Charity in Truth (Caritas In Veritate)
Pope Benedict XVI’s Encyclical
June 29, 2009

Encyclical Summary
By John Hart, Boston University

In Caritas In Veritate, Benedict explores several themes of interest to the Forum on Religion and Ecology. In particular, he advocates that Catholics (and others interested in Catholic teachings) should responsibly care for Earth, and responsibly promote justice for the human family, especially when confronted with ecological devastation and societal globalization. These ideas are couched in traditional church language, for the most part, to establish their relationship to traditional church teachings. Those interested in the general and particular socio-ecology-related teachings might pass over the more doctrinal and philosophical arguments and relationships; those interested in relating the current pope’s thought to Christian teachings might explore the doctrinal part more in depth. The encyclical is available in multiple languages on the Vatican website.

Caritas In Veritate contains forty-two pages of text, and eight pages of endnotes. What follows below represents only a part of its content, but provides themes and statements of greatest interest to members of the Forum on Religion and Ecology.

In the Encyclical Benedict recalls some traditional Catholic ecological/eco-justice themes and phrasing. As has been customary in Church documents, the twofold thrust is care for creation/compassion for the poor (people, peoples, nations). The major issues are protection of the planet and provision for the poor. There is a customary omission of serious consideration of population issues in terms of strains on natural goods (“resources”) by continuously expanding populations, and consequent diminished availability of goods for the poor. Benedict does rightly reiterate, in this author’s assessment, the strain on the availability of natural goods, on members of the extended biotic community. He notes especially the strain on Earth’s integrity and well being, of consumerism, greed, and political manipulation of poor nations by powerful nations, ordinarily in the interests of the wealthiest and most politically powerful segments of the dominant nations. Dangers and benefits of globalization are stated, as are issues of war and peace, migration, the rights of labor (including the right to form unions), and abuses of wealth, the market, and economic structures. He calls for intergenerational responsibility to future generations, as well as for compassion and concern for people who are suffering now. There is a strong commitment to promoting the common good versus individual aggrandizement.

Introduction

In the Introduction, Benedict states that “Charity in truth…is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity” (#1 – all references are to paragraph numbers in the encyclical). He goes on to declare that “Charity is at the heart of the Church’s social doctrine” (2), and links charity/love to Jesus’ teaching that love is the “synthesis of the entire law” (2). Here, as elsewhere, he makes reference to his own prior writings, in this case to his first encyclical, God Is Love/Deus Caritas Est. He observes that “Truth is the light that gives meaning and value to charity” (3). He states that Charity goes beyond justice (6; italics in original). He declares that an important consideration is “…the common good. To love someone is to desire that person’s good and to take effective steps to secure it. Besides the common good of the individual, there is a good that is linked to living in society: the common good. It is the good of ‘all of us’” (7).

Chapter One: The Message of Populorum Progressio

In this chapter, Benedict reflects on and extends teachings of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Populorum Progressio, issued in 1967, shortly after the conclusion of Vatican II. Benedict reinforces Paul VI’s teaching that the Church promotes “integral human development,” namely, the betterment of the whole person in their social and spiritual existence. Benedict states that people have become too reliant on societal institutions to promote human well being, but they need a “transcendent vision” of the human person, and the help of God to achieve social and personal good. Otherwise, they will promote a “dehumanized form of development” (11). Benedict explores these ideas through Vatican II documents and papal encyclicals. He notes for example, that “progress…is first and foremost a vocation (16) and that the Church is therefore involved in integral development, which is not merely technical in nature. Here and elsewhere he calls for freedom for the Church and individuals to pursue their efforts to promote “authentic development,” the “good of every man [sic] and of the whole man” [sic: lamentably, after several decades of awareness of the need for inclusive language in references to humanity or divinity, here and throughout the encyclical Benedict uses exclusive, male terminology] (18). Benedict concludes by stating that “the vision of development as a vocation brings with it the central place of charity within that development,” and declaring that underdevelopment is a “lack of brotherhood among individuals and peoples,” and laments that “As society becomes ever more globalized, it makes us neighbours but does not make us brothers” (19).

Chapter Two: Human Development In Our Time

Benedict begins by discussing the economic, social, and political implications of development. He evaluates profit and the profit motive: “Profit is useful if it serves as a means towards an end that provides a sense both of how o produce it and how to make good use of it. Once profit becomes th4 exclusive goal, if it is produced by improper means and without the common good as its ultimate end, it risks destroying wealth and creating poverty,” and states that economic growth is “weighed down by malfunctions and dramatic problems, highlighted even further by the current crisis” (21). The current crisis provides “an opportunity for discernment, in which to shape a new vision for the future” (21). He takes to task the “corruption and illegality” that are “evident in the conduct of the economic and political class in rich countries, both old and new, as well as in poor ones. Among those who sometimes fail to respect the human rights of workers are large multinational companies as well as local producers” (22).  He complains that in “rich countries there is excessive zeal for protecting knowledge though an unduly rigid assertion to the right to intellectual property, especially in the field of health care” (22).

Benedict notes that “systems of protection and welfare…are finding it hard and could find it even harder in the future to pursue their goals of true social justice in today’s profoundly changed environment” (25). He complains, in this regard, that rich countries in particular use the global market to outsource jobs and reduce the price of goods for domestic consumer markets; that social security systems are being downsized; and that consequently there is “grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State” (25). He notes, too, that “unemployment today provokes new forms of economic marginalization,” and declares that “the primary capital to be safeguarded and valued is man [sic], the human person in his or her integrity” (25).

Benedict calls attention to the plight of people in poor countries. He recalls Jesus’ teaching about meeting the needs of the poor (Matthew 25), by “solidarity and the sharing of goods” (27). He states that eliminating world hunger is “a requirement for safeguarding the peace and stability of the planet”; it is the lack of institutional structures, not a lack of food, which is the major cause of hunger (27). He calls for involving local communities in decisions about agricultural land use, and adds: “At the same time, the question of equitable agrarian reform in developing countries should not be ignored. The right to food, like the right to water, has an important place within the pursuit of other rights, beginning with the fundamental right to life. It is therefore necessary to cultivate a public conscience that considers food and access to water as universal rights of all human beings, without distinction or discrimination” (27). On the population issue, he laments “practices of demographic control,” including abortion and sterilization, and states that “Openness to life is at the centre of true development” (28). He calls for religious freedom, while noting that “at times the religious motive is merely a cover for other reasons, such as the desire for domination and wealth. Today, in fact, people frequently kill in the holy name of God” (29).

Benedict declares that models of development have to be revised to correct “dysfunctions and deviations. This is demanded, in any case, by the earth’s state of ecological health” (32). In the chapter’s concluding paragraph, Benedict notes “the explosion of worldwide interdependence, commonly known as globalization,” and declares that “without the guidance of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and create new divisions within the human family” (33).

Chapter Three: Fraternity, Economic Development and Civil Society

Benedict states at the beginning that “In the list of areas where the pernicious effects of sin are evident, the economy has been included for some time now”; in contrast, “charity in truth is a force that builds community” (34). He says of the “the market” that while it is known to be subject to commutative justice, “the social doctrine of the Church has unceasingly highlighted the importance of distributive justice and social justice for the market economy” (35). The market should promote emancipation of the poor. Economic activity “needs to be directed towards the pursuit of the common good, for which the political community in particular must also take responsibility”; the “market is not, and must not become, the place where the strong subdue the weak” (36). Moreover, “the Church’s social doctrine has always maintained that justice must be applied to every phase of economic activity…every economic decision has a moral consequence” (37). He calls for solidarity, “a sense of responsibility on the part of everyone with regard to everyone” and “attentiveness to ways of civilizing the economy” (38). He laments that the outsourcing of production contradicts corporate responsibility toward societal “stakeholders—namely the workers, the suppliers, the consumers, the natural environment and broader society—in favour of the shareholders” (40).

In the last paragraph (42), Benedict again discusses globalization, which is not only a visible “socio-economic process” but, underneath this, a way by which “humanity is becoming increasingly interconnected.” Its malfunctions must be countered by a “sustained commitment” to “promote a person-based and community oriented cultural process of worldwide integration that is open to transcendence,” and understood in all its dimensions so that “it will be possible to experience and to steer the globalization of humanity in relational terms, in terms of communion and the sharing of goods.”

Chapter Four: The Development of People[’s] Rights and Duties [To] The Environment

[Note: the English heading here is grammatically incorrect, and the meaning is unclear; the bracketed parts have been added by this writer.]

Benedict states that “rights presuppose duties, if they are not to become mere licence,” and notes that individual rights, when detached from duties, “can run wild” (43). He declares that “The sharing of reciprocal duties is a more powerful incentive to action than the mere assertion of rights” (43). In the next paragraph, Benedict returns to population issues, and asserts that “To consider population increase as the primary cause of underdevelopment is mistaken, even from an economic point of view.” He calls for “responsible procreation,” objects to “mandatory birth control,” and advocates responsible family decisions regarding the exercise of sexuality (44). The formulation and implementation of development programs should consider the “centrality of the human person,” and involve people who are to benefit from them (47).

In paragraphs 48-52, which conclude the chapter, Benedict addresses ecological issues directly and extensively:

“Today the subject of development is also closely related to the duties arising from our relationship to the natural environment. The environment is God’s gift to everyone, and in our use of it we have a responsibility towards the poor, towards future generations and towards humanity as a whole…. In nature, the believer recognizes the wonderful result of God’s creative activity, which we may use responsibly to satisfy our legitimate needs, material or otherwise, while respecting the intrinsic balance of creation” (48).

“…the natural environment…is a wondrous work of the Creator…. [P]rojects for integral human development cannot ignore coming generation, but need to be marked by solidarity and inter-generational justice, while taking into account a variety of contexts: ecological, juridical, economic, political and cultural” (48).

Care and preservation of the environment need to consider the “energy problem. The fact that some States, power groups and companies hoard non-renewable energy resources represents a grave obstacle to development in poor countries” (49).

“The technologically advanced societies can and must lower their domestic energy consumption…it is possible to achieve improved energy efficiency while at the same time encouraging research into alternative forms of energy. What is also needed, though, is a worldwide redistribution of energy resources” (49).

“The way humanity treats the environment influences the way it treats itself, and vice versa. This invites contemporary society to a serious review of its life-style, which, in many parts of the world, is prone to hedonism and consumerism, regardless of their harmful consequences”; the adoption of new life-styles” is needed (51).

“Desertification and the decline in productivity in some agricultural areas are also the result of impoverishment and underdevelopment among their inhabitants. When incentives are offered for their economic and cultural development, nature itself is protected. Moreover, how many natural resources are squandered by wars! Peace in and among peoples would also provide greater protection for nature. The hoarding of resources, especially water, can generate serious conflicts among the peoples involved” (51).

“The Church has a responsibility towards creation and she must assert this responsibility in the public sphere” (51).

Chapter Five: The Cooperation of the Human Family

Benedict notes the need for human communities to work together for development; the “human race is a single family working together in true communion, not simply a group of subjects who happen to live side by side” (53).

In perhaps a surprising citation, Benedict reinforces a statement, which some might view as idolatrous, from Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes document: “…all things on earth should be ordered towards man as to their centre and summit” (57; Gaudium, 136). This anthropocentric assertion contradicts earlier and later encyclical affirmation of the Creator’s role in the cosmos, which implies that all is “ordered” toward God.

Benedict returns to globalization: “In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity…Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way” (57). Benedict states that “In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all” (59).

Benedict notes the “direct link between poverty and unemployment,” and calls for “decent” work: “work that expresses the essential dignity of every man and woman in the context of their particular society: work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their children, without the children themselves being forced into labour; work that permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one’s roots at a personal, familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a decent standard of living” (63).

Chapter Six: The Development of Peoples and Technology

Benedict links technology in its current and future forms with the ways that people historically have used tools to provide for their needs: “Technology, in this sense, is a response to God’s command to till and to keep the land (cf. Gen 2:15) that he has entrusted to humanity, and it must serve to reinforce the covenant between human beings and the environment, a covenant that should mirror God’s creative love” (70). [Note here the work “entrusted,” which relates to the idea of “stewardship” often used in Catholic teachings. It contradicts the word “gift,” which is used, too, in the encyclical (e.g., par. 50: nature is “God’s gift to his children”): the recipient of a “gift” is free to dispose of it as they choose; the one who is a “steward,” or who is “entrusted” with something, uses the trust or cares for that thing on behalf of, and in accord with the wishes of, the one who entrusts.]

Benedict declares that “Development is impossible without upright men and women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely attuned to the requirements of the common good” (71). This complements his call earlier for politicians to use their offices to benefit the community as a whole, and promote the common good.

Benedict is concerned about biotechnology and bioethics. He states that “the social question has become a radically anthropological question, in the sense that it concerns not just how life is conceived but also how it is manipulated, as bio-technology places it increasingly under man’s control” (75). He affirms the traditional concept of a “natural law” which is available to reason (75). He states that “The development of individuals and peoples is likewise located on a height, if we consider the spiritual dimension that must be present if such development is to be authentic. It requires new eyes and a new heart, capable of rising above a materialistic vision of human events, capable of glimpsing in development the ‘beyond’ that technology cannot give” (77).

Conclusion

Overall, there should be much that can be mined from the encyclical to urge the faithful, perhaps particularly the politically powerful faithful, to exercise greater care for creation, and greater commitment to compassion and justice: to catalyze people to be, in other words, responsible citizens of Earth and responsible members of the human community.

About the Author

John Hart is Professor of Christian Ethics at Boston University School of Theology. His most recent book is Sacramental Commons: Christian Ecological Ethics (Foreword by Leonardo Boff; Afterword by Thomas Berry; Rowman & Littlefield, 2006). He has been a “ghost writer” for several church documents, including regional statements on environmental issues by the Midwestern U.S. Catholic Bishops (1980) and the Columbia River Watershed Catholic Bishops of the U.S. and Canada (2001), and the papal homily of John Paul II in Des Moines, Iowa (1979). He has lectured on issues of religion and ecology on four continents: in seven nations, and in thirty-four U.S. states.