Understanding The Preferential Option for the Poor

Understanding The Preferential Option for the Poor

Matthew Bellisario O.P. 2020

Today's Myopic View

It is popular today to see Catholics on the Internet writing about Pope Francis' emphasis on "The Preferential Option For the Poor." This idea that as Christians we are to help those in poverty, whether it is economically or spiritually, is nothing new. What is new however is that the "poor" are now being exclusively viewed only in light of their economic status. Unfortunately, today's "new evangelization" seems to be largely focused on fixing the temporal affairs of an impoverished economic class rather than bringing people into the Catholic faith. This exclusive focusing on the poor merely in the economic temporal sense however has never been the teaching of the Church. Read the encyclicals Rerum Novarum, Centesimus Annus, and the Catechism of the Church if you want to understand the full meaning of this teaching, from which I will pull from all three here in this article.

Properly Defining Poverty and the Poor 

How did John Paul II define the "poor" in his encyclical on this very topic? It was not an emphasis on only evangelizing or helping those considered to be poor economically. It was not to feed the poor in lieu of the health of souls. In his encyclical, Centesimus Annus he writes,  "This awareness is also a source of her preferential option for the poor, which is never exclusive or discriminatory towards other groups. This option is not limited to material poverty, since it is well known that there are many other forms of poverty, especially in modern society—not only economic but cultural and spiritual poverty as well." (P57)

Notice here that the definition given is much broader than what we hear about now. Did the apostles in the Gospels and Acts only focus on feeding the economically poor? Obviously not. Yes, they helped the poor but the preaching of the Gospel was their focus and it was for men of all economic status! It was the salvation of souls that mattered most, and part of our road to salvation is helping our fellow men who are in unfortunate situations, both spiritually and materially. Those who have not heard the Gospel and accepted it must also be regarded as "poor" or possessing a "poverty of spirit." Unfortunately, we hear nothing of this in today's "preferential option for the poor." For most Catholics today who write on such topics the soul is not as important as one's physical body. This common error is nothing but the dualistic heresies of the past coming back to haunt us in our age. Instead of "body bad, soul good", its "body good, soul bad, or even non-existent."  

The Catechism also puts all of the corporal and spiritual works of mercy under the Seventh Commandment section VI, 'The Love of the Poor'. Rather than confining the poor to only the economically impoverished, it offers us a full explanation. 

2447: "The works of mercy are charitable actions by which we come to the aid of our neighbor in his spiritual and bodily necessities. Instructing, advising, consoling, comforting are spiritual works of mercy, as are forgiving and bearing wrongs patiently. the corporal works of mercy consist especially in feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned, and burying the dead. Among all these, giving alms to the poor is one of the chief witnesses to fraternal charity: it is also a work of justice pleasing to God."

Aquinas Snapshot on Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy

How are we to view the corporal and spiritual works of mercy?

There are two ways of comparing these almsdeeds. First, simply; and in this respect, spiritual almsdeeds hold the first place, for three reasons. First, because the offering is more excellent, since it is a spiritual gift, which surpasses a corporal gift, according to Proverbs 4:2: "I will give you a good gift, forsake not My Law." Secondly, on account of the object succored, because the spirit is more excellent than the body, wherefore, even as a man in looking after himself, ought to look to his soul more than to his body, so ought he in looking after his neighbor, whom he ought to love as himself. Thirdly, as regards the acts themselves by which our neighbor is succored, because spiritual acts are more excellent than corporal acts, which are, in a fashion, servile. 

Secondly, we may compare them with regard to some particular case, when some corporal alms excels some spiritual alms: for instance, a man in hunger is to be fed rather than instructed, and as the Philosopher observes (Topic. iii, 2), for a needy man "money is better than philosophy," although the latter is better simply. (ST:II:Q32, A3)

The Error of Liberation Theology and Socialism

John Paul II was dead set against Socialist Liberation Theology. It was the error of the Liberation Theologians which sought to reread the Gospel in a new light which gave preference to only the economically poor, pushing class warfare mentality. This erroneous theology has given rise to Catholics adopting socialist-communistic mentalities of one type or another which completely takes Christian charity out of society. It removes the supernatural element out of Catholicism turning it into a mere social service. They, however, forget that supernatural charity is the true remedy and that those who are economically "rich" are to be evangelized and this, in turn, will help relieve those who are economically poor. The rich are obviously the ones who are in the best economic position to help the poor in this regard. 

For those who are narrowminded in focusing on feeding the poor without regard to conversion are actually doing a disservice to the poor by not evangelizing everyone! This Liberation Theology inspired preferential option is ultimately keeping the poor, poor! As Catholics, we certainly understand that economic poverty will never ultimately be done away with. These liberationists however obscure the very notion of Christian charity and the common good of society which seeks to bring souls supernatural grace so that the proper fruits of this grace will bring care for humanity in all its weaknesses. 

Those Catholics who are now supporting the extreme liberation view which is rooted in socialism of one form or another are going against Church teaching. Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum (RN) writes explicitly against such false notions, 

"...the socialists, working on the poor man's envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community." (P4)

Furthermore, Catholics today who are claiming that we should eliminate different classes of people almost equalizing everyone into one class as if everyone is owed the same economic status are also going against Church teaching. Pope Leo XIII again offers us proper Church teaching, 

"It must be first of all recognized that the condition of things inherent in human affairs must be borne with, for it is impossible to reduce civil society to one dead level. Socialists may in that intent do their utmost, but all striving against nature is in vain. There naturally exist among mankind manifold differences of the most important kind; people differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition. Such unequality is far from being disadvantageous either to individuals or to the community."(P17)

Finally, a new theology which loses sight or de-emphasizes the role of the Church in leading all men to eternal salvation by preaching the Gospel in preference for worldly works alone has been condemned by several Church documents. As we know, faith and works go together!

"The feeling of anguish at the urgency of the problems cannot make us lose sight of what is essential nor forget the reply of Jesus to the Tempter: "It is not on bread alone that man lives, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4; cf. Deuteronomy 8:3). Faced with the urgency of sharing bread, some are tempted to put evangelization into parentheses, as it were, and postpone it until tomorrow: first the bread, then the Word of the Lord. It is a fatal error to separate these two and even worse to oppose the one to the other. In fact, the Christian perspective naturally shows they have a great deal to do with one another...To some it even seems that the necessary struggle for human justice and freedom in the economic and political sense constitutes the whole essence of salvation. For them, the Gospel is reduced to a purely earthly gospel." (Ratzinger-Instruction on Certain Aspects of the Theology of Liberation 1984, VI:3)

The Error of Mandatory State Imposed "Help"

This corrupt theology leads inevitably to another error with many of today's Catholics thinking that they have an obligation to promote and defend state programs that feed the poor, rather than promoting the freedom of the Church in order to help the economically poor. The freedom of the Church to act for the poor is always preferential to any government program. Although the state should be just in its laws for the common good legislating laws which are just to men of all classes (RN P31-40), it must never take the place of the Church in its effort to provide relief for the impoverished. Again we look to Pope Leo XIII for a proper perspective. He claims it would be an error that in lieu of the Church, "They would substitute in its stead a system of relief organized by the State. But no human expedients will ever make up for the devotedness and self sacrifice of Christian charity. Charity, as a virtue, pertains to the Church; for virtue it is not, unless it be drawn from the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ; and whosoever turns his back on the Church cannot be near to Christ." (RR P57) 

Sadly there are even some Catholics who think that this issue of state-funded welfare programs is more important than stopping the massacre of the innocents through abortion! What a travesty indeed. The Church and her members with the charity of Christ are in the best position to help those in need, not the secular government. Thus it is more just that our money is put to use in the Church than in going to government taxation of which little is spent prudentially through government-sponsored welfare programs. We also should consider the law of subsidiarity which should handle these issues at the lowest local level possible, hopefully by the local Church. 

“The welfare state is the oldest con game in the world. First you take people's money away quietly and then you give some of it back to them flamboyantly.” (Thomas Sowell)

The Imago Dei

The apostles encouraged their followers, "...that we should be mindful of the poor..." (Galatians 2:10) This is where we truly understand the Imago Dei, the image, and likeness of God in each person. When we care for our fellow man through any of the corporal or spiritual works of mercy, we are caring for the poor! It matters not if they are economically poor, because the Church teaches we are to live out both the corporal and spiritual works of mercy in helping all men in need. When we feed the economically poor we are feeding Christ. (Matthew 25:35-40) When we bring souls into the Church regardless of class we are bringing Christ to the poor! (John 6:35) What has been lost today in the new "Preferential Option For The Poor" is the importance of the salvation of souls. We need to see the big picture in light of original sin and Christ's sacrifice to which all men will certainly first be subject to the former, but can only be freed by the latter. Although the body is important we must view this "option" in light of the complete person in relation to eternity which includes the body and the soul. "And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28)

One of the greatest insights into the treatment of our neighbor in its complete perspective is in light of the great Saint Catherine of Siena, to whom Our Lord spoke to directly. Here is an excerpt from Saint Catherine of Siena's 'The Dialogue'. Our Lord speaking to her offers us a profound catechesis on what it means to truly love our neighbor in light of being "poor." It is worth quoting at some length. The underlining notes my emphasis.  

How every virtue and every defect is obtained by means of our neighbor.

"I wish also that you should know that every virtue is obtained by means of your neighbor, and likewise, every defect; he, therefore, who stands in hatred of Me, does an injury to his neighbor, and to himself, who is his own chief neighbor, and this injury is both general and particular. It is general because you are obliged to love your neighbor as yourself, and loving him, you ought to help him spiritually, with prayer, counseling him with words, and assisting him both spiritually and temporally, according to the need in which he may be, at least with your goodwill if you have nothing else. A man therefore, who does not love, does not help him, and thereby does himself an injury; for he cuts off from himself grace, and injures his neighbor, by depriving him of the benefit of the prayers and of the sweet desires that he is bound to offer for him to Me. 

Thus, every act of help that he performs should proceed from the charity which he has through love of Me. And every evil also, is done by means of his neighbor, for, if he do not love Me, he cannot be in charity with his neighbor; and thus, all evils derive from the soul's deprivation of love of Me and her neighbor; whence, inasmuch as such a man does no good, it follows that he must do evil. To whom does he evil? First of all to himself, and then to his neighbor, not against Me, for no evil can touch Me, except in so far as I count done to Me that which he does to himself. To himself he does the injury of sin, which deprives him of grace, and worse than this he cannot do to his neighbor. Him he injures in not paying him the debt, which he owes him, of love, with which he ought to help him by means of prayer and holy desire offered to Me for him. 

This is an assistance which is owed in general to every rational creature; but its usefulness is more particular when it is done to those who are close at hand, under your eyes, as to whom, I say, you are all obliged to help one another by word and doctrine, and the example of good works, and in every other respect in which your neighbor may be seen to be in need; counseling him exactly as you would yourselves, without any passion of self-love; and he (a man not loving God) does not do this, because he has no love towards his neighbor; and, by not doing it, he does him, as you see, a special injury. And he does him evil, not only by not doing him the good that he might do him, but by doing him a positive injury and a constant evil. In this way sin causes a physical and a mental injury. The mental injury is already done when the sinner has conceived pleasure in the idea of sin, and hatred of virtue, that is, pleasure from sensual self-love, which has deprived him of the affection of love which he ought to have towards Me, and his neighbor, as has been said. And, after he has conceived, he brings forth one sin after another against his neighbor, according to the diverse ways which may please his perverse sensual will. 

Sometimes it is seen that he brings forth cruelty, and that both in general and in particular. "His general cruelty is to see himself and other creatures in danger of death and damnation through privation of grace, and so cruel is he that he reminds neither himself nor others of the love of virtue and hatred of vice. Being thus cruel he may wish to extend his cruelty still further, that is, not content with not giving an example of virtue, the villain also usurps the office of the demons, tempting, according to his power, his fellow-creatures to abandon virtue for vice; this is cruelty towards his neighbors, for he makes himself an instrument to destroy life and to give death. Cruelty towards the body has its origin in cupidity, which not only prevents a man from helping his neighbor, but causes him to seize the goods of others, robbing the poor creatures; sometimes this is done by the arbitrary use of power, and at other times by cheating and fraud, his neighbor being forced to redeem, to his own loss, his own goods, and often indeed his own person. "Oh, miserable vice of cruelty, which will deprive the man who practices it of all mercy, unless he turn to kindness and benevolence towards his neighbor! (Saint Catherine 'The Dialogue)

Does the Church Give Preferential Treatment to the Economically Poor?

The Catechism of the Church offers us an explanation as to the true preference in aiding the poor and the oppressed regarding economics, illness, unjust oppression, and other injustices. Notice again that this treatment of the poor expands further than just to economics, but also to mental illness, physical illness, and unjust oppression. Furthermore, notice how there is an emphasis on the recognition of original sin and the need for salvation. So are we to look in preference for the care of the poor? Yes, but not just those affected economically. 

2448 "In its various forms - material deprivation, unjust oppression, physical and psychological illness and death - human misery is the obvious sign of the inherited condition of frailty and need for salvation in which man finds himself as a consequence of original sin. This misery elicited the compassion of Christ the Savior, who willingly took it upon himself and identified himself with the least of his brethren. Hence, those who are oppressed by poverty are the object of a preferential love on the part of the Church which, since her origin and in spite of the failings of many of her members, has not ceased to work for their relief, defense, and liberation through numerous works of charity which remain indispensable always and everywhere."

Conclusion

Although much more can be said on this subject, the preferential option for the poor is best understood in light of the Imago Dei, in which the human person is restored in true image and likeness of God through supernatural grace. This light allows us to act in charity towards our neighbor. We must feed the poor because it is part of our supernatural faith in Christ to love our neighbor because Christ is in our neighbor. The poor however are also extend to all men and women who are in the poverty of lacking supernatural grace. Those who do not have Christ in their hearts thus need to be evangelized. If the rich are evangelized then the economically poor are more likely to be fed and evangelized more effectively. 

The truth is, it is sin that causes economic poverty and all forms of injustices! Sin is only overcome by supernatural grace. This problem is not solved by work or donations alone. We cannot simply put a bandaid on the problem by feeding the poor and neglecting their souls! Furthermore, evangelization does not prefer the souls of the poor over the rich for as John Paul II said this teaching, "is never exclusive or discriminatory towards other groups." In order to give the preference that is needed to those in impoverished conditions is to convert people of all classes!

We must never fall into the socialist mentality which seeks to build a utopia on earth, which we know will never happen, "For the poor you have always with you..." Pope Leo XIII also says, "...no artifice will ever succeed in banishing from human life the ills and troubles which beset it." (RN P18) The poor remain so we can serve Christ in the physical sense through our neighbor. But we must remember that no economic class is more deserving of hearing the Gospel than another. Everyone deserves to hear the Gospel preached to them for as Sacred Scripture tells us, "I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: For kings, and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:1-4)

In closing, I must reemphasize the fact that we must not create a new theology that prefers evangelizing one class over another. We look to true liberation in Jesus Christ who liberates us all from sin so, in turn, we can try as best as we can to fight all injustices which oppress humanity. 

"It is only when one begins with the task of evangelization understood in its entirety that the authentic requirements of human progress and liberation are appreciated. This liberation has as its indispensable pillars: 'the truth about Jesus the Savior'; 'the truth about the Church'; and 'the truth about man and his dignity'. It is in light of the Beatitudes, and especially the Beatitude of the poor of heart, that the Church, which wants to be the Church of the poor throughout the world, intends to come to the aid of the noble struggle for truth and justice. She addresses each person, and for that reason, every person. She is the "universal Church. The Church of the Incarnation. She is not the Church of one class or another. And she speaks of the name of truth itself. This truth is realistic". It leads to a recognition "of every human reality, every injustice, every tension and every struggle." (Instruction on Certain Aspects of the Theology of Liberation, 1984, XI:5)