| Part ofa series on |
| Catholic social teaching |
|---|
 |
| Overview |
 Catholic Church portal |
Theoption for the poor, or thepreferential option for the poor, is aCatholic social teaching that theBible gives priority to the well-being of the poor and powerless. It was first articulated by the proponents ofLatin American liberation theology during the latter half of the 20th century, and was championed by many Latin AmericanChristian democratic parties.[1] It is also a theological emphasis inMethodism.[2]
The "preferential option for the poor" refers to a trend throughout theBible, of priority being given to the well-being of the poor and powerless of society in the teachings and commands of God as well as the prophets and other righteous people.Jesus taught that on theDay of Judgment,God will ask what each person did to help the poor and needy: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me."[3] This is reflected inCatholic canon law, which states, "[The Christian Faithful] are also obliged to promote social justice and, mindful of the precept of the Lord, to assist the poor from their own resources."[4]
According to this doctrine, through one's words, prayers and deeds one must show solidarity with, and compassion for, the poor. Therefore, when instituting public policy one must always keep the "preferential option for the poor" at the forefront of one's mind. Accordingly, this doctrine implies that the moral test of any society is "how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. We are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor".[5]
Pope Benedict XVI has taught that "love for widows and orphans, prisoners, and the sick and needy of every kind, is as essential as the ministry of the sacraments and preaching of the Gospel".[6] This preferential option for the poor and vulnerable includes all who are marginalized in society, including unborn children, persons with disabilities, the elderly and terminally ill, and victims of injustice and oppression.Pope Leo XIV has also affirmed that "the preferential choice for the poor is a source of extraordinary renewal both for the Church and for society, if we can only set ourselves free of our self-centeredness and open our ears to their cry", adding that "it is easy to understand ... why we can also speak theologically of a preferential option on the part of God for the poor".[7]
The phrase "option for the poor" was used byFr. Pedro Arrupe, Superior General of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) in 1968 in a letter to the Jesuits of Latin America, although its principle existed before Arrupe coined the term.[8] The Option for the Poor, according to theologianGustavo Gutiérrez, "involves a commitment that implies leaving the road one is on" in order to enter the world of an "insignificant" person; selflessness is the goal of this lifestyle.[9] The option for the poor "goes through all of modern Catholic social teaching" according to theologian Daniel Groody.[10] The phrase rose to prominence during the 1960s for its connection toliberation theology, along with its simplicity in capturing doctrinal thought in a turbulent period for the Catholic church.
Jesuit activity inCiudad Neza, Mexico, in 1969 is an example of the option for the poor in action. After theTlatelolco massacre in 1968, demoralized young Jesuits activists "decided to leave behind the comforts of middle-class life in the capital and moved to Ciudad Neza in 1969," bringing a fresh, democratic air to a traditional violent political method in post-revolution Mexico.[11]
The principle was articulated by theCatholic Bishops of Latin America (CELAM) at the influential conferences inMedellin andPuebla. The resulting Medellin document,Excerpts on Justice, Peace, and Poverty, stated that the Church should support national communities "where all of the peoples but more especially the lower classes have, by means of territorial and functional structures" power to affect societal changes.[12] Christian Smith, in analyzing the Medellin document, writes that, while mild compared to other liberation theology doctrines, it "marked a radical departure from the rhetoric and strategy of an institution" which often provided religious passive support for conservative, authoritarian power.[13]
The Puebla conference held many of the same principles, but with some caveats. Conservative members of the Church saw the meeting as an opening to reverse social claims made by the Medellin conference, while liberation theologians desired to re-affirm the progress made in 1968. López Trujillo, the secretary general of CELAM made sure that "[c]onservative bishops were strategically placed to control committees" while "conservative staff members wrote the preparatory documents."[13] TheWashington Post reported that the conservative presence "will be felt in the direction of the conference, in the preparatory documents that will form the basis of discussion, and in the selection of bishops and others participating both as voting delegates and as advisers and official observers."[14] However, as reported byThe New York Times, the meeting ultimately struck a middle-ground, criticizing both capitalism and Marxism while calling on local communities to support the common person.[15]
But the principle behind the phrase was articulated earlier by the Catholic Bishops at theSecond Vatican Council, when in their Pastoral ConstitutionGaudium et spes they spoke of the poor from the very first line, repeating the word nine times and concluding: "The council, considering the immensity of the hardships which still afflict the greater part of mankind today, regards it as most opportune that an organism of the universal Church be set up in order that both the justice and love of Christ toward the poor might be developed everywhere."[16]
TheCompendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, published by theRoman Curia in 2004, summarizes the principle:
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 health care and, above all, those without hope of a better future.[17]
Pope Francis's apostolic exhortationEvangelii gaudium includes a long section on "The inclusion of the poor in society" (186-216) in which he noted that "Without the preferential option for the poor, 'the proclamation of the Gospel ... risks being misunderstood or submerged'."[18]
In its origins, the concept was connected with theLatin American liberation theology movement of the mid-20th century. As a developed theological principle, the option for the poor was first articulated by Fr.Gustavo Gutiérrez,O.P., in his landmark work,A Theology of Liberation (1971). Gutiérrez asserts that the principle is rooted in both the Old and New Testaments and claims that a preferential concern for the physical and spiritual welfare of the poor is an essential element of the Gospel.
In the mid-1980s, CardinalJoseph Ratzinger, who later became Pope Benedict XVI, led the effort by theHoly See to stop liberation theology, which he viewed as a form ofMarxism. In August 1984, shortly before the release of the official view of the Holy See, he strongly criticized several arguments of liberation theology in a private document to theologians leaked to the press.[19]Ratzinger believed that liberation theologians contend that Christians must engage in aclass struggle (in the Marxist sense) in the present to break down the gulf between rich and poor.[citation needed] As summarized by Cardinal Ratzinger, "The biblical concept of the poor provides a starting point for fusing the Bible's view of history with Marxist dialectic; it is interpreted by the idea of the proletariat in the Marxist sense and thus justifies Marxism as the legitimate hermeneutics for understanding the Bible."[19]
TheCongregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (of which Ratzinger was the Prefect) formulated the official Vatican view in "Instruction on Certain Aspects of the 'Theology of Liberation'". Its "limited and precise purpose: to draw the attention of pastors, theologians, and all the faithful to the deviations, and risks of deviation, damaging to the faith and to Christian living, that are brought about by certain forms of liberation theology which use, in an insufficiently critical manner, concepts borrowed from various currents of Marxist thought." The Instruction elaborated that it was not a disavowal of people who were responding to "the 'preferential option for the poor.' It should not at all serve as an excuse for those who maintain the attitude of neutrality and indifference in the face of the tragic and pressing problems of human misery and injustice."[20]
The Instruction implied that some liberation theologians supported methods similar to the deprivation of people's freedoms by totalitarian regimes in the name of liberation. It charged that these supporters "betray the very poor they mean to help."[21]
Jesuit theologian Enrique Nardoni has argued at length in his exhaustive study,Rise Up, O Judge, that the Bible as a whole and its cultural context support a preferential option for the poor.[22]
Several representatives ofLatin American liberation theology also use theoption for the poor as a criterion for assessingenvironmental conflicts. Arguing that the consequences ofenvironmental degradation are distributed unequally and concern thedeveloping countries and the poor to a greater extent than theindustrialized countries that caused the problem, authors likeLeonardo Boff[23] urge the Church to get engaged in environmental policy advocacy and to act as a lawyer on the side of the poor and marginalized. A position paper of theGerman Bishops' Conference on Climate Change (2007) therefore pleads for also applying theoption for the poor to the victims ofclimate change (no. 40).[24]
| International | |
|---|---|
| Other | |
