David B. Couturier, OFM. Cap.,Ph.D, DMin., Lic. Psych.

Structural Conversion

Social Sin118. Certain sins, constitute by their very object a direct assault on one's neighbour.

Such sins in particular are known as social sins. Social sin is every sin committed against the justice due in relations between individuals, between the individual and the community, and also between the community and the individual. Social too is

every sin against the rights of the human person, starting with the right to life, including that of life in the womb, and every sin against the physical integrity of the individual; every sin against the freedom of others, especially against the supreme freedom to believe in God and worship him; and every sin against the dignity and

honour of one's neighbour.

Every sin against the common good and its demands, in the whole broad area of rights and duties of citizens, is also social sin. In the end, social sin is that sin that

“refers to the relationships between the various human communities. These relationships are not always in accordance with the plan of God, who intends that there be justice in the world and freedom and peace between individuals, groups

and peoples”[227].119. The actions and attitudes opposed to the will of God and the good of neighbour,

as well as the structures arising from such behaviour, appear to fall into two categories today: “on the one hand, the all-consuming desire for profit, and on the other, the thirst for power, with the intention of imposing one's will upon others. In

order to characterize better each of these attitudes, one can add the expression: ‘at any price”'[230].

The Insights and Work of John Corriveau, OFM Cap.,Minister General of the Capuchin Order- 1994-2006Bishop of Nelson, BC, Canada 2008-

The Fraternal Economy: A Pastoral Psychology of Franciscan Economics

The Fraternal EconomyWhat do we mean by a “fraternal economy” in

Capuchin-Franciscan literature? What are the “psychodynamics of Gospel

brotherhood?” Is the belief in a fraternal world a fundamental

delusion?

“Corriveau’s conceptualization of the fraternal economy is decidedly deliberative, willful and intentional. He conceives of it…. as a conscious choice and a conscious break from one’s inherited structures… (but research shows that) Victims are more vulnerable not less when the belief in a just world is strongest.:

The Fraternal economy (con’t)The Fraternal Economy and the Development

of a Corporate Imagination: A Socio-Analytic Perspective.

The Development of Communities of International Compassion.

Towards a Pastoral Psychology of Franciscan Economics

The Influence of JPII and a Theology of Communion

Away from a “theology of asceticism” and negation/ sacrifice

From personal perfection to communion

A radical shift in Capuchin experience…. 

“Our entire spirituality and tradition have highlighted poverty, viewing it especially under the ascetical, individual aspect. ...

Nevertheless, the renewed sense of brotherhood, the worldwide spread of the Order, and new

problems in our society invite us to reconsider and deepen the meaning of our ‘gospel poverty in fraternity,’ specifically from the communal, institutional, and structural point of view.”2 2Capuchin Order of Friars Minor, Sixth Plenary Council, 4

The Changing Context

The “Working Poor” of Western Europe as “Model” of Franciscan Poverty

Prior to 1950, the Capuchin Order was overwhelmingly centered in Europe - particularly

in Western Europe - and in North America.

Only about 5% of the brothers were members of autonomous circumscriptions in the poorer

southern hemisphere of our world, none of them in Africa.

Identification with the working poor of Europe

Given the statistics, it is not surprising that the Constitutions of 1925 describe a brotherhood

living in close solidarity with the working class people of Western Europe. Like the working

poor of the time, brothers lived from the fruits of each day’s labor:

 “Only a few days’ provision of the necessities of

life that can be obtained from day to day by begging, shall be made in our friaries.”3

3Constitutions OFMCap., 1925, 118

Direct dependence upon the working poor

Like the occasional day laborers of their age, the brothers held no offices to which fixed salaries were

attached. They lived from the offerings given for their occasional services as preachers and confessors,

spontaneous offerings given by the faithful in their chapels and churches, manual labor in gardens and

orchards, and from the quest. The fact that the livelihood of the brothers depended upon spontaneous

offerings in their chapels and, in particular, on the quest, meant that they were directly dependent

upon the working poor themselves. This forged a strong bond of solidarity between the Capuchins and

the working poor.

Economic SolidarityEconomic solidarity within the brotherhood was

described in this way: 

“Perfect common life shall be religiously and constantly observed. ... All goods, emoluments,

gifts - in a word, everything the religious acquires by any title whatever - must be

consigned to the superior ... so that all shall have in common, food, clothing and everything that is

necessary.”4

 4Constitutions OFMCap., 1925, 111.

Euro-centricThe fact that 91% of the autonomous circumscriptions

of the Order were centered in Europe and North America ensured economic equality among

them. The prescriptions of the Constitutions whereby missions were totally integrated into the

province ensured that the vast majority of the brothers in Asia-Oceania, Africa and Latin America, by reason of the rules of common life, enjoyed equal

access to the goods of the province with their brothers in Europe and North America. Thus, there

was reasonable economic equality between Provinces as well as among the brothers of the

northern and southern hemispheres.

The Disappearing Model: 1950-1970

The economic wealth of the world multiplied. Yet, this wealth was not equally distributed. North America and

Western Europe enjoyed unprecedented prosperity which had the effect of increasing the economic gulf separating the northern and southern hemispheres.

Public and private welfare programs multiplied, particularly in Western Europe and in North America. Those programs ensured the basic needs of children,

education, health care and old age. For the first time in human history entire peoples were given

security for the future. This increased exponentially the disparity between the northern and southern

hemispheres. Generally, southern nations lacked the capability of guaranteeing such rights for their citizens.

Capuchin poverty is differentThe working poor of 1950 were among the beneficiaries of

the social and economic changes in Western Europe and North America.

With the disappearance of the “working poor of 1950,” the “model” for Capuchin communal poverty was also broken.

Like the working poor of 1950, the brothers accepted the social improvements of their age:

 “Superiors may make use of insurance policies or forms

of social security where this is prescribed by ecclesiastical or civil authority for everybody or for certain professions, or

where such things are commonly used by the poor of the region.”5

5Constitutions OFMCap., 1968, 52.

Investments!For the first time, the concept of investment enters

the Capuchin vocabulary.6  

There is a real change in the ordinary means whereby the brothers sustain themselves. For the

first time the Constitutions speak of entitled income, especially salaries and pensions:

 “All goods, including salaries and pensions ... shall be handed over for the use of the fraternity.”7

6Cf. Constitutions OFMCap., 1968, 56.7Constitutions OFMCap., 1968, 51.

No longer dependent on the poor

As a consequence, the quest rapidly disappeared and with it an important bond of solidarity with the people. The brothers were

no longer evidently and directly dependent upon the people - particularly the poor - for

their support.

Development of ministries

There was a very rapid development of ministries among those excluded from the prosperity of the age. Works for the social

progress of people were seen as an integral part of evangelization. The Order expressed its solidarity with the new poor by works of

justice and compassion:

Our task is to “relieve the needs of the poor”

“We ought to live in conscious solidarity with the countless poor of the world, and by our apostolic labor lead the Christian people to

works of justice and charity which further the development of peoples.” 8

 “Freed from the empty cares of this world and cooperating with Divine Providence, we should

regard it as our duty to relieve the needs of the poor.”9

8Constitutions OFMCap., 1968, 47.9Constitutions OFMCap., 1968, 87.

We become benefactors of the poor…

Sustained and supported by the working poor of 1950, the Order became the benefactor of

the new poor of the 1970s. This changed our relationship to the peoples around us.

Structural Economic Inequality Between Brothers

Between 1950 and 2006, the demographics of the Order changed dramatically. In 1950, 91% of the

autonomous circumscriptions and probably 95% of the brothers of the Order were centered in Western Europe

or North America. In 2006, 40% percent of the autonomous circumscriptions of the Order and 48% of the brothers of the Order were in Asia-Oceania,

Africa and Latin America. The statistics do not indicate the equally dramatic increase in numbers in Central and

Eastern Europe. If these are included, 56% of the brothers of the Order are now juridic members of

circumscriptions outside Western Europe and North America. With some exceptions, these circumscriptions

all have dramatically less capability to respond to the needs of the brothers and the ministries of their region than do those in Western Europe and North America.

Structural disparities revealed..Until 1970, the vast majority of brothers in Asia, Africa and Latin America were juridic members of Western European or North American Provinces.

Therefore, the normal rules of common life ensured an equitable distribution of goods

ensuring the well-being of all the brothers and their ministries. With the dramatic shift of

membership toward the economically disadvantaged regions of our world this is no

longer the case. There now exist structural economic disparities between Provinces of our

Order.

What happens to brotherhood…

If structural economic disparities are allowed to persist between Provinces of the Order,

brotherhood will be severely undermined and the mission of our Order in the Church

and society will be compromised.

Two Models of PovertyDespite the momentous social changes of the previous

fifty years, the Order continued to cling to the concept of the “working poor” to define its poverty. As the “working poor” of Western Europe and North American became the new middle class, the friars

followed their patrons. However, the “working poor” of Asia, Africa and most of Latin America did

not experience the same transformation. Therefore, two models persisted within the same religious family: a model in Western Europe and

North America centered on the lower middle class; a model in Asia, Latin America and, particularly

Africa, where poverty was identified with misery.

Poverty and the embrace of securityThe Franciscan scholar, David Flood, OFM has argued convincingly that the poverty of the early

Franciscan fraternity grew out of a conscious effort on the part of Francis and his early companions to separate themselves from the social and economic life of Assisi as represented in the civil charters of

1203 and 1210.14 Flood maintains that the Earlier Rule was progressively crafted as a response to a society and an economy which excluded the poor

and legislated privilege. Therefore, the poverty of the early Franciscan fraternity was not the

embrace of insecurity! 14See Franciscan Digest, Vol. IX, No. 2, June 1999.

Economic choicesRather, Francis sought to establish and give witness

to a new security based on human solidarity rooted in the gospel rather than a security founded

on wealth and privilege. Furthermore, Flood points out that this new fraternity founded on the gospel

became a source of peace for the world. Non-use of money, non-appropriation of goods, manual work for

support, begging in case of necessity: these are economic choices more than ascetical choices!

These are the economic choices which Francis made to build relationships among his brothers and between his brothers and all peoples and

creatures of the earth .

Francis and interdependence“The sense of brotherhood among people (CPOVI, 1)”,

communion, was the driving force of his choices of poverty, “austere simplicity” was the consequence! Francis and Clare, enthralled by the Divine Mystery

revealed in the incarnation and the cross, abandoning themselves to the God-Who-Is-Love, joyfully embraced the contingency of human life.

They embraced as the first logical corollary interdependence with all persons (images of God-Who-Is-Love) and creatures. Like trapeze artists,

they made the high jump without a net trusting totally in God-Who-Is-Love.

SolidaritySolidarity is the center-piece of a fraternal economy.

In his Encyclical, Sollicitudo rei socialis, Pope John Paul II defined solidarity as a moral and Christian virtue. As a

moral virtue, solidarity “is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good”.18 This moral virtue “helps us to see the ‘other’ - whether a

person, people or nation - ... on a par with ourselves, in the banquet of life to which all are equally invited by God.” 19 As a Christian virtue, solidarity sees that “one’s neighbor

is ... the living image of God ... [who] must be loved ... with the same love with which the Lord loves him or her.” 20

 18SRS, 38.19SRS, 39.20SRS, 40.

Globalization and its discontentsGlobalization has produced many blessings for our

world. The transformation of the Capuchin Order from a brotherhood centered until 1970 on Western

Europe and North America to a truly worldwide brotherhood in 2008 would not have been humanly possible without the globalizing effects of modern communications and travel. The global economy

provides large segments of the world’s population with greater security and well-being than at any

other period of human history. At the same time, solidarity and mutual dependence are goals

which are contrary to basic tenets of the global economy which control much of the life and

thinking in our world.

Goals of the modern economy Increase wealth

Make a profit

Profit is increased as dependence is created. The more others depend upon one’s goods and services, the higher

the price that can be demanded! Dependence in the global economy is not something to be celebrated as the “consequence of being human and redeemed, and ... a

right” (see ER IX, 8). In the global economy dependence is feared because it leaves people weak and exposed! In the global economy the discovery of the dependence

of the other is not an invitation to service (see ER IX, 10), but rather an opportunity to exploit others

for greater personal profit and advantage.

The efficiency of the global economyThe efficiency of the global economy is built upon the concentration of

power and the triumph of competition. This applies primarily to economic relationships. However, it produces a mentality and attitudes

which go far beyond the world of economics – one which affects all areas of human life and relationships. Consequently, the approach to life nourished by the global economy rarely produces unity and communion. We live in a world of ever increasing wealth joined to ever increasing insecurity. Global economic forces and the philosophies that direct them promote insecurity and violence. . Poverty was “privatized” in

the rich northern world in the 1950's when the “working poor” disappeared and was replaced by a group of individuals who fell through

the social nets. In the closing decades of the 2nd millennium violence has been privatized. The real threat to world peace is no longer

the struggle between global economic and social systems. Rather, those individuals and isolated groups who feel alienated, excluded and left out of the global economy respond with acts of

violence and terrorism leading to the destabilization of all of human society

An interdependent world…..In direct contrast to the basic principles of the global

economy, solidarity and mutual dependence consciously seek to create an interdependent world since such a vision is more in keeping with a scriptural

view of life (see Genesis 1-3). This view is also closer to “that sublime height of most exalted poverty” described by Francis in Chapter Six of the Rule. It is highly significant and suggestive that Francis describes the "sublime height of most exalted poverty" not in Chapter Four of the Rule

where he describes our relationship to money (the Capuchin Constitutions characterize this chapter as the

chapter on "Poverty"), but in Chapter Six where he describes the human relationships which will result

from this new economy (the Capuchin Constitutions characterize this chapter as a chapter on "Brotherhood").

Solidarity is all about choices….In Sollicitudo rei socialis, Pope John Paul II reminds us that solidarity “is not a vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far” (n.

38). Solidarity is not some vague, ineffective stirring of pity that one might feel in front of a television set at the sight of

earthquake victims or scenes of victims of human rights abuses. We may feel slightly guilty or even angry – but

nothing happens! Solidarity makes something happen because it is about choices that flow from “a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good” – in the words of Pope John Paul II. The

mind-set that gives rise to such determination is the knowledge that “we are all really responsible for all” (ibid). Choices need to be “arrived at” after careful consideration

and investigation of the facts. The work of arriving at choices can be difficult in the case of individuals. For a community,

it involves hard work to arrive at serious, deliberate choices.

Our economic choices….The meaning and role of money and the way in

which private property is viewed in today’s society are different than what they were

when the early Franciscans made their radical economic choices. However, the fundamental

choice of Francis has the same compelling necessity: withdraw from the world of

greed, ambition and competition which underlie the economic choices of our day

in favor of unequivocal choices for an interdependent world.

The Order recrafts its economic choices

Beginning with the Sixth Plenary Council, the Order has attempted to re-craft its economy

based on operational choices which will foster interdependence not only within our

local, provincial and international fraternities, but in the wider context of our societies.

The Principles of the Fraternal Economy

Redeemed RelationshipsSt. Francis did not change the economic structures of his day. However, he established a mode of being for his brothers which posited their security, not upon the amassing of wealth,

but upon the redeemed relationships which they established among themselves and with the people around them. This had drastic effect on their relationships with their neighbours as is

attested by the same Letter from Porto Alegre: 

“In the Legend of Three Companions, Francis explains to the bishop of Assisi that his renunciation of worldly goods was not primarily related to penance and asceticism. Rather, Francis rejected

material possessions so as not to have to defend them with military arms and thus destroy his peaceful relationships

with men and women (Legend, 35). The austerity of the Franciscan life, therefore, was the consequence of a radical

option to live in relationship with everyone and to recreate the bonds of communion among all people and with God.”34

34Ibid.

A new way of serving the poor

“Apply the principles of the fraternal economy in our ministries, and, in a special way, as we

work with poor for their empowerment.”35

Economic choices through the fraternity

The poor are the primary victims of a global economy built upon unfettered competition and

the concentration of wealth. This economy keeps the poor in a condition of perpetual dependence which robs them of hope. “Works of direct aid to poor people should aim to connect people in need

with people of means in a fraternal economy” (CPOVII, 51). Mutual dependence builds the brotherhood/sisterhood of the Kingdom. The

Capuchin fraternity must be a mutual point of reference creating trust and brother/sisterhood between the poor and persons of means. This is one reason why “assistance should not go from

individual [Capuchin] to individual [poor person], but always through the fraternity” (VII PCO, 51

The fraternal principles

We can build solidarity among the poor by involving them in a fraternal economy built upon the same

principles as that of our brotherhood: transparency, participation, equity and austerity. When social

ministries are deprived of these fraternal principles, they can create destructive

competition between the poor, each individual or family seeking its proper advantage without

regard for others. This danger is particularly present in the poorest countries which suffer chronic lack of economic resources. Economic development

springing from an economy of greed and competition divides the poor and has failed miserably to change

their condition. We must use different values.

It’s not a question of economics….Those who think that this is just a question of

economics or of money are absolutely wrong. It is a new way of relating with the people of the earth.

It is a challenge to the most profound conversion within the Order. A “fraternal economy”

prioritizing the building of brother/sisterhood in our world rather than the creation and

protection of wealth. This is a key insight which has not been present in our Order since the time of

Francis. Why? Because it flows from the new ecclesiology of the church. It is a new development

in the Order. It pushes the Order beyond what it has been. It moves the Order in a new direction.