The Reality of Social Sin

Not a few good intentioned Filipinos are willing to give their own share in solving the
different problems of our country. But no single individual or group of individuals can
entirely solve our national problem. We need the whole nation, or at least the majority of our
people, to realize the real cause of our problems before we can solve it. The late Jaime Cardinal
Sin, in one of his homilies, identified the root of our problems and called it "moral decay". This
moral decay is manifested in the sinful persistence of oppressive situations and structures in
our society. In other words, the real root of our problem is structural. There are sinful
situations and structures in our country’s different systems that help perpetuate inequality,
oppression and injustice.

All sins, even those individual sins resulting from personal act, in some way, affect
others. There is no sin, not even the most intimate and secret one, that exclusively affects only
the agent. The whole body of Christ (the Church) is affected, in a greater or lesser way, by
every sin that its members commit. However, there are sins that by their very nature constitute
a direct attack on one’s neighbor and give rise to social structures, institutions and situations
that are contrary to the Divine goodness (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1869). These
structures are considered sinful because they are the root causes of massive poverty,
oppression and injustice and they promote and perpetuate sinful attitude and behavior. These
situations and structures are called social sins – further grouped into sinful structures, sinful
situations, and sinful attitudes.

Sinful structures
Sinful structures are those that step on the people's
dignity and prevent people from exercising their rights. Silence helps the oppressor
An example of this type of social sin is the imposition of not the oppressed. Neutrality
Martial Law in the Philippines during the regime of protects the offender never
Marcos when it was widely believed that almost all the offended.
agencies of the government were infected by graft and
corruption, cronyism and nepotism. Another example is the colonial-style trade relations
between the first world and the third world where third world countries remain at the mercy of
first world countries as the latter dictates the terms and conditions of their trade. Another
example is the debt problem brought about by the present global realities that have become an
institutionalized global usury dominated by international creditor nations, finance institutions
and banks that entrap debtor-nations into debt dependence that pushes poor countries like ours
into deeper debt problem. This was made worse by our P.D. 1177 that automatically allocates a
big portion of our budget that should have been used for social services, to pay our debt’s
interest and only a small fraction of the capital.

There are sinful social structures when there is habitual pattern of human interactions
infected by sin, selfishness, injustice, pride, greed, hatred. They perpetuate disvalues. They are
inducements to sin and are formidable obstacle to Christian living (PCP II, 82).

Sinful situations
Sinful situations lead people to become greedy and selfish. The “culture” of graft and
corruption that exists in our country is a good example of this. A friend, for example, always
makes sure that a one-hundred peso bill is inserted next to his driver’s license. His purpose is
of course to surreptitiously offer a bribe to the policeman if ever he will be caught committing a
traffic violation. He sees nothing wrong in bribing a policeman because it is more expensive
and time consuming to claim back a confiscated license. Another friend complains that, to land
a job in a government office, what is important is not what you know but who you know. Even
in some schools, it is not uncommon to meet a school head or supervisor asking for a gift from a
new teacher. And during elections, vote-buying has become prevalent that people talk about it
openly. Years ago, a person who received money from a candidate will never admit it in public.
But today, many voters even publicly ask for money from candidates or compare among
themselves which candidate “buys” with the highest “price.” This vote buying is often seen as
the root cause of many problems in our society. Politicians who won through this means will
see to it that he gets back the money he spent before his term ends. Drug-trafficking, illegal
logging, the rising number of the poor and unemployed, the justice system that cannot convict
big businessmen for their millions of pesos of unpaid taxes while the poor ordinary citizens
shoulder the burden of the nation’s expenses, these are only some of the examples of the second
type of social sin.

Sinful attitudes
Sinful attitudes are committed by those who allow or directly participate in the evil
committed against others. It also involves the sin of omission because of the inaction of some
people to prevent evil from taking place. The conspiracy among government officials who
make use of their power to enrich themselves; the Filipinos who close their eyes to the abuses
of greedy government officials whom they elected in exchange of a small amount of money or
on the basis of popularity; those who do not care as long as their family is taken care of or
because of the mentality that nothing can be done anymore, those people who buy stolen
cellphones, cars, etc. because they are sold at a much lower price, are just few examples of this
third type of social sin.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (#1868) enumerates ways by which we become
responsible for the sins committed by people around us and by which we contribute to the
social sins in our society. They are:
 participating directly and voluntarily in them;
 ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
 not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so; and
 protecting evil-doers.

Poverty in the Philippines, for instance, is a result of social sin. It is not caused by the
lack of resources. Rather, it is caused by the “gross unequal distribution of wealth.” Some
people have more than they need while the rest do not have even the basic necessities of life.
The wealthy, whether they know it or not are getting richer at the expense of the great masses
who get poorer everyday. But this, of course, should not make those who are rich feel guilty. It
is never sinful to be born to a wealthy family but to remain very rich and live a luxurious life in
the midst of people who die of poverty and hunger is an instance of sin. The inequitable and
unjust distribution of wealth should make the rich realize that there is a connection between
their lifestyle and the poverty around them. This realization or social consciousness should lead
them to share what they have and to cooperate in the programs of the community. Quoting St.
Ambrose, Populorum progressio states that:

You are not making a gift of your possessions to the poor person. You are handing over
to him what is his. For what has been given in common for the use of all, you have
 arrogated to yourself. The world is given to all, and not only to the rich (Populorum
Progresio, 23).

Solicitudo Rei Socialis has the following to say:

One of the greatest injustice of the contemporary world consists precisely in this: that the
ones who possess much are relatively few and those who possess almost nothing are
many. It is the injustice of the poor distribution of the goods and services originally
intended for all (Solicitudo Rei Socialis, 28).

Social sin marks our present world. As Christians, we cannot just close our eyes to what
is happening. PCP II states that:

In the poverty and underdevelopment of our nation, in its conflicts and divisions, we see
the hand of human sinfulness, particularly the grasping paws of greed for profit and
power. It is sinfulness that is at the root of our socio-economic and political problems,
and we need to name the problems by their true name of sin. The Christian conscience
must recoil at the sins committed against the poor . . . our inequity is a moral evil . . .
there are indeed, structures of sin or social sins which consist of situations, collective
behavior, or structures that cause and perpetuate social injustices (PCP II 266, 267, 270).