False charity-4

Last Saturday I cited the quotation by Fr. John Perricone of Blessed Antoine-Frederic Ozaman, the founder of the world-wide charitable institution known as St. Vincent de Paul Society. This society is dedicated to the care of the sick and the elderly. In Iloilo, this society has been in service of the poor for over 100 years. The views of Blessed Ozaman therefore have direct relevance to the concept of Catholic charity

Blessed Ozaman continues to say that “Personal perfection and not the eradication of poverty per se is the primary goal of the Society” referring to his own institution. It might ours as well for indeed Christ said the poor will always be with us. In fact helping the poor is a means and not the end of our sanctification. How we help the needy measures of our love of God.

Fr. Perricone continued to say, “What could be chaotic is made harmonic with the impress of order.” Our charity then must be one of orderliness and not sporadic or perfunctory, some sort of “when we feel like it”. The priest theologian insists that “No Catholic stands exempt from the eleemosynary injunctions of holy charity; a natural and divine order must be obeyed. Each Catholic discharges the duty of charity according to his state, means, and prudently available opportunity – all beneath the hidden cloak of humility, which alone clothes merit. The preferential option for the poor ignores this rich and textured Catholic teaching, thus degenerating into a caricature of charity.”

Where did this term originate and why has it swept the Christian world? Fr. Perricone explained that it was coined in the desiccated university lecture halls of Western Europe (along with the umbrella term ‘liberation theology') and soon migrated across the continent. It found its most congenial home in South America, where it became a battle cry for priests and bishops. Decades passed and the “preferential option for the poor” gnawed away at the once robust foundations of South American Catholicism.”

From the Latin American countries, Liberation Theology came to the Philippines and with that the “battle cry” of “preferential option for the poor.” It triggered a massive realignment in the Philippine Church and in fact became the cause of many priests and seminarians leaving the Church on allegations that the Church is an ally of the ruling elite and consequently the “enemy” of the poor.

The activism of the priest was most welcome by the communists who somehow hijacked the idea with claims that the first Christians were communists. That of course did not bite but led to a redirection of the focus of the Church social action projects.

Liberation Theology divided the Church, some even rejected Church doctrine that, according to Fr. Perricone this theology was “roundly condemned by the Magesterium of Pope John Paul II and executed by his deputy, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. It did not disappear entirely. It mutated into a more benign form, but a form still bearing the theological genes of the preferential option for the poor.”

However it “is still alive and well and has now burrowed into the theological cells of a formidable cross section of the Catholic intelligentsia. It sees the poor through an ideological lens that not only makes the true poor invisible but also hides their intrinsic human dignity. They are no longer men, like other men; they are the poor; they are relegated to being a permanent underclass feeding off the largesse of their ‘betters'.

“Rather than the Church's rousing summons to strive mightily to be more , the ideologues cleverly teach them how to take more .

“In the ideologues creed the poor are to be pitied, never exhorted” and they promote the idea that “all the poor must ever see is their misfortune” that defines them. The “humanity of the poor is eviscerated as ideologues entomb them perpetually as the poor ”.

Fr. Perricone suggests that if the “ideologues truly looked at the poor they would not see poor men but simply men. They would not see the poor, but poor sinners, no different from the rest of the human race (who are) all in need of the same merciful Christ. All that these poor sinners desire are the sweet beauties only the Catholic Church can supply. For the poor are like us, not a class apart. Our Lord does not see rich and poor, privileged and unfortunate, low class and high. He sees only fallen men and women. His only preference is for poor sinners. Who would dare improve upon that?*

back to top