When most of us hear the adjective ‘chronic’ we expect what follows will be some form of illness such as diabetes or arthritis. What are we to think, then, of the phrase ‘chronic vigor’?
In his magisterial treatise, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine Cardinal John Henry Newman (now canonized) identifies chronic vigor as the seventh and final principle that must be present within true doctrinal development. As I understand it, this refers to an inexhaustible quality or impetus within a doctrine or a mystery that allows us to penetrate it more deeply, and to grasp its nature more clearly, without fully understanding it because it remains incomprehensible. In the words of a theological tyro like me, this means that while received dogma cannot change, our comprehension of it is continually maturing. The development of the understanding of the Blessed Trinity during the Church’s first couple of centuries is a case in point.
Is philanthropy a mystery? What has been and will be its role in our unfolding history? Does it manifest a chronic vigor which with each post-Edenic age we come to appreciate more and more but never exhaustively? What is the relation between philanthropy and human dignity? Is the latter possible without the former?
In response to the call for human dignity, the United Nations created in 2015 seventeen world development objectives called the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In summary, these are no poverty; no hunger; good health and well-being; quality education; sexual equality; clean water and sanitation; affordable and clean energy; decent work and economic growth; industry, innovation, and infrastructure; reduced inequality; sustainable cities and communities; responsible consumption and production; climate action; life below water; life on land; peace, justice, and strong institutions; and partnership for the realization of these goals. Even high school students with a smattering of world history can appreciate the unprecedented nature of this global and comprehensive initiative toward a ‘new and universal solidarity’. Who would gainsay the merit of its intention? The Vatican itself has endorsed the U.N.’s plan as a worthy blueprint for just and peaceful development. But, will it be possible without philanthropy?
Referenced here is not institutional philanthropy so much as individual, personal philanthropy, the kind of philanthropy that results from the change of heart Pope Francis calls for as he endorses SDG. Without the conversion of individual hearts are the SDG goals realistic? If they are not voluntary, must they be mandatory to be accomplished? That is, is the alternate path to their achievement centralized totalitarian global government?
Here is where religiously inspired philanthropy comes in. Such philanthropists invest their resources in the betterment of the world because they see themselves as instruments of God’s will. Philanthropy is the force that activates their participation in God’s plan.
Could it be that this philanthropic urge began as an inextinguishable spark in our global ancestors and is now, millennia later, growing into a shared flame whose warmth opens our hearts to the world around us and whose light illuminates more deeply its incomprehensible mystery?
Could it be that Cardinal Newman would attribute to philanthropy that quality of chronic vigor?