"Development and Faternity" at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre in London

On the occasion of the annual "Pope Paul VI Memorial Lecture", Dr Vera Araújo gave a lecture on the theme: "Livesimply: our global challenge"

London, 16 Novembre 2007

In accepting the invitation by CAFOD (Catholic Agency for Overseas Development) to give this lecture, Vera Araújo brought the theme of fraternity to the heart of London.

The occasion took place on the 40th anniversary of Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Populorum Progressio. CAFOD is very active in the field of international development and each year organises a conference of the highest level on various themes linked to its social commitment. This year it was considered that the Encyclical by Paul VI was particurarly suited to its aims and Vera Araújo, coordinator of Social-One, was chosen to give the lecture.

At the prestigious Queen Elizabeth II Centre, in the presence of 650 people representing the intelligentsia of the Catholic Church in England, Vera Araújo focussed her talk on fraternity, a fundamental aspect in the efforts for true development.

"It is a real honour to have this opportunity to talk to you about an encyclical, the Populorum Progressio, which has left a profound mark on Christian social doctrine, and which was the high point in the Pontificate of Pope Paul VI. How can we not recognise the profound connection this encyclical has with your program for 2007: to live simply, to live sustainably and in solidarity?

You only have to read the encyclical today to rediscover intact the prophetic and hope-filled inspiration which captured the essence and atmosphere of the 2nd Vatican Council which had just ended; here we intuit the sharp insight of a Pope who is so alert to the universality of the Christian message with all the weight of its social and global content; we find in Paul VI the capacity to soar high whilst having his feet firmly on the ground; we see in him a prophetic vision to foresee the major issues which at that time were barely surfacing on the horizon. It’s a document which has never stopped challenging women and men of good will, all those who hold in their heart the destiny of nations and individuals.

It's clear that Populorum Progressio has to be situated in the historical context of the 60's and there we have the key to read it and understand it. But what interests us today is to bring out not just what is still valid for our current situation but that which is more than ever relevant (today) and demands concrete, urgent action.

So let’s take it a step at a time, beginning with the first part.

This is the first encyclical which opens up the ‘social question’ onto global dimensions. In many ways he foresees globalisation: “Today it is most important for people to understand and appreciate that the social question binds all people together, in every part of the world (…). The hungry nations of the world cry out to the peoples blessed with abundance” (no. 3).

With these historical words, Paul VI takes the giant ‘leap forward’ that the times demanded: the ‘social question’ which was concentrated on the condition of the working class and limited to the struggle between the classes, now becomes ‘a world question’ and rises to the top of the agenda as part of the global issues which were emerging at the time. Firstly, he addresses the problem of development and situates himself decidedly on the side of the weakest, those on the margins, with the poorest and most oppressed nations.

For Paul VI development is no longer a problem of quantity – having more resources for basic human needs – but rather it’s a problem of quality: “There is more to development than economic growth”. This means going from less humane life conditions to more humane conditions. And citing Fr Lebret he continues, “We cannot allow economics to be separated from human realities, nor development from the civilization in which it takes place. What counts for us is each person —each individual person, each human group, and humanity as a whole'' (no. 14).

Therefore the whole of humankind is called to find this full human development which is made possible if solidarity exists, a kind of solidarity which is made possible in space and in time: “Civilizations spring up, flourish and die. As the waves of the sea gradually creep farther and farther in along the shoreline, so the human race inches its way forward through history. We are the heirs of earlier generations, and we reap benefits from the efforts of our contemporaries; we are under obligation to all men. Therefore we cannot disregard the welfare of those who will come after us to increase the human family” (no. 17).

Despite the fact that many today have taken on this concept of full human development [1], we are a long way off from making it a reality. Some find hard to digest that poorer nations might not necessarily want to imitate richer nations in their efforts to find a way out of poverty. The western world finds it even more difficult to swallow that there are countries who don’t want to imitate them and even less consider them as a model2. Paul VI wanted an integral development: “To be authentic, development must be well rounded; it must foster the development of each individual and of the whole person” (no.14).

The concept of this new type of humanism can seem like a nice but fairly abstract manifesto; and yet, far from it, because immediately it’s followed up by concrete objectives: getting out of poverty, overcoming social scourges, a growth in education, acquiring knowledge and culture. But more than that: it calls for a more simple lifestyle, working for the common good, striving for peace. And still more: the importance of recognising higher values, God, finding faith and unity (cf no. 21).

It’s a question of giving a soul to development, of making it become first and foremost an anthropological (person-centred) and cultural issue. In practical terms, it means moving beyond the idea of simply giving aid and recognising that development must flourish and grow at the heart of every nation, and that each nation must become responsible and the architect of their own history, of their own destiny, of their own calling.

In a globalised world, this demand doesn’t change, rather it has to address new challenges: to take into account the processes of unification and fragmentation that abound; the need to connect the global with the local, or better, to live the local through the lens of the global (multiculturalism, religious, ethnic, linguistic pluralism).[3] Here Populorum Progressio moves in two directions: first of all he makes a series of condemnations and then he introduces a cultural-spiritual dimension.

Paul VI’s vision condemns a variety of issues: from agrarian reform still needed in many countries (para 23); to the flight of (financial) capital (para 24); to industrialisation (para 25); and work (paras 27-28).

In the second part of the encyclical he directs himself to the rich nations calling into question governments and international organisations. It’s not only a condemnation but first of all an appeal which is truly innovative. It’s not a matter of purely giving aid from on high, from those who have more, but of agreeing together, between who gives and who receives, a practical program made up of study, objectives, means, resources, forecasts and the involvement of nations on the receiving end (see para 50).

There is another condemnation which is cited clearly in Populorum Progressio and it is as relevant today as it was then: the need for fairness in trade relations and international rules to govern trade. We are still a long way from reaching this goal, and with globalisation, the problem becomes more acute because organisations like the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO are controlled by the rich nations, in fact, often by interest groups who retain enormous shares (in terms) of economic power. The numbers of players involved continues to grow and therefore the responsibilities are shared out and expand. And it gets harder and harder to pinpoint who is at fault.

The parable of the needy Lazarus and the rich Epulone (Lk 16, 19-31), recalled by the Popolorum Progressio (no. 47) with regard to these issues, was taken up, developed and updated to reflect the current situation by Pope John Paul II: “So widespread is the phenomenon that it brings into question the fìnancial, monetary, production and commercial mechanisms that, resting on various political pressures, support the world economy. (…) these structures unceasingly make the areas of misery spread, accompanied by anguish, frustration and bitterness” (Redemptor Hominis no. 16).

And now we come to the cultural-spiritual proposal. What we mainly find here is the more prophetic dimension - that which anticipates an issue which today is becoming more and more decisive. The era of violent revolutions has passed, even if wars and conflicts are still with us. There is only one revolution which can give credible answers and bring about effective change: the cultural spiritual revolution. It means placing the human person and the world that surrounds them at the centre of every issue. This gives rise to an anthropology which enables people to reach maturity, fulfilment, happiness and to connect personal identity and pluralism.

It’s worth reading the text. In quoting his address in Bombay (3 December 1964), Paul VI writes: ‘… People must meet each other, and nation must meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God. In this mutual understanding and friendship, in this sacred communion, we must also begin to work together to build the common future of the human race" (no. 43). The communion that the Pope proposes is not only a religious or Christian attitude or even ‘just being nice’, it includes the demands for equality, respect for dignity, freedom, justice and true solidarity. Not only, it calls for an attitude of constructive dialogue between individuals and nations in a globalised world.

Para 73 is also inspirational: “… Sincere dialogue between cultures, as between individuals, paves the way for bonds of fellowship. Plans for human development will unite all nations in the joint effort to be undertaken, if every citizen—be they a government leader, a public official, or a simple worker—is motivated by love and is intent on building one universal human civilization that spans the globe.”

Already in 1969, Pope Paul VI said to the General Assembly of the United Nations: “Your vocation is that of bringing together not only some, but all peoples. It is an arduous task but this is your task, your noble task …”.[4]

For Paul VI, universal communion or fraternity is not first and foremost an aim to arrive at but it is also the means by which you reach the necessary goals: “The world is ill. The cause lies not so much the depletion of natural resources, nor their monopolistic control by a privileged few; it is rather the weakening of bonds of fraternity between individuals and nations” (no. 66).

The principle of fraternity or clearly has a religious and moral value and it is present in all the great religions as the ultimate goal of relationships between human beings. It is also the foundation for a healthy and peaceful co-existence. However, it’s with Christianity that it takes on a universal value with an ontological basis; the principle of fraternity of being brothers and sisters touches the core of one’s very being; that is, the universal belief of being children of one Creator and brothers and sisters of one another. Jesus brings in a new element to history: he knocks down the walls that separate those who are ‘the same’ from those who are ‘different’, friends from enemies, those of the same nationality from foreigners, men from women. And in doing so, he unties every unjust or indifferent relationship and invites all of us to build a new society where we are brothers and sisters.

History has given us an experience of fraternity which has been lived but sadly betrayed which would be interesting to look at but there isn’t time here.

Since the period of modernity, a secular value emerges which can be summed up in the cry of the French Revolution – liberty, equality, fraternity – and it brings with it a new social and political theory. Whereas freedom and equality have made significant progress over time, it feels like fraternity has got lost in a bit of a haze. It’s only recently that the concept of fraternity (of being brothers and sisters to one another) is beginning to emerge as the foundation for the other two. The sociologist Sabino Palumbieri writes: ‘fraternity’ is the fundamental element in these three words as it is the guarantee of the other two.’ [5]

Chiara Lubich is more daring: ‘the stark contradictions which define our era need a reference point which is both engaging and incisive. They call for a new school of thought and action which involves every single person. Similarly, nations with their economic, social and political systems need the same reference point. There is a universal idea which is a lived out experience, and has shown that it’s capable of rising to the challenge of our times: it is – universal fraternity or communion.’ 6

The profound shift which our age demands – this is my belief – must begin from a new culture, from a new look at reality, from a reflection which has the courage to bring into the equation new ideas and approaches, or better, old ideas which have been renewed by our experience and our creativity.

Fraternity or universal communion can become, and it is already becoming, a new approach, in fact, a new paradigm for social sciences. It offers untold possibilities for analysing and understanding society: I am dreaming here of a new sociological theory. It also gives a new direction to the changing socio-political and economic order. We could dig deeper to really understand what the concept of fraternity can offer us when translated into the field of politics, economics, law, the arts and so on but we don’t have time to do that here. Instead, I will limit myself to the field of economics, in particular to the dimension of development which is the central topic of Populorum Progressio.

In the UN’s ‘Declaration on the right to development’ (1986), approved by the General Assembly, three important aspects emerge which have a strong bearing on our lecture.

The first is that development constitutes a person's inalienable right and that the human person is the central focus of development.

A second aspect is the full acceptance of a concept of development which would include economic factors (transfer of resources, technical assistance) but which also needs to take on board social and cultural factors: respect for human rights and peace building. All this will bring about the concept of "human development" proposed by the United Nations and already embraced by politics of cooperation for the development of governments and international organisations.

And thirdly, the Declaration recalls in article 3 the "duty to cooperate" demanded of nations, because to every right - as the Church has always taught - there corresponds a duty.

There is a whole movement seeking to put development on foundations which demand a content which is substantially different from what has been seen so far in order to give new substance, new weight even to justice and solidarity.

In this way New Humanity, a Christian NGO, which has special consultative status with the Economic Social Council of the United Nations, presented a written Declaration to the Secretary General on 8/2/2005 where among other things it affirms:

“Universal fraternity affirmed in Article 1 is therefore fulfilled by the disposition contained in Article 29 regarding the duties towards the community and therefore towards each individual. In this perspective, there is a vast gamma of potential subjects responsible for guaranteeing the full enjoyment of human rights.

"Universal fraternity carries with it a number of potential and extensive subjects responsible for the development and duty of cooperation. This extension combines well with the need perceived in the present international context of assuring that the members of civil society will be protagonists in the process of development, beginning with the definition of objectives, on a national and international level, and not simply as executives of decisive plans at an inter-governmental level.

"Universal communion introduces elements that are qualitatively important for how development cooperation is defined: the idea of partnership. To create a partnership for development, among other things, is one of the objectives for the reduction of poverty contained in the Millennium Declaration.

"For this reason, we believe that fraternity or communion can give substance to partnership. It expresses a closeness, friendship and sharing, not only on an individual level but also for each local community, each town, each region, each country with regard to their involvement in public and private sector institutions and structures.

"This way of being brothers and sisters goes beyond mere solidarity, because with solidarity there is the danger that there might still be a gap between those who give and those on the receiving end.

"Universal fraternity in fact tries to understand the person or group of people with whom you want to cooperate, with all their characteristics, their limits and their needs, and therefore not just paying attention to global economic development factors. To achieve this, we need to set aside our own thought processes, ideas and development boundaries, in order to identify those of the other with whom we want to cooperate. From this way of acting, the path towards development emerges; or rather this relationship as brothers and sisters allows the needs and points of view of the other person to come to the fore - needs, which up until that moment were perhaps not even evident.

"In the ambit of reciprocity, fraternal relationships contribute also to re-analyse the growth towards development followed by economic development in research, for example, of ways of development which keep account of global sustainability and the responsibility towards it in a broader sense. And besides, we need to be ‘constitutionally’ open to relationships with other subjects, both on the multicultural level as well as on the regional and local level.”

We can affirm that fraternity goes beyond solidarity. While in solidarity there can still be a distinction and a gap between those who give and those who receive, fraternity renders solidarity attentive to the needs of the recipient. To achieve this, we need to set aside our own ideas and models in order to dialogue with the other person. We need to enter into the shoes of the other person, of the one who needs to be helped. Through this attitude what emerges isn’t so much what one thought; something else emerges. Fraternal relationships bring about other needs, other points of view which, without this dimension, were in no way obvious.

In concluding these brief reflections, I wish to emphasise that not only fraternity is not a utopia but that it remains as the most positive hope in this passage of the journey of humanity that is full of challenges. I wish to quote two significant writings. One is from French sociologist, anthropologist and economist, Serge Latouche, an agnostic, with which he concludes one of his writings:

"The only true conceivable universality, therefore, can be based only on a truly universal consensus. It can only happen through an authentic dialogue between cultures. This kind of dialogue is possible because we are able to communicate. It can only come about if each one is ready to give way. We share the conviction that every culture has much to teach the others, and this can be enriched by numerous gifts. Nonetheless, it’s not sure that each person can play the game of reciprocity, that is, of giving up their own ‘barbaric ways’ in order to get ‘the other’ to give up their ways, which would enable both to gain from their reciprocal exchange. Since there is no hope of basing anything worthwhile on a fraudulent pseudo-universality imposed by violence and perpetrated by the denial of ‘the other’, it’s worth wagering that there could still be a common space of fraternal co-existence yet to be discovered and built."

The other is a quote from Pope Paul VI in Populorum Progressio:

“Some would regard these hopes as vain flights of fancy. It may be that these people are not realistic enough, and that they have not noticed that the world is moving rapidly in a certain direction. Men are growing more anxious to establish closer ties of brotherhood; despite their ignorance, their mistakes, their offences, and even their lapses into barbarism and their wanderings from the path of salvation, they are slowly making their way to the Creator, even without adverting to it” (para 79).

The invitation is open to everyone without exception but the responsibility which lies with Christians is to be living words of light and concrete witness. Development will truly thus continue to be the new pathway for peace."

--------------------------

1 Cf. SEN A., "Lo sviluppo è la libertà", Mondadori, Milan 2000
2 Cf. LATOUCHE S., "L’occidentalisation du monde", Ed. La Découverte, Paris 1989
3 Cf. BECK U., La svolta cosmopolita in “Studi di sociologia”, 2 (2005), pp. 105-153
4 Enchiridion Vat., 1, no/ 3, p. 227
5 PALUMBIERI S., "Homo planetarius; uomo nuovo per tempi nuovi", in  MANTOVANI M., THURUTHIYIL S. (Eds.) Quale globalizzazione?, Ed LAS, Rome 2000, p. 245
6 LUBICH C., Address to the Convention: Ciudades por la unidad; Rosario (Argentina), 2.6.2005.