倍可親

分類博客
博客導航

霧裡看花---川普聯合國痛斥邪惡議程——現在支持烏克蘭戰爭？

作者：change?  於 2025-9-27 02:48 發表於 最熱鬧的華人社交網路--貝殼村

通用分類:政經軍事|已有4評論






特朗普揭批聯合國的邪惡議程——現在支持烏克蘭戰爭？

所有全球主義喉舌都紛紛抨擊唐納德·特朗普在社交媒體上發布的關於烏克蘭以某種方式奪回其領土並贏得戰爭的帖子，並將其描繪成他政策的徹底轉變。英國媒體當然是領頭羊，《每日快報》對此大加讚揚。唐納德·特朗普在烏克蘭領土讓步問題上來個180度大轉彎。他要把烏克蘭全部奪回來。但以下是他們不想讓你思考的。

他今天早些時候在聯合國的所作所為。特朗普在聯合國的講話無異於對過去八十年來破壞國家和人類進步的特定意識形態和機構的公開宣戰。

馬爾科·盧比奧預演了特朗普在聯合國的所作所為----- 

顯然，總統希望今天在聯合國傳達他著名的「以實力求和平」的口號。你預計他會說什麼？
嗯，我認為總統必須解決並且即將要解決的問題之一就是聯合國本身。
這就是為什麼我們仍然需要聯合國？
它擁有巨大的潛力。聯合國是一個有潛力在世界各地做一些偉大事情的組織，但它並沒有這樣做。

特朗普在演講中談到這一點時，他加倍強調了聯合國一直倡導的兩項政策：支持不受約束的移民和綠色政策。最後，我只想重申，移民和所謂的綠色可再生能源的高成本正在摧毀很大一部分自由世界和我們地球的很大一部分。那些珍視自由的國家正因其在這兩個問題上的政策而迅速衰落。

如果你想再次偉大，就需要強大的邊界和傳統能源。特朗普明確表示，這些政策是由心懷惡意的人推動的，而且這些邪惡的意圖已經控制了各個機構。

這讓我想起了教皇約翰·保羅二世1987年發表的那篇意義非凡的通諭《關懷社會》，教皇在其中談到了罪惡的結構。他說，人們可以談論罪惡的結構。它們根植於個人的罪惡，因此總是與個人的具體行為聯繫在一起，這些行為引入了這些結構，鞏固了它們，使其難以消除，因此它們變得更加強大、蔓延，並成為其他罪惡的根源，從而影響了人們的行為。

我認為這是一個非常重要的概念。是的，個人的罪惡是存在的，但我們所反對的是創造那些使罪惡的意識形態永久存在的結構。這些意識形態否認了人是按照上帝的形象被創造的本質。而這正是特朗普所要打擊的。

特朗普在聯合國發表講話之前，緊隨周日查理·柯克非凡追悼會的之後。會上，一位又一位發言人明確表示，這場戰鬥確實是正義與邪惡之間的鬥爭。特朗普在聯合國發表的講話將這場鬥爭提升到了一個新的高度。

我是蘇珊·科金達，幾十年來，我一直在揭露帝國環保運動的反人類根源，表明其潛在的意識形態與西方文明所代表的一切背道而馳，
以及它是如何被用來試圖摧毀美國和其他國家。

如果您覺得我們對這場真正的鬥爭（而非新聞標題所報道的鬥爭）的深入分析有價值，請點贊並訂閱。

今天我將向你們展示三個關鍵點。首先，特朗普的外交政策到底是怎麼回事。
其次，他是如何瞄準帝國邪惡機構的。
第三，這場鬥爭正在催生建設者的復興。


特朗普外交政策的真正走向

那麼，讓我來告訴你特朗普最近關於烏克蘭的言論。他的許多支持者都在懷疑他是否落入了新保守主義者的手中。以下是關鍵的
引言: 

我認為，在歐盟的支持下，烏克蘭有能力打贏這場戰爭，並最終奪回烏克蘭的原有領土。隨著時間的推移、耐心的積累，以及歐洲，特別是北約的財政支持，這場戰爭爆發時的原有邊界完全是一個選擇。

克里姆林宮發言人德米特里佩斯科夫駁斥了烏克蘭奪回其領土的想法，認為這是一個有缺陷的論點，並指出，前線的現實說明了一切。

但稍早之前發生的事情是這樣的。特朗普與扎林斯基會面。只進行了短暫的新聞發布會，只有扎林斯基發表了開場白。當記者問特朗普：「總統先生，您與普京總統的會談有什麼進展嗎？您還信任他嗎？」 特朗普回答說：「呃，我會在大約一個月後告訴你。」

此外，TAS (塔斯社)還對昨天在聯合國發生的事情進行了非常有趣的報道。他們報道稱：「美國沒有加入烏克蘭、歐洲和歐盟譴責俄羅斯的聲明。」該聲明由烏克蘭外交部長安德烈·塞加宣讀。共有38個國家加入了該聲明，包括斯洛伐克。

此外，唐納德·特朗普政府或常駐聯合國代表團的任何官員都沒有出席齊格加的講話。所以，讓我們回顧一下特朗普的帖子，他當時說，烏克蘭可以通過時間、耐心以及歐洲的財政支持贏得勝利。他知道這些因素並不存在。

當天早些時候，他曾表示，歐洲國家正因為綠色政策和大規模移民而走向毀滅。

就連我認為主要是為了攻擊唐納德·特朗普而存在的《衛報》，也刊登了一篇標題為「特朗普語氣的轉變對烏克蘭來說很有價值，但需要的不僅僅是言語」。毫無疑問，特朗普感到沮喪，但他不斷發展出意想不到的新側翼，試圖為真正的外交創造空間。而與此同時，全球主義者仍在繼續他們無休止的戰爭驅動。我們以前就見過他用言語向外交僵局投擲手榴彈。

讓我們來看看美俄關係的另一個重要方面。弗拉基米爾·普京最近提出將《削減戰略武器條約》延長一年，至2027年。普京表示：「為了防止新的戰略軍備競賽的出現，並保持可接受的可預見性和剋制程度，我們認為，在當前動蕩時期，維持《新削減戰略武器條約》確立的現狀是合理的。」 特朗普尚未對此做出直接回應，但在他的聯合國演講中，他重申了他畢生渴望徹底消除核武器的願望。

特朗普如何直擊帝國邪惡機構的命門

正是在那次聯合國演講中，特朗普真正擊中了要害。他不僅批評了政策。他還宣稱這些機構從根本上就是邪惡的，並揭露了推行這些政策的人。首先，他猛烈抨擊了聯合國本身。聯合國不僅沒有解決它應該解決的問題，而且常常在製造新的問題，讓我們去解決。最好的例子就是我們這個時代的頭號政治問題——

失控的移民危機。它已經失控了。你們的國家正在被毀掉。聯合國正在資助對西方國家及其邊境的攻擊。2024年，聯合國預算撥款3.72億美元，用於支持估計有62.4萬移民進入美國。想想看。聯合國正在支持那些非法進入美國的人，然後我們必須把他們趕出去。

但特朗普卻更進一步，宣稱任何導致大規模販賣兒童的制度本質上都是邪惡的。然而，這正是全球主義移民議程的所作所為，這就是它的全部意義所在。

然後，他又對綠色議程的騙局進行了毀滅性的攻擊。特朗普提醒所有人，早在1982年，聯合國環境規劃署就預測，到2000年，氣候變化將造成一場全球性災難，其不可逆轉性堪比核浩劫。結果呢？現在就是這樣。這就是致命一擊。碳足跡是心懷不軌之人編造的騙局，他們正在走向徹底毀滅的道路。他稱之為一場騙局，並描述了歐洲是如何自我毀滅的。

特朗普點名聯合國環境計劃至關重要，因為當你回顧其起源時，你會看到它毫不掩飾的邪惡。聯合國環境計劃最初由加拿大人莫里斯·斯特朗(Maurice Frederick Strong (April 29, 1929 – November 27, 2015) 猶太人 他的表姐是中國人曾經熟悉的著名美國左翼記者安娜 路易 斯特朗, 葬於八寶山革命公墓）領導，他是綠色議程、世界經濟論壇和人口控制優生運動交匯的關鍵人物。就像環保主義者菲利普親王希望自己能變成致命病毒，來幫助解決人口過剩問題一樣，斯特朗也毫不猶豫地公開了自己的真實意圖。他說：「如果我們不改變，我們這個物種將無法生存。

坦率地說，我們可能會走到這樣的地步：

拯救世界的唯一途徑就是工業文明的崩潰。

不僅如此，斯特朗和世界上許多未來的精英一樣，認識到人們不會心甘情願地走向自我毀滅。他建議，我們或許需要修改投票箱民主的概念，以產生能夠做出艱難決策的強大政府，尤其是在維護這一轉型所需的全球環境方面。現代工業文明的毀滅和法西斯政治手段正是我們一直面臨的挑戰，也是唐納德·特朗普及其運動所挑戰的。

普羅米修斯行動的組織者們幾十年來一直在揭露和對抗這種現象。如果您想參與其中，並了解戰略背景和歷史深度，那麼請訂閱我們的免費時事通訊或成為付費會員，幫助我們。建立這場能夠支持特朗普總統的運動，在這場泰坦尼克號般的戰鬥中奮力前行。因為建設者的復興正是全球主義者真正擔心的。

特朗普正在釋放人類作為城市建設者和創造者的創造力

正如史蒂文·米勒在查理·柯克紀念有力地指出的那樣：「這場戰鬥是善與惡的較量。」 但他賦予了善的理念強有力的內涵，它可以在那些城市建設者、生產者和創造者身上找到。

我們的敵人無法理解我們的力量、我們的決心、我們的毅力、我們的熱情。我們的血統和遺產可以追溯到雅典、羅馬、費城和蒙蒂塞洛。我們的祖先建造了城市。他們創造了藝術和建築。他們建立了工業。你們什麼都不是。你們是邪惡。你們是嫉妒。你們是羨慕。你們是仇恨。你們是什麼都不是。你什麼也建不起來。你什麼也生產不出來。你什麼也創造不出來。我們才是建設者。我們才是創造者。我們才是提升人類的人。

你以為你能殺死查理·柯克。你讓他永垂不朽。你讓查理·柯克永垂不朽，現在數百萬人將繼承他的遺志，而我們將用餘生，去完成查理為之獻出最後一絲奉獻的事業。

你無法打敗我們。你無法減緩我們。你無法阻止我們。你無法嚇倒我們。

我們會把查理和艾麗卡放在心上，每一天，都會更加努力地戰鬥，

因為你對我們所做的一切。

你不知道你喚醒了一條惡龍。你不知道我們將會多麼堅定地拯救這個文明，拯救西方，拯救這個共和國。

現在，回想一下教皇約翰·保羅二世關於罪惡結構的思想，然後再想想西方文明的制度，基督教，以及我們的共和國，實際上都是善良的基石。特朗普深諳此道。

還記得特朗普2020年在達沃斯的演講嗎？當時他樂觀地談到了文明建設、人類創造力和技術進步。這不僅僅是空談，而是對美國所代表的價值觀的宣示。特朗普在聯合國演講的結尾再次強調了這一點，邀請全世界慶祝美國即將到來的250周年誕辰。

帝國的機構想要讓人們相信，他們只是消費者，他們的存在正在毀滅地球，他們應該為人類的進步感到內疚。

但特朗普說的恰恰相反。人類的使命是建設、創造，突破可能性的界限。特朗普的聯合國演講不僅僅是又一份政治聲明，而是對定義我們時代的戰線的根本揭露。他在聯合國指出，環保運動、全球主義移民議程不僅是誤導性的政策，更是旨在破壞人類進步和國家主權的邪惡體系。


如果你把特朗普總統在聯合國的演講與上周日所有紀念查理·柯克的非凡紀念活動放在一起，你就會發現，罪惡的結構確實正受到西方文明復興的挑戰。正因如此，你的支持至關重要。

訂閱並隨時了解這場戰鬥的進展，因為如果我們要全面實施特朗普的願景，理解這些更深層次的動態至關重要。建設者的復興已經開始，邪惡的機構正驚慌失措。

所以，請保持專註，保持動員，感謝你的收看。
請花點時間訂閱我們的免費新聞通訊，地址：prometheianaction.com。
特朗普揭露批駁聯合國的邪惡議程——現在支持烏克蘭戰爭？
00:00 引言 03:46 特朗普外交政策的真正走向 06:45 特朗普如何直擊帝國的邪惡機構 10:21 「建設者復興」

本期節目探討唐納德·特朗普在聯合國發表的激烈演講，該演講直指破壞人類進步的全球意識形態和機構。我們深入剖析他對聯合國移民和綠色政策的批判，以及他對全球主義議程的大膽立場。此次演講的意義與近期查理·柯克的紀念活動並列，凸顯了善與惡之間更廣泛的鬥爭。此外，本期節目還將深入探討特朗普在社交媒體上發布的烏克蘭問題、他的外交策略，以及這場意識形態衝突中湧現出的「建設者復興」運動。

【留言前幾條翻譯】

@marygossett4547
聯合國從未做過任何有價值的事情。我們不需要聯合國。

@kimberlycuthbertson9983
特朗普總統在聯合國的演講真是太棒了……**‼️❤****

@gundisaluusmenendiz
我是歐洲人，我們應該擺脫聯合國和北約，讓他們自生自滅。

@maryannknox7158
取消聯合國

@scottwilson1258
我希望歐盟/英國人民能聽從我們偉大總統的號召！

@AlisonQuinto-p1z
我不停地高呼：感謝上帝，賜予我一位能夠對抗邪惡計劃的鬥士！

@oneworldactorsproductionsa1417
「人口過剩」也是個騙局

@maryannknox7158
我祈禱邪惡的撒旦般的聯合國被摧毀和瓦解，奉耶穌基督的名***️

@GabrielKish
沒人說聯合國是入侵的幕後黑手……
聯合國是我們的敵人，不是俄羅斯。

@MK98-n1k
解散聯合國，他們一文不值。

@janalmond4003
販賣兒童、虐待和剝削兒童是最重要的罪行，必須予以制止。否則，我們只能說自己不是人。

@wenflenful
是的。聯合國很久以前就被邪惡勢力滲透了。消滅它吧。

@mimi-ur8pc 他們暫停自動扶梯，希望特朗普摔倒受傷。他們關掉他的提詞器，希望他結巴，忘記他的講話。但針對他的武器沒有一個得逞，唯一受害的只有那些邪惡的全球主義者。巴比倫正在崩塌。謝謝你，特朗普總統。 @clroger4 我以為只有我了解這些事情。 為此，我會停止資助他們，把他們趕出紐約！！！ @User-blu-7999 他們還沒搞清楚，DJ特朗普總統總是比他們領先十步…… 他們真是蠢透了，蠢透了，蠢透了……！！！ 特朗普不需要提詞器！！！  @shaunshaun4733 是的，真是無恥小人。 @EliteAmerican1776 左派全球主義者正在消亡，這都是上帝的傑作。

@derrickricks9047
聯合國可以被定義為一個全球性的恐怖組織。總部設在紐約。


@gundisaluusmenendiz
I'm European and we need to get rid of the UN and NATO, let them fend for themselves.

@maryannknox7158
Delete the United Nations

@scottwilson1258
I hope the People of the EU/UK were Listening to our Great President!

@AlisonQuinto-p1z
I could not stop shouting, Thank You Lord for a fighter against their evil plans!

@oneworldactorsproductionsa1417
"Overpopulation" is also a SCAM

@maryannknox7158
I Pray Against the Evil Satanic Demonic United Nations to be taken down and dismantled in Jesus Christ Name ***️

@GabrielKish
No one is talking about the UN being behind the Invasions....
The UN is our enemy, not Russia.

@MK98-n1k
Disband the UN, they are worthless.

@janalmond4003
The trafficking of children, their torture and exploitation is the MOST IMPORTANT CRIME to bring to an end. Otherwise we can say we are not human beings.

@wenflenful
Yes. The UN was infiltrated long ago by evil. Get rid of it.

@derrickricks9047
The UN could be defined as a world wide terror organization. Based in NY NY.


VOA 特朗普聯大講話：美國將對俄羅斯實施嚴厲懲罰，並敦促歐洲加入並協助這一努力
VOA專訪：美國務院中文發言人談特朗普聯大講話及美中關係

FBI 宣布 「一六暴亂」案重磅消息：「我們FBI當時有 300 名特工在人群中……」|

為什麼這位華裔讓民主黨人怕都怕死？今後想入籍美國必須知道這件事


教皇約翰·保羅二世1987年發表的那篇意義非凡的通諭《關懷社會》

教皇在其中談到了罪惡的結構。他說，人們可以談論罪惡的結構。它們根植於個人的罪惡，因此總是與個人的具體行為聯繫在一起，這些行為引入了這些結構，鞏固了它們，使其難以消除，因此它們變得更加強大、蔓延，並成為其他罪惡的根源，從而影響了人們的行為。

聖座
訓導權
曆法
教宗
羅馬教廷及其他組織
禮儀慶典
樞機主教團
新聞辦公室
梵蒂岡新聞 - 梵蒂岡廣播電台
羅馬觀察報
若望·保祿二世通諭

若望·保祿二世
社會關懷
致主教、司鐸
修會會士、教會子女
以及所有善心人士
慶祝《民族發展》二十周年

祝福

尊敬的弟兄們、親愛的子女們：
祝你們健康，並賜予宗座祝福！

一、引言

1. 教會對社會的關懷，旨在促進人與社會的真正發展，尊重並促進人性的各個層面，一直以來都以各種不同的方式表達出來。近年來，羅馬教宗的訓導是其介入社會事務的特殊途徑之一。教宗以良十三世的《新事》通諭1為參考，頻繁探討這一問題，有時甚至將各種社會文獻的發布日期與該通諭2的周年紀念日相一致。

歷任教宗都通過這些訊息，對教會社會訓導的新方面進行新的闡釋。因此，這一訓導始於良十三世的傑出貢獻，並因訓導的後續貢獻而不斷豐富，如今已成為一部更新的教義「寶庫」。它逐漸建立起來，因為教會在耶穌基督所啟示的圓滿聖言中，並在聖神的協助下（參若14:16, 26；16:13-15），解讀歷史進程中不斷展開的事件。因此，教會力求引導人們，在理性反思和人文科學的支持下，回應他們作為負責任的世俗社會建設者的使命。

2. 這龐大的社會訓導體系的一部分，是著名的《民族發展》通諭，由我尊敬的前任教宗保祿六世於1967年3月26日發表。


如果我們注意到1987年在教會和民間世界的許多地方以各種形式舉行的一系列紀念活動，就不難看出這封通諭的持久意義。為此，宗座正義與和平委員會向東方天主教會主教會議和主教團發出了一份通函，徵求關於如何最好地慶祝通諭周年、豐富其教義並在必要時對其進行更新的意見和建議。在二十周年之際，同一委員會組織了一次隆重的紀念活動，我本人也參加了並致閉幕詞。5 現在，考慮到對上述通函的答覆，我認為在1987年年底，以「民族發展」為主題發表一篇通諭是恰當的。

3. 我主要希望以此方式實現兩個至關重要的目標：一方面，向保祿六世的這份歷史性文獻及其訓導致敬；另一方面，追隨我尊敬的伯多祿教廷前任們的腳步，重申社會訓導的延續性及其不斷更新。事實上，延續性和更新性正是教會訓導永恆價值的證明。

這雙重維度是教會在社會領域訓導的典型特徵。一方面，它是恆定的，因為它在其基本啟示、其「反思原則」、「判斷標準」、其基本的「行動指導」6，以及最重要的是，它與主的福音息息相關方面始終保持一致。另一方面，它常新，因為它會根據歷史條件的變化以及構成人民和社會生活背景的事件的不斷演變而進行必要且適時的調整。

4. 我堅信，《民族發展》通諭在六十年代向人民和社會發出的教誨，在八十年代後期的今天，依然具有強大的力量，它呼籲人們的良知，使我們始終在「民族發展」的目標和靈感的框架內，追溯當今世界的主要脈絡，而這些目標和靈感至今仍遠未窮盡。因此，我打算將這一訊息及其可能的運用，應用於當下這個與二十年前同樣充滿戲劇性的歷史時刻，以擴大其影響力。

眾所周知，時間保持著恆定不變的節奏。然而，今天，我們卻感覺時間流逝得越來越快，尤其是由於我們所處環境的現象日益繁複和複雜。因此，在過去二十年中，世界格局在保留某些基本不變的同時，也發生了顯著的變化，並呈現出一些全新的面貌。

當前正值基督信仰第三個千年的前夕，人們普遍期盼著新的「降臨節」，這在某種程度上觸動了每個人。這為我們提供了一個機會，讓我們能夠更深入地研讀通諭的教義，並展望其未來可能的發展。

本次反思旨在通過對當今世界的神學探究，強調需要根據通諭中的建議，提出一個更全面、更細緻的發展理念。同時也旨在指出一些將其付諸實踐的方法。

二、《人民進步》通諭的獨創性

5. 教宗保祿六世的這份文件一經發表，就因其獨創性而引起了公眾的關注。它以具體而清晰的方式，在教會的社會訓導中，明確了上述延續性和革新性的特徵。因此，通過仔細重讀通諭，重新發現這一教義的諸多方面，將成為當前反思的主線。


但首先，我想就其出版日期——1967年——談一談。教宗保祿六世選擇在那一年發布社會通諭，這一事實本身就促使我們將這份文件與1965年12月8日閉幕的梵蒂岡第二次大公會議聯繫起來思考。

6. 我們應該從中看到更多的東西，而不僅僅是時間上的接近。《民族發展》通諭在某種程度上，是一份踐行梵蒂岡大公會議訓導的文件。它不僅不斷引用梵蒂岡大公會議的文本，8 也源於教會對社會問題的關注，這種關注啟發了梵蒂岡大公會議的全部努力——尤其是《牧職憲章》——以協調和發展其社會訓導的若干主題。

因此，我們可以肯定，《民族發展》通諭是對梵二《牧職憲章》開篇呼籲的一種回應：「當代人，特別是貧困者或任何受苦者，的喜樂與希望、憂患與焦慮，也是基督追隨者的喜樂與希望、憂患與焦慮。事實上，任何真正人性化的事情，都會在他們心中引起共鳴。」9 這些話表達了梵二這份偉大文獻的根本動機，它首先指出了千百萬人生活在貧困和欠發達的境況。

這種貧困和欠發達，換個說法，就是今天的「憂患與焦慮」，特別是「貧困者」的「憂患與焦慮」。面對這片廣闊的痛苦和苦難，梵二希望展現喜樂和希望的前景。保祿六世的通諭也秉持著同樣的宗旨，完全忠實於梵二的啟示。

7. 通諭的主題也與教會社會訓導的偉大傳統相符，它再次直接闡述了梵二會議，尤其是在《論教會在現代世界牧職憲章》中提出的全新闡釋和豐富的綜合。

關於通諭再次闡明的內容和主題，應強調以下幾點：認識到教會作為「人類專家」的職責，「審視時代的徵兆，並根據福音的光照來詮釋它們」10；同樣深刻地意識到她「服務」的使命，這一使命與國家的職能截然不同，即使她關注的是人民的具體處境」11；提到了人民處境中眾所周知的不平等現象12；確認了梵二的教導，忠實地呼應了教會關於「普世善品」13的悠久傳統；欣賞有助於人類解放的文化和技術文明14，但同時也認識到它們的局限性15；最後，關於發展這一具體主題，這正是通諭的主題，它強調較發達國家負有「幫助發展中國家」16的「最重大義務」。通諭提出的發展理念直接源於牧函處理這一問題的方法17。

這些以及其他對牧函的明確引用使人們得出結論，通諭本身就是將梵二在社會事務中的教導應用於發展和人民的欠發達。

8. 以上簡要分析有助於我們更好地理解通諭的獨創性，其獨創性可概括為三點。

第一點在於，它本身就是一份由天主教會最高權威頒布的文件，既面向教會本身，也面向「所有善意人士」，18 所討論的問題乍一看純粹是經濟和社會問題：人民的發展。「發展」一詞源自社會和經濟科學的辭彙。從這個角度來看，《民族發展》通諭與探討「工人狀況」的《新事》通諭直接相關。19 乍一看，這兩個主題似乎都與教會作為宗教機構的正當關切無關——而「發展」甚至比「工人狀況」更無關。

與良十三世通諭相呼應，必須承認保祿六世的這份文件的優點在於強調了人民的倫理和文化特徵。與發展相關的問題，以及教會介入這一領域的合法性和必要性。


此外，教會的社會訓導再次展現了其將天主聖言應用於民眾生活、社會生活以及與之相關的世俗現實的本質，提供了「反思的原則」、「判斷的標準」和「行動的指引」。20 在保祿六世的文獻中，我們發現這三個要素普遍具有實踐性，即指向道德行為。

因此，當教會關注「民族發展」時，不應指責她超越了自身特定的職權範圍，更不應指責她超越了主所賜予的使命。

9. 《民族發展》的第二個獨創性體現在它對通常所說的「社會問題」的廣闊視野。

事實上，教宗若望二十三世在其通諭《慈母與導師》中已經探討了這一更廣闊的視角，21 梵二大公會議在《牧職憲章》中也表達了同樣的觀點。22 然而，教會的社會訓導尚未達到如此清晰地肯定社會問題已具有世界性維度的程度，23 這一肯定及其相關分析也尚未像保祿六世在其通諭中所做的那樣，被轉化為「行動指南」。

如此明確的立場蘊含著豐富的內涵，值得指出。

首先，必須消除一個可能存在的誤解。承認「社會問題」已具有世界性維度，並不意味著它失去了其深刻性或國家和地方重要性。相反，這意味著，特定國家或地區的工業企業或工人和工會運動中的問題不應被視為毫無關聯的孤立案例。相反，它們越來越依賴於超越地域和國界的因素的影響。

不幸的是，從經濟角度來看，發展中國家的數量遠多於發達國家；缺乏發展所提供的商品和服務的人口數量遠多於擁有這些商品和服務的人口數量。

因此，我們面臨著一個嚴重的問題，即原本為所有人提供的生存資料分配不均，由此產生的利益分配也不均。而這種情況的發生並非貧困人口的過錯，更不是某種依賴於自然條件或整體環境的必然性。

保祿六世通諭在宣布社會問題已具有全球性時，首先指出了一個道德事實，這個事實的基礎是對現實的客觀分析。用通諭本身的話來說，「每個人都必須意識到」這一事實，24 正是因為它直接關係到良知，而良知是道德決策的根源。

在此框架下，通諭的獨創性與其說在於對社會問題普遍性的歷史性肯定，不如說在於對這一現實的道德評估。因此，政治領袖以及富裕國家的公民，尤其是基督徒，作為個體，負有道德義務，根據其各自責任的程度，在個人決策和政府決策中，考慮到這種普遍性關係，這種普遍性關係，即他們的行為與千百萬人的貧困和欠發達之間存在的相互依存關係。教宗保祿的通諭將這一道德義務更簡潔地翻譯為「團結互助的責任」25；儘管世界上許多情況已經發生了變化，但這一肯定在今天仍然具有與它撰寫時相同的效力和有效性。

另一方面，在不偏離這一道德願景的前提下，通諭的獨創性還在於這樣一個基本洞見：如果從普遍相互依存的角度來思考，發展的概念本身就會發生顯著變化。真正的發展不能僅僅在於財富的積累和商品與服務的增多，而要以犧牲大眾發展為代價，不充分考慮人類的社會、文化和精神層面。26

10. 第三點，通諭對教會整體的社會訓導以及發展的概念本身做出了非常獨到的貢獻。這種獨到之處體現在通諭結尾的一句話中，這句話既可以被視為通諭的總結，也可以被視為其歷史標籤：「發展是和平的新名稱。」27


事實上，如果社會問題已經具有全球性的維度，那是因為對正義的訴求只有在這個層面才能得到滿足。忽視這一訴求可能會鼓勵不公正的受害者以暴力回應，就像許多戰爭的起源一樣。那些被排除在公平分配原本屬於所有人的利益之外的人們可能會捫心自問：為什麼不以暴力回應那些首先對我們施暴的人呢？如果我們從世界分裂為意識形態陣營的角度來審視這一局勢——這種分裂早在1967年就已存在——並考慮到隨之而來的經濟和政治影響及相互依存，危險就會更加嚴重。

通諭中關於歷史性措辭的驚人內容，首先值得思考，其次，通諭本身也提到了這一點28：巨額資金本應用於促進各國人民的發展，卻被發達國家和發展中國家用來斂財，或用於增加武器儲備，從而擾亂了真正的優先事項，這該如何解釋？考慮到用於援助貧困國家的資金往往難以直接轉移，這一問題就更加嚴重了。如果「發展是和平的新名稱」，那麼戰爭和軍事準備就是各國人民全面發展的主要敵人。

鑒於教宗保祿六世的這一表述，我們應重新審視發展的概念。當然，發展的概念不應僅限於通過增加商品來滿足物質需求，而應忽視大多數人的苦難，將個人和國家的自私自利作為主要動機。正如聖雅各伯書信尖銳地提醒我們：「你們中間的戰爭和鬥毆是從哪裡來的呢？豈不是你們肢體中爭戰的私慾嗎？你們貪戀，卻得不到。」（雅4:1-2）

相反，在一個不同的世界里，一個以全人類的共同福祉為中心，或者說，以「所有人的精神和人性發展」為中心，而不是以追求個人利益為中心，和平才有可能通過「人與人之間更完善的正義」實現。29

鑒於現代人對尊重正義與建立真正和平之間的密切聯繫如此敏感，通諭的這一新內容也具有永恆的當代價值。

三、當代世界概覽

11. 《民族發展》通諭的基本教義在其時代因其新穎性而廣受讚譽。我們今天所處的社會環境與二十年前已不可同日而語。因此，我現在想簡要回顧一下當今世界的一些特點，以便再次從「民族發展」的角度來闡述保祿六世通諭的教義。

12. 首先需要注意的是，當時人們對發展的期盼如此強烈，而今天看來卻遠未實現。

在這方面，通諭沒有抱有任何幻想。其措辭嚴肅，有時甚至帶有戲劇性，但僅限於強調形勢的嚴峻性，並提醒所有人有迫切的義務為解決這一問題做出貢獻。在那些年裡，人們普遍抱有樂觀的態度，認為無需付出過多努力就能克服貧困民族的經濟落後，為他們提供基礎設施，並幫助他們實現工業化。

在此歷史背景下，聯合國組織在各國自身努力的基礎上，連續二十年推動了發展。30 事實上，聯合國採取了一些雙邊和多邊措施，旨在幫助許多國家，其中一些國家已經獨立一段時間，而另一些國家——大多數——則是剛剛從非殖民化進程中誕生的國家。教會方面，感到有責任加深對新形勢所帶來問題的理解，希望以其宗教和人文啟迪支持這些努力，賦予它們「靈魂」和有效的動力。

13. 我們不能說這些宗教、人文、經濟和技術方面的舉措是徒勞的，因為它們確實取得了一定的成果。但總的來說，考慮到各種因素，不可否認的是，從發展的角度來看，當前的世界形勢給人留下了相當負面的印象。


因此，我想提請大家關注一些一般指標，但並不排除其他具體指標。無需深入分析數字和統計資料，只需直面無數人——兒童、成人和老年人——換句話說，他們是真實而獨特的人，正承受著難以承受的貧困重擔，這個現實就已足夠。由於世界許多地方的境況明顯惡化，數百萬人失去了希望。面對我們眾多兄弟姐妹所經歷的這種極度貧困和匱乏的悲劇，正是主耶穌親自前來質問我們（參見瑪竇福音 25:31-46）。

14. 首先要指出的負面觀察是，所謂的發達北方地區和發展中的南方地區之間的差距持續存在，而且往往還在不斷擴大。這個地理術語僅供參考，因為無論發達還是發展中，我們都無法忽視一個事實：貧富的界限在各個社會內部都是交織在一起的。事實上，正如富裕國家存在著直至貧困的社會不平等一樣，在欠發達國家，人們也常常看到自私自利和炫耀財富的現象，這既令人不安，又令人憤慨。

世界某些地區，尤其是發達的北方國家，商品和服務的豐富，與南方國家相比，卻出現了令人無法接受的滯后，而人類的大部分正是生活在這個地緣政治區域。

縱觀各個領域——食品生產和分配、衛生、醫療和住房、飲用水供應、工作條件（尤其是女性）、預期壽命以及其他經濟和社會指標——總體情況令人失望，無論是就其本身而言，還是與發達國家的相應數據相比。「差距」一詞自然而然地浮現在腦海中。

也許這個詞並不適合用來描述真實的現實，因為它會給人一種停滯不前的印象。但事實並非如此。近年來，發達國家和發展中國家的發展速度不一，這進一步拉大了差距。因此，發展中國家，尤其是其中最貧窮的國家，面臨著極其嚴重的發展滯后。

此外，不同人口群體之間存在文化和價值體系的差異，這些差異並不總是與經濟發展水平相匹配，但卻加劇了差距。正是由於這個問題具有普遍性，這些因素和方面使得社會問題更加複雜。

我們觀察到，世界各地被這種日益擴大的差距所隔開，並注意到每個地區似乎都在走自己的路，取得各自的成就，由此我們就能理解為什麼人們會把同一個世界劃分成不同的世界：第一世界、第二世界、第三世界，有時還有第四世界。31 這些表述顯然並非旨在詳盡地概括所有國家，但卻意義重大：它們表明人們普遍認為，世界的統一，即人類的統一，正受到嚴重的破壞。這種措辭，除了其或多或少客觀的價值之外，無疑隱藏著一種道德內涵，教會作為「全人類團結的聖事或標記和工具」32，對此不能漠不關心。

15. 然而，如果不將欠發達的「經濟和社會指標」與其他同樣負面甚至更令人不安的指標（首先是文化水平）結合起來，那麼剛才描繪的圖景就不完整。這些指標包括文盲、難以或不可能獲得高等教育、無法參​​與建設自己的國家、各種形式的剝削以及對個人及其權利的經濟、社會、政治甚至宗教壓迫、各種形式的歧視，尤其是基於種族差異的極其可惡的歧視。如果說其中一些禍害在較發達的北方地區令人遺憾，那麼在發展中國家和欠發達國家，它們無疑更為頻繁、更為持久、也更難以根除。


值得注意的是，在當今世界，經濟主動權在諸多權利中常常受到壓制。然而，這項權利不僅對個人重要，也對公共利益至關重要。經驗告訴我們，否認這項權利，或以所謂的社會人人「平等」的名義對其進行限制，會削弱，甚至在實踐中徹底摧毀公民的主動性，即公民的創造性主體性。結果，與其說是真正的平等，不如說是「拉低水平」。創造性主動性被被動、依賴和對官僚機構的屈從所取代，而官僚機構作為所有商品和生產資料的唯一「命令」和「決策」機構——即使不是「所有者」——將每個人都置於幾乎絕對的依賴地位，這與資本主義社會中工人無產階級的傳統依賴性相似。這引發了一種挫敗感或絕望感，使人們傾向於退出民族生活，迫使許多人移民，也促成了一種「心理」移民。

從「各個民族的權利」的角度來看，這種情況也會產生後果。事實上，一個民族常常被剝奪其主體性，也就是說，被剝奪其在經濟、政治社會以及某種程度上的文化意義上所享有的「主權」，因為在一個民族共同體中，所有這些生活維度都是緊密相連的。

還必須重申，任何社會團體，例如一個政黨，都無權篡奪唯一領導者的角色，因為這會導致社會和公民個體真正主體性的毀滅，就像在各種形式的極權主義中一樣。在這種情況下，個人和人民都變成了「客體」，儘管人們發表了各種相反的聲明和口頭保證。

我們應該在此補充一點，當今世界還有許多其他形式的貧困。難道某些匱乏或剝奪不配得上貧困這個稱號嗎？否認或限制人權——例如宗教自由權、參與社會建設的權利、組織和成立工會的自由，以及在經濟事務中採取主動行動的自由——難道這些權利的匱乏，不與物質財富的匱乏一樣，甚至更甚於物質財富的匱乏，對人類的貧困化難道不堪比提倡嗎？不充分肯定這些權利的發展，難道真的是人類層面的發展嗎？

簡而言之，正如二十年前《民族發展》通諭所指出的，現代欠發達不僅是經濟的，也是文化的、政治的，甚至僅僅是人類的欠發達。因此，在這一點上，我們必須捫心自問，當今悲慘的現實，是否至少在一定程度上，是過於狹隘的發展觀，即主要局限於經濟的發展觀造成的。

16. 應當指出，儘管過去二十年來，發達國家和發展中國家以及國際組織為尋求擺脫困境，或至少是緩解部分癥狀，做出了值得稱讚的努力，但情況卻明顯惡化。

造成這種惡化的原因多種多樣。其中最突出的無疑是發展中國家自身的嚴重疏忽，尤其是那些掌握經濟和政治權力的國家。我們也不能視而不見發達國家的責任，它們並不總是，至少在適當的程度上，感到有義務幫助那些脫離了它們所屬的富裕世界的國家。

此外，我們必須譴責現有的經濟、金融和社會機制，這些機制雖然受人操縱，但往往幾乎是自動運作的，從而加劇了一部分人富裕而另一部分人貧困的狀況。這些機制由較發達國家直接或間接地操縱，其運作本身就有利於操縱它們的人的利益，最終扼殺或制約著欠發達國家的經濟。這些機制稍後將不得不在倫理道德層面進行仔細的分析。

《民族進步》已經預見到，在這種制度下，富人的財富將會增加，而窮人的貧困將持續下去。33 所謂第四世界的出現就是這一預測的證明。


17. 儘管世界範圍內有多少社會呈現出分裂的跡象，並以慣常的「第一世界」、「第二世界」、「第三世界」甚至「第四世界」等名稱來表達，但它們之間的相互依存依然緊密相連。當這種相互依存與其倫理要求脫節時，就會給最弱小的國家帶來災難性的後果。事實上，由於某種內在動力，並在某種只能稱之為反常的機制的推動下，這種相互依存甚至在富裕國家也引發了負面影響。正是在這些國家內部，人們會遇到更為具體的欠發達現象，儘管規模較小。因此，顯而易見的是，發展要麼被世界各地共享，要麼即使在不斷進步的地區也會經歷倒退。這在很大程度上揭示了真正發展的本質：要麼世界各國都參與其中，要麼就不是真正的發展。

在發達國家也日益受到影響的欠發達具體跡象中，有兩個尤其揭示了一種悲慘的局面。首先是住房危機。在聯合國宣布的國際住房年期間。關注數百萬缺乏適當住房或根本沒有住房的人們，旨在喚醒每個人的良知，並找到解決這一嚴重問題及其對個人、家庭和社會造成的負面影響的辦法。34

住房短缺問題普遍存在，這在很大程度上是由於城市化現象日益嚴重造成的。35 即使是在最發達的民族，也呈現出這樣一種悲慘的景象：個人和家庭實際上掙扎求生，沒有屋頂，或者屋頂太小，甚至沒有屋頂。

住房短缺本身就是一個極其嚴重的問題，它應該被視為一系列缺陷的標誌和總結：經濟、社會、文化，甚至僅僅是人為的缺陷。鑒於問題的嚴重性，我們無需多言就能明白，我們距離真正的人民發展還有多遠。

18. 失業和就業不足現象是絕大多數國家共同面臨的另一個指標。

每個人都認識到工業化國家中這一問題的現實性及其日益嚴重的程度。36 儘管發展中國家人口增長率高、年輕人數量眾多，這一問題令人擔憂，但在經濟高度發達的國家，工作機會似乎正在減少，就業機會不增反減。

這種現象也給個人和社會帶來了一系列負面影響，從羞辱到喪失每個男人和女人都應有的自尊，促使我們認真思考過去二十年的發展模式。《勞動演說》通諭中的話語在此極為貼切：「必須強調的是，這一進步的構成要素，以及以教會所宣揚並不斷祈禱的正義與和平精神來驗證這一進步的最有效方式……是對人類勞動的不斷重新評估，既要考慮其客觀目的，也要考慮所有勞動主體——也就是人——的尊嚴。」另一方面，「我們不得不為一個令人不安的、極其巨大的事實所震驚：……大量人口失業……這一事實無疑表明，無論是在各個政治共同體內部，還是在它們在大陸和世界層面的關係中，工作和就業的組織都存在問題，而這些問題恰恰出現在最關鍵、最具社會意義的環節上。」37

第二種現象與前一種現象一樣，由於其普遍性且有擴散的趨勢，是我們今天所見的國家狀況和人民發展質量的一個非常明顯的負面信號。

19. 第三種現象，同樣是近期的一個特徵，儘管並非在所有地方都存在，但無疑同樣表明了發達國家和欠發達國家之間的相互依存關係。這就是國際債務問題，教宗正義與和平委員會就此發布了一份文件。38

在這一點上，我們不能忽視此類問題與民族發展問題之間的密切聯繫——其日益嚴重的程度早在《民族發展》39中就已預見到。


發展中國家人民之所以接受大量可用資本的供給，是因為他們希望能夠將其投資於發展項目。因此，獲得資本以及接受貸款可以被視為對發展的貢獻，這本身就是值得追求且合法的，儘管這種做法或許有些輕率，有時甚至有些草率。

債務國內部和國際金融市場的情況都發生了變化；原本旨在促進發展的工具已經變成了一種適得其反的機制。這是因為，債務國為了償還債務，不得不將改善或至少維持其生活水平所需的資本輸出。也因為出於同樣的原因，他們無法獲得新的、同樣重要的融資。

通過這種機制，原本用於促進人民發展的手段反而變成了發展的絆腳石，在某些情況下甚至加劇了欠發達狀況。

正如宗座正義與和平委員會最近的文件[40]所述，這些觀察應當促使我們反思民族間相互依存的倫理特徵。同樣，這些觀察也應當促使我們反思發展合作的要求和條件，這些要求和條件同樣受到倫理原則的啟發。

20. 如果我們在此探討發展進程嚴重滯后的原因——這種滯后的出現與《民族發展》通諭的指示相悖，而《民族發展》通諭曾寄予厚望——那麼，我們尤其應該關注造成當今局勢的政治根源。

面對諸多無疑錯綜複雜的因素，我們無法指望在此做出全面的分析。然而，我們不能忽視二戰以來政治格局中一個引人注目的事實，這一事實對民族發展的前進產生了重大影響。

我指的是兩個對立的陣營的存在，通常被稱為東方陣營和西方陣營。這種描述的原因並非純粹的政治因素，正如其名，也與地緣政治有關。兩個陣營都傾向於吸收或聚集其他國家或國家集團，並使其加入或參與的程度有所不同。

這種對立首先是政治性的，因為每個陣營都認同一種組織社會和行使權力的體系，而這種體系本身就是對其他陣營的替代。反過來，政治對立又源於更深層次的意識形態對立。

西方存在著一種制度，其歷史淵源受到上個世紀工業化發展而來的自由資本主義原則的啟發。東方存在著一種制度，其靈感源於馬克思主義集體主義，這種集體主義源於對無產階級階級狀況的特定解讀。兩種意識形態基於對人及其自由和社會角色截然不同的理解，在經濟層面上，各自提出並仍在推行截然相反的勞動組織形式和所有制結構，尤其是在所謂的生產資料方面。

隨著對立體系和權力中心的形成，以及各自獨特的宣傳和灌輸形式，意識形態的對立不可避免地會演變成日益增長的軍事對立，並催生出兩大武裝集團，彼此都對對方的統治心存疑慮和恐懼。

反過來，國際關係也必然會感受到這種「集團邏輯」及其各自「勢力範圍」的影響。始於二戰末期的兩大集團之間的緊張關係，主宰了隨後的整個四十年。有時，它以「冷戰」的形式出現，有時通過操縱局部衝突而演變成「代理人戰爭」，有時則以公開的全面戰爭的威脅讓人們心神不寧，焦慮不安。

儘管目前這種危險似乎有所減弱，但並未完全消失，儘管就銷毀一種核武器達成了初步協議，但各集團的存在和對抗仍然是一個真實存在且令人擔憂的事實，仍然籠罩著世界局勢。


21. 這種情況在涉及發展中國家的國際關係中尤其會產生負面影響。眾所周知，東西方之間的緊張關係本身並非兩種不同發展水平之間的對立，而是兩種關於個人和民族發展的概念之間的對立，而這兩種概念都是不完善的，需要徹底修正。這種對立轉移到發展中國家本身，從而加劇了南北之間經濟水平上業已存在的差距，而這種差距源於兩個世界（較發達世界和欠發達世界）之間的距離。

這就是為什麼教會的社會訓導對自由資本主義和馬克思主義集體主義都持批判態度的原因之一。因為從發展的角度來看，一個問題自然而然地出現：這兩種體系在何種程度上能夠進行變革和更新，從而有利於或促進​​現代社會中個人和民族的真正和全面發展？事實上，這些變革和更新對於全人類共同發展的事業而言是迫切且必要的。

那些剛剛獲得獨立、正在努力建立自身文化和政治認同、需要所有富裕和發達國家提供有效且公正援助的國家，發現自己深陷意識形態衝突，有時甚至被其壓倒。這些衝突不可避免地會造成內部分裂，有時甚至會引發全面內戰。此外，發展投資和援助常常被轉移用途，用於維持衝突，這與本應受益的國家的利益背道而馳。許多國家越來越意識到淪為某種新殖民主義犧牲品的危險，並正在努力擺脫這種危險。正是這種意識，儘管面臨重重困難、不確定性，有時甚至充滿矛盾，卻催生了國際不結盟國家運動。該運動的積極意義在於，它希望以有效的方式維護每個民族擁有自身認同、獨立和安全的權利，以及在平等和團結的基礎上分享普惠於所有人的福祉的權利。

22. 鑒於這些考慮，我們很容易對過去二十年的情況有更清晰的認識，也更容易理解北半球，即東西方之間的衝突，是南方發展受阻或停滯的重要原因。

發展中國家非但沒有成為自主的國家，致力於在公平分享本應惠及所有人的商品和服務方面取得進步，反而淪為機器的零件，如同巨大齒輪上的齒輪。社會傳播領域也常常如此，這些領域主要由位於北半球的中心負責，並不總是充分考慮這些國家的優先事項和問題，也不尊重它們的文化構成。它們常常強加一種扭曲的人生觀和人性觀，從而無法回應真正發展的要求。

兩大陣營都以各自的方式，隱含著一種通常所說的帝國主義傾向，或某種形式的新殖民主義傾向：正如歷史（包括近代史）所表明的那樣，它們常常容易陷入這種誘惑。

正是這種由戰爭和過分誇大的安全擔憂造成的異常局面，扼殺了所有人為了人類共同福祉而團結合作的動力，尤其損害了愛好和平的人民的利益，他們被阻撓獲得本應屬於所有人的福祉。

由此看來，當前的世界分裂直接阻礙了發展中國家和欠發達國家真正改變其欠發達狀況。然而，各國人民並不總是聽天由命。此外，受軍費開支、官僚主義和內在低效所扼殺的經濟的真正需求，現在似乎更傾向於採取一些能夠緩和現有反對力量、更容易開啟富有成效的對話和真正的和平合作的進程。

23. 《民族發展》通諭指出，用於武器生產的資源和投資應當用於減輕貧困人民的苦難41，這更加迫切地呼籲消除兩大陣營之間的對立。


如今，現實是，這些資源被用來使兩大陣營各自超越對方，從而保障自身的安全。那些在歷史、經濟和政治上都可能發揮領導作用的國家，卻因這種根本性的扭曲而無法充分履行其團結互助的義務，造福那些渴望全面發展的人民。

現在恰逢其時——毫不誇張地說——國家間的領導地位只有通過能夠並願意為共同利益做出廣泛而慷慨的貢獻才能得到認可。

如果一個國家或多或少地故意屈服於自我封閉的誘惑，而未能履行其在國際社會中優越地位所帶來的責任，那麼它將嚴重違背其明確的道德義務。這在歷史的境況中顯而易見，信士們洞悉天意的安排，隨時準備利用萬民來實現其計劃，使「萬民的謀划落空」（參閱聖詠 33[32]:10）。

當西方表現出逐漸沉溺於日益增長的自私孤立，而東方則似乎出於可疑的原因而忽視其在減輕人類苦難方面合作的義務時，我們面臨的不僅是對人類合理期望的背叛——這種背叛預示著不可預見的後果——而且也是對道德義務的真正背棄。

24. 如果說武器生產在當今世界嚴重擾亂了人類的真正需求，阻礙了人們使用能夠滿足這些需求的手段，那麼武器貿易也同樣應受譴責。事實上，對於後者，必須補充的是，道德審判甚至更為嚴厲。眾所周知，這是一種無國界的貿易，甚至能夠跨越集團的壁壘。它深諳如何克服東西方之間的隔閡，尤其是南北之間的隔閡，甚至——而且更為嚴重——將其滲透到構成南半球的各個地區。因此，我們面臨著一個奇怪的現象：儘管經濟援助和發展計劃面臨著難以逾越的意識形態壁壘以及關稅和貿易壁壘的阻礙，但無論來源如何，武器卻幾乎完全自由地在世界各地流通。正如宗座正義與和平委員會最近關於國際債務的文件42所指出的那樣，眾所周知，在某些情況下，發達國家借出的資金被用於欠發達國家購買武器。

如果除此之外，我們再加上核武器大規模儲存所帶來的巨大且舉世公認的危險，那麼合乎邏輯的結論似乎是：在當今世界，包括經濟領域，普遍存在的景象註定會讓我們更快地走向死亡，而不是像《民族進步》通諭所設想的那樣，關注真正的發展，從而引領所有人走向「更人性化」的生活。43

這種狀況的後果體現在一個傷口的潰爛中，它代表並揭示了現代世界的不平衡和衝突：數百萬難民因戰爭、自然災害、迫害和各種歧視而失去了家園、工作、家人和祖國。這些難民的悲劇反映在一個分裂而荒涼的世界中，男人、女人和孩子們絕望的臉上，他們再也找不到家園。

我們也不能對當今世界另一個令人痛心的傷口視而不見：恐怖主義現象。恐怖主義的意圖在於肆意殺人毀物，製造恐怖和不安全的氣氛，通常包括劫持人質。即使某種意識形態或創造更美好社會的願望被援引為這種非人道行為的動機，恐怖主義行為也永遠無法得到辯護。尤其當像今天這樣，這些決定和行動——有時會導致真正的屠殺，甚至綁架與衝突無關的無辜民眾——聲稱是為了推進某種事業而進行宣傳時，這種做法就更不值得辯護了。更糟糕的是，如果這些決定和行動本身就是目的，以至於謀殺僅僅是為了殺戮。面對如此恐怖和苦難，我幾年前說過的話仍然適用，我想再次重申：「基督教禁止的是通過仇恨的方式、通過謀殺手無寸鐵的人、通過恐怖主義的手段來尋求解決方案。」44


25. 在此，有必要談談人口問題以及當今人們對此問題的討論方式，這與保祿六世在其通諭45中所述，以及我本人在《家庭團體》宗座勸諭46中詳細闡述的觀點一致。

不可否認，人口問題的存在，尤其是在南半球，給發展帶來了諸多困難。

必須立即補充的是，在北半球，這個問題的性質正好相反：令人擔憂的是出生率的下降，以及由此引發的人口老齡化，人口甚至無法在生物學上自我更新。這種現象本身就足以阻礙發展。正如說這些困難完全源於人口增長是錯誤的一樣，也沒有證據表明所有人口增長都與有序發展相矛盾。

另一方面，令人擔憂的是，許多國家的政府正在系統性地發起反對生育的運動，這不僅違背了這些國家自身的文化和宗教特徵，也違背了真正發展的本質。這些運動往往是迫於來自國外的壓力和資金，有時甚至被作為提供財政和經濟援助的條件。無論如何，對當事人的選擇自由完全缺乏尊重，男男女女常常承受著難以忍受的壓力，包括經濟壓力，以迫使他們屈服於這種新形式的壓迫。遭受這種虐待的正是最貧困的群體，這有時會導致某種形式的種族主義傾向，或助長某些同樣帶有種族主義色彩的優生學。

這一事實也應受到最強烈的譴責，它表明了對真正人類發展的錯誤和扭曲的理解。

26. 如果不提​​及當代世界發展現狀中並存的積極方面，那麼這種以負面為主的概述是不完整的。

第一個積極的方面是，眾多男女充分意識到了自身的尊嚴以及每個人的尊嚴。這種意識體現在，例如，人們更加強烈地關注人權應得到尊重，並更加堅決地反對侵犯人權的行為。其中一個標誌是近期成立的私人協會的數量，其中一些協會的成員遍布全球，幾乎所有協會都致力於以極其謹慎和值得稱讚的客觀性來監測這一敏感領域的國際動態。

在這個層面上，我們必須承認聯合國組織四十年前頒布的《人權宣言》所產生的影響。它的存在及其逐漸被國際社會接受本身就表明了人們的意識日益增強。在人權領域，聯合國組織或其他國際組織頒布的其他法律文書也同樣如此。47

我們所討論的這種意識不僅適用於個人，也適用於國家和民族。作為具有特定文化認同的實體，國家和民族對其珍貴遺產的保護、自由行使和弘揚尤為敏感。

與此同時，在一個分裂並飽受各種衝突困擾的世界里，人們日益堅信一種徹底的相互依存，並因此更加需要一種團結互助，將這種相互依存提升到道德層面。如今，人們或許比過去更加深刻地意識到，他們被共同的命運緊密聯繫在一起，只有共同構建這個命運，才能避免全人類的災難。從當代世界典型的痛苦、恐懼和諸如毒品之類的逃避現實現象的深淵中，一種觀念逐漸浮現：我們所有人所追求的善和我們所渴望的幸福，若非全人類（無一例外）共同努力、共同承諾，並因此放棄個人私利，就無法實現。

此外，值得一提的是，作為尊重生命的標誌——儘管存在著通過墮胎和安樂死毀滅生命的種種誘惑——是對和平的關注，以及對和平不可分割性的認識。它要麼屬於所有人，要麼屬於任何人。它要求人們更加嚴格地尊重正義，從而公平地分配真正發展的成果。48

在當今的積極跡象中，我們還必須提到人們更加認識到可用資源的有限性，以及尊重自然的完整性和循環的必要性，並在規劃發展時將其納入考量，而不是為了某些煽動性的觀念而犧牲它們。今天，這被稱為生態關懷。


我們也應當承認政治家、政客、經濟學家、工會會員、科學家和國際官員的慷慨奉獻——他們中的許多人受到宗教信仰的鼓舞——他們不惜犧牲個人利益，努力解決世界弊病，竭盡全力，確保越來越多的人能夠享受和平的益處和名副其實的高質量生活。

一些重要的國際組織和一些區域組織為此做出了不小的貢獻。他們的共同努力使得行動更加有效。

也正是由於這些貢獻，一些第三世界國家儘管承受著諸多不利因素的重負，卻成功地實現了一定的糧食自給，或實現了一定程度的工業化，使其能夠有尊嚴地生存，並為勞動人口提供就業保障。

因此，當代世界並非全是負面的，也不可能全是，因為天父的眷顧甚至關照著我們的日常瑣事（參閱瑪竇福音 6:25-32；10:23-31；路加福音 12:6-7, 22-30）。事實上，我們提到的積極價值觀體現了一種新的道德關懷，尤其關乎發展與和平等人類重大問題。

這一事實促使我思考民族發展的真正本質，這與我們正在紀念的通諭的思路一致，也是為了表達對其教誨的敬意。

四真正的人類發展

27. 通諭邀請我們對當代世界進行審視，這首先使我們注意到，發展並非一個直截了當的過程，它並非自動自發、本身無限，彷彿在特定條件下，人類就能迅速邁向某種未定義的完美境界。49

這種觀念——與源自啟蒙運動的哲學內涵「進步」概念相關，而非與特定經濟和社會意義上的「發展」概念相關——50 如今似乎受到了嚴重的質疑，尤其是在經歷了兩次世界大戰的悲慘經歷、有計劃且部分實現的對整個民族的毀滅以及迫在眉睫的原子彈危機之後。天真的機械樂觀主義已被對人類命運的合理擔憂所取代。

28. 然而，與此同時，與「發展」一詞相關的「經濟」概念本身也陷入了危機。事實上，如今人們更加深刻地認識到，僅僅積累商品和服務，即使是為了大多數人的利益，也不足以實現人類的幸福。因此，近年來科技（包括計算機科學）帶來的諸多實際益處，也未能將人類從各種形式的奴役中解放出來。相反，近年來的經驗表明，除非人類所掌握的大量資源和潛力都以道德理解和對人類真正福祉的追求為指導，否則它們很容易反過來壓迫人類。

關於最近時期的一個令人不安的結論應該能給我們一些啟發：除了自身不可接受的欠發達苦難之外，我們還面臨著一種同樣不可接受的超級發展形式，因為它與前者一樣，與善和真正的幸福背道而馳。這種超級發展，即為了特定社會群體的利益而過度提供各種物質產品，很容易使人們淪為「佔有」和即時滿足的奴隸，除了不斷增加或用更好的東西替換已有的東西之外，別無他途。這就是所謂的「消費」或「消費主義」文明，它包含著大量的「丟棄」和「浪費」。一件已經擁有但現在被更好的東西取代的物品被丟棄，既不考慮其本身可能具有的持久價值，也不考慮其他更貧窮的人。

我們所有人都親身體驗過這種盲目屈服於純粹消費主義的悲慘後果：首先是粗俗的物質主義，同時是徹底的不滿，因為人們很快就會明白——除非人們遠離鋪天蓋地的宣傳和源源不斷的誘人商品——擁有的越多，慾望也就越多，而更深層次的渴望卻得不到滿足，甚至可能被扼殺。


教宗保祿六世的通諭指出了「擁有」與「存在」之間的區別，這一點如今屢屢被強調，51 梵蒂岡第二次大公會議早已以精準的措辭表達了這一點。52 「擁有」物品和財富本身並不能使人性完美，除非它有助於人性「存在」的成熟和豐富，也就是說，除非它有助於實現人性本身的使命。

當然，「存在」與「擁有」之間的區別，以及相對於「存在」的價值，僅僅增加或替換所擁有物品所固有的危險，並不一定會導致矛盾。當代世界最大的不公正之一恰恰在於：擁有大量財富的人相對較少，而幾乎一無所有的人卻很多。這種不公正源於原本應惠及所有人的商品和服務分配不均。

因此，情況就是這樣：有些人——少數擁有大量財富的人——無法真正「存在」，因為價值等級的顛倒，他們被「擁有」的崇拜所阻礙；而另一些人——多數擁有極少甚至一無所有的人——無法實現其基本的人類使命，因為他們被剝奪了必需品。

罪惡不在於「擁有」本身，而在於不顧所擁有物品的質量和有序的等級制度而佔有。質量和等級制度源於物品及其可獲得性對人的「存在」及其真正使命的從屬關係。

這表明，儘管發展具有必要的經濟維度，因為它必須為儘可能多的世界居民提供他們「存在」所必需的物品，但它並不局限於這一維度。如果它僅限於此，那麼它就會反過來損害那些它本應造福的人。

保祿六世曾描述過全面發展的特徵，即「更人性化」的發展，能夠在不否定經濟需求的情況下，在男女真正使命的層面上持續發展。53

29. 發展不僅僅是經濟的發展，它必須根據人的整體性及其使命，即人的內在維度來衡量和引導。毫無疑問，人需要創造的財富和工業產品，而科技進步不斷豐富著這些財富和產品。物質財富的日益豐富不僅滿足了需求，也開闢了新的視野。濫用物質財富和人為需求的出現，絕不應妨礙我們重視並善用這些新財富和資源。相反，我們必須將它們視為天主的恩賜，以及對在基督里圓滿實現的人類使命的回應。

然而，在努力實現真正發展的過程中，我們絕不能忽視人性中蘊含的維度，人是天主按照自己的肖像和樣式所造（參創1:26）。這本質既有肉體，也有靈性，在第二次創造的記載中，這象徵著兩種元素：地，天主用地造人的身體；以及天主吹入人鼻孔的生命之氣（參創2:7）。

因此，人與其他受造物產生了某種親和力：他被召喚去使用它們，並與它們互動。正如《創世記》的記載（參創2:15），人被安置在伊甸園中，肩負著耕種和看守的責任，比天主置於他統治下的其他受造物更優越（參創1:25-26）。但與此同時，人必須始終服從天主的旨意，天主限制人對萬物的使用和統治（參見創 2:16-17），正如祂預示人終有一死（參見創 2:9；智 2:23）。因此，人作為天主的肖像，也與天主有著真正的親和力。基於這一教導，發展不應僅僅在於對受造之物和人類工業產品的使用、統治和無差別的佔有，而應在於將佔有、統治和使用置於人的神聖相似性和人永生的使命之下。這是人類超越性的現實，這一現實從一開始就被視為由一對夫婦，一男一女共同擁有（參見創 1:27），因此從根本上來說，它是社會性的。

30. 因此，根據聖經，發展的概念不僅是「世俗的」或「世俗的」，它本身也被視為人類使命本質維度的現代表達，儘管它本身具有社會經濟維度。


事實上，人並非被造得一動不動、靜止不動。聖經對人的最初描繪，無疑將人描繪成一個受造物和肖像，其最深層的本質由構成他的起源和親緣關係所定義。但這一切都在人類——男人和女人——心中埋下了種子，並要求他們各自以及作為夫妻共同完成一項特殊的任務。這項任務就是「治理」其他受造物，「耕耘園地」。這項任務必須在服從天主律法的框架內完成，因此要尊重所接受的肖像。這肖像是統治權的明確基礎，而統治權被認為是人通往完美的途徑（參見創世記 1:26-30；2:15-16；智經 9:2-3）。

當人違背天主，拒絕服從他的統治時，自然就會反抗他，不再承認他是它的「主人」，因為他玷污了自身神聖的肖像。對受造物的所有權和使用權依然有效，但在罪惡之後，行使這一權利變得困難重重，充滿苦難（參見創世記 3:17-19）。

事實上，《創世記》的下一章向我們展示了加音的後裔建造了「一座城」，從事牧羊業，從事藝術（音樂）和技術（冶金術）；與此同時，人們開始「呼求上主的名」（參見創世記 4:17-26）。

聖經所描述的人類歷史，即使在墮落犯罪之後，仍然是一個不斷成就的故事。儘管這些成就總是受到質疑和罪惡的威脅，但它們仍在不斷重複、增長和擴展，以響應從起初賦予男人和女人的神聖使命（參見創世記 1:26-28），並銘刻在他們所接受的肖像中。

至少對於那些相信天主聖言的人來說，合乎邏輯的結論是：今天的「發展」應被視為始於創世之初的故事中的一個瞬間，而這個故事不斷因違背造物主旨意，尤其是受偶像崇拜的誘惑而受到威脅。但這種「發展」從根本上與第一個前提相符。任何人若以鬥爭艱巨、需要不斷努力為借口，或僅僅因為經歷過失敗、需要重新開始，而放棄改善全人類乃至所有人命運這一艱巨而崇高的任務，那麼這個人就是在背叛造物主天主的旨意。在這方面，我在《勞動練習》通諭中提到了人的勞動聖召，以強調人始終是發展的主角。54

事實上，主耶穌本人在塔冷通諭中，就強調了膽敢隱瞞所獲禮物的人將受到的嚴厲懲罰：「你這又惡又懶的僕人！你知道我沒有種的地方要收割，我沒有揚的地方要聚斂嗎？……把那一千銀子奪過來，交給那有一萬銀子的。」（瑪竇福音 25:26-28）我們領受天主的恩賜，是為了使它們結出果實，我們有責任「撒種」和「收割」。如果我們不這樣做，連我們所有的也將被奪走。

更深入地研讀這些嚴厲的話語，將使我們更加堅定地致力於當今每個人迫切需要履行的責任，即共同努力，促進他人的全面發展：「全人類和所有人的發展」。55

31. 對救贖主基督的信仰，不僅從內在照亮了發展的本質，也引導我們完成合作的任務。在聖保祿致歌羅西人書中，我們讀到基督是「一切受造物的首生者」，並且「萬物都是藉著他造的」，並且是為他而造的（1:15-16）。事實上，「萬物都靠他而立」，因為「天主樂意使一切的豐盛都居住在他內，並藉著他使萬物與自己和好了」（20節）。

這神聖計劃的一部分，始於永恆的基督——天父完美的「肖像」，並以祂——「從死者中首先復生的」（18節）——為頂點。這計劃的一部分，就是我們自身的歷史，以我們個人和集體的努力為標誌，提升人類的境況，並克服我們前進道路上不斷出現的障礙。因此，這計劃預備我們分享「居住在主內」的豐盛，祂將這些豐盛「賜給他的身體，就是教會」（18節；參閱弗1:22-23）。與此同時，那總是試圖陷害我們、危及我們人類成就的罪惡，卻因基督所成就的「和好」而被征服和救贖（參閱哥1:20）。

在此，視野更加開闊。 「無限進步」的夢想再次出現，基督教信仰所創造的新觀點徹底改變了這種夢想，它向我們保證，進步之所以可能，只是因為天父從一開始就決定讓人類在從死里復活的耶穌基督里分享他的榮耀，在耶穌基督里「我們因他的血得蒙救贖」。


在這裡，視野更加開闊。「無限進步」的夢想再次出現，並被基督教信仰所創造的新視角徹底改變，它向我們保證，進步之所以可能，唯有因為天父從一開始就決定讓人在從死里復活的耶穌基督里分享他的榮耀，在耶穌基督里「我們藉這愛子的血得蒙救贖……過犯得以赦免」（弗 1:7）。天主希望在他裡面戰勝罪惡，並使它服務於我們更大的益處，56 這益處無限地超越了進步所能達到的。

因此，當我們在欠發達和過度發達的晦澀和不足中掙扎時，我們可以說，終有一天，這必朽壞的身體將變成不朽壞的，這必死的身體將變成不死的（參見格前 15:54），那時主「要把國交與父神」（24節），所有值得人類付出的努力和行為都將得到救贖。

此外，信仰的概念清晰地闡明了促使教會關注發展問題、將其視為牧靈職責、並敦促所有人思考真正人類發展的本質和特徵的原因。一方面，教會渴望通過自身的奉獻，服務於神聖的計劃，這計劃旨在使萬物達到基督內（參見哥1:19）的圓滿，並由基督傳授給他的身體；另一方面，教會渴望回應其作為「聖事」的基本使命，即「與天主親密結合以及全人類合一的標記和工具」。57

一些教父受到這一理念的啟發，以獨創的方式發展了一種關於歷史意義和人類工作的概念，其目標超越了歷史意義本身，並且始終以其與基督工作的關係為界。換句話說，在教父們的教導中，我們可以找到一種對歷史和工作的樂觀看法，也就是說，它認為真正的人類成就具有永恆的價值，因為它們被基督救贖，並註定要進入應許的天國。58

因此，教會的教導和最古老的實踐之一，就是她堅信，她——她自己、她的聖職人員以及她的每一位成員——有責任不僅從她的「富足」中，而且從她的「必需品」中，去救濟遠近受苦者的苦難。面對需要幫助的情況，人們不能為了追求多餘的教堂裝飾和昂貴的敬拜用品而忽視它們；相反，為了給那些缺乏這些東西的人提供食物、飲料、衣服和住所，出售這些物品可能是義務。59 正如前文所述，這裡向我們展示了財產權框架內「擁有」與「存在」之間的「價值等級」，尤其是當少數人的「擁有」可能損害許多其他人的「存在」時。

教宗保祿六世在其通諭中秉持了這一教導，其靈感源自《牧職憲章》。60 就我個人而言，我想再次強調這一教導的嚴肅性和緊迫性，並祈求上主賜予所有基督徒力量，使他們能夠忠實地將其付諸實踐。

32. 致力於民族發展的義務不僅僅是個人的責任，更不是個人主義的責任，彷彿可以通過每個人的孤立努力來實現這種發展。這是每個男人和女人、社會和國家都應盡的義務。尤其，它要求天主教會以及其他教會和教會團體在這方面與他們合作。從這個意義上說，正如我們天主教徒邀請我們的基督教兄弟參與我們的倡議一樣，我們也宣布我們願意與他們合作，並歡迎他們向我們發出的邀請。在追求人類全面發展的過程中，我們也可以與其他宗教信徒一起做很多事情，事實上，我們正在各地這樣做。

在全人發展和每個人發展方面的合作實際上是所有人對所有人的責任，必須由世界的四個部分共同承擔：東方和西方，北方和南方；或者，正如我們今天所說，由不同的「世界」共同承擔。相反，如果人們試圖只在一個部分或一個世界實現這一目標，那麼他們就會以犧牲其他部分為代價；正是因為忽視了他人，他們自身的發展才被誇大和誤導。

人民或國家也有權實現自身的充分發展，這不僅包括——正如前文所述——經濟和社會層面的發展，也應包括個人的文化認同和對超越的開放。即使是發展的需要，也不能成為將自己的生活方式或宗教信仰強加於人的借口。


33. 任何不尊重和促進人權（包括個人權利、社會權利、經濟權利和政治權利，以及國家和民族的權利）的發展，都不是真正值得人類追求的發展。

如今，或許比過去更加清晰地看到了僅限於經濟因素的發展的內在矛盾。這種發展很容易使人及其最深層的需求屈從於經濟計劃和自私利益的要求。

真正的發展與尊重人權之間的內在聯繫再次揭示了發展的道德特質：人的真正提升，符合每個人的自然和歷史使命，並非僅僅通過利用豐富的商品和服務，或擁有完善的基礎設施就能實現。

如果個人和社群未能嚴格尊重基於人格尊嚴和每個社群（從家庭和宗教團體開始）的固有身份的道德、文化和精神需求，那麼所有其他的一切——商品的供應、豐富的日常生活技術資源、一定程度的物質福祉——都將無法令人滿足，最終淪為可鄙之物。主在福音中明確地闡明了這一點，他呼籲所有人關注真正的價值等級：「人就是賺得全世界，賠上自己的生命，有什麼益處呢？」（瑪16:26）

真正的發展，符合人類——無論男女、兒童、成人還是老年人——的具體需求，尤其對於那些積极參与並負責這一進程的人來說，意味著對所有人和每個人權利的價值有著深刻的認識。同樣，這也意味著要深刻認識到尊重每個人充分利用科技成果的權利的必要性。

在每個國家的內部層面，尊重所有權利都至關重要，尤其是：生命在其存在的各個階段的權利；作為基本社會團體或「社會細胞」的家庭的權利；就業關係中的正義；政治團體生活中固有的權利；以及基於人類超越性使命的權利，首先是自由信奉和實踐自身宗教信仰的權利。

在國際層面，即國家之間，或按當今的說法，不同「世界」之間關係的層面上，必須完全尊重每個民族的身份，包括其自身的歷史和文化特徵。同樣重要的是，正如《民族發展》通諭所要求的那樣，承認每個民族都有平等的權利「坐在共同筵席的餐桌上」，61 而不是像拉匝祿那樣躺在門外，「讓狗來舔他的瘡」（參見路加福音 16:21）。無論是民族還是個人，都必須享有基本平等62，例如，這是《聯合國憲章》的基礎：這種平等是人人享有充分發展權利的基礎。

發展若要真正實現，就必須在團結與自由的框架內實現，不得以任何借口犧牲其中任何一方。當對源於人性本有的真善秩序的一切要求給予最嚴格的尊重時，發展的道德性及其必要的促進就得到了強調。此外，基督徒被教導認識到人是天主的肖像，蒙召分享天主本身的真善，他們不會理解，對發展及其應用的承諾，會排除對這一「肖像」獨特尊嚴的尊重和敬重。換句話說，真正的發展必須建立在對天主和鄰人的愛之上，並且必須有助於促進個人與社會之間的關係。這就是保祿六世經常提到的「愛的文明」。

34. 發展的道德特質也不能排除對構成自然世界的眾生的尊重，古希臘人——正是暗指區分自然世界的秩序——稱之為「宇宙」。這樣的現實也需要尊重，這基於三方面的考量，值得仔細思考。

首先，我們必須逐漸意識到，人們不能根據自身的經濟需要，隨意使用不同類別的眾生，無論是生物還是非生物——動物、植物、自然元素。相反，我們必須考慮到每個眾生的本質及其在一個有序體系中的相互聯繫，而這個體系正是宇宙。

第二個考慮基於這樣一種認識——或許更為緊迫——即自然資源是有限的；有些資源並非如人們所說是可再生的。將它們視為取之不盡、用之不竭的絕對支配，不僅會嚴重危及當代人，更重要的是，會危及子孫後代的生存。

第三個考慮直接涉及某種發展模式對工業化地區生活質量的影響。我們都知道，工業化的直接或間接後果越來越頻繁地是環境污染，這會對人口健康造成嚴重後果。

再次顯而易見的是，發展、管理髮展的規劃以及資源的使用方式必須尊重道德要求。道德要求之一無疑對自然世界的利用施加了限制。造物主賦予人類的統治權並非絕對的權力，也不能說人類擁有「使用和濫用」的自由，或隨心所欲地處置事物的自由。造物主自始便賦予的限制，象徵性地體現在「不可吃樹上的果子」（參創2:16-17）的禁令中。這充分表明，在自然界中，我們不僅要遵守生物法則，還要遵守道德法則，違反這些法則必將受到懲罰。

真正的發展理念不能忽視自然要素的利用、資源的可再生性以及隨意工業化的後果——這三個因素警醒我們的良知，讓我們意識到發展的道德維度。63

五、現代問題的神學解讀

35. 正因為發展本質上具有道德性，阻礙發展的因素顯然也同樣具有道德性。如果自教宗保祿通諭發布以來，這些年來沒有發展——或者發展極少、不規律，甚至自相矛盾——其原因不僅僅是經濟方面的。正如前文所述，政治動機也在其中發揮作用。因為那些加速或減緩民族發展的決定實際上都具有政治性質。為了克服前文提到的誤導性機制，並以更公正、更符合人類共同福祉的新機製取而代之，需要有效的政治意願。遺憾的是，在分析了現狀之後，我們不得不得出結論，這種政治意願是遠遠不夠的。

在像這樣一份牧靈性質的文件中，僅僅局限於分析欠發達（以及所謂的超級發達，也作了必要的修改）的經濟和政治原因，是不完整的。因此，有必要找出道德原因，這些原因就被視為負責任的個人的行為而言，會以某種方式阻礙發展進程並阻礙其充分實現。

同樣，當科學技術資源可用，並結合必要的具體政治決策，應該能夠幫助引導民族實現真正的發展時，發展的主要障礙只有通過本質上道德的決策才能克服。對於信徒，尤其是基督徒來說，這些決定將源於信仰原則，並藉助神聖的恩寵。

36. 因此，重要的是要注意，一個被僵化的意識形態所束縛、分裂成集團的世界，一個由各種形式的帝國主義所主導而非相互依存和團結的世界，只能是一個受制於罪惡結構的世界。所有阻礙真正認識到普世共同福祉及其必要性的負面因素，似乎在個人和機構中製造了難以克服的障礙。64


如果當前的局勢可以歸咎於各種困境，那麼談論「罪惡的結構」也並非不妥。正如我在《和解與懺悔》宗座勸諭中所述，這些結構根植於個人的罪惡，因此始終與個人的具體行為息息相關。正是這些人引入、鞏固了這些結構，並使其難以消除。65 因此，它們不斷壯大、蔓延，成為其他罪惡的根源，從而影響人們的行為。

「罪惡」和「罪惡的結構」這兩個類別很少被應用於當代世界的處境。然而，如果我們不明確困擾我們的罪惡根源，就很難深刻理解我們所面臨的現實。

我們當然可以談論「自私」、「短視」、「錯誤的政治算計」和「輕率的經濟決策」。在每一種評價中，我們都能聽到倫理和道德本質的迴響。人類的處境如此，以至於對個人行為和疏忽的更深入分析，必然會以某種方式牽涉到倫理方面的判斷或參照。

這種評價本身是積極的，尤其當它完全一致，並且基於對天主及其誡命行善、禁止作惡的律法的信仰時。

社會政治分析與正式提及「罪」和「罪的結構」之間的區別就在於此。根據后一種觀點，三位一體天主的旨意、他對人類的計劃、他的正義和他的慈悲都包含在內。這位富於憐憫的天主，人類的救贖主，生命的主宰和賜予者，要求人們擁有明確的態度，這些態度也體現在對鄰人的作為或疏忽上。我們在此引用了十誡中的「第二塊石板」（參見出埃及記 20:12-17；申命記 5:16-21）。不遵守這些就是冒犯上帝，傷害鄰人，並給世界帶來遠遠超出個人行為和短暫生命的影響和障礙。這也涉及到對民族發展進程的干預，其發展是否遲緩也必須以此為依據來判斷。

37. 這種具有宗教性質的一般分析，可以通過一些具體的思考來補充，以表明在違背上帝旨意、鄰人之善以及由此產生的「結構」的行為和態度中，有兩種非常典型：一方面是無所顧忌的利潤慾望，另一方面是權力欲，意圖將自己的意志強加於人。為了更好地描述每一種態度，可以加上「不惜一切代價」這句話。換句話說，我們面臨著人類態度的絕對化及其所有可能的後果。

由於這些態度可以彼此獨立存在，因此它們可以被分離；然而，在當今世界，兩者密不可分，非此即彼。

顯然，不僅個人會成為這種雙重罪惡態度的受害者，國家和集團也可能如此。這更助長了我所說的「罪惡結構」的出現。如果用這些道德標準來審視某些形式的現代「帝國主義」，我們就會發現，在某些看似僅受經濟或政治驅動的決策背後，隱藏著真正的偶像崇拜：對金錢、意識形態、階級和技術的崇拜。

我之所以希望引入這種分析，首先是為了指出我們在民族發展方面所面臨的邪惡的本質：這是一個道德上的邪惡問題，是諸多罪惡的產物，這些罪惡導致了「罪惡結構」。以這種方式診斷邪惡，就是在人類行為的層面上，準確地識別出克服邪惡應遵循的道路。

38. 這條道路漫長而複雜，而且由於人類決心和成就的內在脆弱性，以及難以預測的外部環境的變幻莫測，它不斷受到威脅。然而，我們必須有勇氣踏上這條道路，並且，如果已經邁出了一些步伐或完成了一部分旅程，更要有勇氣堅持到底。

在這些反思的背景下，決定踏上或繼續這段旅程，首先涉及一種道德價值，這種道德價值被有信仰的男女視為天主旨意的要求，是絕對具有約束力的倫理的唯一真正基礎。

希望那些沒有明確信仰的男女也能認識到，全面發展的障礙不僅在於經濟，還在於人類能夠轉化為絕對價值的更深層次的態度。因此，希望所有在某種程度上有責任確保人類同胞過上「更人性化的生活」的人，無論是否受到宗教信仰的啟發，都能充分意識到改變精神態度的迫切需要，這種態度決定了每個人與自身、與鄰人、與最遙遠的人類社群以及與自然本身的關係；所有這些都是為了更高的價值觀，例如共同福祉，或者，用《民族發展》通諭的恰當表述來說，即「整個個人和所有人」的全面發展。66

對於基督徒，以及所有認識到「罪」一詞確切神學含義的人而言，行為、心態或生存方式的改變被稱為「皈依」，用《里赫勒》的話來說（參見谷 13:3, 5；依 30:15）。這種皈依具體意味著與天主、與所犯的罪、與其後果，以及與鄰人（無論是個人還是團體）建立關係。正是天主，「掌權者的心」67 以及所有人的心都在祂手中，祂按照自己的應許，並借著祂聖靈的力量，能夠將「石心」轉變為「肉心」（參見結 36:26）。

在邁向理想的轉變、克服發展中的道德障礙的道路上，我們已經能夠看到個人和國家之間日益增強的相互依存意識所具有的積極道德價值。世界各地的男男女女都切身感受到遙遠國度（或許他們永遠不會踏足）發生的不公正和侵犯人權行為的影響，這進一步表明現實已轉化為意識，並獲得了道德內涵。

這首先是一個相互依存的問題，它被視為一個決定當代世界經濟、文化、政治和宗教等諸多因素之間關係的體系，並被接受為一個道德範疇。當相互依存以這種方式得到認可時，與之相關的道德和社會態度，即「美德」，就是團結互助。因此，這並不是對遠近眾多人民的不幸遭遇而產生的模糊的同情或膚淺的悲痛。相反，這是一種堅定不移地致力於公共福祉的決心；也就是說，為了所有人和每個人的福祉，因為我們實際上都對所有人負有責任。這一決心基於堅定的信念：阻礙全面發展的，正是上文提到的對利益的渴望和對權力的渴求。這些態度和「罪惡的結構」只有通過截然相反的態度才能克服——前提是得到天主恩寵的幫助：致力於鄰人的福祉，並隨時準備在福音的意義上，為了他人而「犧牲自我」，而不是剝削他人；「服侍他人」，而不是為了自己的利益而壓迫他人（參見瑪竇福音 10:40-42；20:25；谷福音 10:42-45；路加福音 22:25-27）。

39. 當每個社會的成員彼此承認為人時，其內部的團結互助才是有效的。那些擁有更多財產和公共服務的較有影響力的人，應該對弱勢群體感到有責任感，並願意與他們分享自己的一切。弱勢群體也應秉持同樣的團結精神，不應採取純粹消極或破壞社會結構的態度，而應在主張自身合法權利的同時，儘力為所有人的福祉服務。而中間群體則不應自私地堅持自身利益，而應尊重他人的利益。

當代世界的積極信號是，窮人之間的團結意識日益增強，他們努力相互支持，並在社會舞台上公開示威，在公共當局的低效或腐敗面前，不訴諸暴力，表達自身的需求和權利。教會憑藉其自身的福音使命，感到有責任與窮人站在一起，辨別他們訴求的正義性，並幫助他們滿足訴求，同時不忽視在公共福祉的背景下群體的福祉。

同樣的標準也適用於國際關係。相互依存必須轉化為團結，其基礎是「萬物皆共享」的原則。人類工業通過原材料加工和勞動貢獻所生產的產品，必須平等地服務於所有人的福祉。

強盛富饒的國家必須克服一切形式的帝國主義和維護自身霸權的決心，對其他國家抱有道德責任感，從而建立一個真正的國際體系，該體系將建立在所有民族平等和對其合理差異予以必要尊重的基礎上。經濟較弱或仍處於溫飽線上的國家，必須在其他民族和國際社會的援助下，利用其人文和文化寶藏為公共福祉做出自己的貢獻，否則這些財富將永遠消亡。

團結互助幫助我們將「他者」——無論是個人、民族還是國家——視為不僅僅是某種工具，擁有勞動能力和體力，可以被廉價利用，然後在不再有用時被丟棄，而應視為我們的「近人」、「幫助者」（參見創世記 2:18-20），與我們平等地分享天主平等邀請所有人共享的生命盛宴。因此，重新喚醒個人和民族的宗教意識至關重要。這樣，對他人的剝削、壓迫和滅絕就被排除在外了。在當今世界分裂為對立陣營的背景下，這些事實共同導致了戰爭的危險和對個人安全的過度關注，這往往損害了位於所謂「勢力範圍」或「安全帶」內的弱國的自治權、決策自由，甚至領土完整。

「罪惡的結構」及其產生的罪惡同樣與和平與發展背道而馳，因為用教宗保祿通諭中耳熟能詳的表述來說，發展是「和平的新名稱」。68

因此，我們所倡導的團結互助是通往和平的道路，同時也是通往發展的道路。因為，除非世界各國領導人認識到相互依存本身就要求摒棄集團政治，犧牲一切形式的經濟、軍事或政治帝國主義，並將相互不信任轉化為合作，否則世界和平是不可想象的。這正是個人之間和國家之間團結互助的應有之義。

我尊敬的前任教宗庇護十二世的座右銘是「Opus iustitiae pax」（和平是正義的果實）。今天，我們也可以同樣精準地、同樣具有聖經啟示力量地再次強調（參見依撒意亞書 32:17；雅3:18）：Opus solidaritatis pax（和平是團結的果實）。

人人都渴望的和平目標，必將通過落實社會和國際正義來實現，也必將通過踐行有利於團結互助、教導我們團結共處的美德來實現，從而通過給予和接受，在團結中建設一個新的社會和一個更美好的世界。

40. 團結互助無疑是基督徒的美德。綜觀以上所述，我們可以看出團結互助與愛德之間有許多交匯之處，而愛德正是基督門徒的顯著特徵（參若十三35）。在信德的光照下，團結互助力求超越自身，展現出基督徒獨有的完全無償、寬恕與和好的維度。因此，我們的近人不僅是擁有自身權利、與他人享有基本平等的人，更是天父活生生的肖像，被耶穌基督的寶血救贖，並被置於聖神的永久感動之下。因此，即使近人是敵人，我們也必須以主愛他的愛去愛他；為了他，我們必須準備好犧牲，甚至是終極的犧牲：為弟兄們捨命（參若一三16）。

此時，對天主共同父性的認識，對基督內所有「子內子女」的兄弟情誼，以及對聖神臨在及其賦予生命之行動的認識，將為我們對世界的理解帶來一個新的標準。超越人與自然之間業已如此緊密牢固的聯繫，在信德的光照下，我們辨識出一種人類合一的新模式，這模式最終必將激發我們的團結互助。這種至高無上的合一模式，反映了三位一體天主的親密生活，正是我們基督徒所說的「共融」。這種獨特的基督徒共融，在主的協助下得到精心維護、擴展和豐富，正是教會使命的靈魂，即成為上文所指的「聖事」。

因此，團結必須在實現這一神聖計劃中發揮作用，無論是在個人層面，還是在國家和國際社會層面。我們所說的「邪惡機制」和「罪惡結構」只有通過踐行教會呼籲我們並孜孜不倦地倡導的人類和基督徒團結才能克服。只有這樣，才能充分釋放這些積極的能量，造福發展與和平。教會的許多封聖聖人為這種團結提供了美好的見證，並在當前艱難的處境中樹立了榜樣。其中，我想提及聖伯多祿·克拉弗及其在卡塔赫納為奴隸們提供的服務，以及聖馬克西米利安·瑪利亞·科爾貝，他在奧斯維辛集中營中為一位素不相識的囚犯獻出了自己的生命。

六一些具體的指導方針

41. 正如教宗保祿六世在其通諭[69]中已明確指出，教會本身並不能提供任何技術革命來解決欠發達問題。因為教會並不主張任何經濟或政治制度或方案，也不會偏袒任何一方，只要人性尊嚴得到適當的尊重和促進，並且教會自身也擁有在世上履行其使命所需的空間。

然而，教會是「人性方面的專家」，[70]這必然使其將宗教使命擴展到各個領域，在這些領域中，人們為尋求與人性尊嚴相符的、在世上可能存在的、始終相對的幸福而付出了努力。

我必須重申，效仿我的前任，任何影響個人和民族尊嚴的問題，例如真正的發展，都不能被簡化為一個「技術」問題。如果以這種方式貶低發展，其真正內涵將被掏空，這將是對發展本應服務的個人和民族的背叛。

正因如此，教會今天，如同二十年前一樣，以及在未來，都對真正發展的性質、條件、要求和目標，以及阻礙其發展的障礙，都有所發言。教會在這樣做的過程中，履行了其福傳的使命，因為當教會宣揚關於基督、關於自身和關於人類的真理，並將這些真理應用於具體情況時，教會就為解決緊迫的發展問題做出了自己的首次貢獻。71

教會運用其社會訓導作為實現這一目標的工具。在當今的困境中，更準確地認識並更廣泛地傳播教會訓導72所提出的「反思原則、判斷標準和行動指南」，將有助於正確界定所面臨的問題並找到最佳解決方案。

由此可見，我們面臨的問題首先是道德問題；無論是對發展問題本身的分析，還是克服當前困境的手段，都不能忽視這一基本維度。

教會的社會訓導並非自由資本主義與馬克思主義集體主義之間的「第三條道路」，甚至也不是其他不那麼對立的解決方案的可能替代方案：相反，它構成了一個獨立的範疇。它也不是一種意識形態，而是在信仰和教會傳統的光照下，對人類生存的複雜現實（無論是在社會中還是在國際秩序中）進行認真反思的結果的精確表述。它的主要目的是解釋這些現實，確定它們是否符合福音關於人及其使命的教義，而這種使命既是世俗的，又是超越的；因此，它的目的是指導基督徒的行為。因此，它不屬於意識形態的領域，而是神學的領域，尤其是道德神學的領域。

宣講和傳播社會訓導是教會福傳使命的一部分。由於這項訓導旨在引導人們的行為，因此它根據每個人的角色、聖召和處境，激發人們「致力於正義」。

譴責邪惡和不公，也是社會領域福傳使命的一部分，而社會領域福傳使命是教會先知角色的一部分。但必須明確的是，宣講始終比譴責更重要，譴責不能忽視宣講，譴責賦予了宣講真正的堅實性和更高動力。


42. 今日，教會的社會訓導比以往更須開放國際視野，這與梵蒂岡第二次大公會議73、最近的通諭74，尤其是我們正在紀念的通諭75相符。因此，在此背景下，重新審視並進一步闡明近年來教會訓導所處理的典型主題和指導方針並非多餘。

在此，我想指出其中之一：對窮人的選擇或偏愛。這是一種選擇，或一種在實踐基督徒愛德時的特殊優先地位，教會的整個傳統都為此作證。它影響著每一位基督徒的生活，因為他或她努力效法基督的生活，但它同樣適用於我們的社會責任，從而適用於我們的生活方式，以及有關財產所有權和使用權的合理決策。

此外，鑒於當今社會問題已呈現出全球性的維度76，這種對窮人的偏愛，以及由此引發的種種決定，必然會波及到無數飢餓、貧困、無家可歸、得不到醫療照顧，以及最重要的，對美好未來失去希望的人。我們不可能不考慮這些現實的存在。忽視它們就等於像那個假裝不認識躺在門口的乞丐拉撒路的「財主」（參見路加福音 16:19-31）77。

我們的日常生活以及我們在政治和經濟領域的決策都必須以這些現實為依據。同樣，國家領導人和國際機構的負責人，雖然有義務在其發展計劃中始終將真正的人性維度作為優先事項，但也不應忘記優先考慮日益加劇的貧困現象。不幸的是，窮人的數量不但沒有減少，反而在不斷增加，這不僅在欠發達國家，而且——這似乎同樣令人震驚——在較發達國家也是如此。

有必要再次強調基督教社會教義的典型原則：世間的財富本是為所有人而設的。78 私有財產權是有效且必要的，但它並不否定這一原則的價值。事實上，私有財產處於「社會抵押」之下，79 這意味著它具有內在的社會功能，其基礎正是財富的普遍歸宿原則，並由這一原則所證明。同樣，在這種對窮人的關懷中，我們不應忽視那種特殊形式的貧困，即被剝奪基本人權，特別是宗教自由權以及經濟自主權。

43. 對窮人——用一個非常有意義的詞來說，他們就是「主的窮人」80——的關懷，必須在各個層面轉化為具體的行動，直至最終實現一系列必要的改革。每個地方的情況都會表明哪些改革最為緊迫以及如何實現這些改革。但正如上文所述，國際不平衡形勢所要求的改革也不容忽視。

在這方面，我想特別提及：國際貿易體系的改革，該體系受保護主義和日益增長的雙邊主義的拖累；世界貨幣和金融體系的改革，該體系目前被認為存在不足；技術交流及其合理使用的問題；以及在國際法律秩序框架內審查現有國際組織結構的必要性。

當今的國際貿易體系經常歧視發展中國家新興產業的產品，並阻礙原材料生產商的發展。此外，還存在一種國際分工，即某些缺乏有效勞動法或勞動法執行不力的國家生產的低成本產品銷往世界其他地區，為從事這種不分國界的生產方式的公司帶來豐厚的利潤。

世界貨幣和金融體系的特點是匯率和利率波動過大，這損害了較貧窮國家的國際收支平衡和債務狀況。

技術形式及其轉讓是當今國際交流的主要問題之一，也是由此造成的嚴重損害之一。發展中國家被拒絕提供所需技術或接收無用技術的情況屢見不鮮。

許多人認為，國際組織似乎正處於其存在的一個階段，需要對其運作方式、運作成本和效率進行仔細審查，並酌情進行修正。顯然，如果沒有各方的合作，如此微妙的進程就無法實施。這就要求克服政治競爭，並放棄一切操縱這些組織的慾望，因為這些組織的存在完全是為了共同的利益。

現有的機構和組織已經為各國人民的福祉發揮了良好的作用。然而，當今人類正處於其真正發展的一個全新且更加艱難的階段。它需要更高程度的國際秩序，以服務於全世界的社會、經濟和文化。

44. 發展首先要求需要發展的國家具有主動精神。81 每個國家都必須根據自身的責任行事，不應期望從更受青睞的國家那裡得到一切，而應與處境相同的其他國家合作。每個國家都必須發現並充分利用其自身的自由領域。每個國家都必須有能力主動響應自身作為一個社會的需求。同樣，每個國家都必須認識到自身的真正需求，以及由此而產生的權利和義務。民族的發展始於每個民族致力於自身發展，並與他人合作，並在此過程中得到最恰當的實現。

因此，發展中國家自身應儘可能地通過接觸更廣泛的文化和自由的信息交流，支持每個公民的自我肯定。正如《民族發展》通諭所倡導的那樣，任何促進識字率以及完善和深化識字率的基礎教育，都是對真正發展的直接貢獻。82 在世界許多地方，這些目標仍遠未實現。

為了走這條道路，各國自身必須根據其人民的具體情況、地理環境和文化傳統，確定自身的優先事項，並清楚地認識到自身的需要。

一些國家必須增加糧食產量，以確保始終有生存和日常生活所需的糧食。在當今世界，飢荒奪走了如此多的受害者，尤其是在幼童之中——但也有一些不太發達的國家實現了糧食自給自足的目標，甚至成為糧食出口國。

其他國家需要改革某些不公正的結構，特別是其政治體制，以便用民主和參與式的政府形式取代腐敗、獨裁和專制的政府形式。我們希望這一進程能夠推廣並不斷發展壯大。因為政治共同體的「健康」——體現在所有公民自由且負責任地參與公共事務、參與法治以及尊重人權的前提下——是「完整的個體和所有人」發展的必要條件和可靠保障。

45. 如果沒有所有人——尤其是國際社會——在團結互助的框架下，從最受忽視的群體開始，包容所有人，上述所有目標都無法實現。但發展中國家自身也有義務在彼此之間以及與世界上最貧困的國家之間踐行團結。

例如，理想的做法是，同一地理區域內的國家應該建立合作形式，以減少對更強大生產國的依賴；它們應該向該地區的產品開放邊境；它們應該研究如何使彼此的產品互補；它們應該聯合起來，提供各自無法單獨提供的服務；它們應該將合作擴展到貨幣和金融領域。

在許多這樣的國家中，相互依存已成為現實。承認這一點，並使其更具可操作性，是避免過度依賴更富裕、更強大國家的一種替代方案，也是人們所期望的發展的一部分，它不與任何國家對抗，而是發掘並最大限度地利用自身的潛力。屬於同一地理區域的發展中國家，尤其是「南方」國家，可以而且應該在平等、自由和參與國際社會的準則的啟發下，建立新的區域組織——正如目前已經發生並取得良好成果的那樣。

全球團結的必要條件是自治和自由自決，在諸如上述協會內部也同樣如此。但與此同時，團結也要求我們願意為了整個國際社會的福祉而做出必要的犧牲。


七、結語

46. 各民族和個人都渴望自由：他們對全面發展的追求，表明他們渴望克服阻礙他們享受「更人性化的生活」的諸多障礙。

近年來，在《民族發展》通諭發布后的一段時間裡，一種應對貧困和欠發達問題的新方法在世界某些地區，尤其是在拉丁美洲，得到了推廣。這種方法將解放作為行動的基本範疇和首要原則。教會訓導當局恰當地指出了這種神學反思和方法所蘊含的積極價值，以及損害信仰的偏差和偏差風險。83

值得補充的是，渴望擺脫一切形式奴役個人和社會的自由，是高尚而正當的。事實上，這正是發展的目的，或者更確切地說，解放與發展，考慮到兩者之間的密切聯繫。

單純的經濟發展無法使人獲得自由，相反，最終只會使人更加被奴役。如果發展不包含人與社會的文化、超越和宗教層面，如果它不承認這些層面的存在，也不努力將其目標和優先事項導向這些層面，那麼這種發展就更無助於真正的解放。人類只有完全做自己，充分履行其權利和義務，才能獲得完全的自由。整個社會也是如此。

通往真正解放的道路上，需要克服的主要障礙是罪惡以及罪惡不斷滋生和蔓延所構建的結構。84

基督釋放了我們自由（參見加拉太書 5:1），這自由鼓勵我們成為眾人的僕人。因此，發展與解放的進程在團結互助的實踐中具體成形，即在對近人，尤其是最貧困者的愛與服務中具體成形：「因為，當真理與愛缺失時，解放的進程將導致自由的消亡，而自由也將失去所有支撐。」85

47. 鑒於近年來的悲慘經歷以及當前主要負面的景象，教會必須堅定地肯定克服阻礙發展的障礙的可能性，無論這些障礙是過度的還是不足的。教會必須堅定地肯定對真正解放的信心。歸根結底，這種信心和這種可能性基於教會對神聖承諾的認識，這承諾保證我們當代的歷史不會自我封閉，而是向天主之國開放。

教會也對人充滿信心，儘管她知道人可能犯下的惡行。因為她深知，儘管人人都遺傳了罪孽，並且都有可能犯下罪孽，但人身上仍存在著足夠的品質和能量，以及一種基本的「善」（參創1:31），因為他是造物主的肖像，處於基督救贖的影響之下，而基督「以某種方式與每個人結合」86，並且因為聖神有效的行動「充滿大地」（智1:7）。

因此，絕望、悲觀或惰性是沒有理由的。儘管令人悲傷，但必須指出的是，正如一個人可能因自私和對過度利益和權力的渴望而犯罪一樣，一個人也可能因恐懼、猶豫不決，以及基本上是懦弱，而無法滿足眾多深陷欠發達境地的人們的迫切需要。我們所有人都被召喚，事實上也有責任，去面對第二個千年最後十年的巨大挑戰，也因為當前的危險威脅著每個人：一場世界經濟危機，一場沒有國界、沒有贏家或輸家的戰爭。面對這樣的威脅，富人和國家與窮人和國家之間的區別將毫無意義，除非那些擁有更多、能夠做得更多的人承擔更大的責任。

然而，這並非唯一的動機，甚至不是最重要的動機。事關人的尊嚴，造物主已將維護和促進人的尊嚴的重任託付給我們，歷史的每個時刻，男男女女都對人的尊嚴負有嚴格而負責任的責任。正如許多人或多或少已經清楚地意識到的那樣，目前的局勢似乎與這種尊嚴格格不入。每個人都被召喚在這場和平的鬥爭中發揮自己的作用，這場鬥爭將以和平的方式進行，以確保和平發展，保護自然本身以及我們周圍的世界。教會也深深地參與到這項事業中，並希望它最終取得成功。

因此，我謹效仿教宗保祿六世在其《民族發展》通諭87中的做法，以樸素和謙卑的態度，呼籲所有人，所有男女，無一例外。我希望他們認識到當前形勢的嚴峻性和每個人的個人責任，並通過個人和家庭的生活方式、資源的運用、公民活動、對經濟和政治決策的貢獻以及對國家和國際事業的個人承諾，落實這些由團結互助和關愛窮人所激發的措施。這正是當前形勢的要求，尤其是人格尊嚴的要求，是造物主天主不可磨滅的肖像，在我們每個人身上都一脈相承。

在這一承諾中，教會的子女們必須成為榜樣和指引，因為他們蒙召，按照耶穌親自在納匝肋會堂所宣布的計劃，「向貧窮的人傳福音……報告被擄的得釋放，瞎眼的得看見，叫那受壓迫的得自由，報告主悅納人的禧年」（路四18-19）。強調平信徒，無論男女，所擔負的卓越角色是恰當的，正如最近舉行的主教會議所重申的那樣。他們的任務是以基督徒的承諾來激活世俗的現實，以此表明他們是和平與正義的見證人和推動者。我特別想向那些通過聖洗聖事和宣認同一信經，與我們分享真實（儘管不完美）共融的人致辭。我確信，通諭中所表達的關切及其背後的動機對他們來說並不陌生，因為這些動機都源於耶穌基督的福音。在此，我們得以找到一份新的邀請，共同見證我們關於人性尊嚴的共同信念：人性由天主創造，由基督救贖，由聖神聖化，並蒙召在世間過著與此尊嚴相符的生活。我同樣向猶太民族發出這一呼籲，他們與我們共同繼承了「我們的信德之父」亞巴郎（參羅 4:11-12）88 的遺產，也繼承了舊約的傳統；我也向穆斯林發出這一呼籲，他們與我們一樣，信仰一位公正仁慈的天主。此外，我將此呼籲擴展至世界各大宗教的所有信徒。

去年10月27日，在聖方濟各城阿西西舉行的會議，旨在為和平祈禱並致力於和平——每個人都忠於自己的宗教信仰——表明，和平，以及作為其必要條件的全人及所有民族的發展，在很大程度上也與宗教息息相關，而和平與發展的圓滿實現，又取決於我們忠於作為信士的聖召。因為這首先取決於天主。

48. 教會深知，任何世俗的成就都不能與天國混為一談，而所有這些成就都只是反映並在某種意義上預示著天國的光榮，即我們在歷史終結時，即主再來時所期待的天國。但這種期待絕不能成為對人們的具體個人處境以及他們的社會、國家和國際生活缺乏關心的借口，因為前者是由後者決定的，尤其是在今天。

無論在歷史的某個時刻，為了使人們的生活「更人性化」，通過每個人的共同努力和神聖的恩寵，所有能夠而且應該做到的事情是多麼不完美和短暫，都不會有任何損失或徒勞。這是梵蒂岡第二次大公會議的教導，在《論教會在現代世界牧職憲章》中一段富有啟發性的文字中寫道：「當我們按照主的命令，並在祂的聖神內，將我們本性和我們事業的成果——人的尊嚴、友愛共融和自由——傳播到世上時，我們將再次找到它們，這一次，它們洗凈了罪惡的污點，煥然一新，煥然一新，當基督將一個永恆而普世的國度呈現給祂的父時……這國度已在世上奧跡中臨在。」89

天主之國臨在，首先體現在聖體聖事的慶典中，即主的祭獻中。在那慶典中，地上的果實和人手的勞作——餅和酒——借著聖神的能力和牧者的話語，以神秘而真實而實質的方式轉化為主耶穌基督的聖體聖血，他是天主之子，也是瑪利亞之子。藉著他，父的國度臨到我們中間。

今世的財富和我們雙手的勞動成果——餅和酒——是為了最終王國的到來，因為主通過祂的聖神將它們吸收到自己裡面，以便將自己奉獻給聖父，並在祂唯一的祭祀中將自己與我們一同奉獻，這祭祀預示著天國的到來，並宣告它的最終降臨。

因此，主通過聖體聖事——聖事和祭祀——將我們與祂自己結合在一起，祂以一種比任何自然結合都更強大的紐帶將我們與祂自己以及彼此結合在一起；如此結合，祂派遣我們到全世界，通過信仰和行動，為天主的愛作證，為祂王國的到來做準備，並期待它，儘管是在當今時代的朦朧之中。

我們所有參加聖體聖事的人都被召喚通過這件聖事來發現我們在世界上為發展與和平而採取的行動的深刻意義；並從中汲取力量，更加慷慨地奉獻自己，效法基督的榜樣，祂在這件聖事中為祂的朋友捨命（參若十五13）。我們個人的奉獻，如同基督的奉獻，並與祂結合，不會徒然，反而必將碩果累累。

49. 我呼籲今年的聖母年，是為了讓天主教信徒能夠越來越多地仰望瑪利亞，她在我們信仰的朝聖之路上走在我們前面90，並以母愛的關懷，在她的聖子、我們的救贖主面前為我們轉求。我願意將現代世界的這個艱難時刻，以及正在進行和將要進行的努力（往往伴隨著巨大的痛苦），都託付給她和她的轉求，為我的前任保祿六世所倡導和宣揚的民族的真正發展作出貢獻。

秉承歷代基督徒的虔誠，我們將個人的困境呈獻給聖母，願她將這些困境呈獻給她的聖子，祈求祂減輕和改變這些困境。我們也向她展現社會形勢和國際危機本身，包括貧困、失業、糧食短缺、軍備競賽、對人權的蔑視，以及部分或全部衝突的局勢或危險等令人擔憂的方面。我們本著孝順的精神，願將這一切呈現在她「慈悲的眼目」面前，並再次滿懷信德和希望地重複那句古老的對句：「至聖天主之母，光榮的聖母啊，求禰不要輕視我們在急難中的懇求，求禰常救我們脫離一切危險。」

至聖瑪利亞，我們的母親和王后，轉向她的兒子說：「他們沒有酒了」（若2:3）。她也讚美天父，因為「祂叫有權勢的從寶座上降下來，叫卑微的升高；叫飢餓的得飽美食，叫富足的空手而去」（路1:52-53）。她慈母般的關懷延伸至世人生活中的個人和社會層面。91

在至聖聖三面前，我將本通諭中所有文字託付給瑪利亞，並邀請所有人反思並積極致力於促進民族的真正發展，正如為此意向的彌撒禱文所言：「天父，禰賦予所有民族一個共同的起源，禰的旨意是將他們聚集在禰內，成為一個家庭。求禰以禰愛的火焰和為所有兄弟姐妹確保正義的渴望，充滿所有人的心。願我們通過分享禰所賜予的美好事物，為每個人爭取正義與平等，終止一切分裂，建立一個建立在愛與和平基礎上的人類社會。」92 最後，我以所有兄弟姐妹的名義，向他們致以特別的祝福，以示問候和良好祝願。

於一九八七年十二月三十日，即我任教宗第十年，在羅馬聖伯多祿大殿頒布。

約翰·保羅二世

1. 利奧十三世，《Rerum Novarum》通諭（1891 年 5 月 15 日）：利奧尼斯十三世 P. M. Acta，XI，羅馬 1892 年，第 97-144 頁。

2. 庇護十一世，《Quadragesimo Anno》通諭（1931 年 5 月 15 日）：AAS 23 (1931)，第 177-J28 頁；約翰二十三世，《Mater et Magistra》（1961 年 5 月 15 日）； AAS 53 (1961)，第 401-464 頁；保祿六世，使徒信 Octogesima Adveniens（1971 年 5 月 14 日）：AAS 63 (1971)，第 401-441 頁；約翰·保羅二世，勞動通諭（1981 年 9 月 14 日）：AAS 73 (1981)，第 577-647 頁。庇護十二世還為利奧十三世通諭五十周年發表了無線電訊息（1941 年 6 月 1 日）：AAS 33 (1941)，第 195-205 頁。

3. 參見。梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，關於神聖啟示的教義憲法，Dei Verbum，n。 4.

4. 保祿六世，《人民進步通諭》（1967 年 3 月 26 日）：AAS 59 (1967)，第 257-299 頁。

5. 參見。 《羅馬觀察家》，1987 年 5 月 25 日。

6. 參見。信理部，《基督徒自由與解放訓令》，《自由意識》（1986年3月22日），72；宗座公報 79（1987年），第586頁；保祿六世，《將臨期十八周》宗座牧函（1971年5月14日），第4號；宗座公報 63（1971年），第403頁及後續頁。

7. 參閱《救主之母》通諭（1987年3月25日），第3號；宗座公報 79（1987年），第363頁及後續頁； 1987 年 1 月 1 日彌撒講道：羅馬觀察家報，1987 年 1 月 2 日。

8. 《人民進步》通諭引用了梵蒂岡第二次大公會議的文件十九次，其中十六次引用的是《現代世界教會牧會章程》（Gaudium et Spes）。

9. 歡樂與希望，n. 1.

10.同上，n。 4；參見人民的進步，n. 13：位置。前引，第 263、264 頁。

11. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 3；流行病進展，n。 13：位置。引，第。 264.

12. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 63；流行病進展，n。 9：位置。引，第。 269.

13. 參見。 Gaudium 等 Spes。名詞69;流行病進展，n。 22：位置。引，第。 269.

14. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 57；流行病進展，n。 41：位置引，第。 277.

15. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 19;流行病進展，n。 41：位置引文，第 277f 頁。

16. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 86；流行病進展，n。 48：loc.cit.，第 48 頁281.

17. 參見。 Gaudium et Spes，n。 69;人民進步，nn。 14-21：地點。前引，第 264-268 頁。

18. 參見。人民進步通諭的銘文：loc。引，第。 257.

19. 利奧十三世通諭《Rerum Novarum》以「工人的狀況」為主要主題。 利奧尼斯十三世 P. M. Acta, XI, Romae 1892, p. 97.

20. 參見。信仰教義集會，基督教自由與解放指導，Libertatis Conscientia（1986 年 3 月 22 日），n。 72：AAS 79 (1987)，第 72 頁。第586章保祿六世，使徒信 Octogesima Adveniens（1971 年 5 月 14 日）；名詞4：AAS 63 (1971)，第 403f 頁。

21. 參見。 《Mater et Magistra》通諭（1961 年 5 月 15 日）：AAS 53 (1961)，第 17 頁。 440.

22. Gaudium et Spes，n。 63.

23. 參見。通諭《人民進步》，n。 3：位置。引，第。 258：比照。也同上，n. 9：位置。引，第。 261.

24. 參見。同上，n. 3：位置。引，第。 258.

25.同上，n。 48：位置引，第。 281.

26. 參見。同上，n. 14：位置。同上，第264頁：「發展不能僅僅局限於經濟增長。為了實現真正的發展，發展必須是完整的：整體的，也就是說，它必須促進每個人的福祉，以及全人類的福祉。」

27. 同上，第87號：同上，第299頁。

28. 參見同上，第53號：同上，第283頁。

29. 參見同上，第76號：同上，第295頁。

30. 此處提到的十年是指1960-1970年和1970-1980年，當前十年是第三個十年（1980-1990年）。

31. 「第四世界」這一表述不僅偶爾用於所謂的欠發達國家，也尤其用於中高收入國家中的極度貧困或赤貧群體。

32. 梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《教會憲章》，《教會憲章》，第1號。

33. 《人民的進步》通諭，第33號：同上，第273頁。

34. 值得注意的是，聖座為慶祝國際年，特別發布了由教宗正義和平委員會發布的題為《你對你無家可歸的兄弟做了什麼？》的特別文件：《教會與住房問題》（1987年12月27日）。

35 參閱保祿六世，《降臨節八日通諭》（1971年5月14日），第111-122號。 8-9：宗座公報 63 (1971)，第406-408頁。

36. 聯合國最近出版的《1987年世界經濟概覽》提供了最新數據（見第8-9頁）。在實行市場經濟的發達國家，失業率從1970年的3%躍升至1986年的8%，目前已達2900萬人。

37. 《勞動實踐》通諭（1981年9月14日），第18號：宗座公報 73 (1981)，第624-625頁。

38. 《服務人類社會：國際債務問題的倫理探討》（1986年12月27日）。

39. 《民族進步》通諭，第54號：同上，第283頁及後續頁：「發展中國家將不再面臨債務負擔過重的風險，因為債務償還會吞噬其大部分收益。貸款的利率和償還期限可以適當調整，以免給任何一方造成過重的負擔，並考慮到贈與、無息或低息貸款以及清償債務所需的時間。」

40. 參見《服務於人類社會：國際債務問題的倫理探討》（1986年12月27日）的「介紹」。

41. 參見《民族進步》通諭，第53號；同上，第283頁及後續頁。 283.

42. 為人類社會服務：國際債務問題的道德方法（986 年 12 月 27 日），III,2,1。

43. 參見。通諭《人民進步》，nn。 20-21：地點。引文，第 267f 頁。

44. 愛爾蘭德羅赫達地址（1979 年 9 月 29 日），n。 5：AAS 71 (1979)，II，p。 1079.

45. 參見。通諭《人民進步》，n。 37：位置引文，第 275f 頁。

46. 參見。宗座勸告 Familiaris Consortio（1981 年 11 月 22 日），尤其是 n. 30：宗座公報 74 (1982)，第115-117頁。

47. 參見：《人權：國際文書彙編》，聯合國，紐約，1983年；若望保祿二世，《人類救主》通諭（1979年3月4日），第17號；宗座公報 71 (1979)，第296頁。

48. 參見：梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《論教會在現代世界牧職憲章》，第78號；保祿六世，《民族發展》通諭，第76號：同上。同上，第294頁及以下：「向苦難宣戰，與不公作鬥爭，不僅能改善境況，還能促進所有人的人文和精神進步，從而增進人類的共同福祉……和平是日復一日建立起來的，是為了追求天主所預定的秩序，這意味著人類之間更完美的正義。」

49. 參閱宗座勸諭《家庭團體》（1981年11月22日），第6號；宗座公報 74（1982年），第88頁：「……歷史並非僅僅是朝著更美好方向的固定進程，而是自由的進程，甚至是各種自由之間的鬥爭……」

50. 因此，通諭中使用的是「發展」一詞，而不是「進步」，但其目的是試圖賦予「發展」一詞最完整的含義。

51. 《民族發展》通諭第19號：同上，第266頁及後續頁：「增加財富並非國家或個人的最終目標。一切成長都是矛盾的……因此，一味追求財富會成為個人成就和人類真正偉大的障礙……無論對國家還是個人而言，貪婪都是道德欠發達最明顯的表現。」；另參保祿六世，《八日先知》（1971年5月14日），第9號：宗座公報 63（1971年），第407頁及後續頁。

52. 參閱《論教會在現代世界》牧函第35號；保祿六世，《致外交使團的講話》（1965年1月7日），宗座公報 57（1965年），第407頁及後續頁。 232.

53. 參見。通諭《人民進步》，nn。 20-21：地點。引文，第 267f 頁。

54.Cf。 Laborem Exercens 通諭（1981 年 9 月 14 日），n。 4：AAS 73 (1981)，第 584f 頁，保羅六世通諭 Populorum Progressio，n。 15：位置。引，第。 265.

55. 通諭《Populorum Progressio》，n。 42：位置引，第。 278.

56. 參見。 Praecium Paschale，Misale Romanum，編輯。典型值阿特拉，1975 年，第 14 頁。 272：「O certe necessarium Adae peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est! O felix culpa, quae talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!」

57. 梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《教會教義憲法》，Lumen Gentium，n。 1.

58. 參見。例如，聖巴西爾大帝，Regulae Fusius Tractatae，Interrogatio XXXVII，nn。 1-2：PG 31, 1009-1012 西爾的西奧多雷，德普羅維登西亞，奧拉蒂奧七世：PG 83, 665-686；聖奧古斯丁，《De Civitate Dei》，XIX，n。 17：CCL 48 683-685。

59. 參見。例如，St. John Chrysostom，In Evang。 S.馬特哈伊，霍姆。 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 32，53f。

60. 通諭《Populorum Progressio》，n。 23：位置。引，第。 268：「凡有今世財富的人，看見弟兄窮乏，卻塞住憐憫的心，愛天主怎能住在他內呢？」（若一 3:17）眾所周知，教父們曾用多麼有力的言辭來描述擁有一切的人對待窮乏之人的正確態度。」在上一期中，教宗引用了梵蒂岡第二次大公會議牧函《論教會在現代世界》第69條。

61. 參閱《民族發展》通諭第47條：「……一個自由不再是空話，窮人拉匝祿也能與富人同桌吃飯的世界。」

62. 參閱同上，第47號：「更確切地說，問題是建立一個世界，讓每個人，無論其種族、宗教或國籍，都能過上完全人性化的生活，擺脫他人強加於他的奴役……」；另參閱梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《教會在現代世界中的牧職憲章》，《牧職憲章》，第29號。這種根本的平等是教會始終反對一切形式種族主義的基本原因之一。

63. 參閱《Val Visdende講道》（1987年7月12日），第5號；《羅馬觀察報》，1987年7月13-14日；保祿六世，《Octogesima Adveniens》宗座牧函（1971年5月14日），第29號。 21：AAS 63 (1971)，第 416f 頁。

64. 參見。梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《現代世界教會教牧憲章》，Gaudium et Spes，n。 25.

65. 宗座勸告 Reconciliatio et Paenitentia（1984 年 12 月 2 日），n。 16：「每當教會談到罪惡的情況，或譴責某些情況，或某些社會群體（無論大小，甚至整個國家或國家集團）的集體行為是社會罪惡時，教會都知道並宣稱，這些社會罪惡是眾多個人罪惡累積和集中的結果。這屬於那些製造、支持或利用罪惡的人的個人罪惡；屬於那些本可以避免、消除或至少限制某些社會罪惡，卻因懶惰、恐懼或默許、暗中同謀或漠不關心而未能做到的人的個人罪惡；屬於那些逃避改變世界之所謂不可能的人的個人罪惡，也屬於那些迴避所需努力和犧牲，編造更高尚的似是而非的理由的人的個人罪惡。因此，真正的責任在於個人。一種情況——或者同樣，一種制度、一種結構、一種社會本身——本身並不是道德行為的對象。因此，一種情況本身不可能是好是壞。」 （宗座公報 77） （1985），第。 217.

66. 通諭《Populorum Progressio》，n。 42：位置引，第。 278.

67. 參見。 Liturgia Horarum、Feria III hebdomadae IIIae Temporis 每年、Preces ad Vesperas。

68. 通諭《Populorum Progressio》，n。 87：位置引，第。 299.

69. 參見。同上，n. 13；地點引文，第 263f、296f 頁。

70. 參見。同上，n. 13：位置。引，第。 263.

71. 參見。在拉丁美洲主教團第三屆全體會議開幕式上的致辭（1979年1月28日）：宗座公報 71（1979），第189-196頁。

72. 信理部，《基督徒自由與解放訓令》，《Libertatis Conscientia》（1986年3月22日），第72號；宗座公報 79（1987），第586頁；保祿六世，《Octogesima Adveniens》宗座牧函（1971年5月14日），第4號；宗座公報 63（1971），第403頁及後續頁。

73. 參閱《論教會在現代世界》，《牧職憲章》，第二部分，第五章，第二節：「建立國際社會」，第83-90頁。

74. 參見。約翰二十三世，《Mater et Magistra》通諭（1961 年 5 月 15 日）：AAS 53 (1961)，第 17 頁。 440；通諭 Pacem in Terris（1963 年 4 月 11 日），第四部分：AAS 55 (1963)，第 291-296 頁；保祿六世使徒書信 Octogesima Adveniens（1971 年 5 月 14 日），nn 2-4：AAS 63 (1971)，第 402-404 頁。

75. 參見。通諭《人民進步》，nn。 3、9：位置。前引，第 258、261 頁。

76. 同上，n. 3：位置。引，第。 258.

77. 通諭《Populorum Progressio》，n。 47：位置引，第。 280；信仰教義集會，基督教自由與解放指導，Libertatis Conscientia（1986 年 3 月 22 日），n。 68：AAS 79 (1987)，第 583f 頁。

78. 參見。梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《現代世界教會教牧憲章》，Gaudium et Spes，n。 69;保羅六世，通諭《人民進步》，n。 22：位置。引，第。 268；信仰教義集會，基督教自由與解放指導，Libertatis Conscientia（1986 年 3 月 22 日），n。 90：宗座公報 79（1987），第594頁；聖多瑪斯·阿奎那，《神學大全》IIa IIae，第66題，第2條。

79. 參閱：在拉丁美洲主教團第三屆全體會議開幕式上的致辭（1979年1月28日）：宗座公報 71（1979），第189-196頁；《致波蘭主教團的宣教》（Ad Limina）第6號（1987年12月17日）：《羅馬觀察報》，1987年12月18日。

80. 因為主願意與他們認同（瑪竇福音 25:31-46），並特別眷顧他們（參閱聖詠 12[11]:6；路加福音 1:52-53）。

81. 《民族發展》通諭，第55號：同上，第284頁：「這些人需要幫助，需要被說服，讓他們掌握自身的發展，逐步獲得發展所需的資源。」；參見《教會在現代世界中的牧職憲章》，第86號。

82. 《民族發展》通諭，第35號：同上，第274頁：「基礎教育是發展計劃的首要目標。」

83. 參見信理部，《關於「解放神學」若干方面的訓誡》（Libertatis Nuntius，1984年8月6日），引言：宗座公報 76（1984年），第876頁及之後。

84. 參見。宗座勸告 Reconciliatio et Paenitentia（1984 年 12 月 2 日），n。 16：AAS 77 (1985)，第 213-217 頁；信理部，《基督徒自由與解放》訓令，Libertatis Conscientia（1986年3月22日，第38、42號；宗座公報 79 (1987)，第569、571頁）。

85. 信理部，《基督徒自由與解放》訓令，Libertatis Conscientia（1986年3月22日，第24號；宗座公報 79 (1987)，第564頁）。

86. 參閱《教會在現代世界中的牧職憲章》，Gaudium et Spes，第22號；若望保祿二世，《人類救主》通諭（1979年3月4日，第8號；宗座公報 71 (1979)，第272頁）。

87. 《人民》通諭《Progressio》第5號：同上，第259頁：「我們相信，所有善心人士，連同我們的天主教子女和基督徒弟兄，都能夠而且應該就此計劃達成一致」；另參第81-83、87號：同上，第296-298、299頁。

88. 參閱梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《關於教會與非基督教宗教關係的宣言》，《教會與非基督教宗教關係宣言》，第4號。

89. 《牧職憲章》，第39號。

90. 參閱梵蒂岡第二次大公會議，《教會憲章》，《教會憲章》，第58號；若望保祿二世，《救主之母》通諭（1987年3月25日），第5-6號：《宗座公報》第79號(1987)，第365-367頁。

91. 參閱保祿六世，《瑪利亞的敬禮》宗座勸諭（1974年2月2日），第37號；宗座公報 66（1974），第148頁及之後；若望保祿二世，《墨西哥薩波潘聖母朝聖地講道》（1979年1月30日），第4號；宗座公報 71（1979），第230頁。

92. 《為了民族的發展》彌撒經書：《羅馬彌撒經書》，1975年修訂版，第820頁。

河南鄭州貨車司機被交警查車逼到跳高架墜亡 家屬痛哭質問交警為什麼要逼死他



高興
感動
同情
搞笑
難過
拍磚
支持
鮮花
收藏 分享邀請 舉報

發表評論 評論 (4 個評論)

回復 change? 2025-9-27 04:09
The Holy See
the holy see
English

×
The Holy See
the holy see
Magisterium
Calendar
Supreme Pontiffs
Roman Curia and Other Organizations
Liturgical Celebrations
College of Cardinals
Press Office
Vatican News - Radio Vaticana
L'Osservatore Romano
John Paul II Encyclicals
zoomText
A
A
A
pdf
Print
DE  - EN  - ES  - FR  - HU  - IT  - LA  - PL  - PT
IOANNES PAULUS PP. II
SOLLICITUDO REI SOCIALIS
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



Blessing

Venerable Brothers and dear Sons and Daughters,
Health and the Apostolic Blessing!

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The social concern of the Church, directed towards an authentic development 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 Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs which, beginning with the Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII as a point of reference,1 has frequently dealt with the question and has sometimes made the dates of publication of the various social documents coincide with the anniversaries of that first document.2

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 outstanding contribution of Leo XIII and enriched by the successive contributions of the Magisterium, has now become an updated doctrinal "corpus." It builds up gradually, as the Church, in the fullness of the word revealed by Christ Jesus3 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 Progressio,4 which my esteemed predecessor Paul VI published on March 26, 1967.

The enduring relevance of this Encyclical is easily recognized if we note the series of commemorations which took place during 1987 in various forms and in many parts of the ecclesiastical and civil world. For this same purpose, the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax sent a circular letter to the Synods of the Oriental Catholic Churches and to the Episcopal Conferences, asking for ideas and suggestions on the best way to celebrate the Encyclical's anniversary, 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.5 And now, also taking into account the replies to the above-mentioned circular letter, I consider it appropriate, at the close of the year 1987, to devote an Encyclical to the theme of Populorum Progressio.

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 document 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.

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,"6 and above all in its vital link with the Gospel of the Lord. On the other hand, it is ever new, because it is subject 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 '60s, retain all their force as an appeal to conscience today in the last part of the '80s, in an effort to trace the major lines of the present world always within the context of the aim and inspiration 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 applications, 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 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 configuration of the world in the course of the last twenty years, while preserving certain fundamental 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,"7 which to some extent touches everyone. 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 emphasize, 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.

II. ORIGINALITY OF THE ENCYCLICAL POPULORUM PROGRESSIO

5. As soon as it appeared, the document of Pope Paul VI captured the attention of public opinion by reason of its originality. In a concrete manner and with great clarity, it was possible to identify the above mentioned characteristics of continuity and renewal within the Church's social doctrine. The intention of rediscovering numerous aspects of this teaching, through a careful rereading of the Encyclical, will therefore; constitute the main thread of the present reflections.

But first I wish to say a few words about the date of publication; the year 1967. The very fact that Pope Paul VI chose to publish a social Encyclical in that year invites us to consider the document in relationship to the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, which had ended on December 8, 1965.

6. We should see something more in this than simple chronological proximity. The Encyclical Populorum Progressio presents itself, in a certain way, as a document which applies the teachings of the Council. It not only makes continual reference to the texts of the Council,8 but it also flows from the same concern of the Church which inspired the whole effort of the Council-and in a particular way the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes - to coordinate and develop a number of themes of her social teaching.

We can therefore affirm that the Encyclical Populorum Progressio is a kind of response to the Council's appeal with which the Constitution Gaudium et Spes begins: "The joys and the hopes. the griefs and the anxieties of the people of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these too are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts."9 These words express the fundamental motive inspiring the great document of the Council, which begins by noting the situation of poverty and of underdevelopment in which millions of human beings live.

This poverty and underdevelopment are, under another name, the "griefs and the anxieties" of today, of "especially those who are poor." Before this vast panorama of pain and suffering, the Council wished to suggest horizons of joy and hope. The Encyclical of Paul VI has the same purpose, in full fidelity to the inspiration of the Council.

7. There is also the theme of the Encyclical which, in keeping with the great tradition of the Church's social teaching, takes up again in a direct manner the new exposition and rich synthesis which the Council produced, notably in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.

With regard to the content and themes once again set forth by the Encyclical, the following should be emphasized: the awareness of the duty of the Church, as "an expert in humanity," "to scrutinize the signs of the times and to interpret them in the light of the Gospel"10; the awareness, equally profound, of her mission of "service," a mission distinct from the function of the State, even when she is concerned with people's concrete situation"11; the reference to the notorious inequalities in the situations of those same people12; the confirmation of the Council's teaching, a faithful echo of the centuries - old tradition of the Church regarding the "universal purpose of goods"13; the appreciation of the culture and the technological civilization which contribute to human liberation,14 without failing to recognize their limits's15; finally, on the specific theme of development, which is precisely the theme of the Encyclical, the insistence on the "most serious duty" incumbent on the more developed nations "to help the developing countries."16 The same idea of development proposed by the Encyclical flows directly from the approach which the Pastoral Constitution takes to this problem.17

These and other explicit references to the Pastoral Constitution lead one to conclude that the Encyclical presents itself as an application of the Council's teaching in social matters to the specific problem of the development and the underdevelopment of peoples.

8. This brief analysis helps us to appreciate better the originality of the Encyclical, which can be stated in three points.

The first is constituted by the very fact of a document, issued by the highest authority of the Catholic Church and addressed both to the Church herself and "to all people of good will,"18 on a matter which at first sight is solely economic and social: the development of peoples. The term "development" is taken from the vocabulary of the social and economic sciences. From this point of view, the Encyclical Populorum Progressio follows directly in the line of the Encyclical Rerum Novarum, which deals with the "condition of the workers."19 Considered superficially, both themes could seem extraneous to the legitimate concern of the Church seen as a religious institution - and "development" even more so than the "condition of the workers."

In continuity with the Encyclical of Leo XIII, it must be recognized that the document of Paul VI possesses the merit of having emphasized the ethical and cultural character of the problems connected with development, and likewise the legitimacy and necessity of the Church's intervention in this field.

In addition, the social doctrine of the Church has once more demonstrated its character as an application of the word of God to people's lives and the life of society, as well as to the earthly realities connected with them, offering "principles for reflection," "criteria of judgment" and "directives for action."20 Here, in the document of Paul VI, one finds these three elements with a prevalently practical orientation, that is, directed towards moral conduct.

In consequence, when the Church concerns herself with the "development of peoples," she cannot be accused of going outside her own specific field of competence and, still less, outside the mandate received from the Lord.

9. The second point of originality of Populorum Progressio is shown by the breadth of outlook open to what is commonly called the "social question."

In fact, the Encyclical Mater et Magistra of Pope John XXIII had already entered into this wider outlook,21 and the Council had echoed the same in the Constitution Gaudium et Spes.22 However, the social teaching of the Church had not yet reached the point of affirming with such clarity that the social question has acquired a worldwide dimension,23 nor had this affirmation and the accompanying analysis yet been made into a "directive for action," as Paul VI did in his Encyclical.

Such an explicit taking up of a position offers a great wealth of content, which it is appropriate to point out.

In the first place a possible misunderstanding has to be eliminated. Recognition that the "social question" has assumed a worldwide dimension does not at all mean that it has lost its incisiveness or its national and local importance. On the contrary, it means that the problems in industrial enterprises or in the workers' and union movements of a particular country or region are not to be considered as isolated cases with no connection. On the contrary they depend more and more on the influence of factors beyond regional boundaries and national frontiers.

Unfortunately, from the economic point of view, the developing countries are much more numerous than the developed ones; the multitudes of human beings who lack the goods and services offered by development are much more numerous than those who possess them.

We are therefore faced with a serious problem of unequal distribution of the means of subsistence originally meant for everybody, and thus also an unequal distribution of the benefits deriving from them. And this happens not through the fault of the needy people, and even less through a sort of inevitability dependent on natural conditions or circumstances as a whole.

The Encyclical of Paul VI, in declaring that the social question has acquired worldwide dimensions, first of all points out a moral fact, one which has its foundation in an objective analysis of reality. In the words of the Encyclical itself, "each one must be conscious" of this fact,24 precisely because it directly concerns the conscience, which is the source of moral decisions.

In this framework, the originality of the Encyclical consists not so much in the affirmation, historical in character, of the universality of the social question, but rather in the moral evaluation of this reality. Therefore political leaders, and citizens of rich countries considered as individuals, especially if they are Christians, have the moral obligation, according to the degree of each one's responsibility, to take into consideration, in personal decisions and decisions of government, this relationship of universality, this interdependence which exists between their conduct and the poverty and underdevelopment of so many millions of people. Pope Paul's Encyclical translates more succinctly the moral obligation as the "duty of solidarity"25; and this affirmation, even though many situations have changed in the world, has the same force and validity today as when it was written.

On the other hand, without departing from the lines of this moral vision, the originality of the Encyclical also consists in the basic insight that the very concept of development, if considered in the perspective of universal interdependence, changes notably. True development cannot consist in the simple accumulation of wealth and in the greater availability of goods and services, if this is gained at the expense of the development of the masses, and without due consideration for the social, cultural and spiritual dimensions of the human being.26

10. As a third point, the Encyclical provides a very original contribution to the social doctrine of the Church in its totality and to the very concept of development. This originality is recognizable in a phrase of the document's concluding paragraph, which can be considered as its summary, as well as its historic label: "Development is the new name for peace."27

In fact, if the social question has acquired a worldwide dimension, this is because the demand for justice can only be satisfied on that level. To ignore this demand could encourage the temptation among the victims of injustice to respond with violence, as happens at the origin of many wars. Peoples excluded from the fair distribution of the goods originally destined for all could ask themselves: why not respond with violence to those who first treat us with violence? And if the situation is examined in the light of the division of the world into ideological blocs a division already existing in 1967 - and in the light of the subsequent economic and political repercussions and dependencies, the danger is seen to be much greater.

The first consideration of the striking content of the Encyclical's historic phrase may be supplemented by a second consideration to which the document itself alludes28: how can one justify the fact that huge sums of money, which could and should be used for increasing the development of peoples, are instead utilized for the enrichment of individuals or groups, or assigned to the increase of stockpiles of weapons, both in developed countries and in the developing ones, thereby upsetting the real priorities? This is even more serious given the difficulties which often hinder the direct transfer of capital set aside for helping needy countries. If "development is the new name for peace," war and military preparations are the major enemy of the integral development of peoples.

In the light of this expression of Pope Paul VI, we are thus invited to re-examine the concept of development. This of course is not limited to merely satisfying material necessities through an increase of goods, while ignoring the sufferings of the many and making the selfishness of individuals and nations the principal motivation. As the Letter of St. James pointedly reminds us: "What causes wars, and what causes fighting among you? Is it not your passions that are at war in your members? You desire and do not have" (Js 4:1-2).

On the contrary, in a different world, ruled by concern for the common good of all humanity, or by concern for the "spiritual and human development of all" instead of by the quest for individual profit, peace would be possible as the result of a "more perfect justice among people."29

Also this new element of the Encyclical has a permanent and contemporary value, in view of the modern attitude which is so sensitive to the close link between respect for justice and the establishment of real peace.

III. 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 conduct 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 economic backwardness of the poorer peoples, of providing them with infrastructures and assisting 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.30 In fact, some measures, bilateral 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 religious, human, economic and technical initiatives have been in vain, for they have succeeded in achieving certain results. But in general, taking 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 analysis of figures and statistics, it is sufficient to face squarely the reality of an innumerable multitude of people - children, adults and the elderly - 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 geographical 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 available 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 this geopolitical area that the major part of the human race lives.

Looking at all the various sectors - the production 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 disappointing 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, especially the poorest of them, find themselves in a situation of very serious delay.

We must also add the differences of culture and value systems between the various population groups, differences which do not always match the degree of economic development, but which help to create distances. These are elements 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 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.31 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 conceals a moral content, before which the Church, which is a "sacrament or sign and instrument...of the unity of the whole human race 32 cannot remain indifference.

15. However, the picture just given would be incomplete if one failed to add to the "economic 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 religious oppression of the individual and his or her rights, discrimination of every type, especially 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 initiative 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 limitation 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 "leveling down." In the place of creative initiative there appears passivity, dependence and submission to the bureaucratic 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 predisposes people to opt out of national life, impelling many to emigrate and also favoring a form of "psychological" emigration.

Such a situation has its consequences also from the point of view of the "rights of the individual 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 community 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 economic matters - do these not impoverish the human person as much as, if not more than, the deprivation of material goods? And is development which does not take into account the full affirmation of these rights really development on the human level?

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 development, 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 become 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 developed 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 accentuating the situation of wealth for some and poverty for the rest. These mechanisms, which are maneuvered directly or indirectly by the more developed countries, by their very functioning favor the interests of the people manipulating them at in the end they suffocate or condition the economies of the less developed countries. Later on these mechanisms will have to be subjected to a careful analysis under the ethical-moral aspect.

Populorum Progressio already foresaw the possibility that under such systems the wealth of the rich would increase and the poverty of the poor would remain.33 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 conventional 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 under development. Thus it should be obvious that development either becomes shared in common by every part of the world or it undergoes a process of regression 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 underdevelopment which increasingly affect the developed countries 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.34

The lack of housing is being experienced universally and is due in large measure to the growing phenomenon of urbanization.35 Even the most highly developed peoples present the sad spectacle of individuals and families literally struggling to survive, without a roof over their heads or with a roof so inadequate as to constitute 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 unemployment and underemployment.

Everyone recognizes the reality and growing seriousness of this problem in the industrialized countries.36 While it is alarming in the developing 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 decreasing 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 the type of development which has been followed 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 proclaims 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 unemployed...a fact that without any doubt demonstrates that both within the individual political communities and in their relationships on the continental and world level there is something wrong with the organization of work and employment, precisely at the most critical and socially most important points."37

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 development of peoples which we see today.

19. A third phenomenon, likewise characteristic of the most recent period, even though it is not met with everywhere, is without doubt equally indicative of the interdependence between developed and less developed countries. It is the question of the international debt, concerning which the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax has issued a document.38

At this point one cannot ignore the close connection between a problem of this kind - the growing seriousness of which was already foreseen in Populorum Progressio39 - and the question of the development of peoples.

The reason which prompted the developing peoples to accept the offer of abundantly available 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 development, something desirable and legitimate in itself, even though perhaps imprudent and occasionally hasty.

Circumstances have changed, both within the debtor nations and in the international financial market; the instrument chosen to make a contribution to development has turned into a counterproductive mechanism. This is because the debtor nations, in order to service their debt, find themselves obliged to export the capital needed for improving or at least maintaining their standard of living. It is also because, for the same reason, they are unable to obtain new and equally essential financing.

Through this mechanism, the means intended 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 Iustitia et Pax states,40 these observations 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 cooperation in development.

20. If at this point we examine the reasons for this serious delay in the process of development, a delay which has occurred contrary to the indications of the Encyclical Populorum Progressio, which had raised such great hopes, our attention is especially drawn to the political causes of today's situation.

Faced with a combination of factors which are undoubtedly complex, we cannot hope to achieve a comprehensive analysis here. However, we cannot ignore a striking fact about the political picture since the Second World War, a fact which has considerable impact on the forward movement of the development of peoples.

I am referring to the existence of two opposing blocs, commonly known as the East and the West. The reason for this des**tion 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, inasmuch 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 industrialization during the last century. In the East there exists a system inspired by the Marxist collectivism which sprang from an interpretation 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 his freedom and social role, has proposed and still promotes, on the economic level, antithetical forms of the organization of labor and of the structures of ownership, especially with regard to the so-called means of production.

It was inevitable that by developing antagonistic systems and centers 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 fearful 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 dominated 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 agreement has been reached on the destruction of one type of nuclear weapon, the existence and opposition of the blocs continue to be a real and worrying fact which still colors the world picture.

21. This happens with particularly negative effects in the international relations which concern 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 favor or promote a true and integral development of individuals and peoples in modern society? In fact, these changes and updatings are urgent and essential for the cause of a development common to all.

Countries which have recently achieved independence, and which are trying to establish a cultural and political identity of their own, and need effective and impartial aid from all the richer and more developed countries, find themselves involved in, and sometimes overwhelmed by, ideological conflicts, which inevitably create internal 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 neocolonialism and are trying to escape from it. It is this awareness which in spite of difficulties, uncertainties 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 security, 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 retardation or stagnation of the South.

The developing countries, instead of becoming autonomous nations concerned with their own progress towards a just sharing in the goods and services meant for all, become parts of a machine, cogs on a gigantic wheel. This is often true also in the field of social communications, which, being run by centers mostly in the northern hemisphere, do not always give due consideration 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 harbors in its own way a tendency towards imperialism, as it is usually called, or towards forms of new- colonialism: an easy temptation to which they frequently succumb, as history, including recent history, 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 transformation of the conditions of underdevelopment in the developing and less advanced countries. However, peoples do not always resign themselves to their fate. Furthermore, the very needs of an economy stifled by military expenditure and by bureaucracy and intrinsic inefficiency now seem to favor processes which might mitigate the existing opposition and make it easier to begin a fruitful dialogue and genuine collaboration for peace.

23. The statement in the Encyclical Populorum Progressio that the resources and investments devoted to arms production ought to be used to alleviate the misery of impoverished peoples41 makes more urgent the appeal to overcome 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 politically have the possibility of playing a leadership 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 exaggeration - the a leadership role among nations can only be justified by the possibility and willingness to contribute widely and generously to the common good.

If a nation were to succumb more or less deliberately to the temptation to close in upon itself and failed to meet the responsibilities following from its superior position in the community of nations, it would fall seriously short of its clear ethical duty. This is readily apparent in the circumstances of history, where believers discern the dispositions of Divine Providence, ready to make use of the nations for the realization of its plans, so as to render "vain the designs of the peoples" (cf. Ps 33[32]: 10).

When the West gives the impression of abandoning 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 harbinger 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 pushing its way into the different sections which make up the southern hemisphere. We are thus confronted with a strange phenomenon: while economic aid and development plans meet with the obstacle of insuperable ideological barriers, and with tariff and trade barriers, arms of whatever origin circulate with almost total freedom all over the world And as the recent document of the Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax on the international debt points out,42 everyone knows that in certain cases the capital lent by the developed world has been used in the underdeveloped 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 economics, 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 envisaged by the Encyclical Populorum Progressio.43

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.

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 behavior, 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 committed 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 defenseless people, by the methods of terrorism."44

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 Encyclicals45 and what I myself stated at length in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio.46

One cannot deny the existence, especially in the southern hemisphere, of a demographic problem which creates difficulties for development.

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 demo graphic growth, neither is it proved that all demo graphic 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 pressures, including economic ones, in order to force them to submit to this new form of oppression. 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 forceful 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 contemporary 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 associations, some worldwide in membership, almost all of them devoted to monitoring with great care and commendable objectivity what is happening 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 community 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 international organizations.47

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 consequently 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 consequent renouncing of personal selfishness.

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 consequently a fair distribution of the results of true development.48

Among today's positive signs we must also mention a greater realization of the limits of avail able resources, and of the need to respect the integrity and the cycles of nature and to take them into account when planning for development, 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, economists, trade unionists, people of science and international 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 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, contribute 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 possible 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. Mt 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.

IV. AUTHENTIC HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

27. The examination which the Encyclical invites us to make of the contemporary world leads us to note in the first place that development 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.49

Such an idea - linked to a notion of "progress" with philosophical connotations deriving from the Enlightenment, rather than to the notion of "development"50 which is used in a specifically economic and social sense - now seems to be seriously called into doubt, particularly since the tragic experience of the two world wars, the planned and partly achieved destruction of whole peoples, and the looming 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 "economic" concept itself, linked to the word development, 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 contrary to what is good and to true happiness. This super-development, which consists in an excessive availability of every kind of material goods for the benefit of certain social groups, easily 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 "consumption" 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 possible 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, between "having" and "being,"51 which had been expressed earlier in precise words by the Second Vatican Council.52 To "have" objects and goods does not in itself perfect the human subject, unless it contributes to the maturing and enrichment 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 few 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 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.53

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 horizons. 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 disposal and the use we make of them. On the 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 development 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 his mortality (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 vocation to immortality. This is the transcendent 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 s**ture therefore, the notion of development is not only "lay" or "profane," but it 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 f
回復 change? 2025-9-27 04:10
30. According to Sacred s**ture therefore, the notion of development is not only "lay" or "profane," but it 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 portrayal 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 accomplished 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 foundation 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," 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, practice 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 s**ture 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 "development" 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 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 Laborem 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.54

Indeed, the Lord Jesus himself, in the parable of the talents, emphasizes the severe treatment given to the man who dared to hide the gift received: "You wicked 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."55

31. Faith in Christ the Redeemer, while it illuminates from within the nature of development, also guides us in the task of collaboration. In the Letter of St. Paul to the Colossians, we read that Christ is "the first-born of all creation," 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 history, 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 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,56 which infinitely surpasses what progress could achieve.

We can say therefore - as we struggle amidst the obscurities and deficiencies of underdevelopment 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 development, 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 communicated to his body; and on the other hand she desires to respond to her fundamental vocation 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."57

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 promised Kingdom.58

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 favor 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 food, drink, clothing and shelter for those who lack these things.59 As has been already noted, here we are shown a "hierarchy of values" - in the framework of the right to property - between"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.60 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 Christians 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. It is an imperative which obliges each and every man and woman, as well as societies and nations. 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 exaggerated 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 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 - personal and social, economic and political, including 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 individual, 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 religious 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 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?" (Mt 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 awareness 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 individual 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, especially: the right to life at every stage of its existence; the rights of the family, as the basic social community, or "cell of society"; justice in employment 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 freedom to profess and practice 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 Encyclical Populorum Progressio already asked, to recognize each people's equal right "to be seated at the table of the common banquet,"61 instead of lying outside the door like Lazarus, while "the dogs come and lick his sores" (cf. Lk 16:21). Both peoples and individual must enjoy the fundamental equality62 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 character of development and its necessary promotion 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 is God himself, does not understand a commitment to development and its application which excludes regard and respect for the unique dignity of this "image." In other words, true development must be based on the love of God and neighbor, and must help to promote the relationships between individuals and society. This is the "civilization of love" of which Paul VI often spoke.

34. Nor can the moral character of development exclude respect for the beings which constitute the natural world, which the ancient Greeks - alluding precisely to the order which distinguishes it - called the "cosmos." Such realities also demand respect, by virtue of a threefold 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 categories 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 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 frequently, 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 renewability of resources and the consequences of haphazard industrialization - three considerations which alert our consciences to the moral dimension of development.63

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 Paul's Encyclical there has been no development - or very little, irregular, or even contradictory development - the reasons are not only economic. As has already been said, political motives also enter in. For the decisions which either accelerate or slow 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 underdevelopment (and, mutatis mutandis, of so-called superdevelopment) would be incomplete. It is therefore necessary to single out the moral causes which, with respect to the behavior of individuals considered as responsible persons, interfere 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 interdependence 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.64

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 Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, are rooted in personal sin, and thus always linked to the concrete acts of individuals who introduce these structures, consolidate them and make them difficult to remove.65 And thus they grow stronger, spread, and become the source of other sins, and so influence people's behavior.

"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.

One can certainly speak of "selfishness" and of "shortsightedness," of "mistaken political calculations" and "imprudent economic decisions." 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 sociopolitical analysis and formal reference to "sin" and the "structures of sin." According 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 clear cut attitudes which express themselves also in actions or omissions toward one's neighbor. 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 neighbor, and to introduce into the world influences and obstacles which go far beyond the actions and brief life span of an individual. This also involves interference in the process of the development of peoples, the 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 particular considerations to demonstrate that among the actions and attitudes opposed to the will of God, the good of neighbor 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 consequences.

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 favors 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 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 be 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 achievements, and because of the mutability of very unpredictable and external circumstances. Nevertheless, 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 decision to set out or to continue the journey involves, 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 attitudes which human beings can make into absolute 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 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 neighbor, 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 Progressio, the full development "of the whole individual and of all people."66

For Christians, as for all who recognize the precise theological meaning of the word "sin," a change of behavior or mentality or mode of existence is called "conversion," to use the language of the Rihle (cf. Mk 13:3, 5, Is 30:15). This conversion specifically entails a relationship to God, to the sin committed, to its consequences and hence to one's neighbor, either an individual or a community. It is God, in "whose hands are the hearts of the powerful"67 and the hearts of all, who according 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 toward the desired conversion, toward the overcoming of the moral obstacles to development, it is already possible to point to the positive and moral value of the growing 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 acquiring a moral connotation.

It is above all a question of interdependence, sensed as a system determining relationships in the contemporary world, in its economic, cultural, political and religious elements, and accepted as a moral category. When interdependence becomes recognized in this way, the correlative 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 persevering 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 conquered - presupposing the help of divine grace - by a diametrically opposed attitude: a commitment to the good of one's neighbor with the readiness, in the gospel sense, to "lose oneself" for the sake of the other instead of exploiting him, and to "serve him" instead of oppressing him for one's own advantage (cf. Mt 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 influential, because they have a greater share of goods and common services, should feel responsible 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 attitude 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 violence, present their own needs and rights in the face of the inefficiency 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.

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 nations, so that a real international system may be established which will rest on the foundation of the equality of all peoples and on the necessary respect for their legitimate differences. The economically weaker countries, or those still at subsistence level, must be enabled, with the assistance 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 "neighbor," 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 invited by God. Hence the importance of reawakening the religious awareness of individuals and peoples. Thus the exploitation, oppression and annihilation 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 Pope Paul's Encyclical, is "the new name for peace."68

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 abandonment of the politics of blocs, the sacrifice of all forms of economic, military or political imperialism, 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 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 favor 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 virtue. In what has been said so far it has been possible to identify many points of contact between solidarity and charity, which is the distinguishing mark of Christ's disciples (cf. Jn 13:35). In the light of faith, solidarity seeks to go beyond itself, to take on the specifically Christian dimension of total gratuity, forgiveness and reconciliation. One's neighbor 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 neighbor 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).

At that point, awareness of the common fatherhood of God, of the brotherhood of all in Christ - "children in the Son" - and of the presence 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 ultimately inspire our solidarity. This supreme model of unity, which is a reflection of the intimate life of God, one God in three Persons, is what we Christians mean by the word "communion." 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 already 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 circumstances. Among them I wish to recall St. Peter Claver and his service to the slaves at Cartagena de Indias, and St. Maximilian Maria Kolbe who offered his life in place of a prisoner unknown to him in the concentration camp at Auschwitz.

VI. SOME PARTICULAR GUIDELINES

41. The Church does not have technical revolutions to offer for the problem of underdevelopment as such, as Pope Paul VI already affirmed in his Encyclical.69 For the Church does not propose economic and political systems or programs, 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,"70 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 development, cannot be reduced to a "technical" 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 fulfills her mission to evangelize, for she offers her first contribution to the solution of the urgent problem of development when she proclaims the truth about Christ, about herself and about man, applying this truth to a concrete situation.71

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 teaching72 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 facing us are above all moral questions; and that neither the analysis of the problem of development 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 collectivism, 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 formulation 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 behavior. 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 behavior, it consequently gives rise to a "commitment to justice," according to each individual's role, vocation and circumstances.

The condemnation of evils and injustices is also part of that ministry of evangelization in the 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,73 the most recent Encyclicals,74 and particularly in line with the Encyclical which we are commemorating.75 It will not be superfluous therefore to reexamine and further clarify in this light the characteristic themes and guidelines 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 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 assumed,76 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 account 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).77

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 development plans, should not forget to give precedence 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 less scandalous-in the more developed ones too.

It is necessary to state once more the characteristic principle of Christian social doctrine: the goods of this world are originally meant for all.78 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,"79 which means that it has an intrinsically social function, based upon and justified precisely by the principle of the universal destination of goods. Likewise, 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 freedom 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"80 - must be translated at all levels 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 increasing bilateralism; the reform of the world monetary and financial system, today recognized as inadequate; the question of technological exchanges and their proper use; the need for a review of the structure of the existing international organizations, in the framework of an international juridical order.

The international trade system today frequently discriminates against the products of the young industries of the developing countries and discourages the producers of raw materials. There exists, too, a kind of international division of labor, whereby the low-cost products of certain countries which lack effective labor laws or which are too weak to apply them are sold in other parts of the world at considerable 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.

Forms of technology and their transfer constitute 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, operating 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 renouncing of all desire to manipulate these organizations, 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 ordering, 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.81 Each of them must act in accordance with its own responsibilities, not expecting everything from the more favored 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 responding to its own needs as a society. Each must likewise 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 collaboration with others.

It is important then that as far as possible the developing nations themselves should favor 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 proposed.82 These goals are still far from being reached in so many parts of the world.

In order to take this path, the nations themselves 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.

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 institutions, 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 community - as expressed in the free and responsible participation of all citizens in public affairs, in the rule of law and in respect for the promotion of human rights - is the necessary condition 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 - especially the international community - in the framework of a solidarity which includes everyone, 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.

It is desirable, for example, that nations of the some 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 products might complement one another; they should combine in order to set up those services which each one separately is incapable of providing; 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 country'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 inspired by criteria of equality, freedom and participation 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.

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 publication of the encyclical Populorum Progressio, 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 category and the first principle of action. The positive 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.83

It is fitting to add that the aspiration to freedom from all forms of slavery affecting the individual and society is something noble and legitimate. This in fact is the purpose of development, or rather liberation and development, taking into account the intimate connection between the two.

Development which is merely economic is incapable of setting man free, on the contrary, it will end by enslaving him further. Development that does not include the cultural, transcendent and religious dimensions of man and society, to the extent that it does not recognize the existence of such dimensions and does not endeavor to direct its goals and priorities toward the same, is even less conducive to authentic 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.84

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 exercise of solidarity, that is to say in the love and service of neighbor, especially of the poorest: "For where truth and love are missing, the process of liberation results in the death of a freedom which will have lost all support."85

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 affirm the possibility of overcoming the obstacles which, by excess or by defect, stand in the way of development. And she must affirm her confidence in a true liberation. Ultimately, this confidence and this possibility are based on the Church's awareness of the divine promise guaranteeing 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), because he is the image of the Creator, placed under the redemptive influence of Christ, who "united himself in some fashion with every man,"86 and 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 underdevelopment, through fear, indecision and, basically, 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 countries 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 defense and promotion 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 peaceful campaign, a campaign to be conducted by peaceful means, in order to secure development in peace, in order to safeguard nature itself and the world about us. The Church too feels profoundly involved in this enterprise, and she hopes for its ultimate success.

Consequently, following the example of Pope Paul VI with his Encyclical Populorum Progressio,87 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 responsibility, 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 personal commitment to national and international undertakings - the measures inspired by solidarity 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 person, 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 program announced by Jesus himself in the synagogue at Nazareth, to "preach 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 accept able 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 reaffirmed 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 profession 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 bear witness together to our common 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 4:11f.)88 and the tradition of the Old Testament, as well as to the Muslims who, like us, believe in a just and merciful God. And I extend it to all the followers of the world's great religions.

The meeting held last October 27 in Assisi the city of St. 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 conditioned 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 teaching of the Second Vatican Council, in an enlightening passage of the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes: "When we have spread on earth the fruits of our nature and our enterprise - human dignity, fraternal communion, and freedom - according 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 transfigured, when Christ presents to his Father an eternal and universal kingdom...here on earth that kingdom is already present in mystery."89

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 transformed 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 coming 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.

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 favor 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. Jn 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 pilgrimage of faith90 and with maternal care intercedes 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 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.91

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."92 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 St. Peter's, on December 30 of the year 1987, the tenth of my Pontificate.



JOHN PAUL II





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

2. Pius XI, Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (May 15, 1931): AAS 23 (1931), pp. 177-J28; John XXIII, Mater et Magistra (May 15, 1961); AAS 53 (1961), pp. 401-464; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971): AAS 63 (1971), pp. 401- 441; John Paul II, Encyclical Laborem Exercens (September 14, 1981): AAS 73 (1981), pp. 577-647. Also Pius XII delivered a radio message (June 1, 1941) for the fiftieth anniversary of the Encyclical of Leo XIII: AAS 33 (1941), pp. 195-205.

3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, n. 4.

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

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

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

7. Cf. Encyclical Redemptoris Mater (March 25, 1987), n. 3: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 363f.; Homily at the Mass of January 1, 1987: L'Osservatore Romano, January 2, 1987.

8. The Encyclical Populorum Progressio cites the documents of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council nineteen times, and sixteen of the references are to the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes.

9. Gaudium et Spes, n. 1.

10. Ibid., n. 4; cf. Populorum Progressio, n. 13: loc. cit., pp. 263, 264.

11. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 3; Populorum Progressio, n. 13: loc. cit., p. 264.

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

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

14. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 57; Populorum Progressio, n. 41: loc. cit., p. 277.

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

16. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 86; Populorum Progres
回復 change? 2025-9-27 04:11
17. Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 69; Populorum Progressio, nn. 14- 21: loc. cit., pp. 264-268.

18. Cf. the Ins**tio of the Encyclical Populorum Progressio: loc. cit., p. 257.

19. 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.

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

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

22. Gaudium et Spes, n. 63.

23. Cf. Encyclical Populorum Progressio, n. 3: loc. cit., p. 258: cf. also ibid., n. 9: loc. cit., p. 261.

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

25. Ibid., n. 48: loc. cit., p. 281.

26. Cf. ibid., n. 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."

27. Ibid., n. 87: loc. cit., p. 299.

28. Cf. ibid., n. 53: loc. cit., p. 283.

29. Cf. ibid., n. 76: loc. cit., p. 295.

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

31. The expression "Fourth World" is used not just occasionally 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.

32. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 1.

33. Encyclical Populorum Progressio, n. 33: loc. cit., p. 273.

34. 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 Iustitia et Pax entitled: "What Have You Done to Your Homeless Brother?" The Church and the Housing Problem (December 27, 1987).

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

36. 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.

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

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

39. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 54: loc. cit., pp. 283f.: "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."

40. Cf. "Presentation" of the document At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical Approach to the International Debt Question (December 27, 1986).

41. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 53; loc. cit., p. 283.

42. At the Service of the Human Community: An Ethical Approach to the International Debt Question (December 27, 986), III, 2, 1.

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

44. Address at Drogheda, Ireland (September 29, 1979), n. 5: AAS 71 (1979), II, p. 1079.

45. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 37: loc. cit., pp. 275f.

46. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (November 22, 1981), especially in n. 30: AAS 74 (1982), pp. 115-117.

47. Cf. Human Rights: Collection of International Instruments, United Nations, New York, 1983; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (March 4, 1979), n. 17: AAS 71 (1979), p. 296.

48. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 78; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 76: loc. cit., pp. 294f.: "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."

49. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Familiarls Consortio (November 22, 1981), n. 6: AAS 74 (1982), p. 88: "...history is not simply a fixed progression toward what is better, but rather an event of freedom, and even a struggle between freedoms...."

50. 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.

51. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 19: loc. cit., pp. 266f.: "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 fulfillment 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 (May 14, 1971), n. 9: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 407f.

52. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 35: Paul VI, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (January 7, 1965): AAS 57 (1965), p. 232.

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

54. C f. Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (September 14, 1981), n. 4: AAS 73 (1981), pp. 584f., Paul VI Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 15: loc. cit., p. 265.

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

56. Cf. Praeconium Paschale, Missale Romanum, ed. typ. altera, 1975, p. 272: "O certe necessarium Adae peccatum, quod Christi morte deletum est! O felix culpa, quae talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem!"

57. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 1.

58. Cf. for example, St. Basil the Great, Regulae Fusius Tractatae, Interrogatio XXXVII, nn. 1-2: PG 31, 1009-1012 Theodoret of Cyr, De Providentia, Oratio VII: PG 83, 665-686; St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, n. 17: CCL 48 683-685.

59. Cf. for example, St. John Chrysostom, In Evang. S. Matthaei, Hom. 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, 53f.

60. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 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 any thing toward persons in need." In the previous number, the Pope had cited n. 69 of the Pastoral Constitution, Gaudium et Spes, of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council.

61. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 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."

62. Cf. ibid., n. 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, n. 29. Such fundamental equality is one of the basic reasons why the Church has always been opposed to every form of racism.

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

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

65. Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (December 2, 1984), n. 16: "Whenever the Church speaks of situations of sin, or when she condemns as social sins certain situations or the collective behavior 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 conspiracy 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 77 (1985), p. 217.

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

67. Cf. Liturgia Horarum, Feria III hebdomadae IIIae Temporis per annum, Preces ad Vesperas.

68. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 87: loc. cit., p. 299.

69. Cf. ibid., n. 13; loc. cit., pp. 263f., 296f.

70. Cf. ibid., n. 13: loc. cit., p. 263.

71. Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Conference of the Latin-American Bishops (January 28, 1979): AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196.

72. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 72: AAS 79 (1987), p. 586; Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 971), n. 4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 403f.

73. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, Part II, Ch. V, Section 2: "Building Up the International Community," nn. 83-90.

74. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (May 15, 1961): AAS 53 (1961), p. 440; Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris (April 11, 1963), Part IV: AAS 55 (1963), pp. 291-296; Paul VI Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971), nn 2-4: AAS 63 (1971), pp. 402-404.

75. Cf. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, nn. 3, 9: loc. cit., pp. 258, 261.

76. Ibid., n. 3: loc. cit., p. 258.

77. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 47: loc. cit., p. 280; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 68: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 583f.

78. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 69; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 22: loc. cit., p. 268; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 90: AAS 79 (1987), p. 594; St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theol. IIa IIae, q. 66, art. 2.

79. Cf. Address at the Opening of the Third General Conference of the Latin-American Bishops (January 28, 1979): AAS 71 (1979), pp. 189-196; Ad Limina Address to a group of Polish Bishops, (December 17, 1987), n. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, December 18, 1987.

80. 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 1:52f.).

81. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 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, n. 86.

82. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 35: loc. cit., p. 274: "Basic education is the first objective of a plan of development."

83. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Certain Aspects of the "Theology of Liberation" Libertatis Nuntius (August 6, 1984), Introduction: AAS 76 (1984), pp. 876f.

84. Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (December 2, 1984), n. 16: AAS 77 (1985), pp. 213-217; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986, nn. 38, 42: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 569, 571.

85. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, Libertatis Conscientia (March 22, 1986), n. 24: AAS 79 (1987), p. 564.

86. Cf. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, n. 22; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (March 4, 1979), n. 8: AAS 71 (1979), p. 272.

87. Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio, n. 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 program"; cf. also nn. 81-83, 87: loc. cit., pp. 296-298, 299.

88. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate, n. 4.

89. Gaudium et Spes, n. 39.

90. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, n. 58; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Mater (March 25, 1987) nn. 5-6: AAS 79 (1987), pp. 365-367.

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

92. Collect of the Mass "For the Development of Peoples": Missale Romanum, ed. typ. altera, 1975, p. 820.
回復 浮平 2025-9-27 21:32
1）特朗普在聯合國的講話主要批評了某些政策，強調國家利益，傳統能源，邊界安全，移民問題，是政策立場的表述，並未使用「邪惡」「心懷惡意」「控制機構」等措辭。

2）該頻道將政策討論極端解讀，宗教化敘事。特別是這段帶有陰謀論的聯想：【特朗普點名聯合國環境計劃至關重要，因為當你回顧其起源時，你會看到它毫不掩飾的邪惡。聯合國環境計劃最初由加拿大人莫里斯·斯特朗（Maurice Frederick Strong，猶太人，其表姐是曾熟悉的美國左翼記者安娜·路易斯·斯特朗，葬於八寶山革命公墓）領導，他是綠色議程、世界經濟論壇和人口控制優生運動交匯的關鍵人物。】

3）大外宣專門找這些極端政治評論，是否因為對上述這段話的敏感？

4）特朗普講話中確實對貿易和環境有批評內容：【貿易面臨的挑戰與氣候問題如出一轍。那些遵守規則的國家，其所有工廠都被掠奪殆盡。這實在令人痛心。它們已被摧毀——被那些違反規則的國家摧毀。正因為如此，美國如今對其他國家徵收關稅。】

價值模糊，信息堆砌，邏輯薄弱，神經敏感容易造成判斷偏差。

facelist doodle 塗鴉板

您需要登錄后才可以評論 登錄 | 註冊

change?最受歡迎的博文
  1. 《答聶文蔚》 [2017/04]
  2. 奧巴馬致女友：我每天都和男人做愛 [2023/11]
  3. 愛國者的喜訊，干吃福利的綠卡族回國希望大增 [2017/01]
  4. 周五落軌的真的是個華女 [2017/03]
  5. 現場! 全副武裝的警察突入燕郊 [2017/12]
  6. 法拉盛的「雞街」剛剛又鬧出人命 [2017/11]
  7. 大部分人品太差了--- 中國公園裡的「黃昏戀」 [2019/12]
  8. 亞裔男孩再讓美國瘋狂 [2018/09]
  9. 年三十工作／小媳婦好嗎 ／土撥鼠真屌／美華素質高? [2019/02]
  10. 看這些入籍美加的中國人在這裡的醜態百出下場可期 [2019/11]
  11. 黑暗時代的明燈 [2017/01]
  12. 文革宣傳畫名作選之 「群醜圖」 都畫了誰？ [2024/01]
  13. 當今的美國是不是還從根本上支持中國的民主運動？ [2017/10]
  14. 香港的抗爭再次告訴世人 [2019/06]
  15. 中國女歡呼日本地震 歐洲老公驚呆上網反思 [2024/01]
  16. 加入外國籍，你還是不是中國人？談多數華人的愚昧和少數華人的覺醒 [2018/02]
  17. 周末逛法拉盛，還是坐地鐵？ [2017/10]
  18. 春蠶到死絲方斷， 丹心未酬血已干 [2017/03]
其它[政經軍事]博文更多

關於本站 | 隱私權政策 | 免責條款 | 版權聲明 | 聯絡我們

Copyright © 2001-2013 海外華人中文門戶：倍可親 (http://big5.backchina.com) All Rights Reserved.

程序系統基於 Discuz! X3.1 商業版 優化 Discuz! © 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

本站時間採用京港台時間 GMT+8, 2025-11-18 14:29

返回頂部