Dear friends of Istituto Acton,
As the leader of the world’s largest religion, the pope’s moral authority is second to none, which is not to say that everyone, even in the Catholic Church, agrees with what he says. It is not controversial or disrespectful to admit this fact or to say that the pope is often more admired than imitated or followed. I would further venture that this is especially the case when the pope addresses issues not concerning matters of faith and morals, i.e. where his teaching is not considered infallible by the Church.
It is one kind of problem if a Catholic disagrees with papal teaching on the Trinity or abortion; that Catholic’s eternal soul would be considered at risk and all efforts would need to be made to correct his erroneous beliefs. It is an altogether different kind of problem if a Catholic disagrees with the pope on his diplomatic efforts or environmental views. Everyone should be in favor of peace between nations and care for God’s creation but we differ on the best ways to approach these worthy objectives. The Church wisely respects differences of opinion on such matters.
I realize it is not always easy to make a clear distinction between principle and prudence when it comes to politics; principle often dictates what must be done and has little tolerance for compromise, while prudence recognizes opposition and various ways to achieve an end. Successful political leaders are able to be both principled and prudential even if they are often criticized for being neither. “Innocent as doves and cunning as serpents” people are hard to find. The difficulty is one reason why so few morally serious people want to go into politics in the first place.
Which is a long way of introducing what I’d like to address in this letter, namely what Pope Francis may say in his upcoming encyclical on human ecology. Some media reports (Fox News, for example) think Francis will embark on a new path from that of his predecessors and call for full support of climate-change policies at the United Nations and other international institutions. Others think he will follow papal teaching on the environment – call for respect for all God’s creation while emphasizing the unique responsibility human beings have in the created order. Still others think he will reveal a Latin American, liberation theology perspective. At this point, it’s anyone’s guess.
In an interview on the plane trip from South Korea last August, the pope himself said that the first draft of the encyclical was both too long and too technical, which were encouraging remarks for climate-change skeptics such as me. Some of his aides, such as Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, have been more outspoken about the need to fight climate change, while other observers are much less enthusiastic about papal forays into the area.
I (very reluctantly) worked on these issues at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace for five years, so I have some insight into how Vatican officials tend to think about the environment. The short answer happens to be, “not very much.” General indifference to environmental issues among clerics may mean that more strident activists may get their way simply because they are more committed to their cause. In my work at the Vatican and travels around the world attending Catholic conferences on the environment, I heard countless calls from activists for a papal encyclical on the environment, so the news of such a document must warm the hearts of my former fellow conferees.
It is probably not surprising that some Catholic environmentalists are less interested in traditional religious matters such as what one believes about God and how one practices the faith than in making sure the birds and fish of the planet were protected from greedy industrialists. In fact, some have a hard time in calling God “Father” because of its patriarchal significance. I got the distinct feeling that environmentalism was at least a large component if not a substitute for their religious faith.
Rather than get into the policy details of UN climate-change discussions, I would be very pleased if Pope Francis addressed issues no political leader would dare to even think about raising: Ask us to examine our own lives in terms of how we regard God the Creator and His creation; Whether we are truly amazed by His Majesty and Beneficence and truly love Him more than His works; Whether our actions show trust in Divine Providence; How nature is affected by human activity for better and for worse; What is the place of human beings in the order of creation; What Christ’s sacrifice means for the redemption of creation.
In doing so, not only would the pope avoid the Scylla of no-growth environmentalism and the Charybdis of technological conquest of nature, he would help us all become more aware of God’s providence as well as the great responsibility He gave us to develop the right polities, laws, and institutions. It would help us better appreciate the meaning of an old term of political philosophy known as the common good that, as Robert Royal points out, transcends both collectivism and individualism. He may not draw as many hosannas from secular and quasi-Catholic ideologues but he will have provided us with more solid food indeed.
Kishore Jayabalan
Director
