Popular Marian University

2006/2007

Course on the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the ChurchFirst Year

2nd LectureSaturday, February 24, 2007RAUL SILVAThe design of God on Mankind: Person and Society

Prepared Text

The Social Doctrine of the Church

In a recent talk to the International Conference on University and Social Doctrine of the Church, Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino issued a statement that was rich in content and promise. He said: “The social doctrine of the Church (…) is born from God’s project of love on humanity1 and transfuses the light and the warmth of the Gospel in the social relationships among people, inviting them to build, with intelligence, forms of structured charity. (…) Charity demands to be organized with intelligence, and intelligence demands to be animated by charity towards the fulfillment of the good of the human person” (no.3). Obviously, such statement rests upon the great work of the Compendium that had been started, as everyone knows, by the Vietnamese Cardinal Francois-Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan.

Making reference to the Social Doctrine of the Church, John Paul II actually speaks of a “new evangelization of sociality”. He explains: “The social doctrine of the Church is a call, first of all, to you, lay Christians, to live in society as ‘witnesses to the saving Christ’2 in the dimension of charity. This is, in fact, the hour for charity, for a social and political charity, able to animate, with the grace of the Gospel, the human realities of work, economics, politics, tracing a path of peace, justice and friendship among people. This is the time of a renewed season of social sanctity, of saints that manifest to the world and in the world the everlasting and inexhaustible fruitfulness of the Gospel”3.

With his encyclical Deus caritas est, Benedict XVI seems to echo those words, offering a vast reflection on the love of God and neighbor. With this programmatic encyclical, the Pope insists on “some fundamental elements, in order to generate throughout the world a renewed dynamism and commitment in humanity’s response to divine love” (no.1).

Therefore, from “God’s project of love on humanity” to “forms of structured charity”4 lays the path of the Church in the social realm and there is the source of the social 1 PONTIFICAL COUNCIL ON JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium on the Social Doctrine of the Church, Part 1, chapter II: “God’s design of love for humanity.”2 John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, no. 5.3 John Paul II, Talk on October 29, 2004, no. 3

doctrine of the Church itself, which is “a knowledge founded on the wisdom of faith in the revealed truth, which assumes within itself philosophy and theology as well as—even if in a different way—the social and human sciences” (no. 1). The social doctrine of the Church “is simultaneously one body of knowledge and several disciplines” (no.3). This is why we speak of the interdisciplinary dimension of the social doctrine.5

The “theological dimension” of the social doctrine of the Church

Let’s start, then, from the “theological dimension”, which, as John Paul II states, “is necessary both for interpreting and for resolving the actual problems of human cohabitation”6. In fact, either speaking of Man or Society, the Church always speaks within the theological dimension that is born from faith itself. Faith, then, gives light so that the Christian action is—as Benedict XVI wrote—led by “a heart that sees”7. What does it see? “This heart sees where love is needed and acts consequently” (Id.).

Benedict XVI also says:”Faith by its specific nature is an encounter with the living God—an encounter opening up new horizons to us extending beyond the sphere of reason. But it is also a purifying force for reason itself. From God’s standpoint, faith liberates reason from its blind spots and therefore helps it to be ever more fully itself. Faith enables reason to do its work more effectively and to see its proper object more clearly. This is where Catholic social doctrine has its place”8. This “purifying force” is manifested in the elaboration of moral judgments in the various areas of our life, in particular in its political, social, cultural and economic aspects.

For Benedict XVI, “the Church has an indirect duty here, in that she is called to contribute to the purification of reason and to the reawakening of those moral forces without which just structures are neither established nor proven effective in the long run”9.

John Paul II had declared in fact that “the social doctrine of the Church enlightens with the light of the Revelation the fundamental values for an orderly and united human cohabitation, ransoming it from darkness and ambiguity”10. He added: “Lay Christians, open to the action of God’s grace, are the living instrument through whom these values can penetrate efficiently history.”

4 Among those “forms of structured charity” we can consider the many “charitable service organizations”, expressions of the “charitable activity of the Church” (cf. Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est, no. 30). Cardinal Renato Martino’s talk refers mostly to the presence of the laity in the world, its specific field of action.5 Cf. the letter Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of State, sent to Cardinal Renato R. Martino, President of the Pontifical Council on Justice and Peace, at the conclusion of the International Conference on University and Social Doctrine of the Church, (Rome, November 17-18), sponsored by the Pontifical Council on Justice and Peace itself together with the Congregation for Catholic Education.6 John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, no. 55.7 Cf. Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est, no. 31.8 Id., no. 28.9 Id., no. 29.10 John Paul II, Talk at the Vatican Foundation Centesimus Annus-Pro Pontefice (December 4, 2004), no. 5.

This is the dimension we want to focus on today. We will do so concentrating on the “fundamental premises of the social doctrine” of the Church contained in the first part of the Compendium, which is: “God’s design of love for man and for society” (nos. 20-59).11

We will attempt to hold on to an essential theme for the comprehension of the social doctrine: “Person and Personalism” within the vision of the Compendium.

I. GOD’S DESIGN OF LOVE FOR HUMANITY

I.1 THE LIBERATING ACTION OF GOD IN ISRAEL’S HISTORY

a. The gratuitous proximity of God

The role of religions – The mystery of God

Penetrating in the text of the Compendium (CSDC) we cannot help notice the immediate reference to “every authentic religious experience in any and all cultural traditions” (no. 20). Such a reference can be explained by the life of the Church and by the conviction expressed by John Paul II in his encyclical Centesimus Annus, in 1991:

“The world today is ever more aware that solving serious national and international problems is not just a matter of economic production or of juridical or social organization, but also calls for specific ethical and religious values, as well as changes of mentality, behavior and structures. (…) In fact I am convinced that the various religions, now and in the future, will have a preeminent role in preserving peace and in building a society worthy of man”12.

In the context of the religious pluralism in which we live, we are brought together by the common experience of the Mystery of God which is discovered and presents itself as “origin of what is” and “standard of what should be.”

Fabio Ciardi spoke recently at a Hindu/Christian seminar in Mumbai, India about God’s mystery13. He first explained the etymology of the word “mystery”, how it comes from the Greek and refers to the ancient mystery cults and religions, how its root is myo, a verb

11 Out of these “fundamental premises of the social doctrine”, lesson 4 will present “the mission of the Church and the nature of the social doctrine”, in the light of the charism of unity and lesson 5 will deal with “the principles and the values of the social doctrine”, with the added dimension brought by the charism.12 John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, n. 60. As we all know, in the last decades, deepening the theme of “the universal aspiration to salvation” and, therefore, natural and supernatural or biblical revelation, the Church has recognized the authenticity of other religious experiences and has manifested an openness to religious pluralism and to inter-religious dialogue as a “necessary path” (cf. John Paul II, Rome, November 13, 1992). In this respect, the many documents issued by the magisterium since 1963 and the dialogue initiatives wisely and prophetically promoted by John Paul II—“the spirit of Assisi” as he called it—in favor of peace are noteworthy. (Cf. John Paul II, Letter to His Eminence Cardinal Walter Kasper on the occasion of the XVIII meeting entitled “Religion and Culture: the courage for a new humanism”, September 3, 2004).13 Cf. Fabio Ciardi, Mistero e mistici nel cristianesimo, in Nuova Umanita’ XXIX (2007/1) 169, pp. 119-130.

that means closing one’s eyes, indicating that the initiation to the rites was secret14. He then explained how “for us, Christians, the mystery is the project that God has for humanity: God wants to enter in communion with humanity and make it participate in His life of love which is a communion of love”15. In this perspective, “Christianity represents the opening of God’s mystery in history; God enters history in order to bring history into God”16.

The Christian experience, therefore, brings to maturity and to completion the universal experience of the mystery and makes us all discover how to be together, encouraging the members of other religions to “offer their contribution to this new humanism that is so much needed by our times”17, working together on joint projects or simply forming “cells of universal brotherhood” as Chiara Lubich hoped for in her address at the 2002 meeting in Assisi18.

Gift and gratuitousness

In experiencing the mystery, “it is important to consider the dimension of gift and gratuitousness, which is seen as an underlying element of the experience that the human beings have of their existence together with others in the world, as well as the repercussions of this dimension on the human conscience, which senses that it is called to manage responsibly and together with others the gift received”19. Gift and gratuitousness find their concrete expression in the so-called golden rule.

Gratuitousness is “the characteristic of what springs out freely and unconditionally from a superabundant initiative.” John Paul II also declares: “The awareness of gratuitousness in each human life and in history has been present on and off: as awe in front of nature or in front of a birth, as aching reflection in front of death, as constructive and, unfortunately, at times destructive experience in the delicate field of affectivity”20.

Benedict XVI observes an interesting effect of the experience of gift and gratuitousness: the existence of countless initiatives that have at their root the logic of the free gift, what we would call the culture of giving, in the universality of its concrete applications: “The increase in diverse organizations engaged in meeting man’s various needs is ultimately due to the fact that the command of love of neighbor is inscribed by the Creator in man’s very nature”21. This thrust towards a love that is gift is within each one of us: a free gift.

14 Id. p. 119.15 Id.16 Id. pp. 121-122.17 John Paul II, op. cit., no. 2.18 Chiara Lubich, Address to the meeting in Assisi, January 24, 2002, www.vatican.va.19 Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, no. 20.20 John Paul II, Message to Giovanni Locatelli, Bishop of Rimini at the approach of the 8th Meeting for Friendship among People, August 6, 1987.21 Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est, no. 31. To the question: “what are the essential elements of Christian and ecclesial charity?”, the Pope answers by sketching in three lines the “profile of charitable action in the Church”: 1. response to immediate needs with professional and humane competence, with heartfelt concern; 2. A “heart that sees”, independent of parties and ideologies; 3. love that is free, credible witness to Christ. Benedict XVI continues indicating the main points of the spirituality that animates the

The golden rule

In the preface to The Golden Rule as Universal Code of Ethics22 we read: “The golden rule, in whatever language it is expressed, in the various wisdom traditions, appears immediately as a striking intuition and, simultaneously, as a highly persuasive commandment. It is as if we were dealing with a universal ethical principle not only because it is present in nearly all the ancient human wisdom tradition, but also because it is difficult to argue with the spiritual truth it carries. It seems to indicate that we are faced here with one of these elementary formulations of the spirit that we usually call principle to express how from this point of light both thought and human thrust find their direction. Certainly, one can always resist these points of light, but it is usually a minority position. The great majority of the community, with more or less solemnity, gives those points of light an uncontested authority.”

Here are a few formulations of the golden rule23 expressed before the time of Jesus: for Zoroaster (628-551 B.C.) “Whatever is good for all and for each one, for anyone, that is good for me (…). Whatever I consider as good in itself, I owe to each. Only universal law is true law” (Gathas, 43.1); for the Mahabharata (3rd century B.C.) “do not do to others what you do not want done to you; wish for others what you wish and expect for yourself (…). Pay attention: this is all of the Dharma” (Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, 113.8); for the author of the deuterocanonical book of Tobit (200 B.C.): “Do to no one what you yourself dislike” (Tob. 4,15); finally for Hillel (1st century B.C.): “Do not do to others what you do not want done to you” (Btalmud, Shabbath 31st).

John Paul II, in his sensitivity to all that unites humanity and with his skill at emphasizing and enriching those elements in the light of the Christian faith stated the following to a group of representatives of non-Christian religions: “It is the duty of most religions to teach respect for conscience, love for neighbor, justice, forgiveness, self-control, freedom from creatures, prayer and meditation. Jesus Christ who we Christians believe and proclaim as our Saving Lord, reminds us of the golden rule: “Do to others as you would have them do to you” (Lk 6:31). Your own beloved religions, I believe, must have a similar commandment that is dictated by every human conscience. The observance of this golden rule is an excellent foundation for peace. Peace needs to be built on justice, truth, freedom and love. Religions fulfill the necessary function of helping to prepare human hearts so that true peace may be fostered and preserved”24.

In his insightful review of The Golden Rule as Universal Code of Ethics, Tomas Tatransky, notes the continuity between Old and New Testament and between the biblical world and Greek culture. He then proceeds to explain how “Jesus could count on the recognition—by his Hebrew contemporaries—of a certain equivalence between the fulfillment of the Law, love of neighbor and the golden rule. Yet, Jesus introduces also

“collaborators” of the charitable activities of the Church.22 Various Authors, La regola d’oro come etica universale, Vita e Pensiero, Milan 2005, p. VII. T. Tatransky gives an interesting review of this book, Sul volume The golden rule as universal ethics, Nuova Umanita’ XXVIII (2006/5) 167, pp. 643-659.23 Id., p. VII, note 1.24 John Paul II, Talk to a group of representatives of non-Christian religions (October 29, 1986)

new elements: first of all, he re-offers the golden rule in its positive version to make explicit, then, its connection to the “Law and the prophets” (Mt. 7:12) and the love of enemies (Lk. 6:31 seg.). We could also add that an other fundamental characteristic of the message of Jesus (…) is the consonance and the positive re-formulation of the golden rule and the reciprocity inherent to the new commandment of Jesus (Jn. 13:34 and 15,12.17)”25.

After having gone over the golden rule in the Judeo-Christian tradition and in other cultures including the European culture (from Pascal to Marion and others), Tomas Tatransky concludes his review as follows: “The love of God (objective and subjective genitive) recharges the ethos of the golden rule even in situations where a simple horizontal logic could lead us to hesitate”26.

Gift and gratuitousness: here is the dual track that encompasses the whole theme of this first chapter on “God’s design of love on humanity”. It is truly a design of love which is slowly revealed to man in the liberating action of God throughout Israel’s history, then, in Jesus Christ, fulfillment of the Father’s design of love. In the light of such revelation we can understand both the human person and the mission of the Church.

Gratuitous proximity of God in Israel’s history

To the man who is looking for God, He manifests himself progressively in the gratuitousness of a love which is together liberation from the slavery of Egypt and promise (cf. Ex. 3:7-8). God enters history and establishes His people, the people of God, through the gift of freedom and land.

Exodus. According to Joseph Ratzinger, “In the accounts of the events leading up to Israel’s flight from Egypt, as well as in those that describe the flight itself, the Exodus appears to have two distinct goals. The first, which is familiar to us all, is the reaching of the Promised Land, in which Israel will at last live on its own soil and territory, with secure borders, as a people with the freedom and independence proper to it. But we also hear repeatedly of another goal. God’s original command to Pharaoh runs as follows: ‘Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness’ (Ex. 7:16). (…) Israel departs, not in order to be a people like all the others; it departs in order to serve God. (…) The land is given to the people to be a place for the worship of the true God”27.

Covenant and Decalogue. With the Covenant that God has established with Moses (cf. Ex.:24) “on Sinai the people receive not only instructions about worship, but also an all-embracing rule of law and life. Only thus can it become a people. (…) In the ordering of the covenant on Sinai, the three aspects of worship, law, and ethics are inseparably interwoven. (…) What took place on Sinai (…) is what gives meaning to the taking of the land. Sinai is not a halfway house, a kind of stop for refreshment on the road to what really matters. No, Sinai gives Israel, so to speak, its interior land without which the

25 T. Tatransky, op. cit. p.646.26 Id. P. 659.27 Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, Ignatius, San Francisco, 2000, pp. 15-17.

exterior one would be a cheerless prospect. Israel is constituted as a people through the covenant and the divine law it contains. It has received a common rule for righteous living. This and this alone is what makes the land a real gift. Sinai remains present in the Promised Land. When the reality of Sinai is lost, the Land, too, is inwardly lost, until finally the people are thrust into exile. Whenever Israel falls away from the right worship of God, when she turns away from God to the false gods (the powers and values of this world), her freedom, too, collapses. (…) Thus we can see what the foundation of existence in the Promised Land must be, the necessary condition for life in community and freedom. It is this: steadfast adherence to the law of God, which orders human affairs rightly, that is, by organizing them as realities that come from God and are meant to return to God”28. Moral life is, therefore, humanity’s response to God’s free love.

Natural moral law. The Decalogue is also a special expression of natural law. God has given humanity “the ability to reach the knowledge of fundamental truth regarding life and its destiny through the light of its reason, and concretely, to discover the norms of righteousness”29. “The primary and most general principle of this law is ‘to do good and avoid evil.’ (…) It is the source where both fundamental rights and ethical imperatives that must be observed spring forth”30. Natural moral law holds an inalienable value for the real and coherent progress of personal life and social order: it emphasizes the true dimension of the human person; it highlights essential duties and fundamental rights; it is at the root of universal morality; it constitutes the primordial rule of every social life.31

Rights of the Poor. From the Decalogue, we draw both a commitment of faithfulness to God and a code to manage social relationships among the people of the Covenant. These are regulated by what is called the rights of the poor: “If one of your kinsmen is in need (…) you shall not harden your heart nor close your hand to him in his need. Instead, you shall open your hand to him and freely lend him enough to meet his need” (Deut. 15: 7-8). This principle also applies to foreigners (cf. Lev 19:33-34). Sabbatical Year, Jubilee Year. “Besides requiring fields to lie fallow, these laws call for the cancellation of debts and a general release of persons and goods: everyone is free to return to his family of origin and to regain possession of his birthright” (CSDC, no. 24). In this way, faithfulness to the plan of God is guaranteed.

b. Creation principle and gratuitous action of God

The people of God had already experienced the saving power of God in its liberation from slavery in Egypt and, consequently, in the gift of freedom and land. In the biblical creation story, it expresses in wisdom terms, in an inspired language, what it has received as revelation: God is the Creator of all that is, the origin of all that exists. For Israel, in the biblical revelation, this is a moment without precedent; it is the moment when Israel

28 Id. pp. 18-20.29 John Paul II, Audience with the members of the International Theological Commission (October 7, 2004).30 Benedict XVI, Audience with the participants in the International Congress on Natural Law sponsored by the Pontifical Lateran University (February 12, 2007).31 Cf. John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, no. 97.

penetrates truly the Mystery of the only God, “origin of what is” and “measure of what is to be.”

“In Israel's profession of faith, to affirm that God is Creator does not mean merely expressing a theoretical conviction, but also grasping the original extent of the Lord's gratuitous and merciful action on behalf of man. In fact, God freely confers being and life on everything that exists. Man and woman, created in his image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:26-27), are for that very reason called to be the visible sign and the effective instrument of divine gratuitousness in the garden where God has placed them as cultivators and custodians of the goods of creation” (CSDC, no.26). Faith in creation puts us in a very special relationship with God the Creator, with the created world and with the human person32.

It is precisely this relationship that is wounded in the experience of sin (cf. Gen 3:1-24). “Disobedience to God means hiding from his loving countenance and seeking to control one's life and action in the world. Breaking the relation of communion with God causes a rupture in the internal unity of the human person, in the relations of communion between man and woman and of the harmonious relations between mankind and the rest of creation.33 It is in this original estrangement that are to be sought the deepest roots of all the evils that afflict social relations between people, of all the situations in economic and political life that attack the dignity of the person, that assail justice and solidarity.” (CSDC, no. 27).

I.2 JESUS CHRIST FULFILLMENT OF THE FATHER’S DESIGN OF LOVE

In Jesus, Word of God made man, the decisive event of God’s interaction with humanity is fulfilled (CSDC, nos. 28-29). Out of love, God made himself so close to us to the point of becoming one of us. With the awareness of being the Son, Jesus acts in continuity with the gratuitousness and the mercy of the Father: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring glad tidings to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19; cf. Is 61:1-2). The acceptable year is 32 Cf. Joseph Ratzinger, In principio Dio creo’ il cielo e la terra. Riflessioni sulla creazione e il peccato, Lindau, Turin 2006.33 Cf. Gaudium et Spes,13 : “Although he was made by God in a state of holiness, from the very onset of his history man abused his liberty, at the urging of the Evil One. Man set himself against God and sought to attain his goal apart from God. Although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, but their senseless minds were darkened and they served the creature rather than the Creator. What divine revelation makes known to us agrees with experience. Examining his heart, man finds that he has inclinations toward evil too, and is engulfed by manifold ills which cannot come from his good Creator. Often refusing to acknowledge God as his beginning, man has disrupted also his proper relationship to his own ultimate goal as well as his whole relationship toward himself and others and all created things. Therefore man is split within himself. As a result, all of human life, whether individual or collective, shows itself to be a dramatic struggle between good and evil, between light and darkness. Indeed, man finds that by himself he is incapable of battling the assaults of evil successfully, so that everyone feels as though he is bound by chains. But the Lord Himself came to free and strengthen man, renewing him inwardly and casting out that ‘prince of this world’ (John 12:31) who held him in the bondage of sin. For sin has diminished man, blocking his path to fulfillment. The call to grandeur and the depths of misery, both of which are a part of human experience, find their ultimate and simultaneous explanation in the light of this revelation.

the jubilee year in which all is restored, in which all is forgiven, according to God’s design.

“His disciples (…) are called to live like him and, after his Passover of death and resurrection, to live also in him and by him, thanks to the superabundant gift of the Holy Spirit, the Consoler, who internalizes Christ's own style of life in human hearts.” (CSDC, no. 29).

Also, it is in the Passover of Jesus that the full revelation of the Trinitarian love of God is revealed (CSDC, nos. 30-33).

Piero Coda published a text that anticipated the encyclical Deus caritas est for its emphasis on agape, the love of God that is made visible in the person of Jesus. In this text, he notes the absolute uniqueness of the human person in its social dimension. In order to understand contemporary humanism we must pay attention to the signs of times.

We, too, are sensitive to the signs of times precisely because they are the signs that indicate the will of God in history. When Chiara, for example, identifies the path for a zone to follow, we say she had an intuition but this intuition came out of signs perceived in the concrete reality. This is the Church’s method and this is why Vatican II speaks of signs of times.

Piero Coda has this to say on the topic: “For those that live the faith experience, understanding the signs of times is a demanding necessity: we must analyze at the light of the Gospel what happens in our history with the certainty that God is not absent from it, but that instead it is the theatre where his project of love for humanity is displayed. He, through his Son who became man, has planted his tent in our midst and through his Spirit, ‘he fills the universe’—the Son of God sits at the heart of history34—and lives in the hearts of those that look for the path for truth and justice”35. Precisely, the Vatican Council “felt the urge to address humanity looking at the great and demanding moments that history marks along its path”36.

In this awareness of the signs of times, we realize how the human person comes first, is put in evidence: “The Church is invited to become aware—as John Paul II will say—that man is its path and that the Gospel of Christ offers history a specific and determined vision of what man is called to be”37. In fact, this sign is the sign of God Himself as God became man. We go back to the Incarnation and its importance: “If, to look at history we need to look at man, to look at man we need to look at Christ”38. We cannot understand the human person unless we look at it, we understand it from Christ’s perspective, looking at the Person of Jesus.

34 Cf. Hans Urs con Balthasar, das Hertz der Welt, Arche verlag, Zurich, 195435 Piero Coda, Gesu’ Cristo, rivelazione dell’agape trinitaria, var. auth., Mistero di Cristo mistero dell’uomo, Paoline, Milan 2005, pp. 47-48.36 Id. p.48.37 Id.38 Id.

This is what the Council says: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come (Rom. 5:14), namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear”39.

Up to now we have mostly underlined the necessity of salvation, because we have sinned. The step we are now taking and that theology, through the centuries, has perceived, is that God, too, needs man—a need born out of love—and this is why God became man. In this perspective, the relationship between Christology and anthropology takes a new light: it is in Christ and in view of Him that man was created and saved. All things were created through Him and, therefore, also man, but in function of Him.

What does salvation mean for us, then? We are redeemed from sin, but we are also divinized, justified; we participate in God, we are sons in the Son; with the incarnation of the Son of God, the gates of heaven are opened wide for ever so that we too can enter in God.

This entering in God means penetrating into God’s experience, in the very life of God. And God is Love. He who abides in love, he who loves is in God as St. John says (cf. 1Jn. 4:7-21). The design of God upon us consists in this: collective participation in the life of God, in Trinitarian life.

“The Trinitarian agape opens a horizon of life and thought to which we are introduced by Jesus Christ and that the Spirit continuously keeps present and renews”40. We enter, here, into a central theme of the Christian faith: Christ mediator41. For Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, in fact, “the glory of God is the living man, but the life of man is the vision of God”42. This being in God is being according to our design; but this being in God is a collective reality. God does not want us, did not create us in order to be alone but in order to enter together in this relationship with Him.

“This is Christian anthropology shining on the face of Christ crucified and risen: God agape in Christ contemplates the transfigured beauty of his masterpiece, man. And man lives contemplating and welcoming in Christ the agape of Father, Son and Holy Spirit”43.

II. THE PERSON AND PERSONALISM WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE COMPENDIUM OF THE SOCIAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH

39 Gaudium et Spes no.22.40 Piero Coda, op. cit., p. 52.41 Cf. Hubertus Blaumeiser, Gesu’ Mediatore/1. Un Mediatore che e’ nulla. Prospettive teologiche alla luce di alcuni scritti di Chiara, in Nuova Umanita’, XX (1998/3-4) 117-118, pp. 385-407.42 Adv. Haer., IV,20,7.43 Piero Coda, op. cit., p.63.

Reading the signs of times, we must, at this point, even if briefly, refer to the development of the concepts of person and personalism.44 We will just cover a few general notions to be kept in mind while studying the Compendium.

Because the Church exists for humanity, the social doctrine of the Church is part of its very mission. In this perspective, the story of the Work of Mary is very beautiful because right from the birth of the charism of unity there was an immediate relationship with the poor certainly motivated by the circumstances of the war but also enlightened by the discovery of unity and, therefore of our being children of God in a universal kinship.45 Then, there was great joy when the economy of communion was born, because our charism, together radically human and divine, was dealing also with social wounds.

Origin of the concept of person

The concept of Person is philosophical. More precisely, it comes from philosophical anthropology; it deals with the human being and emphasizes its autonomy, dignity and freedom.

Where does the word come from? The etymological origin of the word person comes from the Latin personare, “to resound”. The term persona referred to the theatrical mask used in antiquity both to identify a character and to amplify his or her voice. To each mask belonged a different voice, not to be confused with any other, and the mask improved acoustics in the open spaces where performances took place.

The patristic development of person

Soon, the term person was adopted by Christianity.

The concept of person does not exist in the New Testament but it is the fruit of the convergence of two sources: the specific Christian development in the early centuries, and the Semitic influence.

By person we must understand this by which man exists per se, subsists. Coined to address theological problems, the notion of person is positioned on the general background of the Covenant, of man being called to be God’s partner. However, in the complex relationship with the Greek world, the notion of person will slowly drift towards anthropology ending in becoming an instrument for man to know oneself and undergoing the influence of the cosmological and individualistic perspective of the Greek world.46

44 Cf. Sabino Palumbieri, L’uomo, questo paradosso. Antropologia filosofica II. Trattato sulla concentrazione e condizione antropologica, Urbaniana, Rome 2000. The author covers at length and in depth the concepts we will deal with in this second part of the lecture.45 Cf. Chiara Lubich, Jesus: The Heart of His Message, New City Press, Hyde Park 2001.46 Cf. Gianni Colzani, Antropologia teologica. L’uomo paradosso e mistero, EDB, Bologna, 1988, pp.127-129.

In Christianity, this key concept developed during the debate about Trinitarian, Christological and anthropological issues47, mostly in the context of the Trinitarian/Christological disputes that gave rise to the first seven ecumenical councils.

The first great contribution to the philosophical development of the concept of person happened in the elaboration of the patristic theology of the Trinity. The word person was used to attempt to explain the dogma of the Trinity in terms that were comprehensible to human reason. The main motivation was to defend the Church from accusations of polytheism and to stem various Christological heresies that tended to deny either the humanity or the divinity of Christ. “God is a unique nature in three Persons.” From this statement, the concept of person emerges as relationship within God between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and, therefore, with man.

“In the Latin speaking Christian world the term person was introduced with a clear Trinitarian connotation by Tertullian (…); in the Greek speaking world, Origen introduced the concept of ipostasi. These terms are the first attempts to express the unrepeatable originality that belongs to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In saying that all three are persons, we are saying—even if only implicitly at first—that they are not interchangeable. This differentiation is first expressed in the fact that each voice is distinct. Tertullian used the term person in the awareness, based on scripture, of that distinction within the divinity. Here is revealed “disctinctio trinitatis”. In Scripture, we distinguish the “persons” of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is not the same that speaks, to whom it is spoken, and about whom it is spoken. With ease one went from the subject that speaks, from the simple protagonist of the dialogue, to the subject in itself, to the “person” in the way we intend it. The concept was there from the start even if it was enriched with various connotations through time. With the concept of person we want to express the distinction that is in God, the distinction that constitutes the Trinity, distinction in unity”48.

Further reflection during the Council of Nicea emphasized the “relationship”, therefore how the three divine ipostasi (the three Persons of the Trinity) exist in a reciprocal relationship.49

De Trinitate50, by Saint Augustine, marked a decisive step. The person is “substantia singularis atque individuale”, which means “both unique and individual”51. For the bishop of Hippo, “the relationship is based on an absolute substrate”52.

47 Cf. Giulio Maspero, La Trinita’ e l’uomo, Citta’ Nuova, Rome, 2004, pp. 228-237.48 Luis F. Ladaria, La Trinita’ mistero di comunione, Paoline, Milan 2004, pp. 88-89.49 Cf. Id., pp.91-95.50 Cf. Piero Coda, La Trinita’ da Agostino al charisma dell’unita’ (September 30, 2003). In this talk to the Abba School, while he develops in depth the understanding of the Trinity and singles out the novelty Chiara Lubich brought to the subject, he never explicitly uses the term person. Yet, this talk, that was also published by Nuova Umanita’, allows us to understand the development of the comprehension of the Trinity throughout the Church’s history. Cf. Piero Coda, L’esperienza e l’intelligenza della fede in Dio Trinita’ da sant’Agostino a Chiara Lubich, in Nuova Umanita’ XXVIII (2006/5) 167, pp.527-552.51 Cf. Saint Augustine, Opere IV, Citta’ Nuova, Rome 1973, p. 317.52 Luis F. Ladaria, op. cit., p. 98.

Severino Boezio affirms that the person is “individual substance of a rational nature”53. “The relationship is what creates distinction without affecting the unity of the divine essence”54. Therefore, “the relationship is what allows distinction in God”55.

From the reflection on God and Jesus Christ we came to reflect on man himself. In analogy between Creator and creature, the term person can be applied to man as well. Yet, the development of the concept of person in the anthropological sphere presents some ambiguity because of the legalistic use of the term when it refers to the legal subject and the legal person. For this reason, persona is usually avoided in the Latin world when referring to human nature and conditio is a preferred term.

For Gregory of Nyssa, the creation of man in the image of the Trinity corresponds to the divinization of man, through which God made him participate in each perfection, as the divine nature is the sum of all perfections.56

According to Saint Augustine, in the human microcosm we find by analogy traces of the three divine Persons57. According to K. Rahner, until very recently, omitting any reference to the Trinity would have had no impact on Christian experience. Yet, all during the twentieth century, Trinitarian anthropology has made considerable progress and is still waiting for further decisive development. This is where the specific contribution of the charism of unity takes place. It is a new horizon, already revealed in experience and thought processes that find a response in how it is received, as a free gift from God to today’s humanity and also as a heritage to be passed on to future generations.

Personalism

Personalism is the philosophical current that has been most involved with this concept. It is a school of thought of Christian (mostly Catholic) inspiration born in France in the early 1930’s around Emmanuel Mounier and the journal Esprit that he founded in 1932. It expresses itself consistently on different subjects. The general viewpoint of Esprit goes beyond politics and looks for foundations and values for a new humanism and a new worldwide civilization.

53 Severino Boezio, Liber de persona et duabus naturiis, 3 (PL 64, c. 1343).54 Luis F. Ladaria, op. cit., pp. 99-100.55 Id. p. 101.56 Giulio Maspero, op. cit., pp. 228-237. It is mostly in the second chapter—Apofatismo e persona (pp. 201-265)—that the author deals with our subject matter (pp. 228-237). Giving priority to experience, apophatism will not allow us to close ourselves into intellectualism. This short reference to Gregory of Nyssa reminds me of the concept of person as expressed in Giuseppe M. Zanghi’s work and articles, in particular those published from 1991 onward. It is certainly an expression of the anthropology that is maturing more and more within the Abba School, as a ripe fruit of the charism of unity. In the same vein. I see in the pontificate of Benedict XVI and in his explicit reference to God who is Love, an important development of Christian anthropology, unavoidable foundation of the Social Doctrine of the Church and of any socially inspired project. This confirms that every action needs to be checked at the light of profound reflection.57 Cf. Piero Coda, L’esperienza e l’intelligenza della fede in Dio Trinita’ da sant’Agostino a Chiara Lubich, in Nuova Umanita’ XXVIII (2006/5) 167, pp. 527-552.

Born in troubled social and political times, between the two world wars, Personalism finds in the person the key to resolve the crisis of culture and civilization. Mostly, it is a political response, a “third way” between the dangers of capitalist individualism and the collectivist ideologies of fascism and communism (those ideologies, however, were never equated to each other by the personalist thinkers who were clearly Christian democrats leaning strongly to the left).

For Personalism there is no contradiction between conscience and social responsibility. They are both indispensable dimensions for the complete fulfillment of man who, as a person, precisely is in relation: relation with God and relation with the neighbor.

Around the person (who cannot be reduced to the individual) a new type of sociality develops: the “community of persons” to be achieved through a vast “personalistic and communitarian revolution.” It is a society where the juridical structure and the exercise of power are subordinated as much as possible to the person and in function of his dignity. On the other hand, communitarian openness up to the limit of communication and interpersonal communion is essential for the person.

Another theme that is dear to Personalism is restoring the value of corporeity and the critique of dualistic interpretations. In this philosophical environment we find thinkers that are diverse and give birth to various research endeavors: among them, Paul Ricoeur is the French master on phenomenology and hermeneutics; Jacques Maritain was a great contributor to the development of neo-Thomism in the twentieth century.

Some non-Christian philosophers are considered personalist—such as the Jews, Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas—for their emphasis on relationism.

With Personalism, many twentieth century currents of thought cross, in particular neo-Thomism, phenomenology, Christian existentialism (for instance Gabriel Marcel).

Most of all, through Personalism, concepts are developed that will allow theology, Trinitarian anthropology and the social doctrine to go further. This is, in fact, what seems to be happening now. To state, for example, that “man is the way of the Church” can have unimaginable consequences at every level of human life as well as in theology in general. Because of the unique relationship between God and man throughout history, we cannot speak of man without speaking of God nor can we speak of God, I believe, without speaking of man and, mostly, without finding God among men and man in God.