Laudato Si' anniversary: For what do we cherish enough to act?
“Whether believers or not, we are agreed today that the earth is essentially a shared inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone”.
“We need to strengthen the conviction that we are one single human family. There are no frontiers or barriers, political or social, behind which we can hide, still less is there room for the globalization of indifference.” —Pope Francis
“On climate change, there is a clear, definitive and ineluctable ethical imperative to act.”
— Pope Francis
One year ago, June 18, 2015, Pope Francis issued a message to the people of the world concerning the need to understand and address together the environmental and social problems we face. ‘Laudato Si’ is Pope Francis’ Encyclical on ‘the environment’ and examines the quality of our relations to each other and to the world. It calls on us to exercise ‘Care for Our Common Home’. Laudato Si means ‘Praise be to you’ which is the first line of a canticle by St. Francis that praises God with all of his creation.
The encyclical was part of a wider mobilization to achieve both the Paris Agreement in December 2015 and agreement on new sustainable development goals earlier in the year.
In the words of Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change:
‘The Pope’s encyclical, along with mobilization by many other faith groups across the globe, provided a clear moral imperative for taking climate action, supporting the Paris Climate Change Agreement and backing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. One year on, faith groups need to continue their valuable work so as to ensure that words are turned into action, at the speed and scale required to lift the world’s most vulnerable populations out of poverty, in order to catalyze sustainable development and to realize the Paris Agreement’s vision of a climate safe world.’
Excellent post by David Backes
http://gatheringrunes.com/2016/06/pope-francis-and-the-thin-blue-line/
In a video message, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, said that as scientists, governments, economists and concerned citizens were pushing for an international agreement to combat climate change, Pope Francis' encyclical provided the ‘moral imperative to take bold action.’ She said that the Pope's document raised the issue in ‘the hearts and minds of hundreds of millions of people who may not otherwise have considered climate in their daily lives.’ The science and economics of change to protect the environment are essential, Figueres said, but ‘the guidance of our moral compass’ is what will make a difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF_uR-qFhpI&feature=em-subs_digest
The sub-title of the encyclical, ‘On Care of Our Common Home’, summarises the powerful message that is addressed to all of humanity. I agree very profoundly with this document and with the integral ecology that it lays out. The Pope has not ‘gone Green’ and not become ‘left wing’ or ‘Communist’ – these are political celebrations or accusations, depending on one's view, which serve to obfuscate and divert us from an inclusive and expansive message addressed to each and all, left and right, believers and non-believers. It is, at the same time, a profoundly Catholic document, as the countless references to Catholic sources on page after page indicates. I take it to be a 'catholic' work in the most profound sense. In contrast to the Latin universalis, katholikos, the origin of Catholic, derives from two Greek words: kata or kath (meaning ‘through’ or ‘throughout’) and holos (meaning ‘whole’). A concern or consideration that runs ‘throughout-the-whole’ carries no implication of a circle or boundary containing core and periphery and separating those who are ‘inside’ and those who are ‘outside.’ Katholikos is consistent with the ministry of Jesus Christ in a way that the more exclusive notion of the church as ‘universal’ is not. He points to Jesus’ parable of ‘the yeast’ (Matthew 13:33, also Luke 13:21) in which the Kingdom of God is likened to the woman who makes bread. The Kingdom of God is like the yeast that is added to flour and is found ‘throughout-the-whole’ of the dough, not separating out the flour, but building it all together until it becomes part-of and at one-with the bread, contributing to and mutually benefiting from the life of bread. Like yeast, true universality is a catholicity which does not seek uniformity and conformity, but works with and celebrates the diversity of the parts that make the whole so that parts and whole are at-one.
The ‘universal’ approach indicated by universalis is one that draws lines and establishes boundaries around ‘one point’ lying at the centre, with endless debates about who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’ conducted with respect to determining proximity to that point. Such an approach is likely to establish boundaries between ‘the global institution’ and ‘the world’ as a whole. The ‘catholic’ approach indicated by catholicity is one that embraces the whole and everything and everyone that falls within that whole. This approach extends a moral concern and consideration ‘throughout-the-whole’ of the world. This sees ‘the global’ ethic and institution as inclusive in existing as part of, not apart from, the world. In establishing boundaries, we encircle and enclose ourselves around a central and singular ‘one point’, compelling everyone and everything to fall ‘in line’, and excluding those that do not. It may sound strange to the ears, but in this sense, we need not so much to be universal as catholic, in the sense of coming to see and understand ourselves as parts of and as ‘at one’ with the whole, moving ‘throughout-the-whole’. 1 Thessalonians 5:11 refers to a mutuality between individuals in the process of building each other up (‘Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.’ 1 Thessalonians 5:11). This points to a catholicity as a welcoming of each and all. This mutuality I see at work within the whole, extending to all beings and bodies in the More-than-Human World that enfolds and nourishes us. The whole is the more-than-human whole, kata-holic, referring to the whole all around us, something much more than the 'uni-verse' which draws lines and establishes boundaries around the ‘one point’ - it is beyond divisions of centre and periphery, in other words, offering instead a genuine holism.
The encyclical is certainly a Catholic doctrine, drawing on a whole range of Catholic sources and resources page after page. Religious conservatives who are attempting to dismiss Pope Francis' message as a radical aberration are on thin ice, begging questions as to why their own tradition should discomfort them so. But I take the encyclical to be 'catholic' in the holistic and expansive sense I have just outlined too.
If this equates with Green politics, environmental ethics and Communism, then so much the better for such politics and ethics. Most of all, Pope Francis makes the point that care for the natural environment and care for the human environment are intertwined, that the character of the relations between society and nature also expresses the quality of the relations between human beings in society. We need to take care of the moral infrastructure pertaining to the relations between human beings as an integral part of securing our relation to the natural environment upon which all depend. We need a moral ecology that recognizes the facts of social and ecological dependence. We need to pay attention and exercise care to both environments as the one environment we live in. And this takes us past false dichotomies of naturalism and supernaturalism. Earthcare and soulcare go hand in hand in our common home.
‘Reflect upon what it is that you love that can become a focus to move you from apathy and despair to action and hope.’
http://globalsistersreport.org/column/capital-e-earth/environment/laudato-si-anniversary-what-do-we-cherish-enough-act-40411
In the encyclical, Pope Francis adds, ‘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.’
WE NEED ECOLOGICAL CONVERSION
In the end, this issue is as much about ethics as it is about politics, economics, and even science. We need an ‘ecological conversion’ which envisions a fundamental change in orientation toward creation.
To be pieces of the solution
‘Changing the world is a team sport, and there's a spot on that team for every person on the planet, though finding our spot can be damn hard. Learning what we can do is not easy in itself, but discovering what each of us feels called to do, in a way that only we can do it, is one of the hardest tasks life has to offer. In these times, the question "What will I do?" is one of the toughest we may ever ask ourselves.’
- Alex Steffen, World Changing, 2008 Abrams New York
It's easy when we see the big picture. But that's the problem, at present the pieces don't relate to one another equally, but exist within asymmetrical relations of power and control. So much so that private goods trump the common good. Caring for the Earth is caring for the common good. It has reduced our politics to a maximization of our individual freedom and choice. We have forgotten the common good as we have neglected and abused our common home, the earth.
‘Laudato Si’ (‘Praised Be’) is a wake-up call to humanity to understand and address the destruction that human activity is rendering to the environment, to human beings and to other beings and bodies in the more-than-human world. The encyclical criticises and repudiates a ‘misguided anthropocentrism’ which has worked to undermine social bonds and ecosystems on our ‘common home’. As one family, we should care for each other and take responsibility for each other, ‘in union with all creatures’. A home is something we all depend on, physically and emotionally. A home is something inherently worth maintaining and protecting.
In ‘Laudato Si,’ Francis addresses ‘every living person on this planet,’ urging all to hear ‘both the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor’ with respect to the damage done to the Earth from ‘compulsive consumerism,’ waste and the single-minded pursuit of profit.
‘Laudato Si’ declares that the science of climate change is clear and that climate change is a moral issue that comes with the imperative to act in order to protect the Earth and everyone on it. Pope Francis makes it clear that climate change and global poverty are twin ills with a common source that we address together. And he locates the source of the solution in our innate moral compass allied to good habits, ecological virtues and right relationships. By this route, we come to achieve a sustainable way of life, bequeathing a healthy world for future generations.
Displaying a lucid and integral understanding of humanity’s environmental challenges, the encyclical issues an urgent call for all humanity to engage in a profound transformation in the way we live our lives, a transformation that values ‘our common home’, respects the dignity of our fellow humans, particularly the poor and the vulnerable, and which recognizes natural boundaries, the claims of nature and of other species. The message is addressed to all people across all borders and applies at all levels.
The encyclical delivers a message of hope addressed to all people.
‘we come together to take charge of this home which has been entrusted to us, knowing that all the good which exists here will be taken up into the heavenly feast. In union with all creatures … Let us sing as we go. May our struggles and our concern for this planet never take away the joy of our hope.’ (#244).
Repeat those words: 'in union with all creatures ... let us sing as we go.' It is the sound of joy and a celebration of abundance in affirmation of the 'good' world with which we have been gifted. ‘Laudato Si’ is a beautiful document. It is clear, concise, cogent and presents visions, values and virtues that gives us a future just society as the object of our present willing and acting, an ideal which inspires, motivates and obligates us to act together, and equips us with the capacity so to do. With so much rancor in the political world, we need to keep our eyes on this vision of the common good. This is the politics of hope, a triumph over the cycle of fear and division that breeds hatred and self-hatred, taking us to the beauty of Creation, away from those forces that render the world ugly.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0624/One-year-later-how-a-Pope-s-message-on-climate-has-resonated
Broken into its component parts, the depth of meaning and thought applied to each particular issue unfolds logically and is woven seamlessly together within an integral vision. There is a clear narrative flow. ‘Care’ as the need for empathetic relationships and mutual assistance among people, with other living beings and with nature; references to ‘our’ and ‘common’ as invitations to consider the common good and develop a sense of community and belonging; and ‘home’, to emphasize that the Earth is the place that welcomes us, enfolds and nourishes us, and is inextricably connected to our very existence.
http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?270971%2Fpapal-encyclical-anniversary-WWF-statement
An Integral Ecology: Revisiting Laudato Si', One Year On
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2016/06/20/4485213.htm
The structure and format of the document is clear and unfolds with a beautiful logic. It is eminently readable. I will list the chapters and provide key quotes expressing the message.
INTRODUCTION
“Laudato Si’, mi’ Signore” means “Praise be to you, my Lord” and is taken from a canticle by Saint Francis of Assisi which reminds us that earth is like a sister and mother. “Our Sister, Mother Earth” is now crying out because of the way we humans have harmed her.
Nothing in this world is indifferent to us
The concern for the Earth includes a ‘concern to bring the whole human family together to seek a sustainable and integral development.’ We need a new dialogue, that includes everyone, about how we are shaping the future of our planet.
Pope Francis states the goal of the document: ‘In this Encyclical, I would like to enter into dialogue with all people about our common home’ (#3).
The goal of the dialogue: ‘I urgently appeal, then, for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our planet. We need a conversation that includes everyone, since the environment challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all’ (#14).
The Pope calls for an ‘ecological conversion’ so that our habits come to express a concern for the environment. He defines a life of virtue for us as stewards of our common home (#217).
‘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.’ ‘The earth is essentially a shared inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone.’
‘The worldwide ecological movement has already made considerable progress and led to the establishment of numerous organizations committed to raising awareness of these challenges. Regrettably, many efforts to seek concrete solutions to the environmental crisis have proved ineffective, not only because of powerful opposition but also because of a more general lack of interest. Obstructionist attitudes, even on the part of believers, can range from denial of the problem to indifference, nonchalant resignation or blind confidence in technical solutions. We require a new and universal solidarity. As the bishops of Southern Africa have stated: “Everyone’s talents and involvement are needed to redress the damage caused by human abuse of God’s creation”. All of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents.’ (#14).
CHAPTER ONE – WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COMMON HOME
The first part is a flawless, highly educational synopsis of the situation in which the world has found itself: pollution and climate change, water issues, the loss of biodiversity with the consequential deterioration of human quality of life, social degradation, and the spread of injustice in a sea of indifference and perceived helplessness. It's a call for peaceful co-existence on the planet.
‘My predecessor Benedict XVI likewise proposed “eliminating the structural causes of the dysfunctions of the world economy and correcting models of growth which have proved incapable of ensuring respect for the environment’. He observed that the world cannot be analyzed by isolating only one of its aspects, since “the book of nature is one and indivisible”, and includes the environment, life, sexuality, the family, social relations, and so forth. It follows that “the deterioration of nature is closely connected to the culture which shapes human coexistence”.” (#6).
The Pope is outspoken about the effects of the prevailing economic model upon our common home:
‘Each year hundreds of millions of tons of waste are generated, much of it non-biodegradable, highly toxic and radioactive, from homes and businesses, from construction and demolition sites, from clinical, electronic and industrial sources. The earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth.’ (#21).
‘But our industrial system, at the end of its cycle of production and consumption, has not developed the capacity to absorb and reuse waste and by-products. We have not yet managed to adopt a circular model of production capable of preserving resources for present and future generations, while limiting as much as possible the use of non-renewable resources, moderating their consumption, maximizing their efficient use, reusing and recycling them.” (#22).
The Pope establishes the climate as a common good, something of concern to each and all. He therefore warns of the dangers of global warming.
‘The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life. A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system. In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon. 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. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the earth’s orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity… 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.’ (#23).
From the moment I got involved in climate politics, I faced the criticism from radicals that I was a 'class traitor', that Green politics was a middle-class single issue politics that was a diversion from the fundamentals of class struggle. I countered with the view that Marx's 'world to win' only makes sense if there is indeed a world worth winning. That is in increasing doubt - and we need to get beyond fighting over the terms on which various groups possess the earth, going beyond possessive relationships as such. We need to see the Earth as a common home whose gifts benefit each and all. And Pope Francis rightly points out that climate change is a problem that will hit the poorest, those least responsible for climate crisis, hardest and first. He challenges that basic iniquity and injustice.
‘Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades. Many of the poor… are largely dependent on natural reserves and ecosystemic services such as agriculture, fishing and forestry…. There has been a tragic rise in the number of migrants seeking to flee from the growing poverty caused by environmental degradation. They are not recognized by international conventions as refugees…. Sadly, there is widespread indifference to such suffering, which is even now taking place throughout our world. Our lack of response to these tragedies involving our brothers and sisters points to the loss of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women upon which all civil society is founded.’ (#25).
Here we come to the great paradox at the heart of climate politics - those with the greatest incentive to respond to climate crisis and change things have the least power, and those with most power have the least incentive. It is for this reason we need the moral force of the encyclical to transcend rational calculations of self-interest.
‘Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms…. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. 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…. Some countries have made considerable progress… but these good practices are still far from widespread.’ (#26).
The Issue of Water
On water as a fundamental right
‘One particularly serious problem is the quality of water available to the poor…. Yet access to safe drinkable water is a basic and universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights. Our world has a grave social debt towards the poor who lack access to drinking water, because they are denied the right to a life consistent with their inalienable dignity’ (#29-30).
‘But a sober look at our world shows that the degree of human intervention, often in the service of business interests and consumerism, is actually making our earth less rich and beautiful, ever more limited and grey, even as technological advances and consumer goods continue to abound limitlessly. We seem to think that we can substitute an irreplaceable and irretrievable beauty with something which we have created ourselves’ (#34).
DECLINE IN THE QUALITY OF HUMAN LIFE AND THE BREAKDOWN OF SOCIETY
The Pope comes to environmental deterioration, showing how current models of development and the throwaway culture have a detrimental effect on humans.
Cities are becoming too large — ‘We were not meant to be inundated by cement, asphalt, glass and metal, and deprived of physical contact with nature.’
Our omnipresent ‘media and digital world’ can prevent us from living wisely.
Global inequality
Deterioration of the human and natural environments are connected, and both disproportionately hurt the poor. To fix environmental problems we have to also fix ‘human and social degradation.’
Imbalances in population density are a concern, but the primary problem is ‘extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some’ rather than population growth.
Inequity affects not only individuals but entire countries and an ‘ecological debt’ exists between the global north and south. Poor countries (which often have natural resources) fuel the development of richer nations. For this reason national have ‘differentiated responsibilities’ when it comes to climate change.
On the environment and the poor
‘The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation. In fact, the deterioration of the environment and of society affects the most vulnerable people on the planet: “Both everyday experience and scientific research show that the gravest effects of all attacks on the environment are suffered by the poorest”’ (#48).
On overpopulation, the Pope is emphatic that those who single out population growth as the key problem are guilty of evasion. They take us away from the real problems and solutions, solutions which, if put in place, would have the effect of stabilising population growth.
‘Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of ‘reproductive health’…. To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues’ (#50).
There follows a rebuke to some multinational corporations operating in economically underdeveloped countries.
‘Generally, after ceasing their activity and withdrawing, they leave behind great human and environmental liabilities such as unemployment, abandoned towns, the depletion of natural reserves, deforestation, the impoverishment of agriculture and local stock breeding, open pits, riven hills, polluted rivers and a handful of social works which are no longer sustainable.’ (#51).
Pope's climate change encyclical tells rich nations in forthright terms: pay your debt to the poor!
Pontiff’s 180-page intervention in climate change debate casts blame for ‘ecological crisis’ on the indifference of the powerful.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/18/popes-climate-change-encyclical-calls-on-rich-nations-to-pay-social-debt
‘The foreign debt of poor countries has become a way of controlling them, yet this is not the case where ecological debt is concerned. In different ways, developing countries, where the most important reserves of the biosphere are found, continue to fuel the development of richer countries at the cost of their own present and future… We must continue to be aware that, regarding climate change, there are differentiated responsibilities. As the United States bishops have said, greater attention must be given to “the needs of the poor, the weak and the vulnerable, in a debate often dominated by more powerful interests”. We need to strengthen the conviction that we are one single human family. There are no frontiers or barriers, political or social, behind which we can hide, still less is there room for the globalization of indifference.’ (#52).
POLITICAL RESPONSES AND IMPLICATIONS
CLIMATE CHANGE HARMS THE POOREST
The world needs an international legal framework to ‘set clear boundaries and ensure the protection of ecosystems’ but, so far, the ‘international political responses’ have been ‘weak.’
‘It is remarkable how weak international political responses have been. The failure of global summits on the environment make it plain that our politics are subject to technology and finance. There are too many special interests, and economic interests easily end up trumping the common good and manipulating information so that their own plans will not be affected.’ (#54).
CHAPTER TWO – THE GOSPEL OF CREATION
Although they take different approaches to understanding reality, science and religion can enter into an ‘intense dialogue fruitful’ for solving environmental problems.
‘We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us…. Although it is true that we Christians have at times incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures, nowadays we must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures. The biblical texts are to be read in their context, with an appropriate hermeneutic, recognizing that they tell us to ‘till and keep’ the garden of the world (cf. Gen 2:15). ’Tilling’ refers to cultivating, ploughing or working, while ‘keeping’ means caring, protecting, overseeing and preserving. This implies a relationship of mutual responsibility between human beings and nature. Each community can take from the bounty of the earth whatever it needs for subsistence, but it also has the duty to protect the earth and to ensure its fruitfulness for coming generations’ (#67)
The Mystery of the Universe.
The pope affirms inherent worth: ‘every creature has its own value and significance.’ (#76). That view sets the environment within a sense of the sacred.
‘Our insistence that each human being is an image of God should not make us overlook the fact that each creature has its own purpose. None is superfluous. The entire material universe speaks of God’s love, his boundless affection for us. Soil, water, mountains: everything is, as it were, a caress of God. The history of our friendship with God is always linked to particular places which take on an intensely personal meaning; we all remember places, and revisiting those memories does us much good.’ (#84).
The Message of Each Creature in the Harmony of Creation
A UNIVERSAL COMMUNION
‘all of us are linked by unseen bonds and together form a kind of universal family, a sublime communion which fills us with a sacred, affectionate and humble respect.’ (#89).
That communion draws us out of our selves into relation with something greater than we are. It is an expansive, opening out to the world.
THE COMMON DESTINATION OF GOODS
‘Hence every ecological approach needs to incorporate a social perspective which takes into account the fundamental rights of the poor and the underprivileged. The principle of the subordination of private property to the universal destination of goods, and thus the right of everyone to their use, is a golden rule of social conduct and “the first principle of the whole ethical and social order”. The Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable, and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property.’ (#93).
‘The natural environment is a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity and the responsibility of everyone. If we make of all. If we do not, we burden our consciences with the weight of having denied the existence of others. That is why the New Zealand bishops asked what the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” means when “twenty percent of the world’s population consumes resources at a rate that robs the poor nations and future generations of what they need to survive”’ (#95).
CHAPTER THREE – THE HUMAN ROOTS OF THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS
A certain way of understanding human life and activity— the dominant technocratic paradigm—has gone awry, to the serious detriment of the world around us.
Technology can be good, but it is also powerful and increases our power. Not every increase in power is an increase of progress. We need a ‘culture and spirituality genuinely capable of setting limits and teaching clear-minded self-restraint.’
On ‘the human origins of the ecological crisis’.
‘A certain way of understanding human life and activity has gone awry, to the serious detriment of the world around us… I propose that we focus on the dominant technocratic paradigm and the place of human beings and of human action in the world’ (#101).
Technology: Creativity and Power
On the false belief in technology
‘There is a tendency to believe that every increase in power means ‘an increase of “progress” itself’, an advance in ‘security, usefulness, welfare and vigour; …an assimilation of new values into the stream of culture’, as if reality, goodness and truth automatically flow from technological and economic power as such. The fact is that ‘contemporary man has not been trained to use power well’, because our immense technological development has not been accompanied by a development in human responsibility, values and conscience. Each age tends to have only a meagre awareness of its own limitations. It is possible that we do not grasp the gravity of the challenges now before us … Our freedom fades when it is handed over to the blind forces of the unconscious, of immediate needs, of self-interest, and of violence. In this sense, we stand naked and exposed in the face of our ever-increasing power, lacking the wherewithal to control it. We have certain superficial mechanisms, but we cannot claim to have a sound ethics, a culture and spirituality genuinely capable of setting limits and teaching clear-minded self-restraint’. (#105).
THE GLOBALIZATION OF THE TECHNOCRATIC PARADIGM
On science and technology as a belief system
‘The basic problem goes even deeper: it is the way that humanity has taken up technology and its development according to an undifferentiated and one-dimensional paradigm. This paradigm exalts the concept of a subject who, using logical and rational procedures, progressively approaches and gains control over an external object. This subject makes every effort to establish the scientific and experimental method, which in itself is already a technique of possession, mastery and transformation… Now … we are the ones to lay our hands on things, attempting to extract everything possible from them while frequently ignoring or forgetting the reality in front of us. Human beings and material objects no longer extend a friendly hand to one another; the relationship has become confrontational. This has made it easy to accept the idea of infinite or unlimited growth, which proves so attractive to economists, financiers and experts in technology. It 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. It is the false notion that “an infinite quantity of energy and resources are available, that it is possible to renew them quickly, and that the negative effects of the exploitation of the natural order can be easily absorbed”’. (#106).
‘It can be said that many problems of today’s world stem from the tendency, at times unconscious, to make the method and aims of science and technology an epistemological paradigm which shapes the lives of individuals and the workings of society. The effects of imposing this model on reality as a whole, human and social, are seen in the deterioration of the environment, but this is just one sign of a reductionism which affects every aspect of human and social life. We have to accept that technological products are not neutral, for they create a framework which ends up conditioning lifestyles and shaping social possibilities along the lines dictated by the interests of certain powerful groups’ (#107).
‘we do need to slow down and look at reality in a different way, to appropriate the positive and sustainable progress which has been made, but also to recover the values and the great goals swept away by our unrestrained delusions of grandeur.’ (#114).
THE CRISIS AND EFFECTS OF MODERN ANTHROPOCENTRISM
The Crisis and Effects of Modern Anthropocentrism.
The Pope challenges the dominant anthropocentric ethic of the modern world:
‘Modernity has been marked by an excessive anthropocentrism which today, under another guise, continues to stand in the way of shared understanding and of any effort to strengthen social bonds. The time has come to pay renewed attention to reality and the limits it imposes; this in turn is the condition for a more sound and fruitful development of individuals and society’ (#117).
The Pope affirms the right balance with the respect of the environment and humanity:
‘This situation has led to a constant schizophrenia, wherein a technocracy which sees no intrinsic value in lesser beings coexists with the other extreme, which sees no special value in human beings. But one cannot prescind from humanity. There can be no renewal of our relationship with nature without a renewal of humanity itself. There can be no ecology without an adequate anthropology … Human beings cannot be expected to feel responsibility for the world unless, at the same time, their unique capacities of knowledge, will, freedom and responsibility are recognized and valued’ (#118).
‘A misguided anthropocentrism leads to a misguided lifestyle… When human beings place themselves at the centre, they give absolute priority to immediate convenience and all else becomes relative. Hence we should not be surprised to find, in conjunction with the omnipresent technocratic paradigm and the cult of unlimited human power, the rise of a relativism which sees everything as irrelevant unless it serves one’s own immediate interests. There is a logic in all this whereby different attitudes can feed on one another, leading to environmental degradation and social decay.’ (#122)
‘The culture of relativism is the same disorder which drives one person to take advantage of another, to treat others as mere objects, imposing forced labour on them or enslaving them to pay their debts. The same kind of thinking leads to the sexual exploitation of children and abandonment of the elderly who no longer serve our interests. It is also the mindset of those who say: Let us allow the invisible forces of the market to regulate the economy, and consider their impact on society and nature as collateral damage. In the absence of objective truths or sound principles other than the satisfaction of our own desires and immediate needs, what limits can be placed on human trafficking, organized crime, the drug trade, commerce in blood diamonds and the fur of endangered species? This same ‘use and throw away’ logic generates so much waste, because of the disordered desire to consume more than what is really necessary. We should not think that political efforts or the force of law will be sufficient to prevent actions which affect the environment because, when the culture itself is corrupt and objective truth and universally valid principles are no longer upheld, then laws can only be seen as arbitrary impositions or obstacles to be avoided.’ (#123).
The Pope affirms the need to protect employment and affirm the value and dignity of labour:
‘Any approach to an integral ecology … needs to take account of the value of labour …’ (#124).
‘If we reflect on the proper relationship between human beings and the world around us, we see the need for a correct understanding of work; if we talk about the relationship between human beings and things, the question arises as to the meaning and purpose of all human activity… Underlying every form of work is a concept of the relationship which we can and must have with what is other than ourselves.’ (#125).
‘We were created with a vocation to work. The goal should not be that technological progress increasingly replace human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity. Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfilment. Helping the poor financially must always be a provisional solution in the face of pressing needs. The broader objective should always be to allow them a dignified life through work. Yet the orientation of the economy has favoured a kind of technological progress in which the costs of production are reduced by laying off workers and replacing them with machines. This is yet another way in which we can end up working against ourselves.’ (#128)
We need goods that are truly good, and services that truly serve, and we get this only when the economic system is organised in accordance with true purposes and ends, something more than business imperatives:
‘To claim economic freedom while real conditions bar many people from actual access to it, and while possibilities for employment continue to shrink, is to practise a doublespeak which brings politics into disrepute. Business is a noble vocation, directed to producing wealth and improving our world. It can be a fruitful source of prosperity for the areas in which it operates, especially if it sees the creation of jobs as an essential part of its service to the common good.’ (#129).
CHAPTER FOUR – INTEGRAL ECOLOGY
Since everything is closely interrelated we need an integral ecology, one that clearly respects its human and social dimensions.
Ecology studies the relationship between living organisms and the environment in which they develop. When we speak of the ‘environment’, what we really mean is a relationship existing between nature and the society that lives in it. We ourselves are a part of nature. Therefore, the social and environmental crises are intertwined.
We need an ‘economic ecology’ capable of appealing to a broader vision of reality. The analysis of environmental problems cannot be separated from the ‘analysis of human, family, work-related and urban contexts, nor from how individuals relate to themselves, which leads in turn to how they relate to others and to the environment.’
Every violation of solidarity and civic friendship harms the environment.
‘Since everything is closely interrelated, and today’s problems call for a vision capable of taking into account every aspect of the global crisis, I suggest that we now consider some elements of an integral ecology, one which clearly respects its human and social dimensions’ (#137).
‘Each organism, as a creature of God, is good and admirable in itself; the same is true of the harmonious ensemble of organisms existing in a defined space and functioning as a system. Although we are often not aware of it, we depend on these larger systems for our own existence. We need only recall how ecosystems interact in dispersing carbon dioxide, purifying water, controlling illnesses and epidemics, forming soil, breaking down waste, and in many other ways which we overlook or simply ignore. Once they become conscious of this, many people realize that we live and act on the basis of a reality which has previously been given to us, which precedes our existence and our abilities. So, when we speak of “sustainable use”, consideration must always be given to each ecosystem’s regenerative ability in its different areas and aspects.’ (#140).
‘We urgently need a humanism capable of bringing together the different fields of knowledge, including economics, in the service of a more integral and integrating vision. Today, the analysis of environmental problems cannot be separated from the analysis of human, family, work related and urban contexts, nor from how individuals relate to themselves, which leads in turn to how they relate to others and to the environment. There is an interrelation between ecosystems and between the various spheres of social interaction, demonstrating yet again that “the whole is greater than the part’. (#141).
Cultural Ecology
Ecology also involves protecting the ‘cultural treasures of humanity in the broadest sense.’ But our consumerist vision of human beings, encouraged by the mechanisms of today’s globalized economy, has a levelling effect on cultures, diminishing the immense variety that is the heritage of all humanity. We must look for solutions that include local people from within their proper culture.
We must show special care for indigenous communities and their cultural traditions.
The disappearance of a culture can as a serious as the disappearance of a species of plant or animal. The imposition of a dominant lifestyle linked to a single form of production can be just as harmful as the altering of ecosystems.
‘Together with the patrimony of nature, there is also an historic, artistic and cultural patrimony which is likewise under threat. This patrimony is a part of the shared identity of each place and a foundation upon which to build a habitable city… Ecology, then, also involves protecting the cultural treasures of humanity in the broadest sense. More specifically, it calls for greater attention to local cultures when studying environmental problems, favouring a dialogue between scientific-technical language and the language of the people. Culture is more than what we have inherited from the past; it is also, and above all, a living, dynamic and participatory present reality, which cannot be excluded as we rethink the relationship between human beings and the environment.’ (#143).
‘The notion of the common good also extends to future generations. The global economic crises have made painfully obvious the detrimental effects of disregarding our common destiny, which cannot exclude those who come after us. We can no longer speak of sustainable development apart from intergenerational solidarity. 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. Since the world has been given to us, we can no longer view reality in a purely utilitarian way, in which efficiency and productivity are entirely geared to our individual benefit. 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.’ (#159).
CHAPTER FIVE – LINES OF APPROACH AND ACTION
DIALOGUE ON THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
The interdependence of humanity obliges us to think of ‘one world with a common plan.’ We need a global consensus to fix the problem.
Fossil fuels must be phased out as soon as possible. The international community needs to find a way to make this happen.
Buying and selling ‘carbon credits’ is not the right solution.
Enforceable international agreements and global regulatory norms are urgently needed.
We need to develop ‘more efficiently organized international institutions’ to address global warming and poverty. There is urgent need of a true world political authority to address these issues.
‘now we shall try to outline the major paths of dialogue which can help us escape the spiral of self-destruction which currently engulfs us’ (#163).
‘Beginning in the middle of the last century and overcoming many difficulties, there has been a growing conviction that our planet is a homeland and that humanity is one people living in a common home. An interdependent world not only makes us more conscious of the negative effects of certain lifestyles and models of production and consumption which affect us all; more importantly, it motivates us to ensure that solutions are proposed from a global perspective, and not simply to defend the interests of a few countries. Interdependence obliges us to think of one world with a common plan… A global consensus is essential for confronting the deeper problems, which cannot be resolved by unilateral actions on the part of individual countries.’ (#164)
‘Enforceable international agreements are urgently needed, since local authorities are not always capable of effective intervention. Relations between states must be respectful of each other’s sovereignty, but must also lay down mutually agreed means of averting regional disasters which would eventually affect everyone. Global regulatory norms are needed to impose obligations and prevent unacceptable actions, for example, when powerful companies dump contaminated waste or offshore polluting industries in other countries.’ (#173)
‘Let us also mention the system of governance of the oceans. International and regional conventions do exist, but fragmentation and the lack of strict mechanisms of regulation, control and penalization end up undermining these efforts. The growing problem of marine waste and the protection of the open seas represent particular challenges. What is needed, in effect, is an agreement on systems of governance for the whole range of so-called “global commons”’. (#174).
‘The same mindset which stands in the way of making radical decisions to reverse the trend of global warming also stands in the way of achieving the goal of eliminating poverty. A more responsible overall approach is needed to deal with both problems: the reduction of pollution and the development of poorer countries and regions. The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tends to prevail over the political. Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose sanctions. As Benedict XVI has affirmed in continuity with the social teaching of the Church: “To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago”. (#175).
‘Given the real potential for a misuse of human abilities, individual states can no longer ignore their responsibility for planning, coordination, oversight and enforcement within their respective borders. How can a society plan and protect its future amid constantly developing technological innovations? One authoritative source of oversight and coordination is the law, which lays down rules for admissible conduct in the light of the common good. The limits which a healthy, mature and sovereign society must impose are those related to foresight and security, regulatory norms, timely enforcement, the elimination of corruption, effective responses to undesired side-effects of production processes, and appropriate intervention where potential or uncertain risks are involved. There is a growing jurisprudence dealing with the reduction of pollution by business activities. But political and institutional frameworks do not exist simply to avoid bad practice, but also to promote best practice, to stimulate creativity in seeking new solutions and to encourage individual or group initiatives.’ (#177).
On the problem of modern day politics
‘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. Thus we forget that “time is greater than space”, that we are always more effective when we generate processes rather than holding on to positions of power. True statecraft is manifest when, in difficult times, we uphold high principles and think of the long-term common good. Political powers do not find it easy to assume this duty in the work of nation-building.’ (#178).
DIALOGUE FOR NEW NATIONAL AND LOCAL POLICIES
‘In some places, cooperatives are being developed to exploit renewable sources of energy which ensure local self-sufficiency and even the sale of surplus energy. This simple example shows that, while the existing world order proves powerless to assume its responsibilities, local individuals and groups can make a real difference. They are able to instil a greater sense of responsibility, a strong sense of community, a readiness to protect others, a spirit of creativity and a deep love for the land… Because the enforcement of laws is at times inadequate due to corruption, public pressure has to be exerted in order to bring about decisive political action. Society, through non-governmental organizations and intermediate groups, must put pressure on governments to develop more rigorous regulations, procedures and controls. Unless citizens control political power – national, regional and municipal – it will not be possible to control damage to the environment. Local legislation can be more effective, too, if agreements exist between neighbouring communities to support the same environmental policies.’ (#179).
Dialogue and Transparency in Decision-making
POLITICS AND ECONOMY IN DIALOGUE FOR HUMAN FULFILMENT
On the effects of the market on the environment
‘Politics must not be subject to the economy, nor should the economy be subject to the dictates of an efficiency-driven paradigm of technocracy. Today, in view of the common good, there is urgent need for politics and economics to enter into a frank dialogue in the service of life, especially human life. Saving banks at any cost, making the public pay the price, foregoing a firm commitment to reviewing and reforming the entire system, only reaffirms the absolute power of a financial system, a power which has no future and will only give rise to new crises after a slow, costly and only apparent recovery. The financial crisis of 2007-08 provided an opportunity to develop a new economy, more attentive to ethical principles, and new ways of regulating speculative financial practices and virtual wealth.’ (#189).
‘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’ (#190).
‘For new models of progress to arise, there is a need to change “models of global development”; this will entail a responsible reflection on “the meaning of the economy and its goals with an eye to correcting its malfunctions and misapplications”. It is not enough to balance, in the medium term, the protection of nature with financial gain, or the preservation of the environment with progress. Halfway measures simply delay the inevitable disaster. Put simply, it is a matter of redefining our notion of progress. A technological and economic development which does not leave in its wake a better world and an integrally higher quality of life cannot be considered progress.’ (#194).
Religions in Dialogue With Science
Empirical science can’t explain the whole of reality. We need also to look at the ethical and spiritual resources produced by the world’s religions.
We need leaders who speak to values, making the connections between values and the facts concerning the world.
‘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.’ (#200).
‘The majority of people living on our planet profess to be believers. This should spur religions to dialogue among themselves for the sake of protecting nature, defending the poor, and building networks of respect and fraternity. Dialogue among the various sciences is likewise needed, since each can tend to become enclosed in its own language, while specialization leads to a certain isolation and the absolutization of its own field of knowledge. This prevents us from confronting environmental problems effectively. An open and respectful dialogue is also needed between the various ecological movements, among which ideological conflicts are not infrequently encountered. The gravity of the ecological crisis demands that we all look to the common good, embarking on a path of dialogue which requires patience, self-discipline and generosity, always keeping in mind that “realities are greater than ideas”’. (#201).
CHAPTER SIX – ECOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND SPIRITUALITY
TOWARDS A NEW LIFESTYLE
‘Many things have to change course, but it is we human beings above all who need to change. We lack an awareness of our common origin, of our mutual belonging, and of a future to be shared with everyone. This basic awareness would enable the development of new convictions, attitudes and forms of life. A great cultural, spiritual and educational challenge stands before us, and it will demand that we set out on the long path of renewal’ (#202).
TOWARDS A NEW LIFESTYLE
The market tends to promote extreme consumerism, and compulsive consumerism is an example of how the ‘techno-economic paradigm affects individuals.’ This paradigm leads people to believe that they are free as long as they have the supposed freedom to consume. But those really free are the minority who wield economic and financial power.
This leads to self-centeredness, which increases greed. We buy stuff to fill the emptiness within ourselves. This causes us to lose focus on the common good.
The effect will be social unrest. Obsession with a consumerist lifestyle, with increases inequality, will lead to violence and mutual destruction.
The problem isn’t hopeless, however, since humans have the ability to change. A change in our lifestyle could positively influence those who ‘wield political, economic and social power.’
On consumerism - the Pope identifies the ego as a prison and calls upon us to reject a greed that consumes our world and empties our lives of meaning:
‘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. In this horizon, a genuine sense of the common good also disappears’ (#204).
On hope in this situation
‘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. We are able to take an honest look at ourselves, to acknowledge our deep dissatisfaction, and to embark on new paths to authentic freedom. No system can completely suppress our openness to what is good, true and beautiful, or our God-given ability to respond to his grace at work deep in our hearts. I appeal to everyone throughout the world not to forget this dignity which is ours. No one has the right to take it from us.’ (#205).
Educating for the Covenant Between Humanity and the Environment.
‘Environmental education has broadened its goals. Whereas in the beginning it was mainly centred on scientific information, consciousness-raising and the prevention of environmental risks, it tends now to include a critique of the “myths” of a modernity grounded in a utilitarian mindset (individualism, unlimited progress, competition, consumerism, the unregulated market). It seeks also to restore the various levels of ecological equilibrium, establishing harmony within ourselves, with others, with nature and other living creatures, and with God. Environmental education should facilitate making the leap towards the transcendent which gives ecological ethics its deepest meaning. It needs educators capable of developing an ethics of ecology, and helping people, through effective pedagogy, to grow in solidarity, responsibility and compassionate care.’ (#210).
On what we individually can do to help the environment.
‘Yet this education, aimed at creating an “ecological citizenship”, is at times limited to providing information, and fails to instill good habits. The existence of laws and regulations is insufficient in the long run to curb bad conduct, even when effective means of enforcement are present. If the laws are to bring about significant, long-lasting effects, the majority of the members of society must be adequately motivated to accept them, and personally transformed to respond. Only by cultivating sound virtues will people be able to make a selfless ecological commitment. A person who could afford to spend and consume more but regularly uses less heating and wears warmer clothes, shows the kind of convictions and attitudes which help to protect the environment. There is a nobility in the duty to care for creation through little daily actions, and it is wonderful how education can bring about real changes in lifestyle. Education in environmental responsibility can encourage ways of acting which directly and significantly affect the world around us, such as avoiding the use of plastic and paper, reducing water consumption, separating refuse, cooking only what can reasonably be consumed, showing care for other living beings, using public transport or car-pooling, planting trees, turning off unnecessary lights, or any number of other practices. All of these reflect a generous and worthy creativity which brings out the best in human beings. Reusing something instead of immediately discarding it, when done for the right reasons, can be an act of love which expresses our own dignity.’ (#211).
‘We must not think that these efforts are not going to change the world. They benefit society, often unbeknown to us, for they call forth a goodness which, albeit unseen, inevitably tends to spread. Furthermore, such actions can restore our sense of self-esteem; they can enable us to live more fully and to feel that life on earth is worthwhile.’ (#212).
Ecological Conversion.
‘More than in ideas or concepts as such, I am interested in how such a spirituality can motivate us to a more passionate concern for the protection of our world. A commitment this lofty cannot be sustained by doctrine alone, without a spirituality capable of inspiring us, without an “interior impulse which encourages, motivates, nourishes and gives meaning to our individual and communal activity”. Admittedly, Christians have not always appropriated and developed the spiritual treasures bestowed by God upon the Church, where the life of the spirit is not dissociated from the body or from nature or from worldly realities, but lived in and with them, in communion with all that surrounds us.’ (#216).
‘“The external deserts in the world are growing, because the internal deserts have become so vast”. For this reason, the ecological crisis is also a summons to profound interior conversion. It must be said that some committed and prayerful Christians, with the excuse of realism and pragmatism, tend to ridicule expressions of concern for the environment. Others are passive; they choose not to change their habits and thus become inconsistent. So what they all need is an “ecological conversion”, whereby the effects of their encounter with Jesus Christ become evident in their relationship with the world around them. Living our vocation to be protectors of God’s handiwork is essential to a life of virtue; it is not an optional or a secondary aspect of our Christian experience.’ (#217).
Joy and Peace.
‘Christian spirituality proposes an alternative understanding of the quality of life, and encourages a prophetic and contemplative lifestyle, one capable of deep enjoyment free of the obsession with consumption. We need to take up an ancient lesson, found in different religious traditions and also in the Bible. It is the conviction that “less is more”. A constant flood of new consumer goods can baffle the heart and prevent us from cherishing each thing and each moment. To be serenely present to each reality, however small it may be, opens us to much greater horizons of understanding and personal fulfillment. Christian spirituality proposes a growth marked by moderation and the capacity to be happy with little. It is 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. This implies avoiding the dynamic of dominion and the mere accumulation of pleasures.’ (#222).
‘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.’ (#226).
Civic and Political love.
Care for nature is part of a lifestyle which includes the capacity for living together and communion.
Love— ‘overflowing with small gestures of mutual care’ — is also civic and political. Love for society and commitment to the common good affects everyone.
‘Care for nature is part of a lifestyle which includes the capacity for living together and communion.’ (#228).
‘We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it… When the foundations of social life are corroded, what ensues are battles over conflicting interests, new forms of violence and brutality, and obstacles to the growth of a genuine culture of care for the environment.’ (#229).
‘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. Love for society and commitment to the common good are outstanding expressions of a charity which affects not only relationships between individuals but also “macro-relationships, social, economic and political ones”. That is why the Church set before the world the ideal of a “civilization of love”. Social love is the key to authentic development: “In order to make society more human, more worthy of the human person, love in social life – political, economic and cultural – must be given renewed value, becoming the constant and highest norm for all activity”. In this framework, along with the importance of little everyday gestures, social love moves us to devise larger strategies to halt environmental degradation and to encourage a “culture of care” which permeates all of society.' (#231).
‘Not everyone is called to engage directly in political life. Society is also enriched by a countless array of organizations which work to promote the common good and to defend the environment, whether natural or urban. Some, for example, show concern for a public place (a building, a fountain, an abandoned monument, a landscape, a square), and strive to protect, restore, improve or beautify it as something belonging to everyone. Around these community actions, relationships develop or are recovered and a new social fabric emerges. Thus, a community can break out of the indifference induced by consumerism. These actions cultivate a shared identity, with a story which can be remembered and handed on. In this way, the world, and the quality of life of the poorest, are cared for, with a sense of solidarity which is at the same time aware that we live in a common home which God has entrusted to us. These community actions, when they express self-giving love, can also become intense spiritual experiences.’ (#232).
Pope Francis urges citizen organizing:
'Society, through non-governmental organizations and intermediate groups, must put pressure on governments to develop more rigorous regulations, procedures and controls.'
A prayer in union with creation
‘God of love, show us our place in this world as channels of your love for all the creatures of this earth, for not one of them is forgotten in your sight. Enlighten those who possess power and money that they may avoid the sin of indifference, that they may love the common good, advance the weak, and care for this world in which we live. The poor and the earth are crying out.’
Year-old Laudato Si' has stirred up action for Earth
http://ncronline.org/blogs/eco-catholic/encyclical-boost-year-old-laudato-si-has-stirred-action-earth
Everything is Interconnected
By Tracey Easthope
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0624/One-year-later-how-a-Pope-s-message-on-climate-has-resonated
‘Pope Francis has laid out a secular argument for action on the environment, but he seems particularly interested in spurring people of conscience to tackle the moral implications of the scientific information he so forcefully presents. The scientific facts have become a moral imperative for action, he asserts.’
‘Pope Francis notes the positive examples of environmental improvement, both large and small, already taking place around the world. We are all up to the task, he seems to say, but we must all be engaged in changing the way we live.’
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2016/0624/One-year-later-how-a-Pope-s-message-on-climate-has-resonated
A guide to a very important document. I hope it encourages people to read the whole encyclical, but meanwhile give them a more solid understanding of what it includes.
Laudato Si’ a beautifully written document. It is a self-contained whole whose argument unfolds line by line, paragraph by paragraph. It would be useful to give a summary quote and a quote of particular significance from each chapter, but every paragraph in this document has something of importance to say within an overall message, and the fact is that the entire letter is beautiful written and eminently readable. It deserves to be read as it is. The message demands it, the wording deserves it. I'm interested in the fact that, as the political world implodes and the planetary ecology unravel, this document is clear and direct and simple to read. People who ask the question ‘why’ should give the document their considered attention and thought.
If I had to select a paragraph for people to think hard on it would be #211.
‘Yet this education, aimed at creating an “ecological citizenship”, is at times limited to providing information, and fails to instil good habits. The existence of laws and regulations is insufficient in the long run to curb bad conduct, even when effective means of enforcement are present. If the laws are to bring about significant, long-lasting effects, the majority of the members of society must be adequately motivated to accept them, and personally transformed to respond. Only by cultivating sound virtues will people be able to make a selfless ecological commitment.’ (#211).
This paragraph sums up perfectly the message of my own work in emphasising character-construction creating the dispositions to act, forming good habits within right relationships, cultivating ecological virtues as qualities for successful/sustainable living, and emphasising virtuous action within a habitus which enables us to acquire and exercise these virtues. On this basis we will be equipped to respond, personally and collectively, to scientific evidence and moral appeal.
I think this paragraph contains a hugely important truth, one that we seem to have lost as the world has radically separated the worlds of fact and value. Aquinas explains that knowledge is not a virtue in the truest sense, since it lacks an appetitive component. This makes it more akin to Kant’s reason as something apart from natural inclination. Knowledge would be a virtue in the proper sense if it made an agent positively desire to grasp the true. But this is not the case: "Having knowledge does not make one want to consider the truth; it just makes one able to do so" (QDVC 7c).
Guided by the virtue of justice, the disposition of prudence guarantees that our intellect will attend to the relevant information we possess. In this manner, Aquinas describes the intellect as "following the will." The underlying disposition "more truly has the nature of a virtue inasmuch as it gives a person not just the ability or the knowledge to act rightly, but also the will to do so" (QDVC 7c).
This really is something we should bear in mind as we try to bridge the gaps between scientific knowledge, technical know-how and social action. We need to address our problems deep into the motivational economy of human beings.
The work of Renee Lertzman is excellent in this regard.
Environmental Melancholia: Psychoanalytic dimensions of engagement
https://www.routledge.com/Environmental-Melancholia-Psychoanalytic-dimensions-of-engagement/Lertzman/p/book/9780415727990
“In this groundbreaking book, Renee Lertzman applies psychoanalytic theory and psychosocial research to the issue of public engagement and public apathy in response to chronic ecological threats. By highlighting unconscious and affective dimensions of contemporary ecological issues, Lertzman deconstructs the idea that there is a gap between what people care about and what is actually carried out in policy and personal practice. In doing so, she presents an innovative way to think about and design engagement practices and policy interventions.”
"Our need to understand human behavior at the deepest levels is no longer an option, when it comes to meeting our most urgent ecological challenges. Innovating solutions, crafting engagement strategies and designing astute messaging all require a fundamental fluency in how people not only think, but feel about our changing world."
While both solid science and appropriate and effective laws are necessary, they are in themselves not sufficient to build a just and sustainable future.
I like to emphasise prudence, one of the four cardinal virtues, of which too little is said. I use it in a way to get round the impasse with regard to the facts on climate change. We cannot just argue for climate action in terms of the climate science. At the same time, prudential arguments alone will make little difference. We need something more in order to motivate people in such a way that prudence can make a difference, overcoming the powerful individualist and consumerist desires that confine so many within a cultural prison, enchaining them to immediacy and necessity. This is a manacling of individuals by their own wants and desires. The question for me is not why people want what they don’t need – the system of consumerism in stimulating wants answers that question; the real question is why people don’t want and demand what they do need.
I think a key point is that individuals are locked into socially structured patterns of behaviour that prevent them from making the right choices. That's why Pope Francis says, "This economy kills." We lack the appropriate habitus. The cardinal virtues have become sins against the GNP. Given the current social identity, it is irrational for individuals to make 'sacrifices' for the long term social good, they have to act as they do. There is, in that way, a psychic prison - wrong habits formed - that is based upon the way society is organised around individuals having to pursue self-interest. In that respect, the virtues will demand actions and choices on the part of individuals that will be considered irrational. Moral and social transformation will have to proceed hand in hand rather than putting one before the other.
Global Catholic Climate Movement
http://catholicclimatemovement.global/
I’ll end by thanking this movement for the work that it does. I would recommend their wonderful website, which is full of resources which help us in tackling the climate crisis with the moral depth it requires. I am encouraged to see that Pope Francis' view that climate action is a moral imperative is being followed up and acted upon. This valuable work that seeks to cultivate the right habits to ensure that the Pope's fine words will be turned into action.