Some years ago a Roman Catholic theologian named Monika Hellwig composed a list explaining God's preferential option to the poor. Throughout the Bible God shows great partiality towards those who are less fortunate. Dr. Hellwig's list of ten, to me, is a classic.
It won't be much of an election issue, however.
1. The poor know they are in urgent need of redemption.
2. The poor know not only their dependence on God and on powerful people but also their interdependence with one another.
3. The poor rest their security not on things but on people.
4. The poor have no exaggerated sense of their own importance, and no exaggerated need of privacy.
5. The poor expect little from competition and much from cooperation.
6. The poor can distinguish between necessities and luxuries.
7. The poor can wait, because they have acquired a kind of dogged patience born of acknowledged dependence.
8. The fears of the poor are more realistic and less exaggerated, because they already know that one can survive great suffering and want.
9. When the poor have the Gospel preached to them, it sounds like good news and not like a threat or a scolding.
10. The poor can respond to the call of the Gospel with a certain abandonment and uncomplicated totality because they have so little to lose and are ready for anything.
In summary, through no choice of their own—they may urgently wish otherwise—poor people find themselves in a posture that befits the grace of God. In their state of neediness, dependence, and dissatisfaction with life, they may welcome God’s free gift of love.
2 comments:
How many times have I thought of "the poor" people as "them"? In that light we are disconnected from them. And yet the wealth of spirit suggested by Dr. Hellwig's list suggests a people who are closer to the ideal of humanity than we, I among them, who are chasing our tails to "make it".
The somewhat elevated view of the poor does not eliminate the responsibility of the haves to do our part to strive for greater equality of opportunity.
We have a sense of dualism of rich/poor, and have/have nots. You are correct that many people view the poor as 'them.
What is said is that if one listens to talk radio you get the impression that the poor are seen as ethically inferior and do not deserve assistance. There's a societal judgment on the worth poor versus the unworthy poor. By doing this, people are able to salve their consciences by not taking responsibility towards the needy by viewing them as morally defective.
Hellwig would totally agree with you that it does not eliminate the responsibility of the 'haves' towards the 'have nots.' What is interesting is that, if you really read what she's saying, is that by aiding the less fortunate, people become richly blessed. St. Francis said it well when he said that, 'in giving we receive.'
Post a Comment