|
ENCYCLICAL LETTER
1. “LAUDATO
SI’, mi’ Signore” – “Praise be to you, my Lord”. In the words of this
beautiful canticle, 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, and who produces various fruit with coloured
flowers and herbs”.[1]
2. 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.
The violence present in our hearts, wounded by sin, is also reflected in the
symptoms of sickness evident in the soil, in the water, in the air and in all
forms of life. This is why the earth herself, burdened and laid waste, is among
the most abandoned and maltreated of our poor; she “groans in travail” (Rom 8:22).
We have forgotten that we ourselves are dust of the earth (cf. Gen 2:7);
our very bodies are made up of her elements, we breathe her air and we receive
life and refreshment from her waters.
Nothing in this
world is indifferent to us
3. 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. In my Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium, I wrote to all the members of the Church with the aim of encouraging
ongoing missionary renewal. In this Encyclical, I would like to enter into
dialogue with all people about our common home.
4. In 1971,
eight years after Pacem
in Terris, Blessed
Pope Paul VI referred to the ecological concern as “a tragic consequence” of
unchecked human activity: “Due to an ill-considered exploitation of nature,
humanity runs the risk of destroying it and becoming in turn a victim of this
degradation”.[2] He spoke in similar terms to the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations about the potential for an “ecological catastrophe under the
effective explosion of industrial civilization”, and stressed “the urgent need
for a radical change in the conduct of humanity”, inasmuch as “the most
extraordinary scientific advances, the most amazing technical abilities, the
most astonishing economic growth, unless they are accompanied by authentic
social and moral progress, will definitively turn against man”.[3]
5. Saint
John Paul II became increasingly concerned about this issue. In his
first Encyclical he warned that human beings frequently seem “to see no other meaning in
their natural environment than what serves for immediate use and consumption”.[4]Subsequently, he would call for a global ecological conversion.[5] At the same time, he noted that little effort had been made to
“safeguard the moral conditions for an authentic human ecology”.[6] The destruction of the human environment is extremely serious, not only
because God has entrusted the world to us men and women, but because human life
is itself a gift which must be defended from various forms of debasement. Every
effort to protect and improve our world entails profound changes in “lifestyles,
models of production and consumption, and the established structures of power
which today govern societies”.[7] Authentic human development has a moral character. It presumes full
respect for the human person, but it must also be concerned for the world around
us and “take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection
in an ordered system”.[8] Accordingly, our human ability to transform reality must proceed in line
with God’s original gift of all that is.[9]
6. 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”.[10] 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”.[11] Pope Benedict
asked us to recognize that the natural environment has been gravely damaged by
our irresponsible behaviour. The social environment has also suffered damage.
Both are ultimately due to the same evil: the notion that there are no
indisputable truths to guide our lives, and hence human freedom is limitless. We
have forgotten that “man is not only a freedom which he creates for himself. Man
does not create himself. He is spirit and will, but also nature”.[12] With paternal
concern, Benedict urged us to realize that creation is harmed “where we
ourselves have the final word, where everything is simply our property and we
use it for ourselves alone. The misuse of creation begins when we no longer
recognize any higher instance than ourselves, when we see nothing else but
ourselves”.[13]
United by the
same concern
7. These
statements of the Popes echo the reflections of numerous scientists,
philosophers, theologians and civic groups, all of which have enriched the
Church’s thinking on these questions. Outside the Catholic Church, other
Churches and Christian communities – and other religions as well – have
expressed deep concern and offered valuable reflections on issues which all of
us find disturbing. To give just one striking example, I would mention the
statements made by the beloved Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, with whom we
share the hope of full ecclesial communion.
8. Patriarch
Bartholomew has spoken in particular of the need for each of us to repent of the
ways we have harmed the planet, for “inasmuch as we all generate small
ecological damage”, we are called to acknowledge “our contribution, smaller or
greater, to the disfigurement and destruction of creation”.[14] He has
repeatedly stated this firmly and persuasively, challenging us to acknowledge
our sins against creation: “For human beings… to destroy the biological
diversity of God’s creation; for human beings to degrade the integrity of the
earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the earth of its natural
forests or destroying its wetlands; for human beings to contaminate the earth’s
waters, its land, its air, and its life – these are sins”.[15] For “to commit
a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against
God”.[16]
9. At the same
time, Bartholomew has drawn attention to the ethical and spiritual roots of
environmental problems, which require that we look for solutions not only in
technology but in a change of humanity; otherwise we would be dealing merely
with symptoms. He asks us to replace consumption with sacrifice, greed with
generosity, wastefulness with a spirit of sharing, an asceticism which “entails
learning to give, and not simply to give up. It is a way of loving, of moving
gradually away from what I want to what God’s world needs. It is liberation from
fear, greed and compulsion”.[17] As Christians,
we are also called “to accept the world as a sacrament of communion, as a way of
sharing with God and our neighbours on a global scale. It is our humble
conviction that the divine and the human meet in the slightest detail in the
seamless garment of God’s creation, in the last speck of dust of our planet”.[18]
Saint Francis of
Assisi
10. I do not
want to write this Encyclical without turning to that attractive and compelling
figure, whose name I took as my guide and inspiration when I was elected Bishop
of Rome. I believe that Saint Francis is the example par excellence of care for
the vulnerable and of an integral ecology lived out joyfully and authentically.
He is the patron saint of all who study and work in the area of ecology, and he
is also much loved by non-Christians. He was particularly concerned for God’s
creation and for the poor and outcast. He loved, and was deeply loved for his
joy, his generous self-giving, his openheartedness. He was a mystic and a
pilgrim who lived in simplicity and in wonderful harmony with God, with others,
with nature and with himself. He shows us just how inseparable the bond is
between concern for nature, justice for the poor, commitment to society, and
interior peace.
11. Francis
helps us to see that an integral ecology calls for openness to categories which
transcend the language of mathematics and biology, and take us to the heart of
what it is to be human. Just as happens when we fall in love with someone,
whenever he would gaze at the sun, the moon or the smallest of animals, he burst
into song, drawing all other creatures into his praise. He communed with all
creation, even preaching to the flowers, inviting them “to praise the Lord, just
as if they were endowed with reason”.[19] His response to
the world around him was so much more than intellectual appreciation or economic
calculus, for to him each and every creature was a sister united to him by bonds
of affection. That is why he felt called to care for all that exists. His
disciple Saint Bonaventure tells us that, “from a reflection on the primary
source of all things, filled with even more abundant piety, he would call
creatures, no matter how small, by the name of ‘brother’ or ‘sister’”.[20] Such a
conviction cannot be written off as naive romanticism, for it affects the
choices which determine our behaviour. If we approach nature and the environment
without this openness to awe and wonder, if we no longer speak the language of
fraternity and beauty in our relationship with the world, our attitude will be
that of masters, consumers, ruthless exploiters, unable to set limits on their
immediate needs. By contrast, if we feel intimately united with all that exists,
then sobriety and care will well up spontaneously. The poverty and austerity of
Saint Francis were no mere veneer of asceticism, but something much more
radical: a refusal to turn reality into an object simply to be used and
controlled.
12. What is
more, Saint Francis, faithful to Scripture, invites us to see nature as a
magnificent book in which God speaks to us and grants us a glimpse of his
infinite beauty and goodness. “Through the greatness and the beauty of creatures
one comes to know by analogy their maker” (Wis 13:5); indeed, “his
eternal power and divinity have been made known through his works since the
creation of the world” (Rom 1:20). For this reason, Francis asked that
part of the friary garden always be left untouched, so that wild flowers and
herbs could grow there, and those who saw them could raise their minds to God,
the Creator of such beauty.[21]Rather than a
problem to be solved, the world is a joyful mystery to be contemplated with
gladness and praise.
My appeal
13. The urgent
challenge to protect our common home includes a concern to bring the whole human
family together to seek a sustainable and integral development, for we know that
things can change. The Creator does not abandon us; he never forsakes his loving
plan or repents of having created us. Humanity still has the ability to work
together in building our common home. Here I want to recognize, encourage and
thank all those striving in countless ways to guarantee the protection of the
home which we share. Particular appreciation is owed to those who tirelessly
seek to resolve the tragic effects of environmental degradation on the lives of
the world’s poorest. Young people demand change. They wonder how anyone can
claim to be building a better future without thinking of the environmental
crisis and the sufferings of the excluded.
14. 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. 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”. [22] 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.
15. It is my
hope that this Encyclical Letter, which is now added to the body of the Church’s
social teaching, can help us to acknowledge the appeal, immensity and urgency of
the challenge we face. I will begin by briefly reviewing several aspects of the
present ecological crisis, with the aim of drawing on the results of the best
scientific research available today, letting them touch us deeply and provide a
concrete foundation for the ethical and spiritual itinerary that follows. I will
then consider some principles drawn from the Judaeo-Christian tradition which
can render our commitment to the environment more coherent. I will then attempt
to get to the roots of the present situation, so as to consider not only its
symptoms but also its deepest causes. This will help to provide an approach to
ecology which respects our unique place as human beings in this world and our
relationship to our surroundings. In light of this reflection, I will advance
some broader proposals for dialogue and action which would involve each of us as
individuals, and also affect international policy. Finally, convinced as I am
that change is impossible without motivation and a process of education, I will
offer some inspired guidelines for human development to be found in the treasure
of Christian spiritual experience.
16. Although
each chapter will have its own subject and specific approach, it will also take
up and re-examine important questions previously dealt with. This is
particularly the case with a number of themes which will reappear as the
Encyclical unfolds. As examples, I will point to the intimate relationship
between the poor and the fragility of the planet, the conviction that everything
in the world is connected, the critique of new paradigms and forms of power
derived from technology, the call to seek other ways of understanding the
economy and progress, the value proper to each creature, the human meaning of
ecology, the need for forthright and honest debate, the serious responsibility
of international and local policy, the throwaway culture and the proposal of a
new lifestyle. These questions will not be dealt with once and for all, but
reframed and enriched again and again.
CHAPTER ONE
WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COMMON HOME
17. Theological
and philosophical reflections on the situation of humanity and the world can
sound tiresome and abstract, unless they are grounded in a fresh analysis of our
present situation, which is in many ways unprecedented in the history of
humanity. So, before considering how faith brings new incentives and
requirements with regard to the world of which we are a part, I will briefly
turn to what is happening to our common home.
18. The
continued acceleration of changes affecting humanity and the planet is coupled
today with a more intensified pace of life and work which might be called
“rapidification”. Although change is part of the working of complex systems, the
speed with which human activity has developed contrasts with the naturally slow
pace of biological evolution. Moreover, the goals of this rapid and constant
change are not necessarily geared to the common good or to integral and
sustainable human development. Change is something desirable, yet it becomes a
source of anxiety when it causes harm to the world and to the quality of life of
much of humanity.
19. Following a
period of irrational confidence in progress and human abilities, some sectors of
society are now adopting a more critical approach. We see increasing sensitivity
to the environment and the need to protect nature, along with a growing concern,
both genuine and distressing, for what is happening to our planet. Let us
review, however cursorily, those questions which are troubling us today and
which we can no longer sweep under the carpet. Our goal is not to amass
information or to satisfy curiosity, but rather to become painfully aware, to
dare to turn what is happening to the world into our own personal suffering and
thus to discover what each of us can do about it.
I. POLLUTION AND
CLIMATE CHANGE
Pollution, waste
and the throwaway culture
20. Some forms
of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric
pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor,
and causes millions of premature deaths. People take sick, for example, from
breathing high levels of smoke from fuels used in cooking or heating. There is
also pollution that affects everyone, caused by transport, industrial fumes,
substances which contribute to the acidification of soil and water, fertilizers,
insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and agrotoxins in general. Technology,
which, linked to business interests, is presented as the only way of solving
these problems, in fact proves incapable of seeing the mysterious network of
relations between things and so sometimes solves one problem only to create
others.
21. Account must
also be taken of the pollution produced by residue, including dangerous waste
present in different areas. 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. In many parts of the planet, the
elderly lament that once beautiful landscapes are now covered with rubbish.
Industrial waste and chemical products utilized in cities and agricultural areas
can lead to bioaccumulation in the organisms of the local population, even when
levels of toxins in those places are low. Frequently no measures are taken until
after people’s health has been irreversibly affected.
22. These problems are closely linked to a throwaway
culture which affects the excluded just as it quickly reduces things to rubbish.
To cite one example, most of the paper we produce is thrown away and not
recycled. It is hard for us to accept that the way natural ecosystems work is
exemplary: plants synthesize nutrients which feed herbivores; these in turn
become food for carnivores, which produce significant quantities of organic
waste which give rise to new generations of plants. 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. A serious consideration of this issue
would be one way of counteracting the throwaway culture which affects the entire
planet, but it must be said that only limited progress has been made in this
regard.
Climate as a
common good
23. 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. As
these gases build up in the atmosphere, they hamper the escape of heat produced
by sunlight at the earth’s surface. 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.
24. Warming has
effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious circle which aggravates the
situation even more, affecting the availability of essential resources like
drinking water, energy and agricultural production in warmer regions, and
leading to the extinction of part of the planet’s biodiversity. 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. A rise in the sea level, for example,
can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the
world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our
megacities are situated in coastal areas.
25. 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 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. For example, changes in climate, to which animals and plants
cannot adapt, lead them to migrate; this in turn affects the livelihood of the
poor, who are then forced to leave their homes, with great uncertainty for their
future and that of their children. 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;
they bear the loss of the lives they have left behind, without enjoying any
legal protection whatsoever. 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.
26. 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, simply
making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change.
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, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of
renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable
energy. There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies. Some
countries have made considerable progress, although it is far from constituting
a significant proportion. Investments have also been made in means of production
and transportation which consume less energy and require fewer raw materials, as
well as in methods of construction and renovating buildings which improve their
energy efficiency. But these good practices are still far from widespread.
II. THE ISSUE OF
WATER
27. Other
indicators of the present situation have to do with the depletion of natural
resources. We all know that it is not possible to sustain the present level of
consumption in developed countries and wealthier sectors of society, where the
habit of wasting and discarding has reached unprecedented levels. The
exploitation of the planet has already exceeded acceptable limits and we still
have not solved the problem of poverty.
28. Fresh
drinking water is an issue of primary importance, since it is indispensable for
human life and for supporting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Sources of
fresh water are necessary for health care, agriculture and industry. Water
supplies used to be relatively constant, but now in many places demand exceeds
the sustainable supply, with dramatic consequences in the short and long term.
Large cities dependent on significant supplies of water have experienced periods
of shortage, and at critical moments these have not always been administered
with sufficient oversight and impartiality. Water poverty especially affects
Africa where large sectors of the population have no access to safe drinking
water or experience droughts which impede agricultural production. Some
countries have areas rich in water while others endure drastic scarcity.
29. One
particularly serious problem is the quality of water available to the poor.
Every day, unsafe water results in many deaths and the spread of water-related
diseases, including those caused by microorganisms and chemical substances.
Dysentery and cholera, linked to inadequate hygiene and water supplies, are a
significant cause of suffering and of infant mortality. Underground water
sources in many places are threatened by the pollution produced in certain
mining, farming and industrial activities, especially in countries lacking
adequate regulation or controls. It is not only a question of industrial waste.
Detergents and chemical products, commonly used in many places of the world,
continue to pour into our rivers, lakes and seas.
30. Even as the
quality of available water is constantly diminishing, in some places there is a
growing tendency, despite its scarcity, to privatize this resource, turning it
into a commodity subject to the laws of the market. 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. This debt can be paid partly by an increase
in funding to provide clean water and sanitary services among the poor. But
water continues to be wasted, not only in the developed world but also in
developing countries which possess it in abundance. This shows that the problem
of water is partly an educational and cultural issue, since there is little
awareness of the seriousness of such behaviour within a context of great
inequality.
31. Greater
scarcity of water will lead to an increase in the cost of food and the various
products which depend on its use. Some studies warn that an acute water shortage
may occur within a few decades unless urgent action is taken. The environmental
repercussions could affect billions of people; it is also conceivable that the
control of water by large multinational businesses may become a major source of
conflict in this century.[23]
III. LOSS OF
BIODIVERSITY
32. The earth’s
resources are also being plundered because of short-sighted approaches to the
economy, commerce and production. The loss of forests and woodlands entails the
loss of species which may constitute extremely important resources in the
future, not only for food but also for curing disease and other uses. Different
species contain genes which could be key resources in years ahead for meeting
human needs and regulating environmental problems.
33. It is not
enough, however, to think of different species merely as potential “resources”
to be exploited, while overlooking the fact that they have value in themselves.
Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which
we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been
lost for ever. The great majority become extinct for reasons related to human
activity. Because of us, thousands of species will no longer give glory to God
by their very existence, nor convey their message to us. We have no such right.
34. It may well
disturb us to learn of the extinction of mammals or birds, since they are more
visible. But the good functioning of ecosystems also requires fungi, algae,
worms, insects, reptiles and an innumerable variety of microorganisms. Some less
numerous species, although generally unseen, nonetheless play a critical role in
maintaining the equilibrium of a particular place. Human beings must intervene
when a geosystem reaches a critical state. But nowadays, such intervention in
nature has become more and more frequent. As a consequence, serious problems
arise, leading to further interventions; human activity becomes ubiquitous, with
all the risks which this entails. Often a vicious circle results, as human
intervention to resolve a problem further aggravates the situation. For example,
many birds and insects which disappear due to synthetic agrotoxins are helpful
for agriculture: their disappearance will have to be compensated for by yet
other techniques which may well prove harmful. We must be grateful for the
praiseworthy efforts being made by scientists and engineers dedicated to finding
solutions to man-made problems. 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.
35. In assessing
the environmental impact of any project, concern is usually shown for its
effects on soil, water and air, yet few careful studies are made of its impact
on biodiversity, as if the loss of species or animals and plant groups were of
little importance. Highways, new plantations, the fencing-off of certain areas,
the damming of water sources, and similar developments, crowd out natural
habitats and, at times, break them up in such a way that animal populations can
no longer migrate or roam freely. As a result, some species face extinction.
Alternatives exist which at least lessen the impact of these projects, like the
creation of biological corridors, but few countries demonstrate such concern and
foresight. Frequently, when certain species are exploited commercially, little
attention is paid to studying their reproductive patterns in order to prevent
their depletion and the consequent imbalance of the ecosystem.
36. Caring for
ecosystems demands far-sightedness, since no one looking for quick and easy
profit is truly interested in their preservation. But the cost of the damage
caused by such selfish lack of concern is much greater than the economic
benefits to be obtained. Where certain species are destroyed or seriously
harmed, the values involved are incalculable. We can be silent witnesses to
terrible injustices if we think that we can obtain significant benefits by
making the rest of humanity, present and future, pay the extremely high costs of
environmental deterioration.
37. Some
countries have made significant progress in establishing sanctuaries on land and
in the oceans where any human intervention is prohibited which might modify
their features or alter their original structures. In the protection of
biodiversity, specialists insist on the need for particular attention to be
shown to areas richer both in the number of species and in endemic, rare or less
protected species. Certain places need greater protection because of their
immense importance for the global ecosystem, or because they represent important
water reserves and thus safeguard other forms of life.
38. Let us
mention, for example, those richly biodiverse lungs of our planet which are the
Amazon and the Congo basins, or the great aquifers and glaciers. We know how
important these are for the entire earth and for the future of humanity. The
ecosystems of tropical forests possess an enormously complex biodiversity which
is almost impossible to appreciate fully, yet when these forests are burned down
or levelled for purposes of cultivation, within the space of a few years
countless species are lost and the areas frequently become arid wastelands. A
delicate balance has to be maintained when speaking about these places, for we
cannot overlook the huge global economic interests which, under the guise of
protecting them, can undermine the sovereignty of individual nations. In fact,
there are “proposals to internationalize the Amazon, which only serve the
economic interests of transnational corporations”.[24] We cannot fail
to praise the commitment of international agencies and civil society
organizations which draw public attention to these issues and offer critical
cooperation, employing legitimate means of pressure, to ensure that each
government carries out its proper and inalienable responsibility to preserve its
country’s environment and natural resources, without capitulating to spurious
local or international interests.
39. The
replacement of virgin forest with plantations of trees, usually monocultures, is
rarely adequately analyzed. Yet this can seriously compromise a biodiversity
which the new species being introduced does not accommodate. Similarly, wetlands
converted into cultivated land lose the enormous biodiversity which they
formerly hosted. In some coastal areas the disappearance of ecosystems sustained
by mangrove swamps is a source of serious concern.
40. Oceans not
only contain the bulk of our planet’s water supply, but also most of the immense
variety of living creatures, many of them still unknown to us and threatened for
various reasons. What is more, marine life in rivers, lakes, seas and oceans,
which feeds a great part of the world’s population, is affected by uncontrolled
fishing, leading to a drastic depletion of certain species. Selective forms of
fishing which discard much of what they collect continue unabated. Particularly
threatened are marine organisms which we tend to overlook, like some forms of
plankton; they represent a significant element in the ocean food chain, and
species used for our food ultimately depend on them.
41. In tropical
and subtropical seas, we find coral reefs comparable to the great forests on dry
land, for they shelter approximately a million species, including fish, crabs,
molluscs, sponges and algae. Many of the world’s coral reefs are already barren
or in a state of constant decline. “Who turned the wonderworld of the seas into
underwater cemeteries bereft of colour and life?”[25] This phenomenon
is due largely to pollution which reaches the sea as the result of
deforestation, agricultural monocultures, industrial waste and destructive
fishing methods, especially those using cyanide and dynamite. It is aggravated
by the rise in temperature of the oceans. All of this helps us to see that every
intervention in nature can have consequences which are not immediately evident,
and that certain ways of exploiting resources prove costly in terms of
degradation which ultimately reaches the ocean bed itself.
42. Greater
investment needs to be made in research aimed at understanding more fully the
functioning of ecosystems and adequately analyzing the different variables
associated with any significant modification of the environment. Because all
creatures are connected, each must be cherished with love and respect, for all
of us as living creatures are dependent on one another. Each area is responsible
for the care of this family. This will require undertaking a careful inventory
of the species which it hosts, with a view to developing programmes and
strategies of protection with particular care for safeguarding species heading
towards extinction.
IV. DECLINE IN
THE QUALITY OF HUMAN LIFE AND THE BREAKDOWN OF SOCIETY
43. Human beings
too are creatures of this world, enjoying a right to life and happiness, and
endowed with unique dignity. So we cannot fail to consider the effects on
people’s lives of environmental deterioration, current models of development and
the throwaway culture.
44. Nowadays,
for example, we are conscious of the disproportionate and unruly growth of many
cities, which have become unhealthy to live in, not only because of pollution
caused by toxic emissions but also as a result of urban chaos, poor
transportation, and visual pollution and noise. Many cities are huge,
inefficient structures, excessively wasteful of energy and water.
Neighbourhoods, even those recently built, are congested, chaotic and lacking in
sufficient green space. We were not meant to be inundated by cement, asphalt,
glass and metal, and deprived of physical contact with nature.
45. In some
places, rural and urban alike, the privatization of certain spaces has
restricted people’s access to places of particular beauty. In others,
“ecological” neighbourhoods have been created which are closed to outsiders in
order to ensure an artificial tranquillity. Frequently, we find beautiful and
carefully manicured green spaces in so-called “safer” areas of cities, but not
in the more hidden areas where the disposable of society live.
46. The social
dimensions of global change include the effects of technological innovations on
employment, social exclusion, an inequitable distribution and consumption of
energy and other services, social breakdown, increased violence and a rise in
new forms of social aggression, drug trafficking, growing drug use by young
people, and the loss of identity. These are signs that the growth of the past
two centuries has not always led to an integral development and an improvement
in the quality of life. Some of these signs are also symptomatic of real social
decline, the silent rupture of the bonds of integration and social cohesion.
47. Furthermore,
when media and the digital world become omnipresent, their influence can stop
people from learning how to live wisely, to think deeply and to love generously.
In this context, the great sages of the past run the risk of going unheard amid
the noise and distractions of an information overload. Efforts need to be made
to help these media become sources of new cultural progress for humanity and not
a threat to our deepest riches. True wisdom, as the fruit of self-examination,
dialogue and generous encounter between persons, is not acquired by a mere
accumulation of data which eventually leads to overload and confusion, a sort of
mental pollution. Real relationships with others, with all the challenges they
entail, now tend to be replaced by a type of internet communication which
enables us to choose or eliminate relationships at whim, thus giving rise to a
new type of contrived emotion which has more to do with devices and displays
than with other people and with nature. Today’s media do enable us to
communicate and to share our knowledge and affections. Yet at times they also
shield us from direct contact with the pain, the fears and the joys of others
and the complexity of their personal experiences. For this reason, we should be
concerned that, alongside the exciting possibilities offered by these media, a
deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with interpersonal relations, or a harmful
sense of isolation, can also arise.
V. GLOBAL
INEQUALITY
48. 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”.[26] For example,
the depletion of fishing reserves especially hurts small fishing communities
without the means to replace those resources; water pollution particularly
affects the poor who cannot buy bottled water; and rises in the sea level mainly
affect impoverished coastal populations who have nowhere else to go. The impact
of present imbalances is also seen in the premature death of many of the poor,
in conflicts sparked by the shortage of resources, and in any number of other
problems which are insufficiently represented on global agendas.[27]
49. It needs to be said that, generally speaking,
there is little in the way of clear awareness of problems which especially
affect the excluded. Yet they are the majority of the planet’s population,
billions of people. These days, they are mentioned in international political
and economic discussions, but one often has the impression that their problems
are brought up as an afterthought, a question which gets added almost out of
duty or in a tangential way, if not treated merely as collateral damage. Indeed,
when all is said and done, they frequently remain at the bottom of the pile.
This is due partly to the fact that many professionals, opinion makers,
communications media and centres of power, being located in affluent urban
areas, are far removed from the poor, with little direct contact with their
problems. They live and reason from the comfortable position of a high level of
development and a quality of life well beyond the reach of the majority of the
world’s population. This lack of physical contact and encounter, encouraged at
times by the disintegration of our cities, can lead to a numbing of conscience
and to tendentious analyses which neglect parts of reality. At times this
attitude exists side by side with a “green” rhetoric. Today, however, 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.
50. 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”. Yet “while
it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available
resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the
environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully
compatible with an integral and shared development”.[28] To blame
population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of
some, is one way of refusing to face the issues. It is an attempt to legitimize
the present model of distribution, where a minority believes that it has the
right to consume in a way which can never be universalized, since the planet
could not even contain the waste products of such consumption. Besides, we know
that approximately a third of all food produced is discarded, and “whenever food
is thrown out it is as if it were stolen from the table of the poor”.[29] Still,
attention needs to be paid to imbalances in population density, on both national
and global levels, since a rise in consumption would lead to complex regional
situations, as a result of the interplay between problems linked to
environmental pollution, transport, waste treatment, loss of resources and
quality of life.
51. Inequity
affects not only individuals but entire countries; it compels us to consider an
ethics of international relations. 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 export of raw materials to
satisfy markets in the industrialized north has caused harm locally, as for
example in mercury pollution in gold mining or sulphur dioxide pollution in
copper mining. There is a pressing need to calculate the use of environmental
space throughout the world for depositing gas residues which have been
accumulating for two centuries and have created a situation which currently
affects all the countries of the world. 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. There is also the damage caused by the
export of solid waste and toxic liquids to developing countries, and by the
pollution produced by companies which operate in less developed countries in
ways they could never do at home, in the countries in which they raise their
capital: “We note that often the businesses which operate this way are
multinationals. They do here what they would never do in developed countries or
the so-called first world. 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”.[30]
52. 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. The land of the southern poor is rich and mostly unpolluted,
yet access to ownership of goods and resources for meeting vital needs is
inhibited by a system of commercial relations and ownership which is
structurally perverse. The developed countries ought to help pay this debt by
significantly limiting their consumption of non-renewable energy and by
assisting poorer countries to support policies and programmes of sustainable
development. The poorest areas and countries are less capable of adopting new
models for reducing environmental impact because they lack the wherewithal to
develop the necessary processes and to cover their costs. 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”.[31] 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.
VI. WEAK
RESPONSES
53. These
situations have caused sister earth, along with all the abandoned of our world,
to cry out, pleading that we take another course. Never have we so hurt and
mistreated our common home as we have in the last two hundred years. Yet we are
called to be instruments of God our Father, so that our planet might be what he
desired when he created it and correspond with his plan for peace, beauty and
fullness. 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. The establishment of a legal framework which can set clear
boundaries and ensure the protection of ecosystems has become indispensable;
otherwise, the new power structures based on the techno-economic paradigm may
overwhelm not only our politics but also freedom and justice.
54. 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. The Aparecida Documenturges
that “the interests of economic groups which irrationally demolish sources of
life should not prevail in dealing with natural resources”.[32] The alliance
between the economy and technology ends up sidelining anything unrelated to its
immediate interests. Consequently the most one can expect is superficial
rhetoric, sporadic acts of philanthropy and perfunctory expressions of concern
for the environment, whereas any genuine attempt by groups within society to
introduce change is viewed as a nuisance based on romantic illusions or an
obstacle to be circumvented.
55. Some
countries are gradually making significant progress, developing more effective
controls and working to combat corruption. People may well have a growing
ecological sensitivity but it has not succeeded in changing their harmful habits
of consumption which, rather than decreasing, appear to be growing all the more.
A simple example is the increasing use and power of air-conditioning. The
markets, which immediately benefit from sales, stimulate ever greater demand. An
outsider looking at our world would be amazed at such behaviour, which at times
appears self-destructive.
56. In the meantime, 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. Here we see how environmental deterioration and human and ethical
degradation are closely linked. Many people will deny doing anything wrong
because distractions constantly dull our consciousness of just how limited and
finite our world really is. As a result, “whatever is fragile, like the
environment, is defenceless before the interests of a deified market, which
become the only rule”.[33]
57. 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. War always does grave
harm to the environment and to the cultural riches of peoples, risks which are
magnified when one considers nuclear arms and biological weapons. “Despite the
international agreements which prohibit chemical, bacteriological and biological
warfare, the fact is that laboratory research continues to develop new offensive
weapons capable of altering the balance of nature”.[34] Politics must
pay greater attention to foreseeing new conflicts and addressing the causes
which can lead to them. But powerful financial interests prove most resistant to
this effort, and political planning tends to lack breadth of vision. What would
induce anyone, at this stage, to hold on to power only to be remembered for
their inability to take action when it was urgent and necessary to do so?
58. In some
countries, there are positive examples of environmental improvement: rivers,
polluted for decades, have been cleaned up; native woodlands have been restored;
landscapes have been beautified thanks to environmental renewal projects;
beautiful buildings have been erected; advances have been made in the production
of non-polluting energy and in the improvement of public transportation. These
achievements do not solve global problems, but they do show that men and women
are still capable of intervening positively. For all our limitations, gestures
of generosity, solidarity and care cannot but well up within us, since we were
made for love.
59. At the same
time we can note the rise of a false or superficial ecology which bolsters
complacency and a cheerful recklessness. As often occurs in periods of deep
crisis which require bold decisions, we are tempted to think that what is
happening is not entirely clear. Superficially, apart from a few obvious signs
of pollution and deterioration, things do not look that serious, and the planet
could continue as it is for some time. Such evasiveness serves as a licence 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.
VII. A VARIETY
OF OPINIONS
60. Finally, we
need to acknowledge that different approaches and lines of thought have emerged
regarding this situation and its possible solutions. 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. This makes a variety of
proposals possible, all capable of entering into dialogue with a view to
developing comprehensive solutions.
61. On many
concrete questions, the Church has no reason to offer a definitive opinion; she
knows that honest debate must be encouraged among experts, while respecting
divergent views. But we need only take a frank look at the facts to see that our
common home is falling into serious disrepair. 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; these are evident in large-scale natural disasters as well as
social and even financial crises, for the world’s problems cannot be analyzed or
explained in isolation. There are regions now at high risk and, aside from all
doomsday predictions, the present world system is certainly unsustainable from a
number of points of view, for we have stopped thinking about the goals of human
activity. “If we scan the regions of our planet, we immediately see that
humanity has disappointed God’s expectations”.[35]
CHAPTER TWO
THE GOSPEL OF CREATION
62. Why should
this document, addressed to all people of good will, include a chapter dealing
with the convictions of believers? I am well aware that in the areas of politics
and philosophy there are those who firmly reject the idea of a Creator, or
consider it irrelevant, and consequently dismiss as irrational the rich
contribution which religions can make towards an integral ecology and the full
development of humanity. Others view religions simply as a subculture to be
tolerated. Nonetheless, science and religion, with their distinctive approaches
to understanding reality, can enter into an intense dialogue fruitful for both.
I. THE LIGHT
OFFERED BY FAITH
63. Given the
complexity of the ecological crisis and its multiple causes, we need to realize
that the solutions will not emerge from just one way of interpreting and
transforming reality. Respect must also be shown for the various cultural riches
of different peoples, their art and poetry, their interior life and
spirituality. If we are truly concerned to develop an ecology capable of
remedying the damage we have done, no branch of the sciences and no form of
wisdom can be left out, and that includes religion and the language particular
to it. The Catholic Church is open to dialogue with philosophical thought; this
has enabled her to produce various syntheses between faith and reason. The
development of the Church’s social teaching represents such a synthesis with
regard to social issues; this teaching is called to be enriched by taking up new
challenges.
64. Furthermore,
although this Encyclical welcomes dialogue with everyone so that together we can
seek paths of liberation, I would like from the outset to show how faith
convictions can offer Christians, and some other believers as well, ample
motivation to care for nature and for the most vulnerable of their brothers and
sisters. If the simple fact of being human moves people to care for the
environment of which they are a part, Christians in their turn “realize that
their responsibility within creation, and their duty towards nature and the
Creator, are an essential part of their faith”.[36] It is good for
humanity and the world at large when we believers better recognize the
ecological commitments which stem from our convictions.
II. THE WISDOM
OF THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
65. Without
repeating the entire theology of creation, we can ask what the great biblical
narratives say about the relationship of human beings with the world. In the
first creation account in the Book of Genesis, God’s plan includes creating
humanity. After the creation of man and woman, “God saw everything that he had
made, and behold it was very good” (Gen 1:31). The Bible teaches
that every man and woman is created out of love and made in God’s image and
likeness (cf. Gen 1:26). This shows us the immense dignity of each
person, “who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of
self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering
into communion with other persons”.[37] Saint John Paul
II stated that the special love of the Creator for each human being “confers
upon him or her an infinite dignity”.[38] Those who are
committed to defending human dignity can find in the Christian faith the deepest
reasons for this commitment. How wonderful is the certainty that each human life
is not adrift in the midst of hopeless chaos, in a world ruled by pure chance or
endlessly recurring cycles! The Creator can say to each one of us: “Before I
formed you in the womb, I knew you” (Jer 1:5). We were conceived in the
heart of God, and for this reason “each of us is the result of a thought of God.
Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary”.[39]
66. The creation
accounts in the book of Genesis contain, in their own symbolic and narrative
language, profound teachings about human existence and its historical reality.
They suggest that human life is grounded in three fundamental and closely
intertwined relationships: with God, with our neighbour and with the earth
itself. According to the Bible, these three vital relationships have been
broken, both outwardly and within us. This rupture is sin. The harmony between
the Creator, humanity and creation as a whole was disrupted by our presuming to
take the place of God and refusing to acknowledge our creaturely limitations.
This in turn distorted our mandate to “have dominion” over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28),
to “till it and keep it” (Gen 2:15). As a result, the originally
harmonious relationship between human beings and nature became conflictual (cf. Gen 3:17-19).
It is significant that the harmony which Saint Francis of Assisi experienced
with all creatures was seen as a healing of that rupture. Saint Bonaventure held
that, through universal reconciliation with every creature, Saint Francis in
some way returned to the state of original innocence.[40] This is a far
cry from our situation today, where sin is manifest in all its destructive power
in wars, the various forms of violence and abuse, the abandonment of the most
vulnerable, and attacks on nature.
67. We are not
God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us. This allows us to
respond to the charge that Judaeo-Christian thinking, on the basis of the
Genesis account which grants man “dominion” over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28),
has encouraged the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as
domineering and destructive by nature. This is not a correct interpretation of
the Bible as understood by the Church. 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. “The earth is the Lord’s” (Ps 24:1); to him belongs “the
earth with all that is within it” (Dt 10:14). Thus God rejects every
claim to absolute ownership: “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the
land is mine; for you are strangers and sojourners with me” (Lev 25:23).
68. This
responsibility for God’s earth means that human beings, endowed with
intelligence, must respect the laws of nature and the delicate equilibria
existing between the creatures of this world, for “he commanded and they were
created; and he established them for ever and ever; he fixed their bounds and he
set a law which cannot pass away” (Ps 148:5b-6). The laws found in the
Bible dwell on relationships, not only among individuals but also with other
living beings. “You shall not see your brother’s donkey or his ox fallen down by
the way and withhold your help… If you chance to come upon a bird’s nest in any
tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs and the mother sitting upon the
young or upon the eggs; you shall not take the mother with the young” (Dt 22:4,
6). Along these same lines, rest on the seventh day is meant not only for human
beings, but also so “that your ox and your donkey may have rest” (Ex 23:12).
Clearly, the Bible has no place for a tyrannical anthropocentrism unconcerned
for other creatures.
69. Together
with our obligation to use the earth’s goods responsibly, we are called to
recognize that other living beings have a value of their own in God’s eyes: “by
their mere existence they bless him and give him glory”,[41] and indeed,
“the Lord rejoices in all his works” (Ps 104:31). By virtue of our unique
dignity and our gift of intelligence, we are called to respect creation and its
inherent laws, for “the Lord by wisdom founded the earth” (Prov 3:19). In
our time, the Church does not simply state that other creatures are completely
subordinated to the good of human beings, as if they have no worth in themselves
and can be treated as we wish. The German bishops have taught that, where other
creatures are concerned, “we can speak of the priority of being over that
of being useful”.[42] The Catechism
clearly and forcefully criticizes a distorted anthropocentrism: “Each creature
possesses its own particular goodness and perfection… Each of the various
creatures, willed in its own being, reflects in its own way a ray of God’s
infinite wisdom and goodness. Man must therefore respect the particular goodness
of every creature, to avoid any disordered use of things”.[43]
70. In the story
of Cain and Abel, we see how envy led Cain to commit the ultimate injustice
against his brother, which in turn ruptured the relationship between Cain and
God, and between Cain and the earth from which he was banished. This is seen
clearly in the dramatic exchange between God and Cain. God asks: “Where is Abel
your brother?” Cain answers that he does not know, and God persists: “What have
you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground. And
now you are cursed from the ground” (Gen 4:9-11). Disregard for the duty
to cultivate and maintain a proper relationship with my neighbour, for whose
care and custody I am responsible, ruins my relationship with my own self, with
others, with God and with the earth. When all these relationships are neglected,
when justice no longer dwells in the land, the Bible tells us that life itself
is endangered. We see this in the story of Noah, where God threatens to do away
with humanity because of its constant failure to fulfil the requirements of
justice and peace: “I have determined to make an end of all flesh; for the earth
is filled with violence through them” (Gen 6:13). These ancient stories,
full of symbolism, bear witness to a conviction which we today share, that
everything is interconnected, and that genuine care for our own lives and our
relationships with nature is inseparable from fraternity, justice and
faithfulness to others.
71. Although
“the wickedness of man was great in the earth” (Gen 6:5) and the Lord
“was sorry that he had made man on the earth” (Gen 6:6), nonetheless,
through Noah, who remained innocent and just, God decided to open a path of
salvation. In this way he gave humanity the chance of a new beginning. All it
takes is one good person to restore hope! The biblical tradition clearly shows
that this renewal entails recovering and respecting the rhythms inscribed in
nature by the hand of the Creator. We see this, for example, in the law of the
Sabbath. On the seventh day, God rested from all his work. He commanded Israel
to set aside each seventh day as a day of rest, a Sabbath, (cf. Gen 2:2-3; Ex 16:23;
20:10). Similarly, every seven years, a sabbatical year was set aside for
Israel, a complete rest for the land (cf. Lev 25:1-4), when sowing was
forbidden and one reaped only what was necessary to live on and to feed one’s
household (cf. Lev 25:4-6). Finally, after seven weeks of years, which is
to say forty-nine years, the Jubilee was celebrated as a year of general
forgiveness and “liberty throughout the land for all its inhabitants” (cf. Lev 25:10).
This law came about as an attempt to ensure balance and fairness in their
relationships with others and with the land on which they lived and worked. At
the same time, it was an acknowledgment that the gift of the earth with its
fruits belongs to everyone. Those who tilled and kept the land were obliged to
share its fruits, especially with the poor, with widows, orphans and foreigners
in their midst: “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your
field to its very border, neither shall you gather the gleanings after the
harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather
the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and for
the sojourner” (Lev 19:9-10).
72. The Psalms
frequently exhort us to praise God the Creator, “who spread out the earth on the
waters, for his steadfast love endures for ever” (Ps 136:6). They also
invite other creatures to join us in this praise: “Praise him, sun and moon,
praise him, all you shining stars! Praise him, you highest heavens, and you
waters above the heavens! Let them praise the name of the Lord, for he commanded
and they were created” (Ps 148:3-5). We do not only exist by God’s mighty
power; we also live with him and beside him. This is why we adore him.
73. The writings
of the prophets invite us to find renewed strength in times of trial by
contemplating the all-powerful God who created the universe. Yet God’s infinite
power does not lead us to flee his fatherly tenderness, because in him affection
and strength are joined. Indeed, all sound spirituality entails both welcoming
divine love and adoration, confident in the Lord because of his infinite power.
In the Bible, the God who liberates and saves is the same God who created the
universe, and these two divine ways of acting are intimately and inseparably
connected: “Ah Lord God! It is you who made the heavens and the earth by your
great power and by your outstretched arm! Nothing is too hard for you… You
brought your people Israel out of the land of Egypt with signs and wonders” (Jer 32:17,
21). “The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He
does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable. He gives power
to the faint, and strengthens the powerless” (Is 40:28b-29).
74. The
experience of the Babylonian captivity provoked a spiritual crisis which led to
deeper faith in God. Now his creative omnipotence was given pride of place in
order to exhort the people to regain their hope in the midst of their wretched
predicament. Centuries later, in another age of trial and persecution, when the
Roman Empire was seeking to impose absolute dominion, the faithful would once
again find consolation and hope in a growing trust in the all-powerful God:
“Great and wonderful are your deeds, O Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are
your ways!” (Rev 15:3). The God who created the universe out of nothing
can also intervene in this world and overcome every form of evil. Injustice is
not invincible.
75. A
spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable.
That is how we end up worshipping earthly powers, or ourselves usurping the
place of God, even to the point of claiming an unlimited right to trample his
creation underfoot. The best way to restore men and women to their rightful
place, putting an end to their claim to absolute dominion over the earth, is to
speak once more of the figure of a Father who creates and who alone owns the
world. Otherwise, human beings will always try to impose their own laws and
interests on reality.
III. THE MYSTERY
OF THE UNIVERSE
76. In the
Judaeo-Christian tradition, the word “creation” has a broader meaning than
“nature”, for it has to do with God’s loving plan in which every creature has
its own value and significance. Nature is usually seen as a system which can be
studied, understood and controlled, whereas creation can only be understood as a
gift from the outstretched hand of the Father of all, and as a reality
illuminated by the love which calls us together into universal communion.
77. “By the word
of the Lord the heavens were made” (Ps 33:6). This tells us that the
world came about as the result of a decision, not from chaos or chance, and this
exalts it all the more. The creating word expresses a free choice. The universe
did not emerge as the result of arbitrary omnipotence, a show of force or a
desire for self-assertion. Creation is of the order of love. God’s love is the
fundamental moving force in all created things: “For you love all things that
exist, and detest none of the things that you have made; for you would not have
made anything if you had hated it” (Wis 11:24). Every creature is thus
the object of the Father’s tenderness, who gives it its place in the world. Even
the fleeting life of the least of beings is the object of his love, and in its
few seconds of existence, God enfolds it with his affection. Saint Basil the
Great described the Creator as “goodness without measure”,[44] while Dante
Alighieri spoke of “the love which moves the sun and the stars”.[45] Consequently,
we can ascend from created things “to the greatness of God and to his loving
mercy”.[46]
78. At the same
time, Judaeo-Christian thought demythologized nature. While continuing to admire
its grandeur and immensity, it no longer saw nature as divine. In doing so, it
emphasizes all the more our human responsibility for nature. This rediscovery of
nature can never be at the cost of the freedom and responsibility of human
beings who, as part of the world, have the duty to cultivate their abilities in
order to protect it and develop its potential. 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.
79. In this
universe, shaped by open and intercommunicating systems, we can discern
countless forms of relationship and participation. This leads us to think of the
whole as open to God’s transcendence, within which it develops. Faith allows us
to interpret the meaning and the mysterious beauty of what is unfolding. We are
free to apply our intelligence towards things evolving positively, or towards
adding new ills, new causes of suffering and real setbacks. This is what makes
for the excitement and drama of human history, in which freedom, growth,
salvation and love can blossom, or lead towards decadence and mutual
destruction. The work of the Church seeks not only to remind everyone of the
duty to care for nature, but at the same time “she must above all protect
mankind from self-destruction”.[47]
80. Yet God, who
wishes to work with us and who counts on our cooperation, can also bring good
out of the evil we have done. “The Holy Spirit can be said to possess an
infinite creativity, proper to the divine mind, which knows how to loosen the
knots of human affairs, including the most complex and inscrutable”.[48] Creating a
world in need of development, God in some way sought to limit himself in such a
way that many of the things we think of as evils, dangers or sources of
suffering, are in reality part of the pains of childbirth which he uses to draw
us into the act of cooperation with the Creator.[49] God is
intimately present to each being, without impinging on the autonomy of his
creature, and this gives rise to the rightful autonomy of earthly affairs.[50] His divine
presence, which ensures the subsistence and growth of each being, “continues the
work of creation”.[51] The Spirit of
God has filled the universe with possibilities and therefore, from the very
heart of things, something new can always emerge: “Nature is nothing other than
a certain kind of art, namely God’s art, impressed upon things, whereby those
things are moved to a determinate end. It is as if a shipbuilder were able to
give timbers the wherewithal to move themselves to take the form of a ship”.[52]
81. Human
beings, even if we postulate a process of evolution, also possess a uniqueness
which cannot be fully explained by the evolution of other open systems. Each of
us has his or her own personal identity and is capable of entering into dialogue
with others and with God himself. Our capacity to reason, to develop arguments,
to be inventive, to interpret reality and to create art, along with other not
yet discovered capacities, are signs of a uniqueness which transcends the
spheres of physics and biology. The sheer novelty involved in the emergence of a
personal being within a material universe presupposes a direct action of God and
a particular call to life and to relationship on the part of a “Thou” who
addresses himself to another “thou”. The biblical accounts of creation invite us
to see each human being as a subject who can never be reduced to the status of
an object.
82. Yet it would
also be mistaken to view other living beings as mere objects subjected to
arbitrary human domination. When nature is viewed solely as a source of profit
and gain, this has serious consequences for society. This vision of “might is
right” has engendered immense inequality, injustice and acts of violence against
the majority of humanity, since resources end up in the hands of the first comer
or the most powerful: the winner takes all. Completely at odds with this model
are the ideals of harmony, justice, fraternity and peace as proposed by Jesus.
As he said of the powers of his own age: “You know that the rulers of the
Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It
shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your
servant” (Mt 20:25-26).
83. The ultimate
destiny of the universe is in the fullness of God, which has already been
attained by the risen Christ, the measure of the maturity of all things.[53] Here we can add
yet another argument for rejecting every tyrannical and irresponsible domination
of human beings over other creatures. The ultimate purpose of other creatures is
not to be found in us. Rather, all creatures are moving forward with us and
through us towards a common point of arrival, which is God, in that transcendent
fullness where the risen Christ embraces and illumines all things. Human beings,
endowed with intelligence and love, and drawn by the fullness of Christ, are
called to lead all creatures back to their Creator.
IV. THE MESSAGE
OF EACH CREATURE IN THE HARMONY OF CREATION
84. 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. Anyone who has grown up in the hills or used to sit
by the spring to drink, or played outdoors in the neighbourhood square; going
back to these places is a chance to recover something of their true selves.
85. God has
written a precious book, “whose letters are the multitude of created things
present in the universe”.[54] The Canadian
bishops rightly pointed out that no creature is excluded from this manifestation
of God: “From panoramic vistas to the tiniest living form, nature is a constant
source of wonder and awe. It is also a continuing revelation of the divine”.[55] The bishops of
Japan, for their part, made a thought-provoking observation: “To sense
each creature singing the hymn of its existence is to live joyfully in God’s
love and hope”.[56] This
contemplation of creation allows us to discover in each thing a teaching which
God wishes to hand on to us, since “for the believer, to contemplate creation is
to hear a message, to listen to a paradoxical and silent voice”.[57] We can say that
“alongside revelation properly so-called, contained in sacred Scripture, there
is a divine manifestation in the blaze of the sun and the fall of night”.[58] Paying
attention to this manifestation, we learn to see ourselves in relation to all
other creatures: “I express myself in expressing the world; in my effort to
decipher the sacredness of the world, I explore my own”.[59]
86. The universe
as a whole, in all its manifold relationships, shows forth the inexhaustible
riches of God. Saint Thomas Aquinas wisely noted that multiplicity and variety
“come from the intention of the first agent” who willed that “what was wanting
to one in the representation of the divine goodness might be supplied by
another”,[60] inasmuch as
God’s goodness “could not be represented fittingly by any one creature”.[61] Hence we need
to grasp the variety of things in their multiple relationships.[62] We understand
better the importance and meaning of each creature if we contemplate it within
the entirety of God’s plan. 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”.[63]
87. When we can
see God reflected in all that exists, our hearts are moved to praise the Lord
for all his creatures and to worship him in union with them. This sentiment
finds magnificent expression in the hymn of Saint Francis of Assisi:
Praised be you,
my Lord, with all your creatures,
88. The bishops
of Brazil have pointed out that nature as a whole not only manifests God but is
also a locus of his presence. The Spirit of life dwells in every living creature
and calls us to enter into relationship with him.[65] Discovering
this presence leads us to cultivate the “ecological virtues”.[66] This is not to
forget that there is an infinite distance between God and the things of this
world, which do not possess his fullness. Otherwise, we would not be doing the
creatures themselves any good either, for we would be failing to acknowledge
their right and proper place. We would end up unduly demanding of them something
which they, in their smallness, cannot give us.
V. A UNIVERSAL
COMMUNION
89. The created
things of this world are not free of ownership: “For they are yours, O Lord, who
love the living” (Wis 11:26). This is the basis of our conviction that,
as part of the universe, called into being by one Father, 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. Here I
would reiterate that “God has joined us so closely to the world around us that
we can feel the desertification of the soil almost as a physical ailment, and
the extinction of a species as a painful disfigurement”.[67]
90. This is not
to put all living beings on the same level nor to deprive human beings of their
unique worth and the tremendous responsibility it entails. Nor does it imply a
divinization of the earth which would prevent us from working on it and
protecting it in its fragility. Such notions would end up creating new
imbalances which would deflect us from the reality which challenges us.[68] At times we see
an obsession with denying any pre-eminence to the human person; more zeal is
shown in protecting other species than in defending the dignity which all human
beings share in equal measure. Certainly, we should be concerned lest other
living beings be treated irresponsibly. But we should be particularly indignant
at the enormous inequalities in our midst, whereby we continue to tolerate some
considering themselves more worthy than others. We fail to see that some are
mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, while others have not
the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly showing off their
supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste which, if it were the
case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice, we continue to tolerate
that some consider themselves more human than others, as if they had been born
with greater rights.
91. A sense of
deep communion with the rest of nature cannot be real if our hearts lack
tenderness, compassion and concern for our fellow human beings. It is clearly
inconsistent to combat trafficking in endangered species while remaining
completely indifferent to human trafficking, unconcerned about the poor, or
undertaking to destroy another human being deemed unwanted. This compromises the
very meaning of our struggle for the sake of the environment. It is no
coincidence that, in the canticle in which Saint Francis praises God for his
creatures, he goes on to say: “Praised be you my Lord, through those who give
pardon for your love”. Everything is connected. Concern for the environment thus
needs to be joined to a sincere love for our fellow human beings and an
unwavering commitment to resolving the problems of society.
92. Moreover,
when our hearts are authentically open to universal communion, this sense of
fraternity excludes nothing and no one. It follows that our indifference or
cruelty towards fellow creatures of this world sooner or later affects the
treatment we mete out to other human beings. We have only one heart, and the
same wretchedness which leads us to mistreat an animal will not be long in
showing itself in our relationships with other people. Every act of cruelty
towards any creature is “contrary to human dignity”.[69]We can hardly
consider ourselves to be fully loving if we disregard any aspect of reality:
“Peace, justice and the preservation of creation are three absolutely
interconnected themes, which cannot be separated and treated individually
without once again falling into reductionism”.[70] 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.
VI. THE COMMON
DESTINATION OF GOODS
93. Whether
believers or not, we are agreed today that the earth is essentially a shared
inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone. For believers, this
becomes a question of fidelity to the Creator, since God created the world for
everyone. 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”.[71] 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. Saint John Paul II forcefully reaffirmed this teaching, stating that
“God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its
members, without excluding or favouring anyone”.[72] These are
strong words. He noted that “a type of development which did not respect and
promote human rights – personal and social, economic and political, including
the rights of nations and of peoples – would not be really worthy of man”.[73] He clearly
explained that “the Church does indeed defend the legitimate right to private
property, but she also teaches no less clearly that there is always a social
mortgage on all private property, in order that goods may serve the general
purpose that God gave them”.[74] Consequently,
he maintained, “it is not in accord with God’s plan that this gift be used in
such a way that its benefits favour only a few”.[75] This calls into
serious question the unjust habits of a part of humanity.[76]
94. The rich and
the poor have equal dignity, for “the Lord is the maker of them all” (Prov 22:2).
“He himself made both small and great” (Wis 6:7), and “he makes his sun
rise on the evil and on the good” (Mt 5:45). This has practical
consequences, such as those pointed out by the bishops of Paraguay: “Every campesino has
a natural right to possess a reasonable allotment of land where he can establish
his home, work for subsistence of his family and a secure life. This right must
be guaranteed so that its exercise is not illusory but real. That means that
apart from the ownership of property, rural people must have access to means of
technical education, credit, insurance, and markets”.[77]
95. The natural
environment is a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity and the
responsibility of everyone. If we make something our own, it is only to
administer it for the good 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 shall 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”.[78]
VII. THE GAZE OF
JESUS
96. Jesus took
up the biblical faith in God the Creator, emphasizing a fundamental truth: God
is Father (cf. Mt 11:25). In talking with his disciples, Jesus would
invite them to recognize the paternal relationship God has with all his
creatures. With moving tenderness he would remind them that each one of them is
important in God’s eyes: “Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? And not
one of them is forgotten before God” (Lk 12:6). “Look at the birds of the
air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly
Father feeds them” (Mt 6:26).
97. The Lord was
able to invite others to be attentive to the beauty that there is in the world
because he himself was in constant touch with nature, lending it an attention
full of fondness and wonder. As he made his way throughout the land, he often
stopped to contemplate the beauty sown by his Father, and invited his disciples
to perceive a divine message in things: “Lift up your eyes, and see how the
fields are already white for harvest” (Jn 4:35). “The kingdom of God is
like a grain of mustard seed which a man took and sowed in his field; it is the
smallest of all seeds, but once it has grown, it is the greatest of plants” (Mt 13:31-32).
98. Jesus lived
in full harmony with creation, and others were amazed: “What sort of man is
this, that even the winds and the sea obey him?” (Mt 8:27). His
appearance was not that of an ascetic set apart from the world, nor of an enemy
to the pleasant things of life. Of himself he said: “The Son of Man came eating
and drinking and they say, ‘Look, a glutton and a drunkard!’” (Mt 11:19).
He was far removed from philosophies which despised the body, matter and the
things of the world. Such unhealthy dualisms, nonetheless, left a mark on
certain Christian thinkers in the course of history and disfigured the Gospel.
Jesus worked with his hands, in daily contact with the matter created by God, to
which he gave form by his craftsmanship. It is striking that most of his life
was dedicated to this task in a simple life which awakened no admiration at all:
“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary?” (Mk6:3). In this way he
sanctified human labour and endowed it with a special significance for our
development. As Saint John Paul II taught, “by enduring the toil of work in
union with Christ crucified for us, man in a way collaborates with the Son of
God for the redemption of humanity”.[79]
99. In the
Christian understanding of the world, the destiny of all creation is bound up
with the mystery of Christ, present from the beginning: “All things have been
created though him and for him” (Col 1:16).[80] The prologue of
the Gospel of John (1:1-18) reveals Christ’s creative work as the Divine Word (Logos).
But then, unexpectedly, the prologue goes on to say that this same Word “became
flesh” (Jn 1:14). One Person of the Trinity entered into the created
cosmos, throwing in his lot with it, even to the cross. From the beginning of
the world, but particularly through the incarnation, the mystery of Christ is at
work in a hidden manner in the natural world as a whole, without thereby
impinging on its autonomy.
100. The New
Testament does not only tell us of the earthly Jesus and his tangible and loving
relationship with the world. It also shows him risen and glorious, present
throughout creation by his universal Lordship: “For in him all the fullness of
God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things,
whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” (Col 1:19-20).
This leads us to direct our gaze to the end of time, when the Son will deliver
all things to the Father, so that “God may be everything to every one” (1
Cor 15:28). Thus, the creatures of this world no longer appear to us under
merely natural guise because the risen One is mysteriously holding them to
himself and directing them towards fullness as their end. The very flowers of
the field and the birds which his human eyes contemplated and admired are now
imbued with his radiant presence.
CHAPTER THREE
THE HUMAN ROOTS OF THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS
101. It would
hardly be helpful to describe symptoms without acknowledging 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. Should we not
pause and consider this? At this stage, I propose that we focus on the dominant
technocratic paradigm and the place of human beings and of human action in the
world.
I. TECHNOLOGY:
CREATIVITY AND POWER
102. Humanity
has entered a new era in which our technical prowess has brought us to a
crossroads. We are the beneficiaries of two centuries of enormous waves of
change: steam engines, railways, the telegraph, electricity, automobiles,
aeroplanes, chemical industries, modern medicine, information technology and,
more recently, the digital revolution, robotics, biotechnologies and
nanotechnologies. It is right to rejoice in these advances and to be excited by
the immense possibilities which they continue to open up before us, for “science
and technology are wonderful products of a God-given human creativity”.[81] The
modification of nature for useful purposes has distinguished the human family
from the beginning; technology itself “expresses the inner tension that impels
man gradually to overcome material limitations”.[82] Technology has
remedied countless evils which used to harm and limit human beings. How can we
not feel gratitude and appreciation for this progress, especially in the fields
of medicine, engineering and communications? How could we not acknowledge the
work of many scientists and engineers who have provided alternatives to make
development sustainable?
103.
Technoscience, when well directed, can produce important means of improving the
quality of human life, from useful domestic appliances to great transportation
systems, bridges, buildings and public spaces. It can also produce art and
enable men and women immersed in the material world to “leap” into the world of
beauty. Who can deny the beauty of an aircraft or a skyscraper? Valuable works
of art and music now make use of new technologies. So, in the beauty intended by
the one who uses new technical instruments and in the contemplation of such
beauty, a quantum leap occurs, resulting in a fulfilment which is uniquely
human.
104. Yet it must
also be recognized that nuclear energy, biotechnology, information technology,
knowledge of our DNA, and many other abilities which we have acquired, have
given us tremendous power. More precisely, they have given those with the
knowledge, and especially the economic resources to use them, an impressive
dominance over the whole of humanity and the entire world. Never has humanity
had such power over itself, yet nothing ensures that it will be used wisely,
particularly when we consider how it is currently being used. We need but think
of the nuclear bombs dropped in the middle of the twentieth century, or the
array of technology which Nazism, Communism and other totalitarian regimes have
employed to kill millions of people, to say nothing of the increasingly deadly
arsenal of weapons available for modern warfare. In whose hands does all this
power lie, or will it eventually end up? It is extremely risky for a small part
of humanity to have it.
105. 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”,[83] 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”,[84] 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. “The risk is growing day by day that
man will not use his power as he should”; in effect, “power is never considered
in terms of the responsibility of choice which is inherent in freedom” since its
“only norms are taken from alleged necessity, from either utility or security”.[85] But human
beings are not completely autonomous. 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.
II. THE
GLOBALIZATION OF THE TECHNOCRATIC PARADIGM
106. 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. It is as if the subject were to find itself in the
presence of something formless, completely open to manipulation. Men and women
have constantly intervened in nature, but for a long time this meant being in
tune with and respecting the possibilities offered by the things themselves. It
was a matter of receiving what nature itself allowed, as if from its own hand.
Now, by contrast, 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”.[86]
107. 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. Decisions
which may seem purely instrumental are in reality decisions about the kind of
society we want to build.
108. The idea of
promoting a different cultural paradigm and employing technology as a mere
instrument is nowadays inconceivable. The technological paradigm has become so
dominant that it would be difficult to do without its resources and even more
difficult to utilize them without being dominated by their internal logic. It
has become countercultural to choose a lifestyle whose goals are even partly
independent of technology, of its costs and its power to globalize and make us
all the same. Technology tends to absorb everything into its ironclad logic, and
those who are surrounded with technology “know full well that it moves forward
in the final analysis neither for profit nor for the well-being of the human
race”, that “in the most radical sense of the term power is its motive – a
lordship over all”.[87] As a result,
“man seizes hold of the naked elements of both nature and human nature”.[88] Our capacity to
make decisions, a more genuine freedom and the space for each one’s alternative
creativity are diminished.
109. The technocratic paradigm also tends to dominate
economic and political life. The economy accepts every advance in technology
with a view to profit, without concern for its potentially negative impact on
human beings. Finance overwhelms the real economy. The lessons of the global
financial crisis have not been assimilated, and we are learning all too slowly
the lessons of environmental deterioration. Some circles maintain that current
economics and technology will solve all environmental problems, and argue, in
popular and non-technical terms, that the problems of global hunger and poverty
will be resolved simply by market growth. They are less concerned with certain
economic theories which today scarcely anybody dares defend, than with their
actual operation in the functioning of the economy. They may not affirm such
theories with words, but nonetheless support them with their deeds by showing no
interest in more balanced levels of production, a better distribution of wealth,
concern for the environment and the rights of future generations. Their
behaviour shows that for them maximizing profits is enough. Yet by itself the
market cannot guarantee integral human development and social inclusion.[89] At the same
time, we have “a sort of ‘superdevelopment’ of a wasteful and consumerist kind
which forms an unacceptable contrast with the ongoing situations of dehumanizing
deprivation”,[90] while we are
all too slow in developing economic institutions and social initiatives which
can give the poor regular access to basic resources. We fail to see the deepest
roots of our present failures, which have to do with the direction, goals,
meaning and social implications of technological and economic growth.
110. 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. This very fact makes it hard to find adequate ways of
solving the more complex problems of today’s world, particularly those regarding
the environment and the poor; these problems cannot be dealt with from a single
perspective or from a single set of interests. A science which would offer
solutions to the great issues would necessarily have to take into account the
data generated by other fields of knowledge, including philosophy and social
ethics; but this is a difficult habit to acquire today. Nor are there genuine
ethical horizons to which one can appeal. Life gradually becomes a surrender to
situations conditioned by technology, itself viewed as the principal key to the
meaning of existence. In the concrete situation confronting us, there are a
number of symptoms which point to what is wrong, such as environmental
degradation, anxiety, a loss of the purpose of life and of community living.
Once more we see that “realities are more important than ideas”.[91]
111. 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 programme, 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.
112. Yet we can
once more broaden our vision. We have the freedom needed to limit and direct
technology; we can put it at the service of another type of progress, one which
is healthier, more human, more social, more integral. Liberation from the
dominant technocratic paradigm does in fact happen sometimes, for example, when
cooperatives of small producers adopt less polluting means of production, and
opt for a non-consumerist model of life, recreation and community. Or when
technology is directed primarily to resolving people’s concrete problems, truly
helping them live with more dignity and less suffering. Or indeed when the
desire to create and contemplate beauty manages to overcome reductionism through
a kind of salvation which occurs in beauty and in those who behold it. An
authentic humanity, calling for a new synthesis, seems to dwell in the midst of
our technological culture, almost unnoticed, like a mist seeping gently beneath
a closed door. Will the promise last, in spite of everything, with all that is
authentic rising up in stubborn resistance?
113. There is
also the fact that people no longer seem to believe in a happy future; they no
longer have blind trust in a better tomorrow based on the present state of the
world and our technical abilities. There is a growing awareness that scientific
and technological progress cannot be equated with the progress of humanity and
history, a growing sense that the way to a better future lies elsewhere. This is
not to reject the possibilities which technology continues to offer us. But
humanity has changed profoundly, and the accumulation of constant novelties
exalts a superficiality which pulls us in one direction. It becomes difficult to
pause and recover depth in life. If architecture reflects the spirit of an age,
our megastructures and drab apartment blocks express the spirit of globalized
technology, where a constant flood of new products coexists with a tedious
monotony. Let us refuse to resign ourselves to this, and continue to wonder
about the purpose and meaning of everything. Otherwise we would simply
legitimate the present situation and need new forms of escapism to help us
endure the emptiness.
114. All of this
shows the urgent need for us to move forward in a bold cultural revolution.
Science and technology are not neutral; from the beginning to the end of a
process, various intentions and possibilities are in play and can take on
distinct shapes. Nobody is suggesting a return to the Stone Age, but 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.
III. THE CRISIS
AND EFFECTS OF MODERN ANTHROPOCENTRISM
115. Modern
anthropocentrism has paradoxically ended up prizing technical thought over
reality, since “the technological mind sees nature as an insensate order, as a
cold body of facts, as a mere ‘given’, as an object of utility, as raw material
to be hammered into useful shape; it views the cosmos similarly as a mere
‘space’ into which objects can be thrown with complete indifference”.[92] The intrinsic
dignity of the world is thus compromised. When human beings fail to find their
true place in this world, they misunderstand themselves and end up acting
against themselves: “Not only has God given the earth to man, who must use it
with respect for the original good purpose for which it was given, but, man too
is God’s gift to man. He must therefore respect the natural and moral structure
with which he has been endowed”.[93]
116. 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. An inadequate
presentation of Christian anthropology gave rise to a wrong understanding of the
relationship between human beings and the world. Often, what was handed on was a
Promethean vision of mastery over the world, which gave the impression that the
protection of nature was something that only the faint-hearted cared about.
Instead, our “dominion” over the universe should be understood more properly in
the sense of responsible stewardship.[94]
117. Neglecting
to monitor the harm done to nature and the environmental impact of our decisions
is only the most striking sign of a disregard for the message contained in the
structures of nature itself. When we fail to acknowledge as part of reality the
worth of a poor person, a human embryo, a person with disabilities – to offer
just a few examples – it becomes difficult to hear the cry of nature itself;
everything is connected. Once the human being declares independence from reality
and behaves with absolute dominion, the very foundations of our life begin to
crumble, for “instead of carrying out his role as a cooperator with God in the
work of creation, man sets himself up in place of God and thus ends up provoking
a rebellion on the part of nature”.[95]
118. 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. When the human
person is considered as simply one being among others, the product of chance or
physical determinism, then “our overall sense of responsibility wanes”.[96] A misguided
anthropocentrism need not necessarily yield to “biocentrism”, for that would
entail adding yet another imbalance, failing to solve present problems and
adding new ones. 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.
119. Nor must
the critique of a misguided anthropocentrism underestimate the importance of
interpersonal relations. If the present ecological crisis is one small sign of
the ethical, cultural and spiritual crisis of modernity, we cannot presume to
heal our relationship with nature and the environment without healing all
fundamental human relationships. Christian thought sees human beings as
possessing a particular dignity above other creatures; it thus inculcates esteem
for each person and respect for others. Our openness to others, each of whom is
a “thou” capable of knowing, loving and entering into dialogue, remains the
source of our nobility as human persons. A correct relationship with the created
world demands that we not weaken this social dimension of openness to others,
much less the transcendent dimension of our openness to the “Thou” of God. Our
relationship with the environment can never be isolated from our relationship
with others and with God. Otherwise, it would be nothing more than romantic
individualism dressed up in ecological garb, locking us into a stifling
immanence.
120. Since
everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also
incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the
importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or
inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its
presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social
sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is lost, then other forms of
acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away”.[97]
121. We need to
develop a new synthesis capable of overcoming the false arguments of recent
centuries. Christianity, in fidelity to its own identity and the rich deposit of
truth which it has received from Jesus Christ, continues to reflect on these
issues in fruitful dialogue with changing historical situations. In doing so, it
reveals its eternal newness.[98]
Practical
relativism
122. A misguided
anthropocentrism leads to a misguided lifestyle. In the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium, I noted that the practical relativism typical of
our age is “even more dangerous than doctrinal relativism”.[99] 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.
123. 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? Is it not
the same relativistic logic which justifies buying the organs of the poor for
resale or use in experimentation, or eliminating children because they are not
what their parents wanted? 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.
The need to
protect employment
124. Any
approach to an integral ecology, which by definition does not exclude human
beings, needs to take account of the value of labour, as Saint John Paul II
wisely noted in his Encyclical Laborem
Exercens. According to the biblical account of creation, God placed man and woman
in the garden he had created (cf. Gen 2:15) not only to preserve it
(“keep”) but also to make it fruitful (“till”). Labourers and craftsmen thus
“maintain the fabric of the world” (Sir 38:34). Developing the created
world in a prudent way is the best way of caring for it, as this means that we
ourselves become the instrument used by God to bring out the potential which he
himself inscribed in things: “The Lord created medicines out of the earth, and a
sensible man will not despise them” (Sir 38:4).
125. 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. This has to do not only with manual
or agricultural labour but with any activity involving a modification of
existing reality, from producing a social report to the design of a
technological development. Underlying every form of work is a concept of the
relationship which we can and must have with what is other than ourselves.
Together with the awe-filled contemplation of creation which we find in Saint
Francis of Assisi, the Christian spiritual tradition has also developed a rich
and balanced understanding of the meaning of work, as, for example, in the life
of Blessed Charles de Foucauld and his followers.
126. We can also
look to the great tradition of monasticism. Originally, it was a kind of flight
from the world, an escape from the decadence of the cities. The monks sought the
desert, convinced that it was the best place for encountering the presence of
God. Later, Saint Benedict of Norcia proposed that his monks live in community,
combining prayer and spiritual reading with manual labour (ora et labora).
Seeing manual labour as spiritually meaningful proved revolutionary. Personal
growth and sanctification came to be sought in the interplay of recollection and
work. This way of experiencing work makes us more protective and respectful of
the environment; it imbues our relationship to the world with a healthy
sobriety.
127. We are
convinced that “man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and
social life”.[100] Nonetheless,
once our human capacity for contemplation and reverence is impaired, it becomes
easy for the meaning of work to be misunderstood.[101]We need to
remember that men and women have “the capacity to improve their lot, to further
their moral growth and to develop their spiritual endowments”.[102] Work should be
the setting for this rich personal growth, where many aspects of life enter into
play: creativity, planning for the future, developing our talents, living out
our values, relating to others, giving glory to God. It follows that, in the
reality of today’s global society, it is essential that “we continue to
prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone”,[103] no matter the
limited interests of business and dubious economic reasoning.
128. 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. The loss of jobs also has a negative impact on the
economy “through the progressive erosion of social capital: the network of
relationships of trust, dependability, and respect for rules, all of which are
indispensable for any form of civil coexistence”.[104] In other words,
“human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions always
involve human costs”.[105] To stop
investing in people, in order to gain greater short-term financial gain, is bad
business for society.
129. In order to
continue providing employment, it is imperative to promote an economy which
favours productive diversity and business creativity. For example, there is a
great variety of small-scale food production systems which feed the greater part
of the world’s peoples, using a modest amount of land and producing less waste,
be it in small agricultural parcels, in orchards and gardens, hunting and wild
harvesting or local fishing. Economies of scale, especially in the agricultural
sector, end up forcing smallholders to sell their land or to abandon their
traditional crops. Their attempts to move to other, more diversified, means of
production prove fruitless because of the difficulty of linkage with regional
and global markets, or because the infrastructure for sales and transport is
geared to larger businesses. Civil authorities have the right and duty to adopt
clear and firm measures in support of small producers and differentiated
production. To ensure economic freedom from which all can effectively benefit,
restraints occasionally have to be imposed on those possessing greater resources
and financial power. 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.
New biological
technologies
130. In the
philosophical and theological vision of the human being and of creation which I
have presented, it is clear that the human person, endowed with reason and
knowledge, is not an external factor to be excluded. While human intervention on
plants and animals is permissible when it pertains to the necessities of human
life, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that experimentation
on animals is morally acceptable only “if it remains within reasonable limits
[and] contributes to caring for or saving human lives”.[106] The Catechism firmly
states that human power has limits and that “it is contrary to human dignity to
cause animals to suffer or die needlessly”.[107] All such use
and experimentation “requires a religious respect for the integrity of
creation”.[108]
131. Here I
would recall the balanced position of Saint John Paul II, who stressed the
benefits of scientific and technological progress as evidence of “the nobility
of the human vocation to participate responsibly in God’s creative action”,
while also noting that “we cannot interfere in one area of the ecosystem without
paying due attention to the consequences of such interference in other areas”.[109] He made it
clear that the Church values the benefits which result “from the study and
applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines such as
genetics, and its technological application in agriculture and industry”.[110] But he also
pointed out that this should not lead to “indiscriminate genetic manipulation”[111] which ignores
the negative effects of such interventions. Human creativity cannot be
suppressed. If an artist cannot be stopped from using his or her creativity,
neither should those who possess particular gifts for the advancement of science
and technology be prevented from using their God-given talents for the service
of others. We need constantly to rethink the goals, effects, overall context and
ethical limits of this human activity, which is a form of power involving
considerable risks.
132. This, then,
is the correct framework for any reflection concerning human intervention on
plants and animals, which at present includes genetic manipulation by
biotechnology for the sake of exploiting the potential present in material
reality. The respect owed by faith to reason calls for close attention to what
the biological sciences, through research uninfluenced by economic interests,
can teach us about biological structures, their possibilities and their
mutations. Any legitimate intervention will act on nature only in order “to
favour its development in its own line, that of creation, as intended by God”.[112]
133. It is
difficult to make a general judgement about genetic modification (GM), whether
vegetable or animal, medical or agricultural, since these vary greatly among
themselves and call for specific considerations. The risks involved are not
always due to the techniques used, but rather to their improper or excessive
application. Genetic mutations, in fact, have often been, and continue to be,
caused by nature itself. Nor are mutations caused by human intervention a modern
phenomenon. The domestication of animals, the crossbreeding of species and other
older and universally accepted practices can be mentioned as examples. We need
but recall that scientific developments in GM cereals began with the observation
of natural bacteria which spontaneously modified plant genomes. In nature,
however, this process is slow and cannot be compared to the fast pace induced by
contemporary technological advances, even when the latter build upon several
centuries of scientific progress.
134. Although no
conclusive proof exists that GM cereals may be harmful to human beings, and in
some regions their use has brought about economic growth which has helped to
resolve problems, there remain a number of significant difficulties which should
not be underestimated. In many places, following the introduction of these
crops, productive land is concentrated in the hands of a few owners due to “the
progressive disappearance of small producers, who, as a consequence of the loss
of the exploited lands, are obliged to withdraw from direct production”.[113] The most
vulnerable of these become temporary labourers, and many rural workers end up
moving to poverty-stricken urban areas. The expansion of these crops has the
effect of destroying the complex network of ecosystems, diminishing the
diversity of production and affecting regional economies, now and in the future.
In various countries, we see an expansion of oligopolies for the production of
cereals and other products needed for their cultivation. This dependency would
be aggravated were the production of infertile seeds to be considered; the
effect would be to force farmers to purchase them from larger producers.
135. Certainly,
these issues require constant attention and a concern for their ethical
implications. A broad, responsible scientific and social debate needs to take
place, one capable of considering all the available information and of calling
things by their name. It sometimes happens that complete information is not put
on the table; a selection is made on the basis of particular interests, be they
politico-economic or ideological. This makes it difficult to reach a balanced
and prudent judgement on different questions, one which takes into account all
the pertinent variables. Discussions are needed in which all those directly or
indirectly affected (farmers, consumers, civil authorities, scientists, seed
producers, people living near fumigated fields, and others) can make known their
problems and concerns, and have access to adequate and reliable information in
order to make decisions for the common good, present and future. This is a
complex environmental issue; it calls for a comprehensive approach which would
require, at the very least, greater efforts to finance various lines of
independent, interdisciplinary research capable of shedding new light on the
problem.
136. On the
other hand, it is troubling that, when some ecological movements defend the
integrity of the environment, rightly demanding that certain limits be imposed
on scientific research, they sometimes fail to apply those same principles to
human life. There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when
experimentation is carried out on living human embryos. We forget that the
inalienable worth of a human being transcends his or her degree of development.
In the same way, when technology disregards the great ethical principles, it
ends up considering any practice whatsoever as licit. As we have seen in this
chapter, a technology severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its
own power.
CHAPTER FOUR
INTEGRAL ECOLOGY
137. 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.
I.
ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ECOLOGY
138. Ecology
studies the relationship between living organisms and the environment in which
they develop. This necessarily entails reflection and debate about the
conditions required for the life and survival of society, and the honesty needed
to question certain models of development, production and consumption. It cannot
be emphasized enough how everything is interconnected. Time and space are not
independent of one another, and not even atoms or subatomic particles can be
considered in isolation. Just as the different aspects of the planet – physical,
chemical and biological – are interrelated, so too living species are part of a
network which we will never fully explore and understand. A good part of our
genetic code is shared by many living beings. It follows that the fragmentation
of knowledge and the isolation of bits of information can actually become a form
of ignorance, unless they are integrated into a broader vision of reality.
139. When we
speak of the “environment”, what we really mean is a relationship existing
between nature and the society which lives in it. Nature cannot be regarded as
something separate from ourselves or as a mere setting in which we live. We are
part of nature, included in it and thus in constant interaction with it.
Recognizing the reasons why a given area is polluted requires a study of the
workings of society, its economy, its behaviour patterns, and the ways it grasps
reality. Given the scale of change, it is no longer possible to find a specific,
discrete answer for each part of the problem. It is essential to seek
comprehensive solutions which consider the interactions within natural systems
themselves and with social systems. 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.
140. Due to the
number and variety of factors to be taken into account when determining the
environmental impact of a concrete undertaking, it is essential to give
researchers their due role, to facilitate their interaction, and to ensure broad
academic freedom. Ongoing research should also give us a better understanding of
how different creatures relate to one another in making up the larger units
which today we term “ecosystems”. We take these systems into account not only to
determine how best to use them, but also because they have an intrinsic value
independent of their usefulness. 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 do not
know about. 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.
141. Economic
growth, for its part, tends to produce predictable reactions and a certain
standardization with the aim of simplifying procedures and reducing costs. This
suggests the need for an “economic ecology” capable of appealing to a broader
vision of reality. The protection of the environment is in fact “an integral
part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it”.[114] 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”.[115]
142. If
everything is related, then the health of a society’s institutions has
consequences for the environment and the quality of human life. “Every violation
of solidarity and civic friendship harms the environment”.[116] In this sense,
social ecology is necessarily institutional, and gradually extends to the whole
of society, from the primary social group, the family, to the wider local,
national and international communities. Within each social stratum, and between
them, institutions develop to regulate human relationships. Anything which
weakens those institutions has negative consequences, such as injustice,
violence and loss of freedom. A number of countries have a relatively low level
of institutional effectiveness, which results in greater problems for their
people while benefiting those who profit from this situation. Whether in the
administration of the state, the various levels of civil society, or
relationships between individuals themselves, lack of respect for the law is
becoming more common. Laws may be well framed yet remain a dead letter. Can we
hope, then, that in such cases, legislation and regulations dealing with the
environment will really prove effective? We know, for example, that countries
which have clear legislation about the protection of forests continue to keep
silent as they watch laws repeatedly being broken. Moreover, what takes place in
any one area can have a direct or indirect influence on other areas. Thus, for
example, drug use in affluent societies creates a continual and growing demand
for products imported from poorer regions, where behaviour is corrupted, lives
are destroyed, and the environment continues to deteriorate.
II. CULTURAL
ECOLOGY
143. 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. It
is not a matter of tearing down and building new cities, supposedly more
respectful of the environment yet not always more attractive to live in. Rather,
there is a need to incorporate the history, culture and architecture of each
place, thus preserving its original identity. 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.
144. A
consumerist vision of human beings, encouraged by the mechanisms of today’s
globalized economy, has a levelling effect on cultures, diminishing the immense
variety which is the heritage of all humanity. Attempts to resolve all problems
through uniform regulations or technical interventions can lead to overlooking
the complexities of local problems which demand the active participation of all
members of the community. New processes taking shape cannot always fit into
frameworks imported from outside; they need to be based in the local culture
itself. As life and the world are dynamic realities, so our care for the world
must also be flexible and dynamic. Merely technical solutions run the risk of
addressing symptoms and not the more serious underlying problems. There is a
need to respect the rights of peoples and cultures, and to appreciate that the
development of a social group presupposes an historical process which takes
place within a cultural context and demands the constant and active involvement
of local people from within their proper culture. Nor can the notion of
the quality of life be imposed from without, for quality of life must be
understood within the world of symbols and customs proper to each human group.
145. Many
intensive forms of environmental exploitation and degradation not only exhaust
the resources which provide local communities with their livelihood, but also
undo the social structures which, for a long time, shaped cultural identity and
their sense of the meaning of life and community. The disappearance of a
culture can be just as serious, or even more serious, than 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.
146. In this sense, it is essential to show special
care for indigenous communities and their cultural traditions. They are not
merely one minority among others, but should be the principal dialogue partners,
especially when large projects affecting their land are proposed. 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. Nevertheless, in various parts of the world, pressure is being put
on them to abandon their homelands to make room for agricultural or mining
projects which are undertaken without regard for the degradation of nature and
culture.
III. ECOLOGY OF
DAILY LIFE
147. Authentic
development includes efforts to bring about an integral improvement in the
quality of human life, and this entails considering the setting in which people
live their lives. These settings influence the way we think, feel and act. In
our rooms, our homes, our workplaces and neighbourhoods, we use our environment
as a way of expressing our identity. We make every effort to adapt to our
environment, but when it is disorderly, chaotic or saturated with noise and
ugliness, such overstimulation makes it difficult to find ourselves integrated
and happy.
148. An
admirable creativity and generosity is shown by persons and groups who respond
to environmental limitations by alleviating the adverse effects of their
surroundings and learning to orient their lives amid disorder and uncertainty.
For example, in some places, where the façades of buildings are derelict, people
show great care for the interior of their homes, or find contentment in the
kindness and friendliness of others. A wholesome social life can light up a
seemingly undesirable environment. At times a commendable human ecology is
practised by the poor despite numerous hardships. The feeling of asphyxiation
brought on by densely populated residential areas is countered if close and warm
relationships develop, if communities are created, if the limitations of the
environment are compensated for in the interior of each person who feels held
within a network of solidarity and belonging. In this way, any place can turn
from being a hell on earth into the setting for a dignified life.
149. The extreme
poverty experienced in areas lacking harmony, open spaces or potential for
integration, can lead to incidents of brutality and to exploitation by criminal
organizations. In the unstable neighbourhoods of mega-cities, the daily
experience of overcrowding and social anonymity can create a sense of
uprootedness which spawns antisocial behaviour and violence. Nonetheless, I wish
to insist that love always proves more powerful. Many people in these conditions
are able to weave bonds of belonging and togetherness which convert overcrowding
into an experience of community in which the walls of the ego are torn down and
the barriers of selfishness overcome. This experience of a communitarian
salvation often generates creative ideas for the improvement of a building or a
neighbourhood.[117]
150. Given the
interrelationship between living space and human behaviour, those who design
buildings, neighbourhoods, public spaces and cities, ought to draw on the
various disciplines which help us to understand people’s thought processes,
symbolic language and ways of acting. It is not enough to seek the beauty of
design. More precious still is the service we offer to another kind of beauty:
people’s quality of life, their adaptation to the environment, encounter and
mutual assistance. Here too, we see how important it is that urban planning
always take into consideration the views of those who will live in these areas.
151. There is
also a need to protect those common areas, visual landmarks and urban landscapes
which increase our sense of belonging, of rootedness, of “feeling at home”
within a city which includes us and brings us together. It is important that the
different parts of a city be well integrated and that those who live there have
a sense of the whole, rather than being confined to one neighbourhood and
failing to see the larger city as space which they share with others.
Interventions which affect the urban or rural landscape should take into account
how various elements combine to form a whole which is perceived by its
inhabitants as a coherent and meaningful framework for their lives. Others will
then no longer be seen as strangers, but as part of a “we” which all of us are
working to create. For this same reason, in both urban and rural settings, it is
helpful to set aside some places which can be preserved and protected from
constant changes brought by human intervention.
152. Lack of
housing is a grave problem in many parts of the world, both in rural areas and
in large cities, since state budgets usually cover only a small portion of the
demand. Not only the poor, but many other members of society as well, find it
difficult to own a home. Having a home has much to do with a sense of personal
dignity and the growth of families. This is a major issue for human ecology. In
some places, where makeshift shanty towns have sprung up, this will mean
developing those neighbourhoods rather than razing or displacing them. When the
poor live in unsanitary slums or in dangerous tenements, “in cases where it is
necessary to relocate them, in order not to heap suffering upon suffering,
adequate information needs to be given beforehand, with choices of decent
housing offered, and the people directly involved must be part of the process”.[118] At the same
time, creativity should be shown in integrating rundown neighbourhoods into a
welcoming city: “How beautiful those cities which overcome paralyzing mistrust,
integrate those who are different and make this very integration a new factor of
development! How attractive are those cities which, even in their architectural
design, are full of spaces which connect, relate and favour the recognition of
others!”[119]
153. The quality
of life in cities has much to do with systems of transport, which are often a
source of much suffering for those who use them. Many cars, used by one or more
people, circulate in cities, causing traffic congestion, raising the level of
pollution, and consuming enormous quantities of non-renewable energy. This makes
it necessary to build more roads and parking areas which spoil the urban
landscape. Many specialists agree on the need to give priority to public
transportation. Yet some measures needed will not prove easily acceptable to
society unless substantial improvements are made in the systems themselves,
which in many cities force people to put up with undignified conditions due to
crowding, inconvenience, infrequent service and lack of safety.
154. Respect for
our dignity as human beings often jars with the chaotic realities that people
have to endure in city life. Yet this should not make us overlook the
abandonment and neglect also experienced by some rural populations which lack
access to essential services and where some workers are reduced to conditions of
servitude, without rights or even the hope of a more dignified life.
155. Human
ecology also implies another profound reality: the relationship between human
life and the moral law, which is inscribed in our nature and is necessary for
the creation of a more dignified environment. Pope Benedict XVI spoke of an
“ecology of man”, based on the fact that “man too has a nature that he must
respect and that he cannot manipulate at will”.[120] It is enough to
recognize that our body itself establishes us in a direct relationship with the
environment and with other living beings. The acceptance of our bodies as God’s
gift is vital for welcoming and accepting the entire world as a gift from the
Father and our common home, whereas thinking that we enjoy absolute power over
our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power
over creation. Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its
fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology. Also,
valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am
going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is
different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific gifts of another man
or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a
healthy attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no
longer knows how to confront it”.[121]
IV. THE
PRINCIPLE OF THE COMMON GOOD
156. An integral
ecology is inseparable from the notion of the common good, a central and
unifying principle of social ethics. The common good is “the sum of those
conditions of social life which allow social groups and their individual members
relatively thorough and ready access to their own fulfilment”.[122]
157. Underlying
the principle of the common good is respect for the human person as such,
endowed with basic and inalienable rights ordered to his or her integral
development. It has also to do with the overall welfare of society and the
development of a variety of intermediate groups, applying the principle of
subsidiarity. Outstanding among those groups is the family, as the basic cell of
society. Finally, the common good calls for social peace, the stability and
security provided by a certain order which cannot be achieved without particular
concern for distributive justice; whenever this is violated, violence always
ensues. Society as a whole, and the state in particular, are obliged to defend
and promote the common good.
158. 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. This option entails recognizing the implications of the universal
destination of the world’s goods, but, as I mentioned in the Apostolic
Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium,[123] it demands
before all else an appreciation of the immense dignity of the poor in the light
of our deepest convictions as believers. We need only look around us to see
that, today, this option is in fact an ethical imperative essential for
effectively attaining the common good.
V. JUSTICE
BETWEEN THE GENERATIONS
159. 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. The Portuguese bishops have called upon us to acknowledge this obligation of
justice: “The environment is part of a logic of receptivity. It is on loan to
each generation, which must then hand it on to the next”.[124] An integral
ecology is marked by this broader vision.
160. What kind of world do we want to leave to those
who come after us, to children who are now growing up? This question not only
concerns the environment in isolation; the issue cannot be approached piecemeal.
When we ask ourselves what kind of world we want to leave behind, we think in
the first place of its general direction, its meaning and its values. Unless we
struggle with these deeper issues, I do not believe that our concern for ecology
will produce significant results. But 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.
161. 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, such as those which even now periodically occur in different areas
of the world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be reduced by our
decisive action, here and now. We need to reflect on our accountability before
those who will have to endure the dire consequences.
162. Our
difficulty in taking up this challenge seriously has much to do with an ethical
and cultural decline which has accompanied the deterioration of the environment.
Men and women of our postmodern world run the risk of rampant individualism, and
many problems of society are connected with today’s self-centred culture of
instant gratification. We see this in the crisis of family and social ties and
the difficulties of recognizing the other. Parents can be prone to impulsive and
wasteful consumption, which then affects their children who find it increasingly
difficult to acquire a home of their own and build a family. Furthermore, our
inability to think seriously about future generations is linked to our inability
to broaden the scope of our present interests and to give consideration to those
who remain excluded from development. Let us not only keep the poor of the
future in mind, but also today’s poor, whose life on this earth is brief and who
cannot keep on waiting. Hence, “in addition to a fairer sense of
intergenerational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need for a renewed
sense of intragenerational solidarity”.[125]
CHAPTER FIVE
LINES OF APPROACH AND ACTION
163. So far I
have attempted to take stock of our present situation, pointing to the cracks in
the planet that we inhabit as well as to the profoundly human causes of
environmental degradation. Although the contemplation of this reality in itself
has already shown the need for a change of direction and other courses of
action, 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.
I. DIALOGUE ON
THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
164. 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. Yet the same ingenuity which has brought
about enormous technological progress has so far proved incapable of finding
effective ways of dealing with grave environmental and social problems
worldwide. A global consensus is essential for confronting the deeper problems,
which cannot be resolved by unilateral actions on the part of individual
countries. Such a consensus could lead, for example, to planning a sustainable
and diversified agriculture, developing renewable and less polluting forms of
energy, encouraging a more efficient use of energy, promoting a better
management of marine and forest resources, and ensuring universal access to
drinking water.
165. We know
that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels – especially
coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas – needs to be progressively
replaced without delay. Until greater progress is made in developing widely
accessible sources of renewable energy, it is legitimate to choose the less
harmful alternative or to find short-term solutions. But the international
community has still not reached adequate agreements about the responsibility for
paying the costs of this energy transition. In recent decades, environmental
issues have given rise to considerable public debate and have elicited a variety
of committed and generous civic responses. Politics and business have been slow
to react in a way commensurate with the urgency of the challenges facing our
world. 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.
166. Worldwide,
the ecological movement has made significant advances, thanks also to the
efforts of many organizations of civil society. It is impossible here to mention
them all, or to review the history of their contributions. But thanks to their
efforts, environmental questions have increasingly found a place on public
agendas and encouraged more far-sighted approaches. This notwithstanding, recent
World Summits on the environment have not lived up to expectations because, due
to lack of political will, they were unable to reach truly meaningful and
effective global agreements on the environment.
167. The 1992
Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro is worth mentioning. It proclaimed that “human
beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development”.[126] Echoing the
1972 Stockholm Declaration, it enshrined international cooperation to care for
the ecosystem of the entire earth, the obligation of those who cause pollution
to assume its costs, and the duty to assess the environmental impact of given
projects and works. It set the goal of limiting greenhouse gas concentration in
the atmosphere, in an effort to reverse the trend of global warming. It also
drew up an agenda with an action plan and a convention on biodiversity, and
stated principles regarding forests. Although the summit was a real step
forward, and prophetic for its time, its accords have been poorly implemented,
due to the lack of suitable mechanisms for oversight, periodic review and
penalties in cases of non-compliance. The principles which it proclaimed still
await an efficient and flexible means of practical implementation.
168. Among
positive experiences in this regard, we might mention, for example, the Basel
Convention on hazardous wastes, with its system of reporting, standards and
controls. There is also the binding Convention on international trade in
endangered species of wild fauna and flora, which includes on-site visits for
verifying effective compliance. Thanks to the Vienna Convention for the
protection of the ozone layer and its implementation through the Montreal
Protocol and amendments, the problem of the layer’s thinning seems to have
entered a phase of resolution.
169. As far as
the protection of biodiversity and issues related to desertification are
concerned, progress has been far less significant. With regard to climate
change, the advances have been regrettably few. Reducing greenhouse gases
requires honesty, courage and responsibility, above all on the part of those
countries which are more powerful and pollute the most. The Conference of the
United Nations on Sustainable Development, “Rio+20” (Rio de Janeiro 2012),
issued a wide-ranging but ineffectual outcome document. International
negotiations cannot make significant progress due to positions taken by
countries which place their national interests above the global common good.
Those who will have to suffer the consequences of what we are trying to hide
will not forget this failure of conscience and responsibility. Even as this
Encyclical was being prepared, the debate was intensifying. We believers cannot
fail to ask God for a positive outcome to the present discussions, so that
future generations will not have to suffer the effects of our ill-advised
delays.
170. Some
strategies for lowering pollutant gas emissions call for the
internationalization of environmental costs, which would risk imposing on
countries with fewer resources burdensome commitments to reducing emissions
comparable to those of the more industrialized countries. Imposing such measures
penalizes those countries most in need of development. A further injustice is
perpetrated under the guise of protecting the environment. Here also, the poor
end up paying the price. Furthermore, since the effects of climate change will
be felt for a long time to come, even if stringent measures are taken now, some
countries with scarce resources will require assistance in adapting to the
effects already being produced, which affect their economies. In this context,
there is a need for common and differentiated responsibilities. As the bishops
of Bolivia have stated, “the countries which have benefited from a high degree
of industrialization, at the cost of enormous emissions of greenhouse gases,
have a greater responsibility for providing a solution to the problems they have
caused”.[127]
171. 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.
172. For poor
countries, the priorities must be to eliminate extreme poverty and to promote
the social development of their people. At the same time, they need to
acknowledge the scandalous level of consumption in some privileged sectors of
their population and to combat corruption more effectively. They are likewise
bound to develop less polluting forms of energy production, but to do so they
require the help of countries which have experienced great growth at the cost of
the ongoing pollution of the planet. Taking advantage of abundant solar energy
will require the establishment of mechanisms and subsidies which allow
developing countries access to technology transfer, technical assistance and
financial resources, but in a way which respects their concrete situations,
since “the compatibility of [infrastructures] with the context for which they
have been designed is not always adequately assessed”.[128] The costs of
this would be low, compared to the risks of climate change. In any event, these
are primarily ethical decisions, rooted in solidarity between all peoples.
173. 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 or countries dump
contaminated waste or offshore polluting industries in other countries.
174. 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”.
175. 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”.[129] Diplomacy also
takes on new importance in the work of developing international strategies which
can anticipate serious problems affecting us all.
II. DIALOGUE FOR
NEW NATIONAL AND LOCAL POLICIES
176. There are
not just winners and losers among countries, but within poorer countries
themselves. Hence different responsibilities need to be identified. Questions
related to the environment and economic development can no longer be approached
only from the standpoint of differences between countries; they also call for
greater attention to policies on the national and local levels.
177. 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.
178. 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”,[130] 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.
179. 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. They are also concerned about what they will eventually
leave to their children and grandchildren. These values are deeply rooted in
indigenous peoples. 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.
180. There are
no uniform recipes, because each country or region has its own problems and
limitations. It is also true that political realism may call for transitional
measures and technologies, so long as these are accompanied by the gradual
framing and acceptance of binding commitments. At the same time, on the national
and local levels, much still needs to be done, such as promoting ways of
conserving energy. These would include favouring forms of industrial production
with maximum energy efficiency and diminished use of raw materials, removing
from the market products which are less energy efficient or more polluting,
improving transport systems, and encouraging the construction and repair of
buildings aimed at reducing their energy consumption and levels of pollution.
Political activity on the local level could also be directed to modifying
consumption, developing an economy of waste disposal and recycling, protecting
certain species and planning a diversified agriculture and the rotation of
crops. Agriculture in poorer regions can be improved through investment in rural
infrastructures, a better organization of local or national markets, systems of
irrigation, and the development of techniques of sustainable agriculture. New
forms of cooperation and community organization can be encouraged in order to
defend the interests of small producers and preserve local ecosystems from
destruction. Truly, much can be done!
181. Here,
continuity is essential, because policies related to climate change and
environmental protection cannot be altered with every change of government.
Results take time and demand immediate outlays which may not produce tangible
effects within any one government’s term. That is why, in the absence of
pressure from the public and from civic institutions, political authorities will
always be reluctant to intervene, all the more when urgent needs must be met. To
take up these responsibilities and the costs they entail, politicians will
inevitably clash with the mindset of short-term gain and results which dominates
present-day economics and politics. But if they are courageous, they will attest
to their God-given dignity and leave behind a testimony of selfless
responsibility. A healthy politics is sorely needed, capable of reforming and
coordinating institutions, promoting best practices and overcoming undue
pressure and bureaucratic inertia. It should be added, though, that even the
best mechanisms can break down when there are no worthy goals and values, or a
genuine and profound humanism to serve as the basis of a noble and generous
society.
III. DIALOGUE
AND TRANSPARENCY IN DECISION-MAKING
182. An
assessment of the environmental impact of business ventures and projects demands
transparent political processes involving a free exchange of views. On the other
hand, the forms of corruption which conceal the actual environmental impact of a
given project, in exchange for favours, usually produce specious agreements
which fail to inform adequately and to allow for full debate.
183. Environmental impact assessment should not come
after the drawing up of a business proposition or the proposal of a particular
policy, plan or programme. It should be part of the process from the beginning,
and be carried out in a way which is interdisciplinary, transparent and free of
all economic or political pressure. It should be linked to a study of working
conditions and possible effects on people’s physical and mental health, on the
local economy and on public safety. Economic returns can thus be forecast more
realistically, taking into account potential scenarios and the eventual need for
further investment to correct possible undesired effects. A consensus should
always be reached between the different stakeholders, who can offer a variety of
approaches, solutions and alternatives. The local population should have a
special place at the table; they are concerned about their own future and that
of their children, and can consider goals transcending immediate economic
interest. We need to stop thinking in terms of “interventions” to save the
environment in favour of policies developed and debated by all interested
parties. The participation of the latter also entails being fully informed about
such projects and their different risks and possibilities; this includes not
just preliminary decisions but also various follow-up activities and continued
monitoring. Honesty and truth are needed in scientific and political
discussions; these should not be limited to the issue of whether or not a
particular project is permitted by law.
184. In the face
of possible risks to the environment which may affect the common good now and in
the future, decisions must be made “based on a comparison of the risks and
benefits foreseen for the various possible alternatives”.[131] This is
especially the case when a project may lead to a greater use of natural
resources, higher levels of emission or discharge, an increase of refuse, or
significant changes to the landscape, the habitats of protected species or
public spaces. Some projects, if insufficiently studied, can profoundly affect
the quality of life of an area due to very different factors such as unforeseen
noise pollution, the shrinking of visual horizons, the loss of cultural values,
or the effects of nuclear energy use. The culture of consumerism, which
prioritizes short-term gain and private interest, can make it easy to
rubber-stamp authorizations or to conceal information.
185. In any
discussion about a proposed venture, a number of questions need to be asked in
order to discern whether or not it will contribute to genuine integral
development. What will it accomplish? Why? Where? When? How? For whom? What are
the risks? What are the costs? Who will pay those costs and how? In this
discernment, some questions must have higher priority. For example, we know that
water is a scarce and indispensable resource and a fundamental right which
conditions the exercise of other human rights. This indisputable fact overrides
any other assessment of environmental impact on a region.
186. The Rio
Declaration of 1992 states that “where there are threats of serious or
irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a
pretext for postponing cost-effective measures”[132] which prevent
environmental degradation. This precautionary principle makes it possible to
protect those who are most vulnerable and whose ability to defend their
interests and to assemble incontrovertible evidence is limited. If objective
information suggests that serious and irreversible damage may result, a project
should be halted or modified, even in the absence of indisputable proof. Here
the burden of proof is effectively reversed, since in such cases objective and
conclusive demonstrations will have to be brought forward to demonstrate that
the proposed activity will not cause serious harm to the environment or to those
who inhabit it.
187. This does
not mean being opposed to any technological innovations which can bring about an
improvement in the quality of life. But it does mean that profit cannot be the
sole criterion to be taken into account, and that, when significant new
information comes to light, a reassessment should be made, with the involvement
of all interested parties. The outcome may be a decision not to proceed with a
given project, to modify it or to consider alternative proposals.
188. There are
certain environmental issues where it is not easy to achieve a broad consensus.
Here I would state once more that the Church does not presume to settle
scientific questions or to replace politics. But I am concerned to encourage an
honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not
prejudice the common good.
IV. POLITICS AND
ECONOMY IN DIALOGUE FOR HUMAN FULFILMENT
189. 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. But the response to the crisis did not include rethinking
the outdated criteria which continue to rule the world. Production is not always
rational, and is usually tied to economic variables which assign to products a
value that does not necessarily correspond to their real worth. This frequently
leads to an overproduction of some commodities, with unnecessary impact on the
environment and with negative results on regional economies.[133] The financial
bubble also tends to be a productive bubble. The problem of the real economy is
not confronted with vigour, yet it is the real economy which makes
diversification and improvement in production possible, helps companies to
function well, and enables small and medium businesses to develop and create
employment.
190. Here too, it should always be kept in mind that
“environmental protection cannot be assured solely on the basis of financial
calculations of costs and benefits. The environment is one of those goods that
cannot be adequately safeguarded or promoted by market forces”.[134] 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.
Moreover, biodiversity is considered at most a deposit of economic resources
available for exploitation, with no serious thought for the real value of
things, their significance for persons and cultures, or the concerns and needs
of the poor.
191. Whenever
these questions are raised, some react by accusing others of irrationally
attempting to stand in the way of progress and human development. But we need to
grow in the conviction that a decrease in the pace of production and consumption
can at times give rise to another form of progress and development. Efforts to
promote a sustainable use of natural resources are not a waste of money, but
rather an investment capable of providing other economic benefits in the medium
term. If we look at the larger picture, we can see that more diversified and
innovative forms of production which impact less on the environment can prove
very profitable. It is a matter of openness to different possibilities which do
not involve stifling human creativity and its ideals of progress, but rather
directing that energy along new channels.
192. For
example, a path of productive development, which is more creative and better
directed, could correct the present disparity between excessive technological
investment in consumption and insufficient investment in resolving urgent
problems facing the human family. It could generate intelligent and profitable
ways of reusing, revamping and recycling, and it could also improve the energy
efficiency of cities. Productive diversification offers the fullest
possibilities to human ingenuity to create and innovate, while at the same time
protecting the environment and creating more sources of employment. Such
creativity would be a worthy expression of our most noble human qualities, for
we would be striving intelligently, boldly and responsibly to promote a
sustainable and equitable development within the context of a broader concept of
quality of life. On the other hand, to find ever new ways of despoiling nature,
purely for the sake of new consumer items and quick profit, would be, in human
terms, less worthy and creative, and more superficial.
193. In any
event, if in some cases sustainable development were to involve new forms of
growth, then in other cases, 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 behaviour 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. Benedict XVI has said that “technologically advanced societies
must be prepared to encourage more sober lifestyles, while reducing their energy
consumption and improving its efficiency”.[135]
194. For new
models of progress to arise, there is a need to change “models of global
development”;[136] this will
entail a responsible reflection on “the meaning of the economy and its goals
with an eye to correcting its malfunctions and misapplications”.[137] 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. Frequently, in fact, people’s quality of life actually
diminishes – by the deterioration of the environment, the low quality of food or
the depletion of resources – in the midst of economic growth. In this context,
talk of sustainable growth usually becomes a way of distracting attention and
offering excuses. It absorbs the language and values of ecology into the
categories of finance and technocracy, and the social and environmental
responsibility of businesses often gets reduced to a series of marketing and
image-enhancing measures.
195. The
principle of the maximization of profits, frequently isolated from other
considerations, reflects a misunderstanding of the very concept of the economy.
As long as production is increased, little concern is given to whether it is at
the cost of future resources or the health of the environment; as long as the
clearing of a forest increases production, no one calculates the losses entailed
in the desertification of the land, the harm done to biodiversity or the
increased pollution. In a word, businesses profit by calculating and paying only
a fraction of the costs involved. Yet only when “the economic and social costs
of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with transparency and
fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or future
generations”,[138] can those
actions be considered ethical. An instrumental way of reasoning, which provides
a purely static analysis of realities in the service of present needs, is at
work whether resources are allocated by the market or by state central planning.
196. What
happens with politics? Let us keep in mind the principle of subsidiarity, which
grants freedom to develop the capabilities present at every level of society,
while also demanding a greater sense of responsibility for the common good from
those who wield greater power. Today, it is the case that some economic sectors
exercise more power than states themselves. But economics without politics
cannot be justified, since this would make it impossible to favour other ways of
handling the various aspects of the present crisis. The mindset which leaves no
room for sincere concern for the environment is the same mindset which lacks
concern for the inclusion of the most vulnerable members of society. For “the
current model, with its emphasis on success and self-reliance, does not appear
to favour an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak or the less
talented to find opportunities in life”.[139]
197. What is
needed is a politics which is far-sighted and capable of a new, integral and
interdisciplinary approach to handling the different aspects of the crisis.
Often, politics itself is responsible for the disrepute in which it is held, on
account of corruption and the failure to enact sound public policies. If in a
given region the state does not carry out its responsibilities, some business
groups can come forward in the guise of benefactors, wield real power, and
consider themselves exempt from certain rules, to the point of tolerating
different forms of organized crime, human trafficking, the drug trade and
violence, all of which become very difficult to eradicate. If politics shows
itself incapable of breaking such a perverse logic, and remains caught up in
inconsequential discussions, we will continue to avoid facing the major problems
of humanity. A strategy for real change calls for rethinking processes in their
entirety, for it is not enough to include a few superficial ecological
considerations while failing to question the logic which underlies present-day
culture. A healthy politics needs to be able to take up this challenge.
198. Politics
and the economy tend to blame each other when it comes to poverty and
environmental degradation. It is to be hoped that they can acknowledge their own
mistakes and find forms of interaction directed to the common good. While some
are concerned only with financial gain, and others with holding on to or
increasing their power, what we are left with are conflicts or spurious
agreements where the last thing either party is concerned about is caring for
the environment and protecting those who are most vulnerable. Here too, we see
how true it is that “unity is greater than conflict”.[140]
V. RELIGIONS IN
DIALOGUE WITH SCIENCE
199. It cannot
be maintained that empirical science provides a complete explanation of life,
the interplay of all creatures and the whole of reality. This would be to breach
the limits imposed by its own methodology. If we reason only within the confines
of the latter, little room would be left for aesthetic sensibility, poetry, or
even reason’s ability to grasp the ultimate meaning and purpose of things.[141] I would add
that “religious classics can prove meaningful in every age; they have an
enduring power to open new horizons… Is it reasonable and enlightened to dismiss
certain writings simply because they arose in the context of religious belief?”[142] It would be
quite simplistic to think that ethical principles present themselves purely in
the abstract, detached from any context. Nor does the fact that they may be
couched in religious language detract from their value in public debate. The
ethical principles capable of being apprehended by reason can always reappear in
different guise and find expression in a variety of languages, including
religious language.
200. 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. Believers themselves must constantly feel
challenged to live in a way consonant with their faith and not to contradict it
by their actions. They need to be encouraged to be ever open to God’s grace and
to draw constantly from their deepest convictions about love, justice and peace.
If a mistaken understanding of our own principles has at times led us to justify
mistreating nature, to exercise tyranny over creation, to engage in war,
injustice and acts of violence, we believers should acknowledge that by so doing
we were not faithful to the treasures of wisdom which we have been called to
protect and preserve. Cultural limitations in different eras often affected the
perception of these ethical and spiritual treasures, yet by constantly returning
to their sources, religions will be better equipped to respond to today’s needs.
201. 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 demands patience, self-discipline and generosity, always keeping in mind
that “realities are greater than ideas”.[143]
CHAPTER SIX
ECOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND SPIRITUALITY
202. 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.
I. TOWARDS A NEW
LIFESTYLE
203. 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. Romano Guardini had already foreseen this: “The gadgets and
technics forced upon him by the patterns of machine production and of abstract
planning mass man accepts quite simply; they are the forms of life itself. To
either a greater or lesser degree mass man is convinced that his conformity is
both reasonable and just”.[144] 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. Amid this confusion, postmodern humanity has not yet
achieved a new self-awareness capable of offering guidance and direction, and
this lack of identity is a source of anxiety. We have too many means and only a
few insubstantial ends.
204. The current
global situation engenders a feeling of instability and uncertainty, which in
turn becomes “a seedbed for collective selfishness”.[145] When people
become self-centred 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. As these attitudes
become more widespread, social norms are respected only to the extent that they
do not clash with personal needs. So our concern cannot be limited merely to the
threat of extreme weather events, but must also extend to the catastrophic
consequences of social unrest. Obsession with a consumerist lifestyle, above all
when few people are capable of maintaining it, can only lead to violence and
mutual destruction.
205. Yet 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. 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.
206. A change in
lifestyle could bring healthy pressure to bear on those who wield political,
economic and social power. This is what consumer movements accomplish by
boycotting certain products. They prove successful in changing the way
businesses operate, forcing them to consider their environmental footprint and
their patterns of production. When social pressure affects their earnings,
businesses clearly have to find ways to produce differently. This shows us the
great need for a sense of social responsibility on the part of consumers.
“Purchasing is always a moral – and not simply economic – act”.[146] Today, in a
word, “the issue of environmental degradation challenges us to examine our
lifestyle”.[147]
207. The Earth
Charter asked us to leave behind a period of self-destruction and make a new
start, but we have not as yet developed a universal awareness needed to achieve
this. Here, I would echo that courageous challenge: “As never before in history,
common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning… Let ours be a time remembered
for the awakening of a new reverence for life, the firm resolve to achieve
sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace, and the
joyful celebration of life”.[148]
208. We are
always capable of going out of ourselves towards the other. Unless we do this,
other creatures will not be recognized for their true worth; we are unconcerned
about caring for things for the sake of others; we fail to set limits on
ourselves in order to avoid the suffering of others or the deterioration of our
surroundings. 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.
II. EDUCATING
FOR THE COVENANT BETWEEN HUMANITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
209. An
awareness of the gravity of today’s cultural and ecological crisis must be
translated into new habits. Many people know that our current progress and the
mere amassing of things and pleasures are not enough to give meaning and joy to
the human heart, yet they feel unable to give up what the market sets before
them. In those countries which should be making the greatest changes in consumer
habits, young people have a new ecological sensitivity and a generous spirit,
and some of them are making admirable efforts to protect the environment. At the
same time, they have grown up in a milieu of extreme consumerism and affluence
which makes it difficult to develop other habits. We are faced with an
educational challenge.
210.
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.
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. 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.
212. 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.
213. Ecological
education can take place in a variety of settings: at school, in families, in
the media, in catechesis and elsewhere. Good education plants seeds when we are
young, and these continue to bear fruit throughout life. Here, though, I would
stress the great importance of the family, which is “the place in which life –
the gift of God – can be properly welcomed and protected against the many
attacks to which it is exposed, and can develop in accordance with what
constitutes authentic human growth. In the face of the so-called culture of
death, the family is the heart of the culture of life”.[149] In the family
we first learn how to show love and respect for life; we are taught the proper
use of things, order and cleanliness, respect for the local ecosystem and care
for all creatures. In the family we receive an integral education, which enables
us to grow harmoniously in personal maturity. In the family we learn to ask
without demanding, to say “thank you” as an expression of genuine gratitude for
what we have been given, to control our aggressivity and greed, and to ask
forgiveness when we have caused harm. These simple gestures of heartfelt
courtesy help to create a culture of shared life and respect for our
surroundings.
214. Political
institutions and various other social groups are also entrusted with helping to
raise people’s awareness. So too is the Church. All Christian communities have
an important role to play in ecological education. It is my hope that our
seminaries and houses of formation will provide an education in responsible
simplicity of life, in grateful contemplation of God’s world, and in concern for
the needs of the poor and the protection of the environment. Because the stakes
are so high, we need institutions empowered to impose penalties for damage
inflicted on the environment. But we also need the personal qualities of
self-control and willingness to learn from one another.
215. In this
regard, “the relationship between a good aesthetic education and the maintenance
of a healthy environment cannot be overlooked”.[150] By learning to
see and appreciate beauty, we learn to reject self-interested pragmatism. If
someone has not learned to stop and admire something beautiful, we should not be
surprised if he or she treats everything as an object to be used and abused
without scruple. If we want to bring about deep change, we need to realize that
certain mindsets really do influence our behaviour. Our efforts at education
will be inadequate and ineffectual unless we strive to promote a new way of
thinking about human beings, life, society and our relationship with nature.
Otherwise, the paradigm of consumerism will continue to advance, with the help
of the media and the highly effective workings of the market.
III. ECOLOGICAL
CONVERSION
216. The rich
heritage of Christian spirituality, the fruit of twenty centuries of personal
and communal experience, has a precious contribution to make to the renewal of
humanity. Here, I would like to offer Christians a few suggestions for an
ecological spirituality grounded in the convictions of our faith, since the
teachings of the Gospel have direct consequences for our way of thinking,
feeling and living. 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”.[151] 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.
217. “The
external deserts in the world are growing, because the internal deserts have
become so vast”.[152] 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.
218. In calling
to mind the figure of Saint Francis of Assisi, we come to realize that a healthy
relationship with creation is one dimension of overall personal conversion,
which entails the recognition of our errors, sins, faults and failures, and
leads to heartfelt repentance and desire to change. The Australian bishops spoke
of the importance of such conversion for achieving reconciliation with creation:
“To achieve such reconciliation, we must examine our lives and acknowledge the
ways in which we have harmed God’s creation through our actions and our failure
to act. We need to experience a conversion, or change of heart”.[153]
219.
Nevertheless, self-improvement on the part of individuals will not by itself
remedy the extremely complex situation facing our world today. Isolated
individuals can lose their ability and freedom to escape the utilitarian
mindset, and end up prey to an unethical consumerism bereft of social or
ecological awareness. Social problems must be addressed by community networks
and not simply by the sum of individual good deeds. This task “will make such
tremendous demands of man that he could never achieve it by individual
initiative or even by the united effort of men bred in an individualistic way.
The work of dominating the world calls for a union of skills and a unity of
achievement that can only grow from quite a different attitude”.[154] The ecological
conversion needed to bring about lasting change is also a community conversion.
220. This
conversion calls for a number of attitudes which together foster a spirit of
generous care, full of tenderness. First, it entails gratitude and
gratuitousness, a recognition that the world is God’s loving gift, and that we
are called quietly to imitate his generosity in self-sacrifice and good works:
“Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing… and your Father
who sees in secret will reward you” (Mt 6:3-4). It also entails a loving
awareness that we are not disconnected from the rest of creatures, but joined in
a splendid universal communion. As believers, we do not look at the world from
without but from within, conscious of the bonds with which the Father has linked
us to all beings. By developing our individual, God-given capacities, an
ecological conversion can inspire us to greater creativity and enthusiasm in
resolving the world’s problems and in offering ourselves to God “as a living
sacrifice, holy and acceptable” (Rom 12:1). We do not understand our
superiority as a reason for personal glory or irresponsible dominion, but rather
as a different capacity which, in its turn, entails a serious responsibility
stemming from our faith.
221. Various
convictions of our faith, developed at the beginning of this Encyclical can help
us to enrich the meaning of this conversion. These include the awareness that
each creature reflects something of God and has a message to convey to us, and
the security that Christ has taken unto himself this material world and now,
risen, is intimately present to each being, surrounding it with his affection
and penetrating it with his light. Then too, there is the recognition that God
created the world, writing into it an order and a dynamism that human beings
have no right to ignore. We read in the Gospel that Jesus says of the birds of
the air that “not one of them is forgotten before God” (Lk 12:6). How
then can we possibly mistreat them or cause them harm? I ask all Christians to
recognize and to live fully this dimension of their conversion. May the power
and the light of the grace we have received also be evident in our relationship
to other creatures and to the world around us. In this way, we will help nurture
that sublime fraternity with all creation which Saint Francis of Assisi so
radiantly embodied.
IV. JOY AND
PEACE
222. 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 fulfilment. 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.
223. Such
sobriety, when lived freely and consciously, is liberating. It is not a lesser
life or one lived with less intensity. On the contrary, it is a way of living
life to the full. In reality, those who enjoy more and live better each moment
are those who have given up dipping here and there, always on the look-out for
what they do not have. They experience what it means to appreciate each person
and each thing, learning familiarity with the simplest things and how to enjoy
them. So they are able to shed unsatisfied needs, reducing their obsessiveness
and weariness. Even living on little, they can live a lot, above all when they
cultivate other pleasures and find satisfaction in fraternal encounters, in
service, in developing their gifts, in music and art, in contact with nature, in
prayer. Happiness means knowing how to limit some needs which only diminish us,
and being open to the many different possibilities which life can offer.
224. Sobriety
and humility were not favourably regarded in the last century. And yet, when
there is a general breakdown in the exercise of a certain virtue in personal and
social life, it ends up causing a number of imbalances, including environmental
ones. That is why it is no longer enough to speak only of the integrity of
ecosystems. We have to dare to speak of the integrity of human life, of the need
to promote and unify all the great values. Once we lose our humility, and become
enthralled with the possibility of limitless mastery over everything, we
inevitably end up harming society and the environment. It is not easy to promote
this kind of healthy humility or happy sobriety when we consider ourselves
autonomous, when we exclude God from our lives or replace him with our own ego,
and think that our subjective feelings can define what is right and what is
wrong.
225. On the
other hand, no one can cultivate a sober and satisfying life without being at
peace with him or herself. An adequate understanding of spirituality consists in
filling out what we mean by peace, which is much more than the absence of war.
Inner peace is closely related to care for ecology and for the common good
because, lived out authentically, it is reflected in a balanced lifestyle
together with a capacity for wonder which takes us to a deeper understanding of
life. Nature is filled with words of love, but how can we listen to them amid
constant noise, interminable and nerve-wracking distractions, or the cult of
appearances? Many people today sense a profound imbalance which drives them to
frenetic activity and makes them feel busy, in a constant hurry which in turn
leads them to ride rough-shod over everything around them. This too affects how
they treat the environment. An integral ecology includes taking time to recover
a serene harmony with creation, reflecting on our lifestyle and our ideals, and
contemplating the Creator who lives among us and surrounds us, whose presence
“must not be contrived but found, uncovered”.[155]
226. 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. Jesus taught us this attitude when he invited us to
contemplate the lilies of the field and the birds of the air, or when seeing the
rich young man and knowing his restlessness, “he looked at him with love” (Mk 10:21).
He was completely present to everyone and to everything, and in this way he
showed us the way to overcome that unhealthy anxiety which makes us superficial,
aggressive and compulsive consumers.
227. One
expression of this attitude is when we stop and give thanks to God before and
after meals. I ask all believers to return to this beautiful and meaningful
custom. That moment of blessing, however brief, reminds us of our dependence on
God for life; it strengthens our feeling of gratitude for the gifts of creation;
it acknowledges those who by their labours provide us with these goods; and it
reaffirms our solidarity with those in greatest need.
V. CIVIC AND
POLITICAL LOVE
228. Care for
nature is part of a lifestyle which includes the capacity for living together
and communion. Jesus reminded us that we have God as our common Father and that
this makes us brothers and sisters. Fraternal love can only be gratuitous; it
can never be a means of repaying others for what they have done or will do for
us. That is why it is possible to love our enemies. This same gratuitousness
inspires us to love and accept the wind, the sun and the clouds, even though we
cannot control them. In this sense, we can speak of a “universal fraternity”.
229. 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. We have had enough of immorality and the mockery of ethics, goodness,
faith and honesty. It is time to acknowledge that light-hearted superficiality
has done us no good. 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.
230. Saint
Therese of Lisieux invites us to practise 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. In the end, a
world of exacerbated consumption is at the same time a world which mistreats
life in all its forms.
231. 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”.[156] That is why the
Church set before the world the ideal of a “civilization of love”.[157] 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”.[158] 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. When we feel that
God is calling us to intervene with others in these social dynamics, we should
realize that this too is part of our spirituality, which is an exercise of
charity and, as such, matures and sanctifies us.
232. 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.
VI. SACRAMENTAL
SIGNS AND THE CELEBRATION OF REST
233. The
universe unfolds in God, who fills it completely. Hence, there is a mystical
meaning to be found in a leaf, in a mountain trail, in a dewdrop, in a poor
person’s face.[159] The ideal is
not only to pass from the exterior to the interior to discover the action of God
in the soul, but also to discover God in all things. Saint Bonaventure teaches
us that “contemplation deepens the more we feel the working of God’s grace
within our hearts, and the better we learn to encounter God in creatures outside
ourselves”.[160]
234. Saint John
of the Cross taught that all the goodness present in the realities and
experiences of this world “is present in God eminently and infinitely, or more
properly, in each of these sublime realities is God”.[161] This is not
because the finite things of this world are really divine, but because the
mystic experiences the intimate connection between God and all beings, and thus
feels that “all things are God”.[162] Standing
awestruck before a mountain, he or she cannot separate this experience from God,
and perceives that the interior awe being lived has to be entrusted to the Lord:
“Mountains have heights and they are plentiful, vast, beautiful, graceful,
bright and fragrant. These mountains are what my Beloved is to me. Lonely
valleys are quiet, pleasant, cool, shady and flowing with fresh water; in the
variety of their groves and in the sweet song of the birds, they afford abundant
recreation and delight to the senses, and in their solitude and silence, they
refresh us and give rest. These valleys are what my Beloved is to me”.[163]
235. The
Sacraments are a privileged way in which nature is taken up by God to become a
means of mediating supernatural life. Through our worship of God, we are invited
to embrace the world on a different plane. Water, oil, fire and colours are
taken up in all their symbolic power and incorporated in our act of praise. The
hand that blesses is an instrument of God’s love and a reflection of the
closeness of Jesus Christ, who came to accompany us on the journey of life.
Water poured over the body of a child in Baptism is a sign of new life.
Encountering God does not mean fleeing from this world or turning our back on
nature. This is especially clear in the spirituality of the Christian East.
“Beauty, which in the East is one of the best loved names expressing the divine
harmony and the model of humanity transfigured, appears everywhere: in the shape
of a church, in the sounds, in the colours, in the lights, in the scents”.[164] For Christians,
all the creatures of the material universe find their true meaning in the
incarnate Word, for the Son of God has incorporated in his person part of the
material world, planting in it a seed of definitive transformation.
“Christianity does not reject matter. Rather, bodiliness is considered in all
its value in the liturgical act, whereby the human body is disclosed in its
inner nature as a temple of the Holy Spirit and is united with the Lord Jesus,
who himself took a body for the world’s salvation”.[165]
236. It is in
the Eucharist that all that has been created finds its greatest exaltation.
Grace, which tends to manifest itself tangibly, found unsurpassable expression
when God himself became man and gave himself as food for his creatures. The
Lord, in the culmination of the mystery of the Incarnation, chose to reach our
intimate depths through a fragment of matter. He comes not from above, but from
within, he comes that we might find him in this world of ours. In the Eucharist,
fullness is already achieved; it is the living centre of the universe, the
overflowing core of love and of inexhaustible life. Joined to the incarnate Son,
present in the Eucharist, the whole cosmos gives thanks to God. Indeed the
Eucharist is itself an act of cosmic love: “Yes, cosmic! Because even when it is
celebrated on the humble altar of a country church, the Eucharist is always in
some way celebrated on the altar of the world”.[166] The Eucharist
joins heaven and earth; it embraces and penetrates all creation. The world which
came forth from God’s hands returns to him in blessed and undivided adoration:
in the bread of the Eucharist, “creation is projected towards divinization,
towards the holy wedding feast, towards unification with the Creator himself”.[167] Thus, the
Eucharist is also a source of light and motivation for our concerns for the
environment, directing us to be stewards of all creation.
237. On Sunday,
our participation in the Eucharist has special importance. Sunday, like the
Jewish Sabbath, is meant to be a day which heals our relationships with God,
with ourselves, with others and with the world. Sunday is the day of the
Resurrection, the “first day” of the new creation, whose first fruits are the
Lord’s risen humanity, the pledge of the final transfiguration of all created
reality. It also proclaims “man’s eternal rest in God”.[168] In this way,
Christian spirituality incorporates the value of relaxation and festivity. We
tend to demean contemplative rest as something unproductive and unnecessary, but
this is to do away with the very thing which is most important about work: its
meaning. We are called to include in our work a dimension of receptivity and
gratuity, which is quite different from mere inactivity. Rather, it is another
way of working, which forms part of our very essence. It protects human action
from becoming empty activism; it also prevents that unfettered greed and sense
of isolation which make us seek personal gain to the detriment of all else. The
law of weekly rest forbade work on the seventh day, “so that your ox and your
donkey may have rest, and the son of your maidservant, and the stranger, may be
refreshed” (Ex 23:12). Rest opens our eyes to the larger picture and
gives us renewed sensitivity to the rights of others. And so the day of rest,
centred on the Eucharist, sheds it light on the whole week, and motivates us to
greater concern for nature and the poor.
VII. THE TRINITY
AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CREATURES
238. The Father
is the ultimate source of everything, the loving and self-communicating
foundation of all that exists. The Son, his reflection, through whom all things
were created, united himself to this earth when he was formed in the womb of
Mary. The Spirit, infinite bond of love, is intimately present at the very heart
of the universe, inspiring and bringing new pathways. The world was created by
the three Persons acting as a single divine principle, but each one of them
performed this common work in accordance with his own personal property.
Consequently, “when we contemplate with wonder the universe in all its grandeur
and beauty, we must praise the whole Trinity”.[169]
239. For
Christians, believing in one God who is trinitarian communion suggests that the
Trinity has left its mark on all creation. Saint Bonaventure went so far as to
say that human beings, before sin, were able to see how each creature “testifies
that God is three”. The reflection of the Trinity was there to be recognized in
nature “when that book was open to man and our eyes had not yet become
darkened”.[170] The Franciscan
saint teaches us that each creature bears in itself a specifically
Trinitarian structure, so real that it could be readily contemplated if only
the human gaze were not so partial, dark and fragile. In this way, he points out
to us the challenge of trying to read reality in a Trinitarian key.
240. The divine
Persons are subsistent relations, and the world, created according to the divine
model, is a web of relationships. Creatures tend towards God, and in turn it is
proper to every living being to tend towards other things, so that throughout
the universe we can find any number of constant and secretly interwoven
relationships.[171] This leads us
not only to marvel at the manifold connections existing among creatures, but
also to discover a key to our own fulfilment. The human person grows more,
matures more and is sanctified more to the extent that he or she enters into
relationships, going out from themselves to live in communion with God, with
others and with all creatures. In this way, they make their own that trinitarian
dynamism which God imprinted in them when they were created. Everything is
interconnected, and this invites us to develop a spirituality of that global
solidarity which flows from the mystery of the Trinity.
VIII. QUEEN OF
ALL CREATION
241. Mary, the
Mother who cared for Jesus, now cares with maternal affection and pain for this
wounded world. Just as her pierced heart mourned the death of Jesus, so now she
grieves for the sufferings of the crucified poor and for the creatures of this
world laid waste by human power. Completely transfigured, she now lives with
Jesus, and all creatures sing of her fairness. She is the Woman, “clothed in the
sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev 12:1).
Carried up into heaven, she is the Mother and Queen of all creation. In her
glorified body, together with the Risen Christ, part of creation has reached the
fullness of its beauty. She treasures the entire life of Jesus in her heart
(cf. Lk 2:19,51), and now understands the meaning of all things. Hence,
we can ask her to enable us to look at this world with eyes of wisdom.
242. At her side
in the Holy Family of Nazareth, stands the figure of Saint Joseph. Through his
work and generous presence, he cared for and defended Mary and Jesus, delivering
them from the violence of the unjust by bringing them to Egypt. The Gospel
presents Joseph as a just man, hard-working and strong. But he also shows great
tenderness, which is not a mark of the weak but of those who are genuinely
strong, fully aware of reality and ready to love and serve in humility. That is
why he was proclaimed custodian of the universal Church. He too can teach us how
to show care; he can inspire us to work with generosity and tenderness in
protecting this world which God has entrusted to us.
IX. BEYOND THE
SUN
243. At the end,
we will find ourselves face to face with the infinite beauty of God (cf. 1
Cor 13:12), and be able to read with admiration and happiness the mystery of
the universe, which with us will share in unending plenitude. Even now we are
journeying towards the sabbath of eternity, the new Jerusalem, towards our
common home in heaven. Jesus says: “I make all things new” (Rev 21:5).
Eternal life will be a shared experience of awe, in which each creature,
resplendently transfigured, will take its rightful place and have something to
give those poor men and women who will have been liberated once and for all.
244. In the
meantime, 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, we journey through this land
seeking God, for “if the world has a beginning and if it has been created, we
must enquire who gave it this beginning, and who was its Creator”.[172] Let us sing as
we go. May our struggles and our concern for this planet never take away the joy
of our hope.
245. God, who
calls us to generous commitment and to give him our all, offers us the light and
the strength needed to continue on our way. In the heart of this world, the Lord
of life, who loves us so much, is always present. He does not abandon us, he
does not leave us alone, for he has united himself definitively to our earth,
and his love constantly impels us to find new ways forward. Praise be to him!
* * * * *
246. At the
conclusion of this lengthy reflection which has been both joyful and troubling,
I propose that we offer two prayers. The first we can share with all who believe
in a God who is the all-powerful Creator, while in the other we Christians ask
for inspiration to take up the commitment to creation set before us by the
Gospel of Jesus.
A prayer for our
earth
All-powerful
God, you are present in the whole universe
A Christian
prayer in union with creation
Father, we
praise you with all your creatures.
Son of God,
Jesus,
Holy Spirit, by
your light
Triune Lord,
wondrous community of infinite love,
God of love,
show us our place in this world
Given in Rome at
Saint Peter’s on 24 May, the Solemnity of Pentecost, in the year 2015, the third
of my Pontificate.
Franciscus
[1] Canticle of the Creatures, in Francis of Assisi: Early Documents, vol. 1, New
York-London-Manila, 1999, 113-114.
[2] Apostolic Letter Octogesima
Adveniens (14 May 1971), 21: AAS 63
(1971), 416-417.
[3] Address
to FAO on the 25th Anniversary of its Institution (16 November 1970), 4: AAS
62 (1970), 833.
[4] Encyclical Letter Redemptor
Hominis (4 March 1979), 15: AAS 71 (1979), 287.
[5] Cf. Catechesis (17 January 2001), 4: Insegnamenti 41/1 (2001), 179.
[6] Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 38: AAS 83
(1991), 841.
[7] Ibid., 58: AAS 83 (1991), p. 863.
[8] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo
Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), 34: AAS
80 (1988), 559.
[9] Cf. ID., Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 37: AAS 83
(1991), 840.
[10] Address
to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (8 January 2007): AAS 99
(2007), 73.
[11] Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 51: AAS 101
(2009), 687.
[12] Address
to the Bundestag, Berlin (22 September 2011): AAS 103 (2011), 664.
[13] Address
to the Clergy of the Diocese of Bolzano-Bressanone (6 August 2008): AAS 100
(2008), 634.
[14] Message for the Day of Prayer for the Protection of Creation (1 September 2012).
[15] Address in Santa Barbara, California (8 November 1997); cf. JOHN CHRYSSAVGIS, On Earth as in Heaven:
Ecological Vision and Initiatives of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew,
Bronx, New York, 2012.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Lecture at the Monastery of Utstein, Norway (23 June 2003).
[18] “Global Responsibility and Ecological Sustainability”, Closing
Remarks, Halki Summit I, Istanbul (20 June 2012).
[19] THOMAS OF CELANO, The Life of Saint Francis, I, 29, 81: in Francis
of Assisi: Early Documents, vol. 1, New York-London-Manila, 1999, 251.
[20] The Major Legend of Saint Francis, VIII, 6, in Francis of
Assisi: Early Documents, vol. 2, New York-London-Manila, 2000, 590.
[21] Cf. THOMAS OF CELANO, The Remembrance of the Desire of a Soul,
II, 124, 165, in Francis of Assisi: Early Documents, vol. 2, New
York-London-Manila, 2000, 354.
[22] SOUTHERN AFRICAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Pastoral Statement on
the Environmental Crisis (5 September 1999).
[23] Cf. Greeting
to the Staff of FAO (20 November 2014): AAS 106 (2014), 985.
[24] FIFTH GENERAL CONFERENCE OF THE LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN BISHOPS, Aparecida
Document (29 June 2007), 86.
[25] CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Pastoral Letter What
is Happening to our Beautiful Land? (29 January 1988).
[26] BOLIVIAN BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Pastoral Letter on the Environment and
Human Development in Bolivia El universo, don de Dios para la vida (23
March 2012), 17.
[27] Cf. GERMAN BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Commission for Social Issues, Der
Klimawandel: Brennpunkt globaler, intergenerationeller und ökologischer
Gerechtigkeit (September 2006), 28-30.
[28] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 483.
[29] Catechesis (5 June 2013): Insegnamenti 1/1
(2013), 280.
[30] BISHOPS OF THE PATAGONIA-COMAHUE REGION (ARGENTINA), Christmas
Message (December 2009), 2.
[31] UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS, Global Climate Change:
A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence and the Common Good (15 June 2001).
[32] FIFTH GENERAL CONFERENCE OF THE LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN BISHOPS, Aparecida
Document (29 June 2007), 471.
[33] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 56: AAS
105 (2013), 1043.
[34] JOHN PAUL II, Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 12: AAS 82
(1990), 154.
[35] ID., Catechesis (17 January 2001), 3: Insegnamenti 24/1
(2001), 178.
[36] JOHN PAUL II, Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 15: AAS 82
(1990), 156.
[37] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 357.
[38] Angelus in Osnabrück
(Germany) with the disabled, 16 November 1980: Insegnamenti 3/2 (1980),
1232.
[39] BENEDICT XVI, Homily
for the Solemn Inauguration of the Petrine Ministry (24 April 2005): AAS 97
(2005), 711.
[40] Cf. BONAVENTURE, The Major Legend of Saint Francis, VIII, 1, in Francis
of Assisi: Early Documents, vol. 2, New York-London-Manila, 2000, 586.
[41] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2416.
[42] GERMAN
BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Zukunft der Schöpfung – Zukunft der Menschheit.
Einklärung der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz zu Fragen der Umwelt und der
Energieversorgung, (1980), II, 2.
[43] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 339.
[44] Hom. in Hexaemeron, I, 2, 10: PG 29, 9.
[45] The Divine Comedy, Paradiso, Canto XXXIII, 145.
[46] BENEDICT XVI, Catechesis (9 November 2005), 3: Insegnamenti 1
(2005), 768.
[47] ID., Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 51: AAS 101
(2009), 687.
[48] JOHN PAUL II, Catechesis (24 April 1991), 6: Insegnamenti 14
(1991), 856.
[49] The Catechism explains that God wished to create a world which is
“journeying towards its ultimate perfection”, and that this implies the presence
of imperfection and physical evil; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church,
310.
[50] Cf. SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Pastoral Constitution on the
Church in the Modern World Gaudium
et Spes, 36.
[51] THOMAS AQUINAS, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 104, art. 1 ad 4.
[52] ID., In octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis expositio, Lib. II,
lectio 14.
[53] Against this horizon we can set the contribution of Fr Teilhard de
Chardin; cf. PAUL VI, Address in a Chemical and Pharmaceutical Plant (24
February 1966): Insegnamenti 4 (1966), 992-993; JOHN PAUL II, Letter
to the Reverend George Coyne (1 June 1988): Insegnamenti 11/2 (1988), 1715; BENEDICT XVI, Homily
for the Celebration of Vespers in Aosta (24 July 2009): Insegnamenti 5/2
(2009), 60.
[54] JOHN PAUL II, Catechesis (30 January 2002),6: Insegnamenti 25/1
(2002), 140.
[55] CANADIAN CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS, SOCIAL AFFAIRS COMMISSION,
Pastoral Letter You Love All that Exists… All Things are Yours, God, Lover of
Life” (4 October 2003), 1.
[56] CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE OF JAPAN, Reverence for Life. A Message
for the Twenty-First Century (1 January 2000), 89.
[57] JOHN PAUL II, Catechesis (26 January 2000), 5: Insegnamenti 23/1
(2000), 123.
[58] ID., Catechesis (2
August 2000), 3: Insegnamenti 23/2 (2000), 112.
[59] PAUL
RICOEUR, Philosophie de la Volonté, t. II: Finitude et Culpabilité,
Paris, 2009, 216.
[60] Summa Theologiae, I, q. 47, art.
1.
[61] Ibid.
[62] Cf. ibid., art. 2, ad 1; art. 3.
[63] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 340.
[64] Canticle of the Creatures, in Francis of Assisi: Early
Documents, New York-London-Manila, 1999, 113-114.
[65] Cf. NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE BISHOPS OF BRAZIL, A Igreja e a
Questão Ecológica, 1992, 53-54.
[66] Ibid., 61.
[67] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 215: AAS
105 (2013), 1109.
[68] Cf. BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 14: AAS 101 (2009), 650.
[69] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2418.
[70] CONFERENCE OF DOMINICAN BISHOPS, Pastoral Letter Sobre la relación
del hombre con la naturaleza (21 January 1987).
[71] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Laborem
Exercens (14 September 1981), 19: AAS
73 (1981), 626.
[72] Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 31: AAS 83 (1991), 831.
[73] Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo
Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), 33: AAS
80 (1988), 557.
[74] Address to Indigenous and Rural People, Cuilapán, Mexico (29
January 1979), 6: AAS 71 (1979), 209.
[75] Homily at Mass for Farmers, Recife, Brazil (7 July 1980): AAS 72 (1980): AAS 72 (1980), 926.
[76] Cf. Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 82
(1990), 152.
[77] PARAGUAYAN
BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Pastoral Letter El campesino paraguayo y la tierra (12
June 1983), 2, 4, d.
[78] NEW ZEALAND CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE, Statement on Environmental
Issues (1 September 2006).
[79] Encyclical Letter Laborem
Exercens (14 September 1981), 27: AAS 73 (1981), 645.
[80] Hence Saint Justin could speak of “seeds of the Word” in the world; cf. II
Apologia 8, 1-2; 13, 3-6: PG 6, 457-458, 467.
[81] JOHN PAUL II, Address
to Scientists and Representatives of the United Nations University, Hiroshima (25 February 1981), 3: AAS 73 (1981),
422.
[82] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 69: AAS 101 (2009), 702.
[83] ROMANO GUARDINI, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 9th ed., Würzburg, 1965,
87 (English: The End of the Modern World, Wilmington, 1998, 82).
[84] Ibid.
[85] Ibid., 87-88 (The End of the Modern World, 83).
[86] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 462.
[87] ROMANO GUARDINI, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 63-64 (The End of the
Modern World, 56).
[88] Ibid., 64 (The End of the Modern World, 56).
[89] Cf. BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 35: AAS 101 (2009), 671.
[90] Ibid., 22: p. 657.
[91] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 231: AAS 105 (2013), 1114.
[92] ROMANO GUARDINI, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 63 (The End of the
Modern World, 55).
[93] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 38: AAS 83 (1991), 841.
[94] Cf. Love for Creation. An Asian Response to the Ecological Crisis,
Declaration of the Colloquium sponsored by the Federation of Asian Bishops’
Conferences (Tagatay, 31 January-5 February 1993), 3.3.2.
[95] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 37: AAS 83 (1991), 840.
[96] BENEDICT XVI, Message
for the 2010 World Day of Peace, 2: AAS 102
(2010), 41.
[97] ID., Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 28: AAS 101 (2009), 663.
[98] Cf. VINCENT OF LERINS, Commonitorium Primum, ch. 23: PL 50, 688:
“Ut annis scilicet consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate”.
[99] No. 80: AAS 105 (2013), 1053.
[100] SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Pastoral Constitution on the Church
in the Modern World Gaudium
et Spes, 63.
[101] Cf. JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 37: AAS 83
(1991), 840.
[102] PAUL VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum
Progressio (26 March 1967), 34: AAS 59
(1967), 274.
[103] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 32: AAS 101 (2009), 666.
[104] Ibid.
[105] Ibid.
[106] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2417.
[107] Ibid., 2418.
[108] Ibid., 2415.
[109] Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 6: AAS 82
(1990), 150.
[110] Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (3 October 1981),
3: Insegnamenti 4/2 (1981), 333.
[111] Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 7: AAS 82
(1990), 151.
[112] JOHN PAUL II, Address
to the 35th General Assembly of the World Medical Association (29 October 1983), 6: AAS 76
(1984), 394.
[113] EPISCOPAL COMMISSION FOR PASTORAL CONCERNS IN ARGENTINA, Una tierra
para todos (June 2005), 19.
[114] Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (14 June 1992),
Principle 4.
[115] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 237: AAS 105 (2013), 1116.
[116] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 51: AAS 101 (2009), 687.
[117] Some authors have emphasized the values frequently found, for example,
in the villas, chabolas or favelas of Latin America: cf.
JUAN CARLOS SCANNONE, S.J., “La irrupción del pobre y la lógica de la
gratuidad”, in JUAN CARLOS SCANNONE and MARCELO PERINE (eds.), Irrupción del
pobre y quehacer filosófico. Hacia una nueva racionalidad, Buenos Aires,
1993, 225-230.
[118] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 482.
[119] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 210: AAS
105 (2013), 1107.
[120] Address
to the German Bundestag, Berlin (22
September 2011): AAS 103 (2011), 668.
[121] Catechesis (15 April 2015): L’Osservatore
Romano, 16 April 2015, p. 8.
[122] SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Pastoral Constitution on the Church
in the Modern World Gaudium
et Spes, 26.
[123] Cf. Nos. 186-201: AAS 105 (2013), 1098-1105.
[124] PORTUGUESE BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Pastoral Letter Responsabilidade
Solidária pelo Bem Comum (15 September 2003), 20.
[125] BENEDICT XVI, Message
for the 2010 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 102
(2010), 45.
[126] Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (14 June 1992),
Principle 1.
[127] BOLIVIAN BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, Pastoral Letter on the Environment and
Human Development in Bolivia El universo, don de Dios para la vida (March
2012), 86.
[128] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Energy, Justice and Peace, IV,
1, Vatican City (2014), 53.
[129] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 67: AAS 101 (2009).
[130] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 222: AAS
105 (2013), 1111.
[131] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 469.
[132] Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development (14 June
1992), Principle 15.
[133] Cf. MEXICAN BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, EPISCOPAL COMMISSION FOR PASTORAL AND
SOCIAL CONCERNS, Jesucristo, vida y esperanza de los indígenas e campesinos (14
January 2008).
[134] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 470.
[135] Message
for the 2010 World Day of Peace, 9: AAS 102
(2010), 46.
[136] Ibid.
[137] Ibid., 5: p. 43.
[138] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 50: AAS 101
(2009), 686.
[139] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 209: AAS
105 (2013), 1107.
[140] Ibid., 228: AAS 105 (2013), 1113.
[141] Cf. Encyclical Letter Lumen
Fidei (29 June 2013), 34: AAS 105
(2013), 577: “Nor is the light of faith, joined to the truth of love, extraneous
to the material world, for love is always lived out in body and spirit; the
light of faith is an incarnate light radiating from the luminous life of Jesus.
It also illumines the material world, trusts its inherent order, and knows that
it calls us to an ever widening path of harmony and understanding. The gaze of
science thus benefits from faith: faith encourages the scientist to remain
constantly open to reality in all its inexhaustible richness. Faith awakens the
critical sense by preventing research from being satisfied with its own formulae
and helps it to realize that nature is always greater. By stimulating wonder
before the profound mystery of creation, faith broadens the horizons of reason
to shed greater light on the world which discloses itself to scientific
investigation”.
[142] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 256: AAS
105 (2013), 1123.
[144] ROMANO GUARDINI, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 9th edition,
Würzburg, 1965, 66-67 (English: The End of the Modern World, Wilmington,
1998, 60).
[145] JOHN PAUL II, Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 1: AAS 82 (1990), 147.
[146] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009), 66: AAS 101 (2009), 699.
[147] ID., Message
for the 2010 World Day of Peace, 11: AAS
102 (2010), 48.
[148] Earth Charter, The Hague (29 June 2000).
[149] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus
Annus (1 May 1991), 39: AAS 83 (1991), 842.
[150] ID., Message
for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 14: AAS 82
(1990), 155.
[151] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 Nov 2013), 261: AAS 105 (2013), 1124.
[152] BENEDICT XVI, Homily
for the Solemn Inauguration of the Petrine Ministry (24 April 2005): AAS 97
(2005), 710.
[153] AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE, A New Earth – The
Environmental Challenge (2002).
[154] ROMANO GUARDINI, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 72 (The End of the
Modern World¸ 65-66).
[155] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), 71: AAS 105 (2013), 1050.
[156] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas
in Veritate (29 June 2009) 2: AAS 101 (2009), 642.
[157] PAUL VI, Message
for the 1977 World Day of Peace: AAS 68 (1976),
709.
[158] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium
of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 582.
[159] The spiritual writer Ali al-Khawas stresses from his own experience the
need not to put too much distance between the creatures of the world and the
interior experience of God. As he puts it: “Prejudice should not have us
criticize those who seek ecstasy in music or poetry. There is a subtle mystery
in each of the movements and sounds of this world. The initiate will capture
what is being said when the wind blows, the trees sway, water flows, flies buzz,
doors creak, birds sing, or in the sound of strings or flutes, the sighs of the
sick, the groans of the afflicted...”
(EVA DE VITRAY-MEYEROVITCH [ed.], Anthologie du soufisme, Paris 1978,
200).
[160] In
II Sent., 23, 2, 3.
[161] Cántico
Espiritual, XIV, 5.
[162] Ibid.
[163] Ibid., XIV, 6-7.
[164] JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Letter Orientale
Lumen (2 May 1995), 11: AAS 87 (1995), 757.
[165] Ibid.
[166] ID., Encyclical Letter Ecclesia
de Eucharistia (17 April 2003), 8: AAS 95 (2003), 438.
[167] BENEDICT XVI, Homily
for the Mass of Corpus Domini (15 June 2006): AAS 98 (2006), 513.
[168] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2175.
[169] JOHN PAUL II, Catechesis (2 August 2000), 4: Insegnamenti 23/2 (2000), 112.
[170] Quaest.
Disp. de Myst. Trinitatis, 1, 2 concl.
[171] Cf. THOMAS AQUINAS, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 11, art. 3; q. 21,
art. 1, ad 3; q. 47, art. 3.
[172] BASIL THE GREAT, Hom. in Hexaemeron, I, 2, 6: PG 29, 8.
©
Copyright - Libreria Editrice Vaticana |