An Analysis of Justice in the World

Using the Three Hermeneutical Keys in

Interpreting a Catholic Social Teaching
A. Examine the historically conditioned social position of Justice in the World (JW) and its
authors/collaborators in the light of social situations.
1. Who were the authors/collaborators of JW? What were the likely or known positions of
these people?
The documents publication/promulgation date was 30 November 1971 and its official
name (Latin) was Convenientes Ex Universo[1]. A significant number of persons were
involved in the formulation of JW. An abbreviated list[2] of the people involved is as
follows:
a) The 1971 Synod of Bishops on the question of Justice (SB/SB Justice),
There was also a deliberation, prior to the discussion on justice, on the ordained
ministry during the 1971 Synod.
b) Pontifical Commission Iustitia et Pax (PCJP),
- also known as Commission Justice and Peace
- now known as Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
c) Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops for Justice (SB Justice Sec),
d) Maurice Cardinal Roy,
- President of PCJP
- President of the Council of the Laity (PCL)
e) Bishop Ramon Torrella Cascante,
- Vice-President of PCJP
- Special Secretary of the SB Justice
- Head of the Document Drafting Committee of SB Justice
- Former Auxiliary Bishop of Barcelona, Spain
f) Juan Alfaro S.J.,
- Official Theologian of SB Justice
- Principal author of Chapter II, The Gospel Message and the Mission of the
Church
g) Members of the Document Drafting Committee for the SB Sec:
i.

Philip Land, S.J.,

o Staff at PCJP

ii. Vincent Cosmao, O.P.

o Member of PCJP
o Associated with Centre Foie et Dveloppement
(an organization founded by Louis Lebret)
o Principal author of Introduction of JW
h) Lay Experts who made Interventions before the SB
i.

Barbara Ward - an economist,

o Topic: Planetary Justice

ii. Candido Mendez - from the University of Rio de Janeiro,

o Topic: Development and Structural Marginalization
iii. Kinhide Mushakoji - Japanese expert on Disarmament
o Topic: The Universal Aspiration to Participation
2. What was/were the intellectual school/s of the authors/collaborators of JW?
A majority of the authors/collaborators were bishops members of the hierarchy who
were progressively more aware of the rapid, sweeping and powerful changes that took
place in the 20th centurys first half. And in 1971, the native bishops of Africa, Asia and
Latin America had become confident and articulate enough to exert authoritative stimulus
to the discussion of justice which was a particularly dominant issue in their respective
regions.[3] The bishops have also realized that the reforms on Episcopal collegiality were
infusing added tasks to their current local/regional responsibilities. They were, so to
speak, being given a more global exercise of their local identity, role, and mission.
As for the other authors/collaborators, they were very much involved with the intellectual
discipline critiquing the evolving social order. They were in tune with the
contemporaneous concerns analyzed by the social sciences.
Gregory Baum commented as well that the Synod had adopted the vocabulary from the
social thinking in South America.[4] That region was experiencing a tremendous change
not only in the socio-political sphere, but also in the religious-spiritual context where
Christian faithful, theologians and the ecclesiastical hierarchy were in dialogue with the
Marxists especially on the issue of injustice and political oppression. In this regard, the
social/political/economic struggle experienced by a large majority of South Americans,
and the rest of the underdeveloped sector of the world, was scrutinized through the lens
of religious-moral thought.
3. How was JW in continuity with other/previous official pronouncements?
JW tackled basically the following: (a) Gospel Mandate for Justice, (b) Right to
Development, (c) Justice as Christian Love, (d) Education for Justice, and (e)
International Action.[5] The themes were detectable in John XXIIIs Mater et Magistra

(MM) and Pacem in Terris (PT), in Vatican IIs Gaudium et Spes (GS), and in Paul VIs
Populorum Progressio (PP) and Octogesima Adveniens (OA). JWs themes may be
plainly linked with OA which was issued about six (6) months earlier to Cardinal Roy,
the then President of the PCJP and the immediate superior of Bishop Torrella Cascante.
Paul VI also communicated to Cardinal Roy his thoughts on the moral dimensions of the
worlds social problems at that juncture which were not dealt with fully and of his desire
to present that apostolic letter as fresh material to both the PCL and PCJP.[6] In terms of
continuity, JW may have been OAs further development since Episcopal collegiality and
authoritative native representation may have carried more weight to render impact on the
faithful regarding social, political, and economic matters.
Among the direct citations found in JW, there are only two (2) that have come from an
earlier document - PP15 as found in JW15 and PP37 in JW67. Of these, the more notable
was PP 15 and may be the primary key in unlocking a personalist understanding of JW.
The text proceeds as:
each person remains, whatever be the influences affecting him/her, the principal agent
of his/her own success or failure. By the unaided effort of ones intelligence and will,
each person can grow in humanity, can enhance his/her personal worth, can become more
a person.[7] [Modification mine.]
Properly understood, it may be the growing appreciation of the human person that may
thread together the continuity among the documents from MM to OA, and proceeding to
JW.
4. What were the antecedent movements and disputed questions to which JW responded?
Looking at JW having the documents MM, PT, GS, PP, and OA as background in
assessing the antecedent movements and disputed questions, it was justice its lack,
distortion or absence that caught the Synods attention. Justice was the pressing social
concern and it was properly the most serious issue as drawn from the indicated
documents. Using Schultheis et als format[8], the main socio-political concerns that
surfaced in the documents can be seen in the following table:
-

MM
Just Remuneration
Structural Injustice
Subsidiarity
Agriculture
Economic Development
Role of the Church
International Cooperation
Socialization

PT
Peoples Rights and Duties
Role of Public Authorities
Common Good
Christian World Order
International Relations
Disarmament

GS
Human Dignity
Common Good
Signs of the Times
Public Responsibility
Respect for Families
Right of Human Culture
Justice and Development
Peace

PP
- Human Aspirations
- Structural Injustice
- Church and
Development
- New Humanism
- Common Good
- Economic Planning
- International Trade
- Peace

OA
- Urbanization
- Role of Local Churches
- Duties of Individual
Christians
- Political Activity
- Worldwide Dimensions
of Justice

Justice may be viewed then as the providential culmination of the social concerns
detailed above. In the light of the Christian-Marxist dialogue, the dictatorial regimes in
Third World countries, the development of underdevelopment, the intensification of

migration due to repression and economic factors etc., the widening of the poor-rich
gap, and the deepening validity-reliability of the social sciences, justice was the most
tangible touchstone for progressive and critical social transformation.
5. How was JW received by the Church the People of God?
Based on the critical comments selected by Gerald Darring[9], the issue of JWs
reception by the Church can be settled with that of continuing reflection. JW may be seen
as a product, content, method and tool for reflection on and for justice. Its theme justice
is, in the present year 2005, a harassing issue. Our times and our various spheres of
experiences are still being haunted by the justice specter. It is in this context that JW
is still being received, processed and suspected-appreciated by Gods people. If we
zero-in on the phrase action on behalf of justice and the participation in the
transformation of the world as constitutive dimension of the preaching of the Gospel
of the Churchs mission we would still be invited, or even pushed, to reflect on how
we, as individuals and as a community, are doing justice to justice.
B. Examine the foundations of the ideals, principles and values of JW. From where were these
derived and how? How were these foundations and sources understood and used?
1. Was the Natural Law (NL) argumentation used in JW? Was the NL employed on the
basis of the order of nature (ON) or of the order of reason (OR)?
2. Was JW deductive or inductive in its approach?
3. How were the Scriptures used in JW?
Reading through JW, I was exceptionally struck by key statements in its Introduction
which I think would be truly helpful in determining the presence of an NL argumentation,
whether it was taking the course of ON or of OR, and, subsequently, answer whether it
had a deductive or inductive approach and identify how the Scriptures were employed.
These statements which I name the We-Declarations of the Synod Fathers are as
follows:
a) We have questioned ourselves about the mission of the People of God to further
justice in the world. JW1
b) We have listened to the Word of God that we might be converted to the fulfilling of
the divine plan for the salvation of the world. JW2
c) We have been able to perceive the serious injustices building around the world.
JW3
d) We have noted the inmost stirring moving the world in its depths. JW4

e) We have shared our awareness of the Churchs vocation to be present in the heart of
the world. JW5
From these we can see that they (the Synod Fathers) were coming to terms with the
Churchs dialogue with the contemporary world. It was evident to them that their
faculties of reason were converging at the centrality of justice as an application and a
full expression in Gods divine plan or eternal law. If we apply a definition of NL based
on Thomas Aquinas understanding, that is, natural law as the human persons
participation in eternal law through the use of reason, then we can categorically say that
the Synod Fathers made use of the NL argumentation. It is no wonder that the principal
authorship of the Introduction was ascribed to a Dominican[10], because of the use of an
NL insight derived from Thomas Aquinas.
Now that the presence of the NL argumentation has been established, the issue whether
JW took the ON or the OR emerges. In Chapter I Justice and World Society, having the
topics: Crisis of Universal Solidarity, Right to Development, Voiceless Injustices, and
Need for Dialogue, it is very factual that critical socio-political examination was utilized.
From this examination there surfaces various methods employed by the social sciences,
particularly that of economics, sociology and political theory. JW16-19 can be
highlighted since this section, as I recall, is a very comprehensive summary of a political
orientation seminar (POS) that I attended as a college student in the early 1990s. That
POS made a profound impact because of its critical yet dispassionate analysis of the
Philippines socio-politico-economic situation. There was a certain logic in that POS
assessment. Using that thought as basis, I can surmise that there was more reason applied
in JW than the utilization of a nature-concept.
Going back to the We-Declarations, an appraisal of its methodology points to an
inductive rather than a deductive approach. Conclusions or generalizations were made
from particular, ostensible realities instead of proceeding from specific principles to a
universal analysis. Especially noteworthy is We-Declaration C wherein the Synod
Fathers indicate, which I think of with a certain anguish, the presence of structural
injustice. From this observation, they have moved to appropriate justice within the
Church first as found in Chapter III The Practice of Justice JW39-47.
Scriptures were not used as proof-text in JW. Chapter III The Gospel Message and the
Mission of the Church clearly shows that the Synod Fathers, at the outset, reflected on
Gods Word regarding the issue of justice. In JW29 we read/hear that they endeavored
to listen with a humble and open heart to the word of God in order that God may
show us new paths toward action in the cause of justice in the world. This posture
may be to neutralize whatever tint of neo-scholastic theology pervading in the Church
that might be counterproductive to the bishops desire to dedicate ourselves to the
liberation of humanity even in its present existence in this world (JW35) [modification
mine].
C. Examine the underlying understanding of the identity and mission of the Church vis--vis the
world as found/expressed in JW?

1. What image of society did JW present? What ecclesiological model did JW put forth?
JW cannot be labeled as ambitious or idealistic when it stated:
To obtain true unity of purpose, as is demanded by the world society of humanity, a
mediatory role is essential to overcome day by day the opposition, obstacles and
ingrained privileges which are to be met with in the advance towards a more human
society. JW27 [Emphasis and modification mine.]
That mediatory role, or commonly understood as openness to dialogue, is JWs primary
proposal for an image of society. Humanity-society or human society cannot be just if it
has not integrated dialogue, participation, and open communication as prerequisites, even
to those who are not within the confines of our class or mainstream environment. Each
individual is called to mediate and to dialogue. JW28 elaborated this cogent option
further:
But effective mediation involves the creation of a lasting atmosphere of dialogue. A
contribution to the progressive realization of this can be made by people unhampered by
geo-political, ideological or socio-economic conditions or by the generation gap. To
restore the meaning of life by adherence to authentic values, the participation and witness
of the rising generation of youth is as necessary as communication among peoples.
[Modification mine.]
The Synod itself was a Synod-in-dialogue.[11] The Synod attempted to present the
Church in dialogue with liberation theology, the social sciences and with the faithful in
the midst of injustice. Borrowing reflections from a Theology of the Church class[12] and
from the ideas of Avery Dulles[13], the basic image I see being appropriated in JW is that
of the Servant model, which was being worked on to include Herald, Sacrament,
Communion models (in that order). Eventually I can say that JW could not have been too
ambitious since the Synod tried its very best to make and exhort the Church truly present
in and responsive to the current conditions of humanity.
2. What role did the laity/sciences have in the formulation of JW?
As it has been shown in A.1.h, there was ample intervention of the laity armed with the
sciences. The experts (Ward, Mendez and Mushakoji) thoughts were evident in
JW.[14] The critique put forth by Andrew Greeley was conjectural, stating that the
comments made by JW were without the sophistication that can only come from expert
advice.[15] He must have overlooked the intervention of an economist, a university
professor and a disarmament advocate in the 1971 Synod.
To cap this analysis off, JW was addressed and directed to the laity, to Christians of
various traditions, and to all people when it indicated in communion with all who
believe in Christ and with the entire human family (JW1). The Synod exerted every
effort to include the urgent concerns of entire humanity. Furthermore, the Synod Fathers

knew that the then and future faithful would eventually bear the tasks suggested by JW.
Towards the end of JW, they encouraged the entire Church with these words:
Let Christians therefore be convinced that they will yet find the fruits of their own
nature and effort cleansed of all impurities in the new earth which God is now preparing
for them, and in which there will be the kingdom of justice and love, a kingdom which
will be fully perfected when the Lord himself will come. JW74 [Emphasis and
modification mine.]

Endnotes:
[1] Austin Flannery, O.P., General Editor, Vatican Council II: More Postconciliar Documents,
(NY: Costello Publishing, 1982) 695.
[2] Based on Charles M. Murphy, Action for Justice as Constitutive of the Preaching of the
Gospel: What did the 1971 Synod Mean? in Readings in Moral Theology No. 5: Official
Catholic Social Teaching, Charles E. Curran and Richard McCormick, Editors, (NY: Paulist
Press, 1986) 152-153.
[3] David J. OBrien and Thomas A. Shannon, Editors, Renewing the Earth: Catholic
Documents on Peace, Justice and Liberation, (Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 384.
[4] Gregory Baum, Synods Double Message, National Catholic Reporter 8 (10 Dec 1971) 8.
[5] Michael J. Schultheis, Ed P. DeBerri, and Peter Henriot, Our Best Kept Secret: The Rich
Heritage of Catholic Social Teaching (A Primer), Philippine Reprint (Manila: Cardinal Bea
Institute, 1985) 38.
[6] Paul VI, Octogesima Adveniens 52, Latin text in LOsservatore Romano 15 May 1971,
English translation by John Drury.
[7] Paul VI, Populorum Progressio, 26 March 1967, Philippine Reprint (Pasay City: Daughters
of St. Paul, 1990 - 10th Printing) 6. [Modification mine.]
[8] Michael J. Schultheis, et al., Our Best Kept Secret, pp. 23, 26, 29, 33 and 36.
[9] Gerald Darring, Internet material: www.shc.edu/theolibrary/resources/comments_justice.htm
[10] Charles M. Murphy, Action for Justice as Constitutive of the Preaching of the Gospel 153.
[11] Christine E. Gudorf, Major Differences: Liberation Theology and Current Church
Teaching, in Readings in Moral Theology No. 5: Official Catholic Social Teaching, Charles E.
Curran and Richard McCormick, Editors, (NY: Paulist Press, 1986) 454.
[12] Theo111, Theology of the Church, IPR-SLU Baguio City, Summer 2005.

[13] Avery Dulles, Models of the Church, (Garden City: Doubleday/Image, 1974) 203.
[14] Murphy, Action for Justice as Constitutive of the Preaching of the Gospel 153 (cfr.
footnote 2).
[15] Andrew M. Greeley, After the Synod, America 125 (20 Nov 1971) 424.

Paolo Fernando C. Colabres

Maryhill School of Theology
Adult Theological Education Program
TH304 Justice and Liberation
First Semester 2005-2006
October 2005