Solidarity as Participation

A final implication of solidarity as spiritual exercise for our consideration is the notion that solidarity strives for and values participation. For Sobrino and John Paul II alike, the praxis of solidarity is always an attempt to overcome the consequences of sin and separation: poverty and war, for example, have the effect of dehumanizing their vic-tims and separating them from the human community. While death-dealing isolation and suffering gives particular priority to solidarity with the least, solidarity is ultimately in-tended for—and ought to practiced by—all.

The notion of participation helps to illuminate how solidarity culminates in grace for all, and not just those who are most recognizably suffering the consequences of sin.

25 Dych, 248-249.

Certainly the materially poor and physically suffering have a particular need for material relief, but as we have already discussed simple humanitarian assistance does not consti-tute solidarity. Rather, as we explored in the phenomenological analysis of the four movements of the spiritual exercise of solidarity based on the writings of Jon Sobrino, the encounter of the poor with the poor can have the effect of awakening within the non-poor an awareness of how their lives were deficient when they were not related to those who were suffering. In short, they become acutely aware of how their own humanity suf-fered by their lack of relationship to others. Transformed by the praxis and experience of solidarity, however, both the poor and the non-poor express their commitment to this par-ticipation that restores their humanity by engaging in actions and activities that create structures to support their ongoing relationship and mutual worth. In solidarity, they commit themselves to full participation – and thereby transcend the subject-object dy-namic that often accompanies humanitarian assistance. John Paul II speaks of this notion of participation poignantly in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis:

Solidarity helps us to see the “other”-whether a person, people or nation-not just as some kind of instrument, with a work capacity and physical strength to be ex-ploited at low cost and then discarded when no longer useful, but as our “neigh-bor,” a “helper” (cf. Gen 2:18-20), to be made a sharer, on a par with ourselves, in the banquet of life to which all are equally invited by God.²⁶

As this passage from John Paul indicates, the notion of participation as a fruit of solidarity extends beyond the relationship between persons who are separated by material poverty or suffering. Solidarity ought to be practiced in every situation where the human community risks intractable division, such as in the differences between people of diverse

26 Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, §39.

cultures, religions, and political vision. As we have mentioned, in these cases, solidarity is not fulfilled by a homogenization of difference. Rather, solidarity can be a method by which bridges are built between those who are different, and the bridge itself becomes a meeting place through which people can engage and otherwise participate in each other’s cultures, ideals, and beliefs.²⁷

At this level, David Hollenbach, S.J., has argued on behalf of a commitment to in-tellectual solidarity, which he defines as “a willingness to take other persons seriously enough to engage them in conversation and debate about what they think makes life worth living, including what they think will make for the good of the polis.”²⁸ David Tracy has also argued on behalf of a rich notion of conversation, whereby people from diverse traditions participate with another in a dialogue that risks learning from one an-other.²⁹ Both Tracy and Hollenbach well-explicate how the praxis of solidarity extends beyond the physical praxis of engaging with those in need to an intellectual and philoso-phical openness to others, and a readiness to learn and be transformed by the encounter with others. The praxis of intellectual solidarity itself, or of conversation itself, creates

27 Boswell, 106.

28 Hollenbach, David. “Contexts of the Political Role of Religion: Civil Society and Culture.”

San Diego Law Review 30, 892.

See also Hollenbach’s “Afterword: A Community of Freedom” in Douglas, R. Bruce, ed. Ca-tholicism and Liberalism: Contributions to American Public Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-sity Press, 1994. 323-341.

29 Tracy, David. Plurality & Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope. Chicago: U Chicago Press, 1987:

Conversation in its primary form is an exploration of possibilities in the search for truth. In fol-lowing the track of any question, we must allow for difference and otherness. At the same time, as the question takes over, we notice that to attend to the other as other, the different as different, is also to understand the different as possible. To recognize possibility is to sense some similarity to what we have already experienced or understood. But similarity here must be described as simi-larity-in-difference, that is, analogy. An imagination trained to that kind of encounter is an analogical imagination. All good interpreters possess it. For the phrase “an analogical imagina-tion” simply reminds us that conversation occurs if, and only if, we will risk ourselves by allowing the questions of the text. Tracy, 20.

the bridge that humanizes those who might otherwise be considered “other” due to their traditions or beliefs. Without homogenizing or steamrolling the differences between people with potentially incommensurable beliefs or traditions, engaging in this praxis strives for a dialogue and exchange of ideas that seeks the full participation of those who might otherwise be separated and alienated from one another.

---

The spiritual exercise of solidarity makes a particular and complementary contri-bution to the development of solidarity in the official Catholic social tradition. As we have seen, this conception of solidarity integrates and animates contemporary Christian spirituality, Scripture, and ethics in a manner that a traditional understanding of solidarity as virtue cannot. Moreover, solidarity as an interpersonal spiritual exercise is able to transcend the individualistic tendencies of Christian personalism and virtue ethics in a manner that is more appropriate to the Christian understanding of the Reign of God. Be-cause the spiritual exercise of solidarity entails a primary concern for the poor, the suffer-ing, and the marginalized, it provides a praxis by which we might respond to the most pressing and immediate humanitarian crises of our day, and assures that victims and those who suffer are not objectified as problems to be solved, but invited to be equal partners in creating social structures that preserve the integrity and full participation of all.

BIBLIOGRAPHY