Posts
In recent
days Pope Francis released his long anticipated encyclical on climate
change. It turns out to be far more than
that. Laudato Si’, Blessed Be, addresses
the entire global social and economic situation that has brought the world to radical
climate disruption. It is a profound document calling on humanity to, as the subtitle says, “care for our common
home.” Its prescriptions range far
beyond the technology and policy advocacy that characterizes most climate
politics. Indeed, they go to the very
fundamentals of who we are as human beings.
Francis
sets Laudato Si’ in the context of another time the world was veering close to
destruction. The Cuban Missile Crisis
had just taken place. Nuclear war had been only narrowly averted.
Writes
Francis, “More than fifty years ago, with the world teetering on the brink of
nuclear crisis, Pope Saint John XXIII wrote an Encyclical which not only
rejected war but offered a proposal for peace. He addressed his message, Pacem
in Terris, to the entire ‘Catholic world’ and indeed ‘to all men and women of
good will.’ Now, faced as we are with global environmental deterioration, I
wish to address every person living on this planet.”
Laudato Si’
is a rich document that would be impossible to fully summarize in a reasonably
sized blog post. But it does crystallize
key themes that can. This Cascadia Planet post lets Francis speak to those
themes in his own words. Those who wish
to read the full encyclical can find it here.
OUR COMMON CONDITION
“. . .
Saint Francis of Assisi reminds us that our common home is like a sister with
whom we share our life and a beautiful mother who opens her arms to embrace us.
‘Praise be to you, my Lord, through our Sister, Mother Earth, who sustains and
governs us . . . ‘ This sister now cries
out to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use
and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her. We have come to see
ourselves as her lords and masters, entitled to plunder her at will.”
“Never
have we so hurt and mistreated our common home as we have in the last two hundred
years . . . The problem is that we still lack the culture needed to confront
this crisis. We lack leadership capable of striking out on new paths and
meeting the needs of the present with concern for all and without prejudice
towards coming generations.”
“Hope
would have us recognize that there is always a way out, that we can always
redirect our steps, that we can always do something to solve our problems.
Still, we can see signs that things are now reaching a breaking point, due to
the rapid pace of change and degradation . . .”
“Doomsday
predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving
to coming generations debris, desolation and filth. The pace of consumption,
waste and environmental change has so stretched the planet’s capacity that our
contemporary lifestyle, unsustainable as it is, can only precipitate
catastrophes.’”
“Although
the post-industrial period may well be remembered as one of the most
irresponsible in history, nonetheless there is reason to hope that humanity at
the dawn of the twenty-first century will be remembered for having generously
shouldered its grave responsibilities.”
“I urgently
appeal, then, for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our
planet. We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental
challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all . .
. We require a new and universal solidarity.”
A CRITIQUE OF TECHNOLOGY AND GROWTH
“A
certain way of understanding human life and activity has gone awry, to the
serious detriment of the world around us
. . . the dominant technocratic paradigm and the place of human beings
and of human action in the world.”
“ . . . the
idea of infinite or unlimited growth, which proves so attractive to economists,
financiers and experts in technology . . . is based on the lie that there is an
infinite supply of the earth’s goods, and this leads to the planet being
squeezed dry beyond every limit.”
“A
politics concerned with immediate results, supported by consumerist sectors of
the population, is driven to produce short-term growth. In response to
electoral interests, governments are reluctant to upset the public with
measures which could affect the level of consumption or create risks for
foreign investment. The myopia of power politics delays the inclusion of a
far-sighted environmental agenda within the overall agenda of governments.”
“ .
. .given the insatiable and irresponsible growth produced over many decades, we
need also to think of containing growth by setting some reasonable limits and
even retracing our steps before it is too late. We know how unsustainable is
the behavior of those who constantly consume and destroy, while others are not
yet able to live in a way worthy of their human dignity. That is why the time
has come to accept decreased growth in some parts of the world, in order to
provide resources for other places to experience healthy growth.”
“The specialization which belongs to technology makes it
difficult to see the larger picture. The fragmentation of knowledge proves
helpful for concrete applications, and yet it often leads to a loss of
appreciation for the whole, for the relationships between things, and for the
broader horizon, which then becomes irrelevant . . . Life gradually becomes a
surrender to situations conditioned by technology, itself viewed as the
principal key to the meaning of existence.”
“Any
technical solution which science claims to offer will be powerless to solve the
serious problems of our world if humanity loses its compass, if we lose sight
of the great motivations which make it possible for us to live in harmony, to
make sacrifices and to treat others well.”
“If we
acknowledge the value and the fragility of nature and, at the same time, our
God-given abilities, we can finally leave behind the modern myth of unlimited
material progress. A fragile world, entrusted by God to human care, challenges
us to devise intelligent ways of directing, developing and limiting our power.”
AGAINST CONSUMERISM AND MARKETISM
“Once
more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest
that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies
or individuals. Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with
maximizing profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they
will leave behind for future generations? Where profits alone count, there can
be no thinking about the rhythms of nature, its phases of decay and
regeneration, or the complexity of ecosystems which may be gravely upset by
human intervention.”
“. . .
economic powers continue to justify the current global system where priority
tends to be given to speculation and the pursuit of financial gain, which fail
to take the context into account, let alone the effects on human dignity and
the natural environment . . . It is foreseeable that, once certain resources
have been depleted, the scene will be set for new wars, albeit under the guise
of noble claims.”
“Since
the market tends to promote extreme consumerism in an effort to sell its
products, people can easily get caught up in a whirlwind of needless buying and
spending. Compulsive consumerism is one example of how the techno-economic
paradigm affects individuals.”
“When
people become self-centered and self-enclosed, their greed increases. The
emptier a person’s heart is, the more he or she needs things to buy, own and
consume. It becomes almost impossible to accept the limits imposed by reality.
. . . Obsession with a consumerist lifestyle, above all when few people are
capable of maintaining it, can only lead to violence and mutual destruction.”
“A
consumerist vision of human beings, encouraged by the mechanisms of today’s
globalized economy, has a leveling effect on cultures, diminishing the immense
variety which is the heritage of all humanity . . . The imposition of a
dominant lifestyle linked to a single form of production can be just as harmful
as the altering of ecosystems.”
“In
this sense, it is essential to show special care for indigenous communities and
their cultural traditions . . . For them, land is not a commodity but rather a
gift from God and from their ancestors who rest there, a sacred space with
which they need to interact if they are to maintain their identity and values.
When they remain on their land, they themselves care for it best.”
AGAINST SHALLOW ENVIRONMENTALISM
“Ecological culture cannot be reduced to a series of urgent
and partial responses to the immediate problems of pollution, environmental
decay and the depletion of natural resources. There needs to be a distinctive
way of looking at things, a way of thinking, policies, an educational program,
a lifestyle and a spirituality which together generate resistance to the
assault of the technocratic paradigm. Otherwise, even the best ecological
initiatives can find themselves caught up in the same globalized logic. To seek
only a technical remedy to each environmental problem which comes up is to
separate what is in reality interconnected and to mask the true and deepest problems
of the global system.”
“. . .
we can note the rise of a false or superficial ecology which bolsters
complacency and a cheerful recklessness. . . .
Such evasiveness serves as a license to carrying on with our present
lifestyles and models of production and consumption. This is the way human
beings contrive to feed their self-destructive vices: trying not to see them,
trying not to acknowledge them, delaying the important decisions and pretending
that nothing will happen.”
“The
strategy of buying and selling ‘carbon credits’ can lead to a new form of
speculation which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases
worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the
guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow
for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may
simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of
some countries and sectors.”
“At one
extreme, we find those who doggedly uphold the myth of progress and tell us
that ecological problems will solve themselves simply with the application of
new technology and without any need for ethical considerations or deep change.
At the other extreme are those who view men and women and all their
interventions as no more than a threat, jeopardizing the global ecosystem, and
consequently the presence of human beings on the planet should be reduced and
all forms of intervention prohibited. Viable future scenarios will have to be
generated between these extremes, since there is no one path to a solution.”
THE CLIMATE CRISIS
“The
climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all . . . A very solid
scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing
warming of the climatic system . . . Humanity is called to recognize the need
for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, in order to combat this
warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it . . .“
“ The
problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of
fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system. Another
determining factor has been an increase in changed uses of the soil,
principally deforestation for agricultural purposes.”
“The
melting in the polar ice caps and in high altitude plains can lead to the
dangerous release of methane gas, while the decomposition of frozen organic
material can further increase the emission of carbon dioxide. Things are made
worse by the loss of tropical forests which would otherwise help to mitigate
climate change. Carbon dioxide pollution increases the acidification of the
oceans and compromises the marine food chain. If present trends continue, this
century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented
destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us.”
“Its
worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades.
Many of the poor live in areas particularly affected by phenomena related to
warming, and their means of subsistence are largely dependent on natural
reserves and ecosystemic services such as agriculture, fishing and forestry.
They have no other financial activities or resources which can enable them to
adapt to climate change or to face natural disasters, and their access to
social services and protection is very limited.”
“There is
an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission
of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced,
for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable
energy.”
THE ECOLOGICAL IS THE SOCIAL
“We are
faced not with two separate crises, one environmental and the other social, but
rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental.
Strategies for a solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty,
restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature.”
“. . . we
have to realize that a true ecological approach always becomes a social
approach; it must integrate questions of justice in debates on the environment,
so as to hear both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor.”
“A true
‘ecological debt’ exists, particularly between the global north and south,
connected to commercial imbalances with effects on the environment, and the
disproportionate use of natural resources by certain countries over long
periods of time . . . The warming caused
by huge consumption on the part of some rich countries has repercussions on the
poorest areas of the world, especially Africa, where a rise in temperature,
together with drought, has proved devastating for farming.”
RETURN TO THE COMMON GOOD
“Human
ecology is inseparable from the notion of the common good, a central and
unifying principle of social ethics.”
“In
the present condition of global society, where injustices abound and growing
numbers of people are deprived of basic human rights and considered expendable,
the principle of the common good immediately becomes, logically and inevitably,
a summons to solidarity and a preferential option for the poorest of our
brothers and sisters.”
“The
notion of the common good also extends to future generations. . . . Once we
start to think about the kind of world we are leaving to future generations, we
look at things differently; we realize that the world is a gift which we have
freely received and must share with others . . . Intergenerational solidarity
is not optional, but rather a basic question of justice, since the world we
have received also belongs to those who will follow us.”
“. .
. if these issues are courageously faced, we are led inexorably to ask other
pointed questions: What is the purpose of our life in this world? Why are we
here? What is the goal of our work and all our efforts? What need does the
earth have of us? It is no longer enough, then, simply to state that we should
be concerned for future generations. We need to see that what is at stake is
our own dignity. Leaving an inhabitable planet to future generations is, first and
foremost, up to us. The issue is one which dramatically affects us, for it has
to do with the ultimate meaning of our earthly sojourn.”
RECOGNIZE OUR INTERDEPENDENCE
“As the
Catechism teaches: 'God wills the interdependence of creatures. The sun and the
moon, the cedar and the little flower, the eagle and the sparrow: the spectacle
of their countless diversities and inequalities tells us that no creature is
self-sufficient. Creatures exist only in dependence on each other, to complete
each other, in the service of each other.'”
“Everything
is related, and we human beings are united as brothers and sisters on a
wonderful pilgrimage, woven together by the love God has for each of his
creatures and which also unites us in fond affection with brother sun, sister
moon, brother river and mother earth.”
A MOTIVATING SPIRITUAL PATHWAY
“. . . all
is not lost. Human beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of
rising above themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start,
despite their mental and social conditioning.”
“Disinterested
concern for others, and the rejection of every form of self-centeredness and
self-absorption, are essential if we truly wish to care for our brothers and
sisters and for the natural environment. These attitudes also attune us to the
moral imperative of assessing the impact of our every action and personal
decision on the world around us. If we can overcome individualism, we will
truly be able to develop a different lifestyle and bring about significant
changes in society.”
“ A
commitment this lofty cannot be sustained by doctrine alone, without a
spirituality capable of inspiring us . . . the ecological crisis is also a
summons to profound interior conversion . . .
(to) a prophetic and contemplative lifestyle, one capable of deep
enjoyment free of the obsession with consumption . . . a return to that simplicity which allows us
to stop and appreciate the small things, to be grateful for the opportunities
which life affords us, to be spiritually detached from what we possess, and not
to succumb to sadness for what we lack.”
“Happiness
means knowing how to limit some needs which only diminish us, and being open to
the many different possibilities which life can offer.”
“We are speaking of an attitude of the heart, one which
approaches life with serene attentiveness, which is capable of being fully
present to someone without thinking of what comes next, which accepts each
moment as a gift from God to be lived to the full.”
“Saint Therese of Lisieux invites us to practice the little
way of love, not to miss out on a kind word, a smile or any small gesture which
sows peace and friendship. An integral ecology is also made up of simple daily
gestures which break with the logic of violence, exploitation and selfishness .
. . Love, overflowing with small gestures of mutual care, is also civic and
political, and it makes itself felt in every action that seeks to build a
better world.”
