I
would like today to highlight a few points from the second chapter of Pope
Francis’ letter. This chapter enters with realism and humility into the major
challenges facing families today. In fact, the second chapter cannot really be
understood without reference to the prior chapter, where the focus is on the
primacy of biblical teaching and the example of Jesus. At the same time, the
second chapter prepares us for what follows in the third, where the Pope
invites us to direct our gaze to the face of Christ. This turn to the Lord,
after identifying the contemporary challenges, is necessary and indispensable
for a Christian, lest we fall into despair for having failed to seek and trust
in the grace of God.
I
recommend that you read carefully the analysis offered in the second chapter
because the discernment of cultural, economic and technological currents forms
part of our responsibility as Christians. The Word of God lived and transmitted
in the heart of the Church guides us in this discernment, giving us light to
distinguish between the good and the bad.
In
general, the actual challenges identified in the second chapter cover an immense
horizon, touching the border of history that we are living; it includes
cultural changes, economic factors and technical advances that have made
possible the manipulation of the human body. “Our time,” as a poet has said, “with
a face of an enormous goodness”, says to us, “you will be like gods”. [i] The cultural crisis that
we live has much to do with how to understand the power that we have achieved
as human beings. To us it falls that we recognize and touch the wounds that
result from the bad use of this power, and to apply the salutary remedies
developed in the light of the Gospel.
The
phenomenon of individualism seems to be a life-style option that opens up on
account of these powerful human abilities; in this cultural environment it
expresses itself as exaggerated self-sufficiency. The idea that one can
maintain himself alone, without depending on the help of others, has been
promoted as a kind of contemporary ideal. It implies not feeling obligated to
take into account the circumstances of our neighbors. We are dealing with an
overvalued value. In fact human maturity does imply that we have dominion over
ourselves, and over our actions (as Saint Thomas teaches). [ii] Nevertheless, our age
proposes as a schema to organize society the determination of our decisions and
acts without any effective reference to the community around us. That is why
the Pope (AL 33) notes the following:
On the other hand, “equal
consideration needs to be given to the growing danger represented by an extreme
individualism which weakens family bonds and ends up considering each member of
the family as an isolated unit, leading in some cases to the idea that one’s
personality is shaped by his or her desires, which are considered absolute”. […]
Freedom of choice makes it possible to plan our lives and to make the most of
ourselves. Yet if this freedom lacks noble goals or personal discipline, it
degenerates into an inability to give oneself generously to others.
To
be generous, an essential element for us to be able to experience the greatness
of human life, can only be lived in relation to others persons. The fact that
we all enter into this world depending on the family indicates that the world
does not flourish on account of the fact that we are self-sufficient; on the
contrary, from the beginning of our lives, the free, in this case parents, generously
care for those who lack the ability to dominate their own actions, in this case
the children. We enter into this world with relation already written into our
very being. Adults are called to be generous with children, and children depend
on adults. And with the passing of time, arriving at the noble maturity of life
as children, and seeing that our siblings and our parents need our help, we
encounter the essential call to respond with generosity.
We
can respond with generosity to the lives around us, or we can try to build a
life with no reference to people around us. The second option, that of an exaggerated
self-sufficiency results in an isolated and lonely life. In extreme cases, it
results in what the Pope describes as a narcissism destructive of the
individual: Narcissism makes people
incapable of looking beyond themselves, beyond their own desires and needs. Yet
sooner or later, those who use others end up being used them- selves, manipulated
and discarded by that same mind-set. (AL 39)
It
seems clear that the indicated options between a life with little sense of responsible
relations with others and a mature life, lived with reference to others,
establishes the principal challenge of our time. It also seems to me that an
exaggerated individualism has had a corrosive effect within families. The Pope
has criticized this attitude within the Church and he has named it using the
word “self-referential”. We can easily understand that this ecclesial malady
has roots in a self-referential attitude that afflicts individuals, families
and entire societies. And so, it is understandable why the Pope writes the
following: This makes us see how important
it is to insist on the rights of the family and not only those of individuals.
The family is a good which society cannot do without, and it ought to be
protected. (AL 44)
The
Church, in the depth of her heart knows well that the Gospel clarifies what
human experience adumbrates. The Parable of the Good Samaritan affirms the
primacy of the relation against the modern myth of self-sufficiency. The
discernment of the Church over the actual conditions in this world so
economically and technologically powerful has everything to do with an
essential question: how does this economy, this technology, and this society
affect persons and the environment? An individual, a family, a society, and the
world at large cannot exercise dominion without reference to the neighbor.
To
exercise a power or exploit a technology cannot be decided in the abstract, as
if our decisions deserved to be approved as good without reference to how they
affect the young, the poor, the elderly, the environment, etc. The moral
calculation that does not take into account that the human condition is
essentially a condition in relation results in the tyranny of those who have economic
and technological control and power over those who do not have it: “We are creatures, and not omnipotent.
Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we
are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place,
accepting it and respecting it as it was created.” (AL 56)
Precisely
under this Christian and human insistence that we not forget our responsibilities
to each other, the Pope speaks of the deeper wounds in our time. For example: “Euthanasia and assisted suicide are serious
threats to families worldwide”. (AL 48) This is so because they offend the
dignity of the person and because they institutionalize a culture wherein the
powerful determine what happens to the life of the weak. In the end, under
these kinds of laws it is the living who determine who lives and who dies. Similarly,
this could be said of the technologies capable of manipulating embryos and
discarding the lives of the un-born. In his letter, the Holy Father proposes our
response to the migrant and those with special needs as a paradigmatic example of
the kind of relational generosity we are called to show forth in our world
today. Here I would stress that
dedication and concern shown to migrants and to persons with special needs
alike is a sign of the Spirit. Both situations are paradigmatic: they serve as
a test of our commitment to show mercy in welcoming others and to help the
vulnerable to be fully a part of our communities. (AL 47)
From
this perspective, we understand why the Pope calls us to humanize the world
economy. Despite the fact that the economic machine that moves the world is so
powerful, at the same time it shows signs of grave weakness. This is seen in
the high level of unemployment that afflicts the young, and the way it exploits
the immigrant and the unborn. All of this gravely affects the simple and
precious desire of many young people: to be able to establish a family.
At the risk of oversimplifying, we
might say that we live in a culture which pressures young people not to start a
family, because they lack possibilities for the future. Yet this same culture
presents others with so many options that they too are dissuaded from starting
a family”. In some countries, many young persons “postpone a wedding for
economic reasons, work or study. Some do so for other reasons, such as the
influence of ideologies which devalue marriage and family, the desire to avoid
the failures of other couples, the fear of something they consider too
important and sacred, the social opportunities and economic benefits associated
with simply living together, a purely emotional and roman- tic conception of
love, the fear of losing their freedom and independence, and the rejection of
something conceived as purely institutional and bureaucratic”. (AL 40)
Paradoxically,
in a world so advanced and that proposes the ideal of self-sufficiency, our young
people feel insecure and are afraid, as if they lack the hopes to be able to forge a
happy family life. As another poet once said: “This is for me the most
revolutionary thought possible: not that everyone have power over the world, as
was earlier sought, but, yes, that each one have a little power of his own
self.” [iii] The Pope always looks
toward the future, and tries to encourage our young people to overcome their
fears with a heroism inspired by the grace of God:
We need to find the right language,
arguments and forms of witness that can help us reach the hearts of young
people, appealing to their capacity for generosity, commitment, love and even
heroism, and in this way inviting them to take up the challenge of marriage
with enthusiasm and courage. (AL
40)
+df
[i] Javier Sicilia, “El diario de
Esteban Martorus”
[ii] Prologue
to the Second Part of the Summa Theologiae
No comments:
Post a Comment