parolin on Human Dignity and Human Development
(Vatican Radio) The Vatican Secretary of State has addressed a
Conference on Human Dignity and Human Development that took place this week at
the University of Notre Dame Global Gateway in Rome, telling participants that
under current economic and development models the very understanding of man and
our nature as social beings is at stake.
The Cardinal noted: “Our present way of thinking, on the other
hand, tends to see economics as a science whose method is phenomenological,
charged with the task of finding the best means of directing human activity
towards the goal of a maximum exploitation of resources”.
Instead, “the Church’s social teaching has constantly emphasized that
the greatest obstacles to universal and integral human development are found in
a distorted vision of man and economic activity, one which threatens the
dignity of the human person”.
Below the full text of Card. Parolin’s intervention
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I thank the Kellogg Institute for International Studies for its
invitation to take part in this Conference on Human Dignity and Human
Development, which marks the inauguration of the University of Notre Dame
Global Gateway. In these closing remarks, I would like to present some
considerations drawn from the Church’s social teaching and from the more recent
magisterium of Pope Francis. I trust they will prove helpful for summarizing
the discussion, stimulating deeper reflection and opening new avenues for the
social action of Catholics and all those who seek a more humane and fraternal
world.
The topics which have been discussed show that, in speaking of the
relationship between development and human dignity, the terms “economy”,
“economic systems” and the like, can all be employed as synonyms for the term
“development”. This in itself helps us to appreciate better the challenges we
face in promoting human dignity. Development is in fact closely linked to the
proper management of resources in poorer countries, and the economic decisions
made by wealthy countries, which have positive or negative repercussions on the
economy of developing countries. But the more fundamental reason for beginning
with economics is that the Church’s social teaching has constantly emphasized
that the greatest obstacles to universal and integral human development are
found in a distorted vision of man and economic activity, one which threatens
the dignity of the human person.
“What exactly is at stake?” This is one of the questions raised by
your working document. What is at stake is the very understanding of man and
our nature as social beings. Pope Francis, in pointing out the deficiencies of
the present world economic situation, does not mince words. He states: “Just as
the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ sets a clear limit in order to safeguard
the value of human life, today we also have to say ‘Thou shalt not’ to an
economy of exclusion and inequality... As a consequence [of this], masses of
people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without
possibilities, without any means of escape” (Evangelii Gaudium, 53). “To
sustain a lifestyle which excludes others, … a globalization of indifference
has developed. Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of
feeling compassion at the outcry of poor, weeping for other people's pain, and
feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s
responsibility and not our own” (ibid., 54).
The teaching found in the Holy Father’s Apostolic Exhortation
Evangelii Gaudium is not meant to condemn or promote any one economic system.
The Pope himself says that such is not his intention (cf. ibid., 184 and 209).
His is a much more profound and farsighted aim: to stir consciences and to call
for renewed attention to man, to human beings, who cannot be reduced to mere
pawns of the market, means of production or consumers or both. Such renewed
attention would necessarily lead to a rethinking of the foundations of economic
theory. It would also be the key to appreciating the proper relationship
between “human development and human dignity”.
Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and,
through the redemption of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word, are called to be
God’s children. As such, they are also called to live in peace with their
brothers and sisters, in a spirit of self-giving and love which is a reflection
of God himself, who is love (cf. Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate, 54). Gratuity
is thus indispensable for building and sustaining life in society (cf. Id.,
Deus Caritas Est, 2, 6-7 and 38; Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, 205). Reducing
human beings to agents of the economy leads first to discarding one’s own true
identity and ultimately to “discarding” others when they no longer prove
materially useful. Charity, as the most authentic manifestation of our human
dignity, is the first thing to go. As Pope Francis sees it, “the great danger
in today’s world, pervaded as it is by consumerism, is the desolation and
anguish borne of a complacent yet covetous heart, the feverish pursuit of
frivolous pleasures, and a blunted conscience” (Evangelii Gaudium, 2). Hence,
“if we wish to lead a dignified and fulfilling life, we have to reach out to others
and seek their good” (ibid., 9). We are all aware, and there is no need to
dwell on the point, of how a materialistic vision of man and society has
resulted from a certain current of thought closed to the transcendent, one
which has developed over the past three centuries and significantly influenced
economic thinking.
Taking up a classical notion dating back to Aristotle (Politics,
I, 9), the Holy Father states that “economics, as the very word indicates,
should be the art of achieving a fitting management of our common home, which
is the world as a whole” (Evangelii Gaudium, 206). Economic theory and policy
are thus primarily “practical”, subordinated to the life of the pólis and
morality, and meant to be directed by the virtues of justice and prudence. Our
present way of thinking, on the other hand, tends to see economics as a science
whose method is phenomenological, charged with the task of finding the best
means of directing human activity towards the goal of a maximum exploitation of
resources.
Aristotle, on the other hand, whose thought, as taken up by the
medieval scholastics, has served as an inspiration for Christian social theory,
had already warned against what he called a second form of “chrematistics”,
which would turn all human gifts and activities into means of making money
(Politics, I, 9). This age-old temptation has returned to the fore in our own
day, as Pope Francis observed when he pointedly called into question “our
relationship with money, since we calmly accept its dominion over ourselves and
our societies” (Evangelii Gaudium, 55).
Certainly, a correct approach to economics, understood as the
science and “art of achieving a fitting management of our common home”
(Evangelii Gaudium, 206), would involve formulating theories and general models
based on reality and supported by empirical sciences and technical instruments.
However if economics is to be efficacious in its service of humanity, it cannot
afford to forsake an integral vision of the human person and of society, and
constant interaction with the realities with which it deals. Only thus can
economics remain faithful to its nature as a practical and moral science.
Otherwise it risks becoming a tool of the dictatorship of relativism and
aprioristic thinking. What the Holy Father has said of all intellectual
activity applies particularly to economic thought and theory: “There has to be
continuous dialogue between the two, lest ideas become detached from realities”
(Evangelii Gaudium, 231). And again: “Ideas – conceptual elaborations – are at
the service of communication, understanding, and praxis” (ibid., 232).
Here I would like to stress the profound harmony between the
teaching of Pope Francis and that of his predecessors, particularly Benedict
XVI, whose Encyclical Caritas in Veritate contains a lucid analysis of the
relativistic attempt to make political science, of which economics is a part,
into a “technocracy” detached from a transcendent vision of man. In Benedict’s
own words: “The development of peoples goes awry if humanity thinks it can
re-create itself through the ‘wonders’ of technology; [in the same way]
economic development is exposed as a destructive sham if it relies on the
‘wonders’ of finance in order to sustain unnatural and consumerist growth. In
the face of such Promethean presumption, we must fortify our love for a freedom
that is not merely arbitrary, but is rendered truly human by acknowledgment of
the good that underlies it. To this end, man needs to look inside himself in
order to recognize the fundamental norms of the natural moral law which God has
written on our hearts” (Caritas in Veritate, 68).
Both Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, using very similar words, warn
that the problems of development and the just regulation of the economy remain
insoluble without a holistic vision of the human person and a commitment to
constant and coherent moral standards firmly grounded in the natural law and
the pursuit of the common good. “Development will never be fully guaranteed
through automatic or impersonal forces, whether they derive from the market or
from international politics. Development is impossible without upright men and
women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely attuned
to the requirements of the common good” (Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate,
71).
Conversion of mind and heart is thus required if economic activity
as a whole is to be genuinely directed to integral human development. A
“Promethean faith” in the market, or in other ideologies and forms of
aprioristic thinking, will need to be replaced by faith in God and a
transcendent vision of men and women as God’s children. This in turn will lead
to intellectual conversion in the sense of developing an economic science and
praxis which begins with an integral understanding of the human person, that is
placed at the service of human development, and is capable of orienting
production and consumption to authentic human fulfillment, in our relationship
with God and with our neighbour.
I would like to conclude these “remarks” in the words of the Holy
Father, in the conviction that “openness to the transcendent can bring about a
new political and economic mindset which would help to break down the wall of
separation between the economy and the common good of society” (Evangelii
Gaudium, 205). Why should we not turn to God and ask him to inspire the
thinking of scholars, experts and leaders in the fields of finance and
development (cf. ibid.)?
Thank you, once again, Professor Carozza, for the opportunity to
address this meeting and I thank all of you for your kind welcome and your
attention.
(Emer McCarthy)
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét