Hill Heat

CHAPTER THREE: THE ROOT OF HUMAN ECOLOGICAL CRISIS

101. Nothing will serve to describe the symptoms, if we do not recognize the human root of the ecological crisis. There is a way of understanding life and human action that strays and that contradicts the reality to the point of ruin. Why cannot we stop and think about this? I propose therefore to focus on the technocratic paradigm dominant in place that deals with the human being and his action in the world.

I. Technology: creativity and power

102. Humanity has entered a new era in which the power of technology puts us at a crossroads. We are the heirs of two centuries of huge waves of change: the steam engine, the railroad, the telegraph, electricity, the automobile, the airplane, the chemical industry, modern medicine, computer science and more recently the digital revolution, robotics, biotechnology and nanotechnology. It is right to rejoice for these advances and be excited before the wide possibilities that we open with these novelties, because “science and technology are a wonderful product of human creativity that is a gift of God.” [81 John Paul II, Address to representatives of science, culture and of Higher Studies of the United Nations University, Hiroshima (25 February 1981), 3: AAS 73 (1981), 422.] The transformation of nature for purposes of utility is a feature of the human race since its beginnings, and thus technology “expresses the inner tension that impels him gradually to overcome to the material limitations.” [82 Benedict XVI, Enc. Lett. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 69: AAS 101 (2009), 702.] Technology has remedied many ills that plagued and limited human beings. It is not possible not to appreciate and give thanks for the progress achieved, especially in medicine, engineering and communications. And how can we recognize all the efforts of many scientists and engineers who have developed alternatives for sustainable development?

103. Techno-science, well-oriented, is able not only to produce really valuable things for improving the quality of life of the human being, from objects of domestic use to great means of transport, to bridges, to buildings, to public spaces. It is also able to produce beauty and to achieve for the human being, in the material world, the “leap” in the field of beauty. You cannot deny the beauty of an airplane, or some skyscrapers, can you? There are precious paintings and music obtained through the use of new technical tools. Thus, the desire for beauty and the craftsman who contemplates that beauty takes the leap to a certain, properly human fullness.

104. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore that nuclear energy, biotechnology, information technology, knowledge of our own DNA and other potentiality that we have acquired offers a tremendous power. Indeed, they give those who hold the knowledge and especially the economic power to exploit a impressive domain of the whole human race and the whole world. Mankind has never had so much power over itself and no guarantee that it will use well, especially considering the way in which it is availing itself. Just remember the atomic bombs dropped in the middle of the twentieth century, as the largest deployment of technology flaunted by Nazism, communism and other totalitarian regimes at the service of the extermination of millions of people, not to mention that now war has more and more deadly tools. In whose hands and in whose reach is so much power? It’s terribly risky that it resides in a small part of humanity.

105. There is a tendency to believe that “every purchase of power is simply progress, increasing safety, utility, well-being, vitality, fullness of values”, [83 Romano Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 19659 Würzburg, 87 (ed. trans .: The End of the Modern, Brescia 1987, 80).] as if reality, the beneficial, and the truth effloresces spontaneously from the very power of technology and the economy. The fact is that “modern man was not brought up in the right use of power,” [84 Ibid. (Ed. Trans .: 81).] because the immense technological growth has not been accompanied by the development of the human being with regard to responsibility, values and conscience. Every age tends to develop poor self-awareness of its own limitations. It is therefore possible that today humanity does not feel the seriousness of the challenges it faces, and “man’s ability to use its power of evil is growing” when “there are no rules of freedom, but only the claimed necessity of utility and security. “[85 Ibid., 87-88 (ed. trans .: 81).] The human being is not fully autonomous. His freedom is sick when he surrenders to the blind forces of the unconscious, of immediate needs, selfishness, brutal violence. In this sense, he is naked and exposed before his own power that continues to grow, without having the tools to control it. He may have superficial mechanisms, but we can say that he lacks adequate solid ethics, a culture and a spirituality that really give a limit and contain it within a lucid self-control.

II. The globalization of the technocratic paradigm

106. The fundamental problem is another, even more profound: the matter-of-fact way humanity has taken technology and its development together with a uniform and one-dimensional paradigm. In this paradigm stands a conception of the subject that gradually, in the logico-rational process, understands and thereby owns the object that is outside. This subject is expressed in the establishment of the scientific method with its experimentation, which is already explicitly a technique of possession, dominion and transformation. It is as if the subject were facing the formless reality completely open to manipulation. The intervention of human being in nature has always been the case, but for a long time has had the accompanying feature, of favoring the possibilities of things themselves. It was to receive what the natural reality itself allows, as a reaching out. Conversely, what matters now is to extract everything possible from things through the imposition of the human hand, which tends to ignore or forget the very image of what he had before. In this way human beings and things have ceased to give each other a friendly hand, instead becoming contenders. From here you can go easily to the idea of infinite or unlimited growth, which has so impressed economists, theorists of finance and of technology. This presupposes the lie about the infinite availability of goods on the planet, leading to “squeeze” to the limit and beyond the limit. This is the false assumption that “there is an unlimited amount of energy and usable resources, that their immediate regeneration is possible and that the negative effects of the manipulation of nature can be easily absorbed.” [86 Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 462.]

107. We can therefore say that the cause of many problems in the world today there is first a tendency, not always conscious, to set the methodology and the objectives of science and technology according to a paradigm of understanding that affects people’s lives and the functioning of society . The effects of the application of this model to all of reality, human and social, are found in degradation of the environment, but this is just a sign of reductionism that affects human life and society in all their dimensions. It must be recognized that the products of technology are not neutral, because they create a story that ends up influencing lifestyles and guides the social possibilities in the direction of the interests of certain powerful groups. Certain choices that seem purely instrumental, are actually choices relevant to the type of social life intended to be developed.

108. You can not think of supporting another cultural paradigm and use of technology as a mere tool, because today the technocratic paradigm has become so dominant that it is very difficult regardless of one’s resources, and even more difficult is to use one’s resources without being dominated by its logic. It has become counter-cultural to choose a lifestyle with objectives that can be at least partially independent of technology, its costs and its globalizing power and overpowering. In fact, technology has a tendency to let anything remain outside its iron logic, and “the man who is the protagonist knows that, ultimately, it is neither utility nor welfare, but dominion; dominion in the extreme sense of the word.” [87 Romano Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 63-64 (ed. trans .: The end of the modern age, 58).] Thus,”trying to grasp the elements of nature and together those of human existence.” [88 Ibid., 64 (ed. trans .: 58).] This reduces the ability of decision, the more authentic freedom and the space for alternative creativity from individuals.

109. The technocratic paradigm tends to exert its dominance also on the economy and politics. The economy takes every technological development in function of profit, without paying attention to possible negative consequences for human beings. Finance stifles the real economy. We have not learned the lessons of the global financial crisis and very slowly one learns that about environmental deterioration. In some circles it is argued that the current economy and technology will solve all environmental problems, the same way one says, with a non-academic language, that the problems of hunger and poverty in the world will be solved simply with market growth. It is not a matter of economic theory, that perhaps no one today dares to defend, but their settlement in the factual development of the economy. Those who do not argue with the words support it with deeds, when one does not seem to worry about the right level of production, a better distribution of wealth, a responsible care for the environment or the rights of future generations. The behavior says that the goal of maximizing profits is sufficient. The market alone does not ensure integral human development and social inclusion. [89 Cf. Benedict XVI, Enc. Lett. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 35: AAS 101 (2009), 671.] In the meantime, we have a “sort of a wasteful and consumerist overdevelopment which forms an unacceptable contrast with the ongoing situations of dehumanizing deprivation” [90 Ibid., 22: p. 657.] while we are not developing fast enough the economic institutions and social programs that enable the poor to access resources on a regular basis. There is not enough awareness of what are the deeper roots of the current imbalances, which have to do with the orientation, purpose, meaning and social context of technological and economic growth.

110. The specialization due to technology implies considerable difficulty in having an overview. The fragmentation of knowledge performs its task in time to obtain concrete applications, but often leads one to lose the sense of wholeness, of the relations that exist between things, the broad horizon, meaning that becomes irrelevant. This same fact prevents one from identifying appropriate ways of solving the most complex problems of today’s world, especially those of the environment and the poor, who cannot be addressed from a single point of view or from one type of interest. A science that claims to offer solutions to the big issues, should necessarily take account of all that knowledge produced in other areas of knowledge, including philosophy and social ethics. But this is a way of acting tough to carry on today. So you may not even recognize the true horizons of ethical reference. Life becomes a surrender to circumstances influenced by technology, seen as the main resource for interpreting existence. In the concrete reality that challenges us, different symptoms appear showing the error, such as environmental degradation, anxiety, loss of sense of life and of living together. This demonstrates once again that “the reality is superior to the idea.” [91 Apost. ap. Evangelii gaudium (24 November 2013), 231: AAS 105 (2013), 1114.]

111. Ecological culture cannot be reduced to a series of urgent and partial answers to the problems that arise with respect to environmental degradation, depletion of natural reserves and pollution. It should be a different look, a thought, a policy, an educational program, a lifestyle and a spirituality that give shape to a resistance against the advance of the technocratic paradigm. Otherwise, even the best ecological efforts may end up locked in the same globalized logic. To search only for a technical remedy for any environmental problem that is presented, purports it as an isolated thing that is in fact connected, hiding the true and most profound problems of the global system.

112. One can, however, extend one’s gaze again, and human freedom is capable of limiting technology, to direct it, and put it at the service of another kind of progress, healthier, more humane, more social and more integral. Liberation from the prevailing technocratic paradigm in fact happens in some occasions. For example, when the community of small producers opts for cleaner production systems, supporting a way of life, of happiness and of conviviality not consumerism. Or when technology is geared primarily to solve the concrete problems of others, with a commitment to help them live with more dignity and less suffering. And even when the creative search of beauty and its contemplation are able to overcome the objectifying power in a kind of salvation that takes place in beauty and the person who contemplates it. The authentic humanity, which calls for a new synthesis, seems to live in the midst of technological civilization, almost imperceptibly, like fog seeping under a closed door. It will be a permanent promise, despite everything, that blossoms as stubborn resistance for what is authentic?

113. On the other hand, people no longer seems to believe in a happy future, do not trust blindly in a better tomorrow starting from the current state of the world and technological capacity. One becomes aware that the progress of science and technology is not equivalent to the progress of humanity and history, and sees that other roads are essential to a happy future. Nevertheless, neither does one imagine giving up the possibilities offered by technology. Humanity has changed profoundly and the accumulation of novelties consecrates a transience that draws us to the surface in one direction. It becomes difficult to stop to recover the depth of life. If the architecture reflects the spirit of an era, the mega-structures and tract houses express the spirit of globalized technology, where the permanent newness of products merges with a heavy ennui. Not resign ourselves to this and not give up on us questions about the meaning and purpose of all things. Otherwise, only we legitimize the status quo and we will need more surrogates to tolerate the void.

114. What is happening makes us face the urgent need to proceed in a courageous cultural revolution. Science and technology are not neutral, but may involve beginning at the end of a process different intentions and possibilities, and can be configured in various ways. Nobody wants to go back to the cave, but it is essential to slow the march to see reality in another way, collect the positive and sustainable developments, and at the same time recover the values and great purposes destroyed by a megalomaniac licentiousness.

III. Crisis and consequences of modern anthropocentrism

115. Modern anthropocentrism, paradoxically, ended up placing the technical reason above the reality, because the human being “no longer feels the nature neither as valid norm nor as living shelter. He sees without assumptions, objectively, as space and matter in which to create a work in which to throw everything, and no matter what it will be.” [92 Romano Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, 63 (ed. Trans .: The End of the Modern, 57-58).] In this way, it diminishes the intrinsic value of the world. But if the human being does not rediscover his true place, he does not include adequately himself and ends up contradicting his own reality. “Not only the land was given by God to man, who must use it with respect for the original good purpose, according to which it was given; but the man has given himself to God and must therefore respect the natural and moral structure, which has been endowed.” [93 John Paul II, Enc. Lett. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 38: AAS 83 (1991), 841.]

116. In modern times there has been a considerable anthropocentric excess that, in another capacity, today continues to undermine any reference to something common and any attempt to strengthen social ties. So it is time to pay attention to reality again with the limits it sets, which in turn constitute the possibility of more healthy and fruitful human and social development. An inadequate presentation of Christian anthropology has come to promote a misconception of the relationship between human beings and the world. Many times was aired a Promethean dream of dominating the world that caused the impression that the care of nature is something for the weak. Instead the correct interpretation of the concept of the human being as the lord of the universe is to understand him as a responsible administrator. [94 See Statement Love for Creation. An Asian Response to the Ecological Crisis, Interview promoted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (Tagaytay, 31 January to 5 February 1993), 3.3.2. ]

117. The lack of concern for measuring the damage to nature and the environmental impact of decisions, is only the reflection of an evident lack of interest in acknowledging the message that nature carries inscribed in its own structure. When you do not recognize the reality itself of the importance of a poor person, of a human embryo, a person with disabilities – to name but a few – hardly you will hear the cries of nature itself. Everything is connected. If the human being is declared independent from reality and absolute ruler, the very basis of its existence crumbles, because “Instead of carrying out his role as a cooperator with God in the work of creation, man replaces God and thus ends up provoking a rebellion of nature.” [95 John Paul II, Enc. Lett. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 37: AAS 83 (1991), 840.]

118. This situation leads us to a permanent schizophrenia, ranging from technocratic exaltation hat does not recognize in other beings their own value, up to the reaction to deny any special value to the human being. But one can not prescind humanity. There will not be a new relationship with nature without a new human being. There is no adequate ecological anthropology. When the human person is only considered to be one among others, who results from a game of chance or by a physical determinism, “you run the risk that the attenuation in people an awareness of responsibility.” [96 Benedict XVI, Message for the World Day of Peace 2010, 2: AAS 102 (2010), 41.] A deviated anthropocentrism does not have to give way to a “bio-centrism” because that would imply introducing a new imbalance, which not only will not solve the problems, but will add another. It cannot be required on the part of the human commitment to the world, if you do not recognize and do not enhance at the same time our peculiar capacity for knowledge, desire, freedom and responsibility.

119. The criticism of deviated anthropocentrism should also be placed in the background of the value of relationships between people. If the ecological crisis is an emergence or an external manifestation of the ethical crisis, spiritual and cultural modernity, we cannot pretend to heal our relationship with nature and the environment without restoring all fundamental human relations. When Christian thought claims for the human being a unique value on top of the other creatures, it gives space to the development of every human person, and thus stimulates the recognition of the other. The opening to a “you” who can know, love and dialogue continues to be the nobility of the human person. Therefore, in order to ensure an adequate relationship with creation, there is no need to downplay the social dimension of the human being and even its transcendent dimension, its openness to the “You” of God. In fact, one cannot propose a relationship with the environment ignoring that with other people and with God. It would be a romantic individualism disguised as ecological beauty and a suffocating self-seclusion in immanence.

120. Since everything is related, neither is justification of abortion compatible with the defense of nature. It does not appear viable an educative path for the reception of weak beings that surround us, that are sometimes troublesome or importunate, when you do not give protection to human embryos although his arrival is due to hardships and difficulties: “If you lose the personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of a new life, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away.” [[97 Id., Lett. Enc. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 28: AAS 101 (2009), 663.]

121. The development of a new synthesis that overcomes the false dialectic of the last centuries is still waiting. Christianity itself, remaining faithful to its identity and treasure of truth which he received from Jesus Christ, always thinks back to express again in dialogue with the new historical situations, letting bloom its perennial newness. [98 See Vincent of Lérins, Commonitorium primum, chap. 23: PL 50, 668: “Ut annis scilicet consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur Aetate.”]

The practical relativism

122. A deviated anthropocentrism results in a deviated lifestyle. In the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium I referred to the practical relativism that characterizes our era, and that is “even more dangerous than doctrinal.” [99 N. 80: AAS 105 (2013), 1053.] When the human being puts himself in the center, he ends up giving top priority to his contingent interests, and all the rest becomes relative. So it should not surprise that, together with omnipresence of the technocratic paradigm and the adoration of human power without limits, this relativism develops in people, in which everything becomes irrelevant if it serves their immediate interests. There is in this logic that allows us to understand how to nurture simultaneously different attitudes that cause at the same time environmental degradation and social degradation.

123. The culture of relativism is the same disease that drives a person to take advantage of another and to treat him as a mere object, forcing him to forced labor, or reducing him to slavery due to a debt. It is the same logic that leads to sexually exploiting children, or abandoning the elderly who do not serve one’s interests. It is also the internal logic of those who say: let the invisible forces of the market govern the economy, because their effects on society and nature are unavoidable damage. If there are no objective truths or stable principles, outside of meeting the aspirations and immediate needs, what limits trafficking in human beings, organized crime, drug trafficking, the trade in blood diamonds and endangered animal skins? Is it not the same relativist logic that justifies the purchase of organs from poor people in order to sell them or use them for testing, or the discarding of children because they do not respond to the desire of their parents? It is the same logic as “disposable” that produces a lot of refuse only for the inordinate desire to consume more than what one really needs. So we cannot think that the political agendas or the force of the law will be enough to avoid the behaviors that affect the environment, because when it is the culture which is corrupt and no longer recognizes any objective truth or universally valid principles, laws are seen just as arbitrary impositions and obstacles to avoid.

The need to defend labor

124. In any setting of integral ecology, which does not exclude the human being, it is essential to integrate the value of work, so expertly developed by St. John Paul II in his encyclical Laborem exercens. Recall that, according to the biblical account of creation, God placed the human being in the just created garden (cf. Gen 2:15), not just to take care of the existing (to guard), but to work there in order to produce fruit (to cultivate). So the workmen and artisans “ensure the eternal creation” (Sir 38,34). In reality, human intervention that promotes the prudent development of creation is the most appropriate way to take care, because it involves providing an instrument of God to help bring out the potential that he himself has inscribed in things, “The Lord has created medicines from the earth, the sensible man will not despise them” (Sir 38,4).

125. If we try to think about what the appropriate relationship is between the human being and the world around him, a need emerges for a correct conception of labor, because if we talk about the relationship between human beings and things, there is the question about the meaning and purpose of human reality. We do not speak only of manual labor or work on the land, but any activity that involves some transformation of existence, from the development of a social study to the design of a technological development. Any form of work requires an idea about the relationship that man can or must establish with the other self. Christian spirituality, along with contemplative wonder for creatures that we find in St. Francis of Assisi, has also developed a rich and healthy understanding of labor, as we can find, for example, in the life of Blessed Charles de Foucauld and his disciples.

126. We also collect something from the long monastic tradition. At first it favored a certain way to escape from the world, trying to get away from urban decay. For this, the monks sought the desert, convinced that it was the right place to recognize the presence of God. Then, St. Benedict wanted his monks to live in community, combining prayer and study with manual work (Ora et labora). This introduction of manual work steeped in the spiritual sense proved revolutionary. One learned to look for the maturation and sanctification interweaving between recollection and work. In this manner of living work makes us more able to care and respect for the environment, impregnates our relationship with the world with healthy sobriety.

127. We affirm that “man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life.” [100 Conc. Vatican Ecumenical Council. Vat. II, Const. Past. Gaudium et Spes on the Church in the Modern World, 63.] Nevertheless, in the human being when you lose the ability to contemplate and respect, it creates the conditions so that the meaning of work is distorted. [101 Cf. John Paul II, Lett. enc. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 37: AAS 83 (1991), 840.] It should always remember that the human being is at the same time “capable of becoming an actor himself responsible for his material improvement of his moral progress, the full arc of his spiritual destiny. ” [102 Paul VI, Enc. Lett. Populorum Progressio (26 March 1967), 34: AAS 59 (1967), 274.] Labor should be the scope of this multifaceted personal development, where we bring into play many dimensions of life: creativity, projecting into the future, development of capabilities, the pursuit of values, communication with others, an attitude of adoration. Therefore, the social reality of today’s world, beyond the narrow interests of business and a questionable economic rationality, demands that “we continue to prioritize the goal of access to work [...] for all.” [103 Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 32: AAS 101 (2009), 666.]

128. We are called to work since our creation. You should not try to replace more and more human labor with technological progress: doing so would damage humanity itself. Work is a necessity, is the meaning of life on this earth, maturation, human development and fulfillment. In this way, helping the poor with money should always be a temporary remedy to cope with emergencies. The real goal should always be to allow them a dignified life through work. However, the orientation of the economy has encouraged a kind of technological progress aimed at reducing production costs due to the decrease in jobs, which are being replaced by machines. It is another way in which the action of the human being can turn against itself. The reduction in jobs “also has a negative impact on the economic level, through the progressive erosion of ‘social capital’: the network of relationships of trust, reliability and respect of the rules, which are essential to any civil coexistence”. [104 Ibid.] In short, “the human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions always involve human costs.” [105 Ibid.] To give up investing in people to get more immediate profit is a bad deal for society.

129. In order to continue to be possible to offer employment, it is essential to promote an economy that encourages product diversification and entrepreneurial creativity. For example, there is a wide variety of agricultural and food systems of small scale that continues to feed most of the world population, using a small portion of the land and water and producing less waste, either in small agricultural plots and gardens, or in hunting and collection of forest products, or in the artisanal fisheries. The economies of scale, especially in the agricultural sector, end up forcing small farmers to sell their land or to abandon their traditional crops. The attempts of some of them to develop other forms of more diversified production are useless because of the difficulty of access to regional and global markets or because the sales infrastructure and transport is at the service of big business. The authorities have the right and responsibility to take measures to clearly and firmly support small producers and diversification of production. For there to be an economic freedom in which all actually benefit, sometimes it may be necessary to put limits to those who hold the greatest resources and financial power. The announcement of economic freedom is simple, but when the actual conditions that prevent many can access it in reality, and when you reduce access to employment, it becomes a contradictory phrase that dishonors policy. Entrepreneurial activity, which is a noble vocation oriented to create wealth and improve the world for everyone, can be a very fruitful to promote the region where it places its activities, especially if that includes the creation of jobs, is an essential part of one’s service to the common good.

Innovation from biological research

130. In the philosophical and theological vision of the human being and creation, which I tried to suggest, it is clear that the human person, with the peculiarity of his reason and of his science, is not an external factor that should be removed completely. However, while the human being can intervene in the world of plants and animals and use them when necessary to his life, the Catechism teaches that animal testing is legitimate only if it “remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives” . [106 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2417.] Remember firmly that human power has limits and that “it is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer needlessly and have indiscriminately of their lives.” [107 Ibid., 2418.] Any such use and experimentation “requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.” [108 Ibid., 2415.]

131. I want to acknowledge here the balanced position of St. John Paul II, who emphasized the benefits of scientific and technological advances, which “demonstrate the nobility of the human vocation to participate responsibly in the creative action of God” but at the same time remembered “interfering in one area of the ecosystem can not be separated from considering its consequences in other areas.” [109 Message for the World Day of Peace 1990, 6: AAS 82 (1990), 150.] He proclaimed that the Church appreciates the contribution “of the study and applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines such as genetics and its technological application in agriculture and industry.” [110 Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (October 3, 1981), 3: L’Osservatore 4/2 (1981), 333.] Although he said also that this must not lead to an “indiscriminate genetic manipulation” [111 Message for the World Day of Peace 1990, 7: AAS 82 (1990), 151.] ignoring the negative effects of these interventions. You can not curb human creativity. If you can not forbid an artist to express his creative ability, you can neither hinder those who possess special gifts for the development of science and technology, whose capabilities have been given by God for the service of others. At the same time, one can not help but reconsider the objectives, the effects, the context and the ethical limits of the human activity that is a form of power with great risks.

132. In this context should be located any reflection about the human intervention on the plant and animal world, which today involves genetic mutations produced by biotechnology in order to tap the opportunities present in the material reality. Respect for faith towards reason demands paying attention to what the same biological science, developed independently over economic interests, can teach about the biological structures and their possibilities and mutations. In any case, it is legitimate intervention that affects the nature “to help it develop according to its essence, that of creation, that willed by God.” [112 John Paul II, Address to the thirty-fifth General Assembly of the World Medical Association (29 October 1983), 6: AAS 76 (1984), 394.]

133. It is difficult to give an overall judgment on the development of genetically modified organisms (GMO), plant or animal, for medical purposes or in agriculture, since they can be very different and require different considerations. Instead, the risks are not always attributed to the same technique, but its inadequate or excessive application. In fact, genetic mutations have happened many times and are produced by nature itself. Even those caused by humans are not a modern phenomenon. The domestication of animals, the crossing of species and other universally accepted traditional practice can fit into these considerations. It should be remembered that the beginning of scientific developments on transgenic cereals has been the observation of bacteria that naturally and spontaneously produced a change in the genome of a plant. However in nature these processes have a slow pace, which is not comparable to the speed set by current technological advances, even when such advances are based on a scientific development of centuries.

134. Although we have no definitive evidence about the damage that transgenic grains could cause to humans, and in some regions, their use has produced economic growth that has helped solve some problems, there are significant problems that should not be minimized. In many areas, following the introduction of these crops, there has been a concentration of productive land in the hands of a few, due to the “gradual disappearance of small producers, who, in consequence of the loss of cultivated land, have been forced to retreat from direct production.” [113 Episcopal Commission for Social Pastoral of Argentina, A tierra para todos (June 2005), 19.] The most vulnerable among them become temporary workers and many farm workers migrate end up in miserable urban settlements. The spread of these crops destroys the complex web of ecosystems, decreases diversity in production and affects the present or the future of regional economies. In several countries there is a trend in the development of oligopolies in the production of seeds and other products needed for cultivation, and the dependence deepens when you consider the production of sterile seeds, which would end up forcing farmers to buy from producers.

135. No doubt there is need of constant attention, which leads to consider all ethical aspects involved. To this end it is necessary to ensure a scientific and social debate that is responsible and large, able to consider all the information available and to call things by their name. Sometimes one do not put on the table the full information, but it is selected according to one’s interests, be they political, economic or ideological. This makes it difficult to develop a balanced and prudent judgment on the various issues, taking into account all the variables involved. We must have places of debate in which all those who somehow could be directly or indirectly involved (farmers, consumers, authorities, scientists, seed producers, people close to the treated field and others) set out their problems with access to extensive and reliable information to make decisions oriented to the common present and future good. The issue of GMOs is one that is complex, that must be approached with a sympathetic look in all its aspects, and this would require at least one more effort to finance several lines of independent and interdisciplinary research that they can bring new light.

136. On the other hand, it is worrying that some environmental movements defend the integrity of the environment, and with reason reclaim limits to scientific research, and sometimes do not apply these same principles to the human life. Often it justifies that go beyond all limits when experimenting with human embryos alive. It forgets that the inalienable value of a human being goes far beyond the degree of its development. Equally, when technology does not recognize the great ethical principles, it ends up considering any practice legitimate. As we have seen in this chapter, technology separated from ethics is unlikely to be able to self-limit its own power.

CHAPTER TWO: THE GOSPEL OF CREATION

62. Why include in this document, addressed to all people of good will, a chapter related to the convictions of faith? I am aware that, in the field of politics and thought, some strongly reject the idea of a Creator, or consider it irrelevant, the point to be relegated to the realm of the irrational wealth that religions can make for integral ecology and for the full development of the human race. Other times it is assumed that they account for a subculture that simply must be tolerated. However, science and religion, which provide different approaches to reality, may come into a sustained and productive dialogue for both.

I. The light that faith offers

63. If we take into account the complexity of the ecological crisis and its multiple causes, we should recognize that the solutions can not come from a single way to interpret and transform reality. It is necessary to resort to diverse cultural riches of the peoples, art and poetry, to the inner life and spirituality. If you really want to build an ecology that allows us to fix everything that we destroyed, then no branch of science, and no form of wisdom can be neglected, even the religious one with its own language. Moreover, the Catholic Church is open to dialogue with philosophical thought, and this allows it to produce various synthesis between faith and reason. As for social issues, this can be seen in the development of the social doctrine of the Church, called to enrich themselves even more from the new challenges.

64. On the other hand, even though this Encyclical opens a dialogue with everyone to search together for ways of liberation, I want to show from the beginning as the beliefs of the Christian faith offer, and partly to other believers, high motivation to take care of nature and of our more fragile brothers and sisters. If the mere fact of being human moves people to take care of the environment of which they are part, “Christians, in particular, feel that their tasks within creation and their duty towards nature and the Creator are part of their faith.”[36 John Paul II, Message for the World Day of Peace 1990, 15: AAS 82 (1990), 156.] Therefore, it is good for humanity and for the world that we believers better recognize the ecological commitments arising from our beliefs.

II. The wisdom of the biblical stories

65. Without reproducing here the whole theology of Creation, we wonder what the great biblical stories tell us about the relationship between human beings and the world. In the first story of the creative work in the book of Genesis, God’s plan includes the creation of mankind. After the creation of man and woman, it is said that “God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good” (Gen 1:31). The Bible teaches that every human being is created out of love, made in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1:26). This statement shows us the immense dignity of every human person, which “is not just something, but someone. It is capable of knowing, self-possession, free self-giving and entering into communion with others.” [37 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 357.] St. John Paul II recalled how the very special love that the Creator has for each human being “gives infinite dignity.” [38 See Angelus in Osnabrück (Germany) with people with disabilities, 16 November 1980: Teachings 3/2 (1980), 1232.] Those who engage in the defense of human dignity can find in the Christian faith the deeper reasons for this commitment. It certainly is wonderful to know that the life of every person is not lost in a hopeless chaos, in a world ruled by pure chance or by cycles that repeat nonsense! The Creator can say to each of us: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Jer 1,5). We were conceived in the heart of God and therefore “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 Benedict XVI, Homily for the solemn inauguration of the Petrine ministry (24 April 2005): AAS 97 (2005), 711.]

66. The accounts of creation in Genesis contain, in their symbolic language and narrative, profound teachings on human existence and its historical reality. These stories suggest that human existence is based on three fundamental, closely related relationships: the relationship with God, the one with our neighbor and the one with the earth. According to the Bible, these three vital relationships are broken, not only outside, but also within us. This break is sin. The harmony between the Creator, mankind and all creation has been destroyed for us through having claimed to take the place of God and having refused to recognize ourselves as limited creatures. This has distorted the nature of the mandate to subdue the earth (cf. Gen 1:28) and to grow it and keep it (cf. Gen 2:15). As a result, the originally harmonious relationship between human beings and nature has turned into a conflict (cf. Gen 3,17-19). It is therefore significant that the harmony that St. Francis of Assisi lived with all creatures has been interpreted as a healing of this rupture. St. Bonaventure said that through the universal reconciliation with all creatures in some way Francis was returned to the state of original innocence. [40 See Legenda Maior, VIII, 1: FF 1134.] Far from that model, today sin is manifested by all its strength of destruction in wars, in the various forms of violence and abuse, abandonment of the most fragile, in the attacks against nature.

67. We are not God. The earth came before us and was given to us. This allows you to answer an accusation launched against the Jewish-Christian thought: it was said that, from the Genesis account that invites you to subdue the earth (cf. Gen 1:28), would be favored the uncontrolled exploitation of nature by presenting an image of the human being as domineering and destructive. This is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church. Although it is true that sometimes Christians have interpreted the Scriptures incorrectly, today we must reject with force that from being created in the image of God and the mandate to subdue the earth we can deduce an absolute dominion over other creatures. It is important to read the biblical texts in their context, with a right hermeneutic, and remember that they invite us to “till and keep” the garden of the world (cf. Gen 2:15). While “till” means to plow or work soil, “keep” means protect, heal, preserve, maintain, supervise. This implies a mutual responsibility between human beings and nature. Each community can take the goodness of the earth what they need for their survival, but also has a duty to protect it and ensure continuity of its fertility for future generations. Ultimately, “the earth is the Lord’s” (Ps 24.1), belongs to him, “the earth and all that therein is” (Deut 10:14). Therefore, God denies any claim of freehold: “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine and you are but aliens and at guests” (25:23).

68. This responsibility before of an earth that belongs to God, implies that the human being, endowed with intelligence, respecting the laws of nature and the delicate balance between the beings of this world, because “he commanded and they were created. And it established them for ever forever; He has set a decree which shall not pass” (Ps 148,5b-6). It follows that the biblical law is to stop proposing to human beings various standards, not only in relation to other human beings, but also in relation to other living beings: “If you see the ass of your brother or his ox fell along the way, do not pretend to not hide thyself from them [...]. When, along the way, you find a tree or on the ground a bird’s nest or eggs and the mother who is brooding birds or the eggs, do not take the mother who is with the children “(Dt 22,4.6). In this line, the rest of the seventh day is proposed not only for humans, but also “so that your ox and your donkey can enjoy quiet ” (Exodus 23:12). So we realize that the Bible does not give rise to a despotic anthropocentrism without the interests of other creatures.

69. While we can make responsible use of things, we are called to recognize that other living things have a value in front of God and “with their mere existence they bless him and give him glory,” [41 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2416.] because the Lord rejoices in his works (cf. Ps 104,31). Because of his unique dignity and being endowed with intelligence, the human being is called to respect creation with its domestic laws, since “the Lord founded the earth with wisdom” (Proverbs 3:19). Today the Church does not say in a simplistic way that other creatures are completely subordinated to the good of the human being, as if they have a value in themselves and we could dispose of at will. So the Bishops of Germany explained that all creatures “one could talk about the priority of being, compared to being useful.” [42 German Bishops’ Conference, Zukunft der Schöpfung – Zukunft der Menschheit. Erklärung der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz zu Fragen der Umwelt und der Energieversorgung (1980), II, 2.] The Catechism puts into question in a very direct and insistant manner that it would be a deviant anthropocentrism: “Every creature has its own goodness and his own perfection [...] The various creatures, willed in their own being, reflect, each in its own way a ray of God’s infinite wisdom and goodness. For this man must respect the particular goodness of every creature, to avoid disordered use of things. ” [43 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 339.]

70. In the story of Cain and Abel, we see that jealousy drove Cain to take the extreme injustice against his brother. This in turn has caused a breakdown in the relationship between Cain and God and between Cain and the earth, from which he was exiled. This step is summarized in the dramatic dialogue between God and Cain. God asks, “Where is Abel your brother?”. Cain says he does not know and God insists: “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to me from the land! Now you are cursed, away from [this] land” (Gen 4.9 to 11). Neglecting the commitment to cultivate and maintain a proper relationship with others, for which I have a duty of care and custody, it destroys my inner relationship with myself, with others, with God and with the land. When all these relations are neglected, when justice does not live on earth, the Bible tells us that all life is in danger. This is what the story of Noah tells us, when God threatens to wipe out humanity for its continuing failure to live up to the demands of justice and peace: “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them.”(Gen 6:13). In these stories so ancient, and rich with deep symbolism, was already contained a conviction heard today: that everything is related, and that the genuine care of our own life and our relationship with nature is inseparable from fraternity, justice and loyalty towards others.

71. Although “the wickedness of man was great in the earth” (Gen 6.5) and God “regretted having made man on the earth” (Gen 6.6), however, through Noah, who still retained integrity and fairness, God decided to open a path to salvation. Thus it gave mankind the possibility of a new beginning. It is enough that there is a good man because there is hope! The biblical tradition makes it clear that this rehabilitation involves the re-discovery and compliance with the rhythms inscribed in nature from the hand of the Creator. This is seen, for example, in the law of Shabbat. On the seventh day, God rested from all his works. God commanded Israel that every seventh day was to be celebrated as a day of rest, one Shabbat (cf. Gen 2,2-3; Ex 16,23; 20,10). Similarly, a year off was established to Israel and its land, every seven years (cf. Lv 25.1 to 4), in which he allowed a complete rest to the land, not sowed and gathered only that needed to survive and offer hospitality (cf. Lv 25.4 to 6). Finally, when seven weeks of years, that is forty-nine years, elapsed, he celebrated the jubilee year of forgiveness and universal “liberation in the land to all its inhabitants” (Lev 25:10). The development of this legislation has sought to ensure the balance and fairness in the relationship of human beings with each other and with the land where he lived and worked. But, at the same time, it was a recognition of the fact that the gift of the earth with its fruits belong to all the people. Those who cultivated and guarded the territory had to share the fruits, especially with the poor, widows, orphans and strangers: “When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of the field, nor reap what remains to be glean the harvest; As for your vineyard, you do not gather the gleanings or gather the fallen grapes: Leave them for the poor and the alien “(Lev 19.9 to 10).

72. The Psalms invite frequently the human being to praise God the Creator, the One who “spread out the earth upon the waters, for his love endures forever” (Ps 136,6). But they also invite other creatures to praise: “Praise him, sun and moon, praise him, all shining stars. Praise him, 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 exist not only through the power of God, but in front of Him and with Him. Thus we adore him.

73. The writings of the prophets invite us to regain strength in difficult moments contemplating the powerful God who created the universe. The infinite power of God does not bring us to escape his paternal tenderness, because in Him love and strength are combined. In fact, every healthy spirituality implies at the same time we receive divine love and worship the Lord with trust in his infinite power. In the Bible, the God who liberates and saves is the same that created the universe, and these two ways of acting divine are intimately and inextricably linked: “Ah, Lord God, with your great power and your strength you did create heaven and earth; nothing for you is impossible [...]. You took your people out of Egypt to Israel with signs and wonders” (Jer 32,17.21). “Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.. He gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak”(Is 40,28b-29).

74. The experience of slavery in Babylon brought about a spiritual crisis that led to a deepening of faith in God, explaining his creative omnipotence, to exhort the people to find hope in the midst of their unhappy situation. Centuries later, in another time of trial and persecution, when the Roman Empire tried to impose an absolute rule, the faithful returned to find comfort and hope by increasing their trust in Almighty God, and sang: “Great and wonderful are your works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are your ways!” (Rev 15,3). If God could create the universe out of nothing, he can also intervene in this world and defeat every form of evil. Therefore, the injustice is not invincible.

75. We cannot support a spirituality that forgets God the almighty and creator. In this way, we would end up worshiping other powers of the world, or we would place ourselves in the seat of the Lord, so far as to purport to tread upon the reality created by Him without knowing the limit. The best way to place the human being in his place and put an end to his claim to be an absolute ruler of the earth, is to return to propose the figure of a Father creator and sole master of the world, because otherwise the human being will always tend to want to impose on reality his own laws and his own interests.

III. The mystery of the universe

76. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, to say “creation” is to say nature, because it has to do with a loving plan of God, where every creature has a value and meaning. Nature is often understood as a system that analyzes itself, comprises itself and manages itself, but the creation can only be understood as a gift which flows from the open hand of the Father of all, as a reality illuminated by the love that calls us to a universal communion.

77. “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made” (Ps 33.6). So it is indicated that the world comes from a decision, not by chaos or randomness, and this implies even more. There is a free choice expressed in the creative word. The universe is not born as a result of arbitrary omnipotence, of a show of force or a desire for self-affirmation. The creation belongs to the command of love. The love of God is the fundamental reason of all creation: “For you love all things that exist and not try disgust for any of the things which you have made; if you had hated something, you would not have formed “(Wisdom 11:24). So, every creature is the subject of the tenderness of the Father, which gives her a place in the world. Even the ephemeral life of the most insignificant being is the subject of his love, and in those few seconds of existence, He surrounds them with his affection. St. Basil the Great said that the Creator is also “the goodness without calculation,” [44 Hom. in Hexaemeron, 1, 2, 10: PG 29, 9.] and Dante Alighieri spoke of “the love that moves the sun and other stars.” [45 Divine Comedy. Paradiso, Canto XXXIII, 145.] Therefore, the works created ascend “up to his loving mercy.” [46 Benedict XVI, catechesis (Nov. 9, 2005), 3: Insegnamenti1 (2005), 768.]

78. At the same time, Jewish-Christian thought has demythologized nature. Without stopping to admire it for its beauty and its immensity, it has not been given a more divine character. In this way our commitment to it will be further underscored. A return to nature can not be at the expense of the freedom and responsibility of the human being, who is the part of the world with the task of cultivating their ability to protect and develop its potential. If we recognize the value and fragility of nature, and at the same time the capabilities that the Creator has given us, this allows us to end the modern myth of unlimited material progress. A fragile world, with a human being to whom God entrusted its care, challenges our intelligence to recognize how we should orient, cultivate and limit our power.

79. In this universe, composed of open systems that come into communication with each other, we can find many forms of relationship and participation. This also leads us to think about the set as open to the transcendence of God, in which it develops. Faith enables us to interpret the meaning and the mysterious beauty of what happens. Human freedom can offer its intelligent contribution towards a positive development, but it can also add new evils, new causes of suffering and moments of retreat. This gives rise to the thrilling and dramatic human story, capable of being transformed into a hive of liberation, growth, salvation and love, or in a process of decay and of mutual destruction. Therefore, the action of the Church not only tries to remember the duty to take care of nature, but at the same time “must above all protect mankind against the destruction of himself.” [47 Id., Lett. Enc. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 51: AAS 101 (2009), 687.]

80. Nevertheless, God, who wants to work with us and rely on our collaboration, it is also able to take something good from the evil that we do, because “the Holy Spirit has infinite inventiveness, proper to the divine mind, who knows cater to untie the knots of human affairs even more complex and impenetrable. ” [48 John Paul II, Catechesis (24 April 1991), 6: Teachings 14/1 (1991), 856.] In some way, he wanted to limit himself to create a world in need of development, where many things that we consider evil , hazards or sources of suffering, in reality are part of the pain of childbirth, which encourage us to collaborate with the Creator. [49 The Catechism teaches that God wanted to create a world on the way up to its ultimate perfection, and that this implies a physical presence of imperfection and evil: cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 310.] He is present in the most intimate of all things without affecting the autonomy of her child, and this gives rise to the legitimate autonomy of earthly realities. [50 cf. Conc. Vatican Ecumenical Council. Vat. II, Const. past. Gaudium et Spes on the Church in the Modern World, 36.] This divine presence, which ensures continuity and development of all beings, “is a continuation of the creative action.” [51 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 104, art. 1 to 4.] The Spirit of God filled the universe with the potential to allow that from the womb of the same things can always sprout something new: “Nature is nothing but the reason for some art, especially of divine art, inscribed in things, so the same things are moving toward a certain end. As if the master shipbuilder could allow the timber to move by itself to take the shape of the ship.” [52 Id., In octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis expositio, lib. II, lectio 14.]

81. The human being, although suppose also evolutionary processes, involves a novelty not fully explained by the evolution of other open systems. Each of us has a personal identity itself able to enter into dialogue with others and with God himself. The capacity for reflection, reasoning, creativity, interpretation, processing and other artistic skills original show a singularity that transcends the physical and biological. The new quality implied by the rise of a personal being inside the material universe presupposes a direct action of God, a special call to the life and relationship of a You to another you. Starting from the biblical texts, we consider the person as a subject, which can never be reduced to the category of object.

82. However, it would also be wrong to think that other living beings should be regarded as mere objects subject to the arbitrary rule of the human being. When you propose a vision of nature only as an object of profit and interest, it also carries serious consequences for society. The vision that strengthens the will of the stronger favored immense inequality, injustice and violence for most of humanity, because resources become the property of the first come, or one that has more power: the winner takes all. The ideal of harmony, justice, brotherhood and peace that Jesus offers is the opposite of that model, and so he expressed it, referring to the powers of his time: “The rulers of the nations lord it over them, and their leaders oppress them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant” (Mt 20.25 to 26).

83. The goal of the journey of the universe is in the fullness of God, which has already been achieved by the risen Christ, the center of universal maturity. [53 In this perspective, there is the contribution of Father Teilhard de Chardin; cf. Paul VI, Address on a chemical-pharmaceutical factory (24 February 1966): Teachings 4 (1966), 992- 993; John Paul II, Letter to the Reverend Father George V. Coyne (June 1, 1988): Teachings 11/2 (1988), 1715; Benedict XVI, Homily at Vespers in Aosta (July 24, 2009): Teachings 5/2 (2009), 60.] In this way, we add an additional argument to reject any despotic and irresponsible dominion of the human being over the other creatures. We are not the ultimate goal of the other creatures. Instead all advance, together with us and through us, towards the common goal, which is God, in a transcendent fullness where the risen Christ embraces and illuminates everything. The human being, in fact, endowed with intelligence and love, and drawn to the fullness of Christ, is called to bring all creatures to their Creator.

IV. The message of every creature in the harmony of all creation

84. To insist in saying that the human being is the image of God should not make us forget that every creature has a function and nothing is superfluous. All the material universe is a language of God, of his boundless love for us. Soil, water, mountains, everything is God’s caress. The story of one’s friendship with God develops more in a geographical space that becomes a very personal mark, and everyone keeps in mind the places whose memories are so good. He who grew up in the mountains, or a child who was sitting beside the stream to drink, or who played in a square of his neighborhood, when he returns to those places feels called to recover his identity.

85. God has written a wonderful book, “whose letters are the multitude of creatures in the universe.” [54 John Paul II, Catechesis (30 January 2002), 6: Teachings 25/1 (2002), 140.] The bishops of Canada have expressed well that no creature is out of this manifestation of God: “Come over to the sweeping vistas more slender forms of life, nature is a constant source of wonder and reverence. It is also a continuing revelation of the divine. ” [55 Conference of Catholic Bishops of Canada. Social Affairs Committee, Pastoral Letter “You Love All That Exists … All Things Are Yours, God, Lover of Life” (4 October 2003), 1.] The Bishops of Japan, for their part, have said something very striking: “Perceiving every creature who sings the anthem of its existence is to live with joy in God’s love and hope. ” [56 Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Japan, Reverence for Life. A Message for the Twenty-First Century (1 January 2001), 89.] This contemplation of creation allows us to discover everything through some teaching that God wants to communicate, because “for the believer to contemplate creation is also to hear a message, hear a paradoxical and silent voice.” [57 John Paul II, Catechesis (26 January 2000), 5: Teachings 23/1 (2000), 123.] We can say that “In addition to the revelation itself in Sacred Scripture is, therefore, a divine manifestation in the blaze of the sun and the fall of the night. ” [58 Id., Catechesis (August 2, 2000), 3: L’Osservatore 23/2 (2000), 112.] By paying attention to this event, the human being learns to recognize itself in relation to other creatures: “I express myself expressing the world; I explore my deciphering the sacredness of the world. ” [59 Paul Ricoeur, Philosophie de la volonté. 2. Finitude et Culpabilité, Paris 2009, 216 (trans. Trans .: finitude and guilt, Bologna, 1970, 258). ]

86. The whole of the universe, with its multiple relationships, shows best the inexhaustible richness of God. St. Thomas Aquinas pointed out wisely that the multiplicity and variety come from “the intention of the first agent,” Whom wanted “what is lacking in each thing to represent the divine goodness is compensated by other things,” [60 Summa Theologica I, q. 47, art. 1.] that his goodness “can not be adequately represented by one creature.” [61 Ibid. ] For this, we need to grasp the variety of things in their multiple relationships. [62 Cf. ibid., Art. 2, ad. 1; art. 3.] Therefore, we understand better the importance and significance of any creature, if we contemplate it jointly in the overall plan of God. This the Catechism teaches: “The interdependence of creatures is willed by God. The sun and the moon, the cedar and the little flower, the eagle and the sparrow: the countless diversities and inequalities tells us that no creature is self-sufficient, that they exist only in dependence on each other, to complete each other, in the service one another ”. [63 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 340.]

87. When you realize the reflection of God in all that exists, the heart experiences the desire to worship the Lord for all his creatures, and along with them, as it appears in the beautiful song of St Francis of Assisi, “Praised be, my Lord, through all Your creatures, especially through my lord Brother Sun, who brings the day; and You give light through him. And he is beautiful and radiant in all his splendor! Of You, Most High, he bears the likeness. Praised be, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars; in the heavens You have made them bright, precious and beautiful. Praised be, my Lord, through Brothers Wind and Air, and clouds and storms, and all the weather, through which You give Your creatures sustenance. Praised be, my Lord, through Sister Water; she is very useful, and humble, and precious, and pure. Praised be, my Lord, through Brother Fire, through whom You brighten the night. He is beautiful and cheerful, and powerful and strong.” [64 Canticle of the Sun: FF 263.]

88. The Bishops of Brazil have stressed that all of nature, in addition to expressing God, is the place of his presence. In every creature lives his life-giving Spirit that calls us to a relationship with Him. [65 Cf. National Conference of Brazilian Bishops, A Igreja and Questão ecológica, 1992, 53-54.] The discovery of this presence stimulates in us the development of “ecological virtues.” [66 Ibid., 61.] But when we say this, we do not forget that there is also an infinite distance, that the things of this world do not have the fullness of God. Otherwise we would not even be good to creatures, because we would not recognize their own just and authentic place, and we would end up requiring unduly from them what in their smallness cannot give us.

V. A universal communion

89. The creatures of this world can not be considered without a good owner, “I am yours, Lord, lover of life” (Wis 11:26). This leads to the belief that, having been created by the same Father, all we beings in the universe are united by invisible ties and form a kind of universal family, a sublime communion that drives us to a sacred respect, loving and humble. I want to remember that “God has united us so closely to the world around us, that desertification of soil is like a disease for everyone, and we can lament the extinction of a species like a mutilation.” [67 Apost. ap. Evangelii gaudium (24 November 2013), 215: AAS 105 (2013), 1109.]

90. This is not to equate all living beings and remove that value peculiar to the human being that implies both a tremendous responsibility. Neither does it lead to a deification of the earth, which would deprive us of the call to collaborate with it and protect its fragility. These conceptions would create new imbalances in an attempt to escape from reality that challenges us. [68 Cf. Benedict XVI, Enc. Lett. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 14: AAS 101 (2009), 650.] It feels sometimes the obsession to deny the human person any prominence, and is pursuing a struggle for other species that we do not enact to defend the equal dignity of human beings. Certainly we have to worry that other living beings are not treated in an irresponsible way, but we should be ashamed especially by the enormous inequalities that exist between us, because we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more worthy than others. We do not realize that some more toil in abject poverty, with no real possibility of improvement, while others do not even know what to do with their possessions, flaunt with vanity an alleged superiority and leave behind them a level of waste that would be impossible to generalize it without destroying the planet. We continue in fact to admit that some feel more human than others, as if they were born with more rights.

91. It cannot be a genuine feeling of intimate union with other beings of nature, if at the same time in the heart there is no tenderness, compassion and concern for human beings. Clearly, the inconsistency of those who fight against the trafficking of animals in danger of extinction, but remain completely indifferent to trafficking in persons, is indifferent to the poor, or is determined to destroy another human being that he is not welcome. This undermines the sense of struggle for the environment. It is no coincidence that, in the song that praises God for creatures, Francis added: “Praised be my Lord, through those who give pardon for your love.” Everything is connected. For this it requires a concern for the environment combined with the sincere love for human beings and a constant commitment to the problems of society.

92. On the other hand, when the heart is truly open to a universal communion, nothing and no one is excluded from this fraternity. Consequently, it is also true that the indifference or cruelty to other creatures of this world always end up moving to how we treat other human beings. The heart is one and the same misery that leads to mistreat an animal is soon to appear in relation to other people. Any mistreatment towards any creature “is contrary to human dignity.” [69 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2418.] We can not consider ourselves people who really love our interests if we exclude a part of reality, “Peace, justice and protection of creation are three matters completely connected, that you can not separate in order to be treated individually, on pain of falling back into reductionism. ” [70 Conference of the Dominican, Pastoral Letter Sobre la relación del hombre with naturaleza (15 March 1987).] Everything is related, and all human beings are united as brothers and sisters in a wonderful pilgrimage, bound by the love God has for each of his creatures and unites us also, with tender affection, to brother sun, sister moon, to brother river and to Mother Earth.

VI. The common destination of goods

93. Today, believers and non-believers alike agree that the earth is essentially a common heritage, the fruits of which should go to the benefit of all. For believers, this becomes a matter of loyalty to the Creator, because God created the world for all. Consequently, every ecological approach must integrate a social perspective that takes into account the fundamental rights of the most disadvantaged. The principle of the subordination of private property to the universal destination of goods and, therefore, the universal right to their use, is a “golden rule” of social behavior, and the “first principle of the whole ethical and social order.” [71 John Paul II, Enc. Lett. Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), 19: AAS 73 (1981), 626.] The Christian tradition has never recognized as absolute or inviolable right to private property, and emphasized the social function of any form of private property. St. John Paul II recalled emphatically that doctrine, saying that “God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favoring anyone.” [72 Lett. Enc. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 31: AAS 83 (1991), 831.] These words are weighty and strong. He remarked that “it would not be truly worthy of man a kind of development that does not respect and promote human rights, personal and social, economic and political, including the rights of nations and peoples”. [73 Lett. Enc. Ioannis Pauli PP (30 December 1987), 33: AAS 80 (1988), 557.] With great clarity he explained that “the Church defends yes the legitimate right to private property, but also teaches with no less clarity that on any private property rests always a social mortgage, because the assets serve the general purpose that God has given them.” [74 speech to the indigenous and the campesinos of Mexico, Cuilapan (29 January 1979) , 6: AAS 71 (1979), 209.] Thus says that “it is not according to God’s plan to manage this gift so that its benefits are only for the benefit of a few.” [75 Homily at the Mass celebrated by the Farmers in Recife, Brazil (July 7, 1980), 4: AAS 72 (1980), 926.] This casts serious doubts on the unjust habits of a part of humanity. [76 Cf. Message for the World Day of Peace 1990, 8 : AAS 82 (1990), 152.]

94. The rich and the poor are equal in dignity, because “the Lord created the one and the other” (Pr 22,2), “he created the small and the great” (Wis 6,7), and “he makes his sun rise on the evil and the good” (Mt 5,45). This has practical consequences, such as those set out by the Bishops of Paraguay: “Every farmer has the natural right to possess a reasonable plot of land, where it can establish his household, to work for the support of his family and have security for their own existence. This right must be guaranteed so that its exercise is not illusory but real. Which means that in addition to the title of the property, the farmer must rely on means of technical training, loans, insurance and market access”.[77 Paraguayan Episcopal Conference, Pastoral Letter El campesino paraguayo y la tierra (12 June 1983), 2, 4, d.]

95. The environment is a collective heritage of all humanity and the responsibility of all. Who owns part is only to administer it for the benefit of all. If we do not, we load on the conscience the weight of denying the existence of others. For this reason the Bishops of New Zealand have wondered what it means the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” when “a twenty percent of the world population consumes resources to an extent that steal from poor nations and to future generations what they need to survive”. [78 Episcopal Conference of New Zealand, Statement on Environmental Issues, Wellington (1 September 2006).]

VII. The gaze of Jesus

96. Jesus takes up the biblical faith in God the Creator and brings out a fundamental fact: God is the Father (cf. Mt 11:25). In the dialogues with his disciples, Jesus invited them to recognize the paternal relationship that God has with all creatures, and reminded them with a touching tenderness as each of them is important in his eyes: “Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten before God” (Lk 12,6). “Look at the birds of the air: for they sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them” (Mt 6:26).

97. The Lord could invite others to be attentive to the beauty that is in the world, because he himself was in continuous contact with nature and paying attention full of affection and awe. When he walked every corner of his land, he stopped to contemplate the beauty sown by his Father, and he invited the disciples to grasp things in a divine message: “Lift up your eyes and look at the fields, are already white for harvest” (Jn 4.35). “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it is grown, it is bigger than the other garden plants and becomes a tree “(Mt 13,31-32).

98. Jesus lived a perfect harmony with creation, and the others were astonished: “Who is this man, that even the winds and the sea obey him?” (Mt 8:27). He did not look like an ascetic separated from the world, or enemy of the nice things of life. Referring to himself he said: “It is the Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say: ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard’”(Mt 11,19). He was far from the philosophies that despised the body, matter and the realities of this world. However, these unhealthy dualisms have had a significant influence on some Christian thinkers throughout history and have distorted the Gospel. Jesus worked with his hands, taking daily contact with matter created by God to shape it with his skills as a craftsman. It is noteworthy the fact that most of his life has been devoted to this effort, in a simple life that did not arouse any admiration: “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary?” (Mk 6,3) . So he hallowed work and conferred it a special value for our maturation. St. John Paul II taught that “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 Lett. Enc. Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), 27: AAS 73 (1981), 645.]

99. According to the Christian understanding of reality, the fate of the whole creation through the mystery of Christ, which is present from the beginning: “All things were created through him and for him” (Col 1 , 16). [80 For this reason, St. Justin could speak of “seeds of the Word” in the world: cf. II Apologia 8, 1-2; 13, 3-6: PG 6.457 to 458; 467.] The prologue of the Gospel of John (1,1-18) shows the creative activity of Christ as the divine Word (Logos). But this prologue is surprising in its statement that this Word “became flesh” (Jn 1:14). A Person of the Trinity has entered the created cosmos, sharing the fate up to the cross. Since the beginning of the world, but especially from the Incarnation, the mystery of Christ works in a hidden way in the whole of natural reality, without undermining its independence.

100. The New Testament not only tells us about the earthly Jesus and his relationship so real and loving with the world. He is also shown risen and glorious, present in all creation with his universal lordship: “For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”(Col 1,19-20). This propels us to the end of time, when the Son will deliver all things to the Father, so that “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). Thus, the creatures of this world there appear more than as a merely natural reality, because the Risen mysteriously surrounds and inspires them to a destiny of fullness. The same flowers of the field and the birds that He contemplated admiringly with his human eyes, are now full of his luminous presence.

ENCYCLICAL PRAISED BE
THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS
ON CARE OF OUR COMMON HOME

1. “Praised be, my Lord,” sang Saint Francis of Assisi. In this beautiful song he reminded us that our common home is also a sister, with whom we share the existence, and a beautiful mother who welcomes us into her arms: “Praised be, my Lord, through Sister Mother Earth, who sustains and governs us, and produces various fruits with colored flowers and herbs.” [1 Canticle of the Sun: Franciscan Sources (FF) 263.]

2. This sister protests the evil that we provoke, because of the irresponsible use and the abuse of the goods that God has placed in her. We grew up thinking that we were its owners and rulers, allowed to plunder it. The violence that exists in the human heart wounded by sin is also manifested in the symptoms of the disease we perceive in soil, water, air and in living things. For this, among the most abandoned poor and abused, there is our oppressed and devastated land, that “groaning in travail” (Rm 8:22). We forget that we ourselves are earth (cf. Gen 2.7). Our body is made up of the same elements of the planet, its air is the one that gives us the breath and its water gives us life and restores.

Nothing that arises in this world is indifferent.

3. More than fifty years ago, while the world teetered on the brink of a nuclear crisis, the saint Pope John XXIII wrote an Encyclical with which was not limited only to reject the war, but he wanted to submit a draft proposal peace. He directed his message Pacem in Terris to all the “Catholic world”, but added “as well to all men of good will. “Now, of the deteriorating global environment, I speak to every person who lives this planet. In my Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, I wrote to the members of the Church to mobilize a reform process still on a mission from accomplishing. In this encyclical, I propose especially to enter into dialogue with all respecting our common home.

4. Eight years after the Pacem in Terris, in 1971, Blessed Pope Paul VI referred to the ecological question, presenting it as a crisis that is “a dramatic consequence” of uncontrolled activity of the human being: “Through a reckless exploitation of nature he risks destroying it and becoming in his turn the victim of this degradation”. [2 Lett. Ap. Octogesima adveniens (14 May 1971), 21: AAS 63 (1971), 416-417.] He also spoke to the FAO of the possibility “under the influence of backlash of industrial civilization, of [...] a real ecological catastrophe,” emphasizing “the urgent need for a radical change in the conduct of mankind,” because “the most extraordinary scientific advances, the most amazing technical feats, the most prodigious economic growth, if they are not joined to a genuine social and moral progress, they turn, ultimately, against man. ” [3 Address to FAO on the 25th anniversary (November 16, 1970), 4: AAS 62 (1970), 833.]

5. St. John Paul II dealt with this issue with a growing interest. In his first encyclical, he said that the human being seems “to perceive no other meaning in his natural environment, but only those that serve the purpose of immediate use and consumption.” [4 Lett. Enc. Redemptor hominis (4 March 1979), 15: AAS 71 (1979), 287.] Subsequently he invited to a global ecological conversion. [5 Cf. Catechism (17 January 2001), 4: L’Osservatore 24/1 (2001), 179.] But at the same time he pointed out that it takes little effort to “safeguard the moral conditions for an authentic human ecology.” [6 Lett. Enc. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 38: AAS 83 (1991), 841.] The destruction of the human environment is something very serious, not only because God has entrusted the world to the human being, but because human life itself is a gift that must be protected by various forms of degradation. Any aspiration to treat and improve the world requires to change profoundly the “lifestyles, of models of production and consumption, the established structures of power which today govern societies”. [7 Ibid., 58: p. 863.] Authentic human development has a moral character and assumes the full respect of the human person, but must also pay attention to the natural world and “take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system”. [8 John Paul II, Enc. Lett. Ioannis Pauli PP (30 December 1987), 34: AAS 80 (1988), 559.] Therefore, the ability of human beings to transform reality must be developed on the basis of prior and original gift of the things of God. [9 Cf. Id., Lett. enc. Centesimus Annus (May 1, 1991), 37: AAS 83 (1991), 840.]

6. My predecessor Benedict XVI renewed the invitation “to eliminate the structural causes of global economic dysfunction and to correct models of growth that seem incapable of guaranteeing respect for the environment.” [10 Address to the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See (January 8, 2007): AAS 99 (2007), 73.] He recalled that the world can not be analyzed by isolating just one aspect, because “the book of nature is one and indivisible “and includes the environment, life, sexuality, family, social relationships, and other aspects. Consequently, “the degradation of nature is closely linked to the cultural models shaping human coexistence.” [11 Lett. Enc. Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 51: AAS 101 (2009), 687.] Pope Benedict has proposed to recognize that the natural environment is full of wounds caused by our irresponsible behavior. Even the social environment has its wounds. But all are caused basically by the same evil, that is the idea that there are no indisputable truths to guide our lives, that human freedom has no limits. He forgets that “man is not only a freedom that creates itself. Man does not create himself. He is spirit and desire, but also nature. ” [12 Address to the Deutscher Bundestag, Berlin (September 22, 2011): AAS 103 (2011), 664.] With fatherly concern he invited us to recognize that the creation is compromised “where we ourselves are the ultimate demand, where the set is merely our property and we consume it for ourselves alone. And the wasting of creation begins where we no longer recognize any need superior to us, but we see only ourselves. ” [13 Address to the clergy of the Diocese of Bolzano-Bressanone (August 6, 2008): AAS 100 (2008), 634.]

United by the same concern

7. These contributions of the Popes collect the reflection of countless scientists, philosophers, theologians and social organizations that have enriched the Church’s thinking on these issues. But we cannot ignore that, even outside the Catholic Church, other churches and Christian communities – as well as other religions – have developed a deep concern and a valuable reflection on these issues that are dear to us all. To name just a particularly significant example, I want to take a brief part of the contribution of the first Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, with whom we share the hope of full ecclesial communion.

8. Patriarch Bartholomew has referred particularly to the need for everyone to repent of their way of mistreating the planet, because “to the extent that all of us we cause little damage to the environment,” we are called to recognize “our contribution, small or large, the distortion and destruction of the environment. ” [14 Message for the Day of Prayer for the integrity of creation (1 September 2012). ] On this point, he has repeatedly expressed firmly and bracingly, inviting us to recognize sins against creation: “What humans destroy the biological diversity of God’s creation; that humans affect the integrity of the earth and contribute to climate change, stripping the earth of its natural forests or destroying its wetlands; that humans pollute the waters, soil, air: all these are sins. “[15 speech in Santa Barbara, California (November 8, 1997); cf. John Chryssavgis, On Earth as in Heaven: Ecological Vision of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Initiatives, Bronx, New York, 2012.] Because “a crime against nature is a crime against ourselves and a sin against God.” [16 Ibid.]

9. At the same time Bartholomew has called attention to the ethical and spiritual roots of environmental problems, which invite us to seek solutions not only in technology, but also a change in the human being, because otherwise it would address only the symptoms. He proposed to move from consumption to sacrifice, from greed to generosity, from the waste to the ability to share, in an asceticism that “means learning to give, and not simply give up. It is a way to love, to gradually shift from what I want to what the world of God needs. It is freedom from fear, greed and addiction.” [17 Conference to Utstein Monastery, Norway (June 23, 2003).] We Christians, also, are called to “accept the world as a sacrament of communion, as a way of sharing with God and with one another in a global scale. It is our humble belief that the divine and the human meet in the smallest detail of the seamless garment of God’s creation, even the last speck of dust of our planet.” [18 Speech “Global Responsibility and Ecological Sustainability: Closing Remarks”, The Summit of Halki, Istanbul (20 June 2012).]

St. Francis of Assisi

10. I do not want to proceed in this encyclical without mentioning a beautiful and motivating example. I took his name as a guide and inspiration in the moment of my election as Bishop of Rome. I think Francis is the example par excellence of care for the weak and of an integral ecology, lived with joy and authenticity. He is the patron saint of all those who study and work in the field of ecology, loved by many who are not Christians. He showed special attention towards the creation of God and for the poor and abandoned. He loved and was loved for his joy, his selfless dedication, his universal heart. He was a mystic and a pilgrim who lived with simplicity and in a wonderful harmony with God, with others, with nature and with himself. In him we find the extent to which concern for nature, justice for the poor, commitment to society and inner peace are inseparable.

11. His testimony also shows us that the integral ecology requires openness towards categories that transcend the language of the exact sciences or biology and connect us with the essence of the human. Just as it happens when we fall in love with a person, whenever Francis looked at the sun, the moon, the smaller animals, his reaction was singing, involving in its praise all other creatures. He entered into communication with the whole of creation, and even preached to the flowers and “invited them to praise and love God, as beings endowed with reason.” [19 Thomas of Celano, First Life of St. Francis, XXIX, 81: FF 460. ] His reaction was much more than an intellectual appreciation or an economic calculation, because for him any creature was a sister, joined to him with bonds of affection. For that he felt called to take care of all that exists. His disciple, St. Bonaventure said of him, “considering that all things have a common origin, he felt full of pity and even more called creatures, however small, as his brother or sister.” [20 Legenda Maior, VIII, 6: FF 1145.] This belief cannot be despised as an irrational romanticism, because it influences the choices that determine our behavior. If we approach nature and environment without this opening to amazement and wonder, if we no longer talk the language of brotherhood and beauty in our relationship with the world, our attitudes will be those of the ruler, the consumer or the mere exploiter of natural resources, unable to put a limit to his immediate interests. Conversely, if we feel intimately united with all that exists, sobriety and care will arise spontaneously. The poverty and austerity of St. Francis were not only external asceticism but something more radical: a renunciation of making reality a mere object of use and domination.

12. On the other hand, St. Francis, faithful to Scripture, proposes to recognize nature as a wonderful book in which God speaks to us and gives us something of its beauty and goodness: “For from the greatness and beauty of created things come a corresponding perception of their author” (Wis 13,5) and “his eternal power and divinity has been clearly perceived by the creation of the world through the things he has made” (Romans 1:20). Why the convent asks that you always leave a part of the garden uncultivated, because wild herbs will grow, so that those who admire them might raise the thought to God, the author of so much beauty. [21 See Thomas of Celano, second Life of St. Francis, CXXIV, 165: FF 750] The world is more than a problem to be solved, it is a happy mystery we contemplate with joy and praise.

My appeal

13. The urgent challenge of protecting our common home understands the concern to unite the whole human family in the search for sustainable and integral development, for we know that things can change. The Creator does not abandon us, he never backed down in his plan of love, does not regret having created. Humanity still has the ability to work together to build our common home. I wish to express gratitude, encourage and thank all those who, in various fields of human activity, are working to ensure the protection of the home we share. Those who fight vigorously to solve the dramatic consequences of environmental degradation in the lives of the world’s poorest deserve a special gratitude. Young people demand of us a change. They wonder how can you claim to build a better future without thinking about the environmental crisis and the suffering of the excluded.

14. I address an urgent call to renew the dialogue on how we are building the future of the planet. We need a comparison that unites us all, because the environmental challenge in which we live, and its human roots, concern us and affect us all. The ecological movement worldwide has already come a long and rich way, and has created numerous coalitions that have fostered citizens’ awareness. Unfortunately, a lot of effort to find concrete solutions to the environmental crisis are often frustrated not only by the refusal of the powerful, but also by the lack of interest of others. Attitudes that hinder the ways of solution, even among believers, range from denial of the problem to indifference, to comfortable resignation, or blind faith in technical solutions. We need new universal solidarity. As the Bishops of South Africa said, “the talent and the involvement of everyone is needed to repair the damage caused by humans on the creation of God.” [22 Conference of Catholic Bishops of Southern Africa, Pastoral Statement on the Environmental Crisis ( September 5, 1999). ] We can all work together as instruments of God for the care of creation, each with his own culture and experience, his own initiative and capabilities.

15. I hope that this encyclical letter, in addition to the social teaching of the Church, help us to recognize the magnitude, the urgency and the beauty of the challenge facing us. First, I’ll make a brief journey through various aspects of the current ecological crisis in order to engage the best fruits of scientific research available today, to let us touch it deeply and give a basic substance to the ethical and spiritual path that follows. From this overview, I will take up some of the arguments arising from the Judeo-Christian tradition, in order to give greater coherence to our commitment to the environment. Then I’ll try to get to the roots of the current situation, in order to grasp not only the symptoms but also the root causes. So we propose an ecology that, in its various dimensions, integrates the specific place that man occupies in this world and its relations with the world around him. In the light of this reflection I would like to take a step forward in some broad lines of dialogue and action that involve both all of us, and international politics. Finally, since I am convinced that any change needs motivations and an educative path, propose some lines of human development inspired by the treasure of Christian spiritual experience.

16. Each chapter, though it has its own theme and a specific methodology, takes in turn, from a new perspective, important issues addressed in the previous chapters. This especially concerns some cornerstones that cross all the Encyclical. For example: the intimate relationship between the poor and the fragility of the planet; the belief that everything in the world is closely connected; the criticism of the new paradigm and the forms of power that arise from technology; an invitation to look for other ways of understanding the economy and progress; the intrinsic value of every creature; the human sense of ecology; the need for sincere and honest debates; the grave responsibility of local and international policy; the culture of waste and the proposal of a new lifestyle. These themes are never closed or abandoned, but rather constantly taken up and enriched.

CHAPTER ONE: WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR HOME

17. The philosophical or theological reflections on the state of humanity and the world may sound like a repetitive and empty message, if not presented anew starting from a comparison with the current situation, in what’s new for the story of humanity. For this, first to recognize that faith brings new motivation and needs in front of the world to which we belong, I propose to take a brief look to consider what is happening to our common home.

18. The continued acceleration of the changes of mankind and the planet joins today the intensification of the rhythms of life and work, in what some call in Spanish “rapidación” (rapidization). Although the change is part of the dynamics of complex systems, the speed that human actions impose today contrasts with the natural slowness of biological evolution. Added to this is the problem that the objectives of this rapid and constant change are not necessarily geared to the common good and sustainable and integral human development. Change is something auspicious, but it becomes worrisome when it changes into deterioration of the world and the quality of life of most of humanity.

19. After a period of irrational faith in progress and in human capabilities, a part of society is entering a phase of greater awareness. There is an increasing sensitivity about the environment and care of nature, and it developed a sincere and painful concern for what is happening to our planet. Let’s take a path which will be certainly incomplete, through those issues which today cause anxiety and that now we can no longer hide under the rug. The goal is not to collect information or to satisfy our curiosity, but to take painful awareness, to dare to transform personal suffering that happens in the world, and thus recognize what is the contribution that each can bring.

I. Pollution and climate change

Pollution, refuse and culture of waste

20. There are forms of pollution that affect people every day. Exposure to air pollutants produces a wide range of health effects, particularly the poorest, and cause millions of premature deaths. We get sick, for example, due to inhalation of large amounts of smoke produced by fuels used for cooking and heating. Added to this is the pollution that affects everyone, caused by transport, by industrial fumes, by emitting of substances that contribute to the acidification of soil and water, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and toxic pesticides in general. Technology, related to finance, claims to be the only solution to the problems, in fact it is not able to see the mystery of the multiple relationships that exist between things, and this sometimes solves a problem by creating new ones.

21. We must also consider the pollution produced by waste, including hazardous waste present in different environments. They produce hundreds of millions of tons of waste a year, many of which are not biodegradable: household and commercial waste, demolition debris, clinical waste, highly toxic and radioactive electronic or industrial waste. The earth, our home, seems to become more and more in a huge garbage dump. In many places on the planet, the elderly remember with nostalgia the landscapes of the past, which now appear inundated with junk. Much industrial waste as the chemicals used in the towns and fields, can produce an effect of bio-accumulation in the bodies of the inhabitants of neighboring areas, which also occurs when the level of the presence of a toxic element in a place is low. Many times they take measures only when effects on people’s health produced are irreversible.

22. These issues are intimately linked to the culture of waste, which is harmful to both human beings as well as the things that turn quickly into trash. Let us realize, for example, that most of the paper that is produced is thrown away and not recycled. Hard to recognize that the functioning of natural ecosystems is exemplary: the plants synthesize nutrients that feed the herbivores; these in turn feed the carnivores, which provide large quantities of organic waste, which give rise to a new generation of plants. In contrast, the industrial system, at the end of the cycle of production and consumption, has not developed the ability to absorb and reuse waste and slag. It has not yet managed to adopt a circular pattern of production to ensure resources for all and for future generations, and that requires us to limit the use of non-renewable resources, moderate consumption, maximize the efficiency of exploitation, reuse and recycle. Addressing this issue would be a way to counter the culture of waste that ends up hurting the entire planet, but we see that progress in this direction are still very limited.

The climate as a common good

23. The climate is a common good of all and for all. It, globally, is a complex system in relation to many conditions essential for human life. There is a very consistent scientific consensus indicating that we are witnessing an alarming warming of the climate system. In recent decades, this warming has been accompanied by a steady rise in the sea level, and is also hard not to relate it to the increase in extreme weather events, regardless of the fact that we can not attribute a scientifically determined cause to every particular phenomenon. Humanity is called to become aware of the need to change lifestyles, production and consumption, to combat this heating or, at least, the human causes that produce or accentuate it. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanism, and the variations of the orbit of the Earth, the solar cycle), but numerous scientific studies indicate that most of the global warming of recent decades is due to the large concentration of gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and other) issued mainly because of human activity. Their concentrations in the atmosphere prevent the heat of sunlight reflected by the earth from being dispersed into space. This is especially enhanced by the development model based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the center of the world energy system. It has also been affected by the increase in the practice of land-use change, primarily deforestation for agricultural purposes.

24. In turn, the heating has effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious cycle that exacerbates the situation even more and that will affect the availability of essential resources such as drinking water, energy and agricultural production of the hottest areas, and will result in the extinction of the planet’s biodiversity. The melting of polar ice and high altitude threat of methane gas escaping at high risk, and the decomposition of frozen organic matter could further accentuate the emission of carbon dioxide. In turn, the loss of tropical forests makes things worse, since they help to mitigate climate change. The pollution produced by carbon dioxide increases the acidity of the oceans and affects the marine food chain. If the current trend continues, this century could witness unprecedented climate change and unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. Rising sea levels, for example, can create situations of extreme seriousness when we consider that a quarter of the world population lives by the sea or very close to it, and most of the megacities are located in coastal areas.

25. Climate change is a global problem with serious environmental, social, economic, distributive, and political implications, and are a major current challenge for humanity. Heavier impacts probably will fall in the coming decades on developing countries. Many poor people live in areas particularly affected by phenomena related to global warming, and their livelihoods are heavily dependent on nature reserves and by so-called ecosystem services, such as agriculture, fisheries and forestry. They have no other financial resources and other resources that enable them to adapt to climate impacts or deal with catastrophic situations, and have little access to social services and protection. For example, climate change gives rise to migration of animals and plants that can not always adapt, and this in turn affects the productive resources of the poor, who also are forced to migrate with great uncertainty about the future of their lives and of their children. Tragically, the increase of migrants fleeing poverty exacerbated by environmental degradation, are not recognized as refugees in international conventions and carry the burden of lives abandoned by a lack of any protective legislation. Unfortunately there is a general indifference to these tragedies, which commonly occur in different parts of the world. The lack of reaction in the face of these tragedies of our brothers and sisters is a sign of the loss of the sense of responsibility for our fellow men that underpin any civilized society.

26. Many of those who hold more resources and economic or political power appear to be concentrating mainly in masking the problems and hiding the symptoms, just trying to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. But many signs indicate that these effects may be worse and worse if we continue with current patterns of production and consumption. Therefore it has become an urgent and compelling policy development in the coming years that the emission of carbon dioxide and other heavily polluting gases is reduced drastically, for example, by replacing fossil fuels and developing renewable energy sources. In the world there is a small level of access to clean and renewable energy. There is still a need to develop adequate technologies for storage. However, in some countries there have been advances that begin to be significant, although they are far from reaching a significant proportion. There are also a number of investments in modes of production and transportation that use less energy and require fewer raw materials, as well as in methods of construction or renovation of buildings that improve energy efficiency. But these practices are far from becoming general.

II. The water issue

27. Other indicators of the current situation are related to the depletion of natural resources. We know it is impossible to sustain the current level of consumption of more developed countries and the wealthiest sectors of society, where the habit of wasting and throwing away reaches unprecedented levels. Already they have exceeded certain maximum limits of exploitation of the planet, without the problem of poverty having been resolved.

28. Clean drinking water is an issue of primary importance, because it is essential for human life and for supporting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Sources of fresh water supply the health, agro-pastoral and industrial sectors. The availability of water has remained relatively constant for a long time, but now in many places demand exceeds sustainable supply, with serious consequences in the short and long term. Big cities, dependent on major water reserves, suffer periods of shortage of the resource, which at critical moments is not always administered with proper and impartial management. There is a poverty of public water especially in Africa, where large sections of the population do not have access to safe drinking water, or suffer droughts that make the production of food difficult. In some countries, there are regions with plenty of water, while others suffer from a serious shortage.

29. A particularly serious problem is that of the quality of water available to the poor, which causes many deaths every day. Among the poor there are frequent water-related diseases, including those caused by microorganisms and chemicals. Dysentery and cholera, due to inadequately improved sanitation and water reserves, are a significant factor of suffering and mortality. The aquifers in many places are threatened by pollution from certain mining, agricultural and industrial practices, especially in countries where there are not sufficient regulations or controls. We do not think only of waste from factories. Detergents and chemicals that people use in many places around the world continue to pour in rivers, lakes and seas.

30. While the quality of the available water is steadily worse, in some places the trend is advancing to privatize this scarce resource, transformed into a commodity subject to market forces. In fact, access to safe drinking water is an essential, a fundamental and universal human right, because it determines the survival of the people, and this is a requirement for the exercise of other human rights. This world has a serious social debt to the poor who have no access to clean water, because that is to deny them the right to life rooted in their inalienable dignity. This debt is joined in part with greater economic contributions to provide clean water and sanitation services among the poorest populations. But there is a waste of water, not only in developed countries but also in developing ones that have large reserves. This highlights that the water problem is partly a question of education and culture, because there is not awareness of the seriousness of such conduct in a context of great inequity.

31. A greater water shortage will result in the increase in the cost of food and various products that depend from its use. Some studies have reported the risk of suffering an acute shortage of water within a few decades if action is not taken urgently. The environmental impacts could affect billions of people, and on the other hand it is expected that the water control by large global companies will become a major source of conflict in this century. [23 See Greeting to FAO staff ( November 20, 2014): AAS 106 (2014), 985.]

III. Loss of biodiversity

32. Even the earth’s resources are plundered because of the economy and the commercial and productive attitudes too tied to the immediate result. The loss of forests and woodlands implies at the same time the loss of species which may constitute in the future extremely important resources, not only for feeding, but also for the treatment of diseases and for multiple services. Different species contain genes that may be key resources to respond in the future to some human need or to solve some environmental problem.

33. But do not just think about the different species just like any exploitable “resources”, forgetting that they have a value in themselves. Every year thousands of species of plants and animals disappear that we can no longer know, that our children will not be able to see, lost forever. The vast majority is extinguished for reasons having to do with some human activity. Because of us, thousands of species will not give glory to God with their lives, nor can communicate his message. We have not the right.

34. Probably becoming aware of the extinction of a mammal or a bird troubles us, because of their greater visibility. But for the proper functioning of ecosystems there is also needed fungi, algae, worms, small insects, reptiles and countless variety of microorganisms. Some species that are few in number, usually going unnoticed, play a role critical to stabilizing the balance of a place. It is true that the human being has to intervene when a geosystem enters a critical stage, but today the level of human intervention in a reality as complex as the nature is such, that the constant disasters caused by human cause his new intervention, so that human activity become ubiquitous, with all the risks that entails. It creates a vicious circle in which the intervention of the human being to solve a problem often worsens the situation further. For example, many birds and insects that die out as a result of toxic pesticides created by technology, are useful to agriculture itself, and their disappearance will be compensated with another technological intervention that probably will bring new harmful effects. The efforts of scientists and technicians who try to solve the problems created by humans are commendable and sometimes admirable. But looking at the world we see that this level of human intervention, often in the service of finance and consumerism, actually causes the earth we live in to become less rich and beautiful, more and more limited and gray, while at the same time the development of technology and consumer goods continues to advance without limits. In this way, it seems that we delude ourselves that we are able to replace a unique and unrecoverable beauty by another created by us.

35. When analyzing the environmental impact of any economic initiative, it is customary to consider the effects on the soil, water and air, but it does not always include a careful study of the impact on biodiversity, as if the loss of some species or groups of animal or vegetation was something unimportant. Roads, new crops, fences, water bodies and other buildings, they are taking possession of and sometimes fragmenting habitat so that animal populations can no longer migrate or move freely, so that some species are threatened with extinction. There are alternatives that at least mitigate the impact of these works, such as the creation of biological corridors, but in only a few countries there is such care and such attention. When we commercially exploit certain species, we don’t always consider their growth mode, to avoid their excessive reduction with the consequent imbalance of the ecosystem.

36. The attention of ecosystems requires a look that goes beyond the immediate, because when you look at only quick and easy financial gain, there is not anyone truly interested in their preservation. But the cost of damage caused by neglect selfish is far higher than the economic benefit that you can get. In case of loss or serious damage to some species, we are talking about values that exceed any calculation. For this, we can be silent witnesses to serious inequity when one attempts to obtain significant benefits by charging to the rest of humanity, present and future, the high costs of environmental degradation.

37. Some countries have made progress in the effective conservation of certain places and areas – on land and in the oceans – which forbids any human intervention that can change its appearance or alter its original constitution. In the care of biodiversity, specialists insist on the need to place a special emphasis on those areas with the richest variety of species, endemic species, and infrequent or lesser degree of effective protection. There are places that require special care because of their enormous importance to the global ecosystem, or that are significant reserves of water and thus ensure other forms of life.

38. We recall, for example, those lungs of the planet full of biodiversity that are the Amazon and the river basin of the Congo, or the great aquifers and glaciers. The importance of these regions for the whole planet and for the future of humanity is well known. The ecosystems of tropical forests have a biodiversity of great complexity, almost impossible to know completely, but when these forests are burned or razed to increase crops, in a few years you lose countless species, or those areas are transformed into arid deserts. However, a delicate balance is required when it comes to these places, because you cannot ignore the huge international economic interests which, on the pretext of taking care, may endanger national sovereignty. In fact there is the “proposed internationalization of the Amazon, which only serves the economic interests of transnational corporations.” [24 V General Conference of Latin American Bishops, Aparecida Document (June 29, 2007), 86.] It is a commendable commitment of international agencies and civil society organizations to sensitize the people and cooperate in a critical way, even using legitimate mechanisms of pressure, so that every government and fulfills its non-delegable duty to preserve the environment and natural resources of their country, without selling to ambiguous local or international interests.

39. Not even the replacement of the areas planted with wildflowers with timber farms, which are generally monocultures, is usually subject to appropriate analysis. In reality it can seriously affect biodiversity which is not accomodated by new species that are planted. The wetlands, which are converted into agricultural land, lose the enormous biodiversity that was housed there. In some coastal areas there is the alarming disappearance of mangrove ecosystems.

40. The oceans not only contain most of the planet, but also most of the wide variety of living things, many of which are still unknown to us and are threatened by various causes. In addition, life in rivers, lakes, seas and oceans, which feeds much of the world’s population, is seen to be affected by the uncontrolled withdrawal of fish resources, which results in drastic declines of some species. Yet we continue to develop selective fishing methods that discard much of the collected species. Marine organisms that we do not take into account are particularly threatened, as some forms of plankton that form a very important component in the marine food chain, and ultimately, species that are used for human food, on which they depend.

41. Delving in tropical and subtropical seas, we find the coral reefs, which correspond to the great forests of the mainland, because they are home to approximately one million species, including fish, crabs, molluscs, sponges, algae. Many of the world’s coral reefs today are infertile or are in steady decline “Who turned the wonderful marine world into submarie cemeteries stripped of life and color?”. [25 Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, Pastoral Letter What is Happening to our Beautiful Land? (29 January 1988).] This phenomenon is largely due to the pollution that reaches the sea as a result of deforestation, monoculture farming, industrial waste and destructive fishing methods, especially those using cyanide and dynamite. It is aggravated by the temperature of the oceans. All this helps us to understand how any actions on nature can have consequences that we do not notice at first glance, and that some forms of exploitation of resources are obtained at the cost of a decline that eventually reaches all the way to the oceans.

42. You need to invest much more in research to better understand the behavior of ecosystems and properly analyze the different variables of the impact of any significant change of the environment. Since all creatures are related to each other, each of their value must be recognized with affection and admiration, and all we created beings need each other. Each region has a responsibility in the care of this family, so it should make a thorough inventory of species it houses, with a view to developing programs and strategies of protection, taking care with particular attention to species in danger of extinction.

IV. Deterioration in the quality of human life and social degradation

43. If we take into account the fact that the human being is a creature of this world, who has the right to live and be happy, and also has a special dignity, we can not fail to consider the effects of environmental degradation, of the current development model and the culture of waste on people’s lives.

44. Today we find, for example, the boundless and disordered growth of many cities that have become unbearable from the point of view of health, not only for the pollution originated by toxic emissions, but also for the urban chaos, the problems of transport and visual pollution and noise. Many large cities are inefficient structures that consume excessive water and energy. There are areas that, although they have been built recently, are congested and disorderly, without sufficient green spaces. It is not for people on this planet to live increasingly inundated with concrete, asphalt, glass and metals, deprived of physical contact with nature.

45. In some places, rural and urban, the privatization of space has made it difficult for citizens’ access to areas of particular beauty; elsewhere they have created residential “greens” only available to a few, where you do so to prevent others from entering a disturbing artificial tranquility. Often there is a beautiful city full of well-tended green spaces in some “safe” areas, but not so in less visible areas, home to society’s discarded.

46. Among the social components of global change will include the employment effects of some technological innovations, social exclusion, inequality in the availability and consumption of energy and other services, social fragmentation, the increase in violence and the emergence of new forms of social aggression, drug trafficking and the increasing consumption of drugs among young people, the loss of identity. They are signs, among others, that show how the growth of the last two centuries has no sense of a true integral progress and a better quality of life in all its aspects. Some of these signs are both symptoms of a real social degradation, of a silent rupture of the ties of integration and of social communion.

47. Add to this the dynamics of the media and the digital world, which, when they become ubiquitous, do not favor the development of a capacity to live with wisdom, to think deeply, to love generously. The great sages of the past, in this context, would run the risk of seeing stifled their wisdom in the noise-dispersive information. This will require an effort to ensure that such media result in a new cultural development of mankind and not in a deeper deterioration of its wealth. True wisdom, the result of reflection, dialogue and encounter between generous people, is not acquired by a mere accumulation of data that eventually saturates and confuses, in a kind of mental pollution. At the same time, the real relationships with others, with all the challenges that imply, tend to be replaced by a type of communication mediated by Internet. This allows you to select or delete relations according to our will, and so it often generates a new type of artificial emotions, which have more to do with devices and screens than with people and nature. The current means allow us to communicate among ourselves and we share knowledge and affection. However, sometimes they also prevent us from making direct contact with the anguish, with the tremor, with the joy of the other and with the complexity of his personal experience. Therefore it should not surprise that, together with the overwhelming offerings of these products, go an increasingly deep and melancholic dissatisfaction in relationships, or a damaging insulation.

V. Planetary inequities

48. The human environment and the natural environment will degrade together, and we cannot adequately address environmental degradation, if we do not pay attention to the causes that have to do with the social and human degradation. In fact, the deterioration of the environment and society affect especially the most vulnerable on the planet: “Both the common experience of ordinary life and scientific research shows that the poorest people suffer the worst effects of all environmental assaults”. [26 Bolivian Episcopal Conference, Pastoral Letter on the environment and human development in Bolivia El universe, Don de Dios para la vida (2012), 17.] For example, the depletion of fish stocks penalizes especially those who live on artisanal fishing and not have a subsitute, water pollution particularly affects the poorest who do not have the opportunity to buy bottled water, and rising sea level mainly affects impoverished coastal populations that have nowhere to move. The impact of the current imbalances is also manifested in the premature death of many poor, in the conflicts generated by the lack of resources and many other issues that do not find enough space on the agendas of the world. [27 Cf. German Bishops’ Conference. Committee on Social Affairs, Der Klimawandel: Brennpunkt globaler, intergenerationeller und ökologischer Gerechtigkeit (September 2006), 28-30.]

49. I would observe that often we do not have clear understanding of the problems affecting particularly the marginalized. They are most of the planet, billions of people. Today they are mentioned in political debates and international economics, but mostly it seems that their problems present themselves as an appendix, as a matter to be added almost as an obligation or in a peripheral manner, if not considered a mere collateral damage. In fact, at the moment of concrete implementation, frequently they remain in last place. This is partly due to the fact that many professionals, opinion leaders, media and power centers are located far away from them, in urban areas isolated, with no direct contact with their problems. They live and reflect from the comfort of a development and a quality of life that are beyond the reach of most of the world population. This lack of physical contact and meeting, sometimes exacerbated by the fragmentation of our cities, help cauterize the conscience and to ignore reality in partial analyses. This sometimes coexists with a “green” discourse. But today we cannot help but recognize that a true ecological approach becomes a social approach, which must integrate environmental justice in the discussions, to hear the cry of the earth as much as the cry of the poor.

50. Instead of solving the problems of the poor and thinking of a different world, some limit themselves to propose a reduction in the birth rate. There is no lack of international pressure on countries in the developing world affecting economic aid to certain policies of “reproductive health”. However, “it is true that the unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and to a sustainable use of the environment, it should be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development.” [28 Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 483.] Blaming the increase in population instead of the extreme and selective consumerism of some, is a way to avoid facing problems. So it claims to legitimize the current distribution model, where a minority believes in the right to consume in a proportion that would be impossible to generalize, because the planet cannot even contain the waste of such consumption. In addition, we know that we waste approximately one third of the foods that are produced, and “the food that is thrown away is as if you steal from the table of the poor.” [29 Catechesis (5 June 2013): Teachings 1/1 (2013 ), 280.] However, it is certain that we must pay attention to the imbalance in the distribution of the population of regions, both nationally and globally, because the increase in consumption would lead to complex regional situations, for combinations of problems of environmental pollution, transport, waste disposal, with the loss of resources, with the quality of life.

51. The inequity affects not only individuals, but whole countries, and forces one to think of ethics in international relations. There is in fact a true “ecological debt”, especially between the North and the South, related to trade imbalances with consequences in the context of ecology, as well as the disproportionate use of natural resources historically made by some countries. Exports of some raw materials to satisfy the markets in the industrialized North have produced local damage, such as pollution from mercury in gold mining or sulfur dioxide in the copper. In particular there is to reckon the use of the ambient space around the planet to deposit waste gases that have been accumulating for two centuries and have created a situation that now affects every country in the world. The warming caused by the enormous consumption of some rich countries has an impact in the poorest places on earth, especially in Africa, where the increase in temperature combined with drought has disastrous effects on yields. This is combined with the damage caused by the export to developing countries of solid and liquid toxic pollutants and activity of enterprises in less developed countries what they can not do in countries that provide their capital: “We often note companies operating so are multinational, they do here what they are not allowed in the developed or the so-called first world. Generally, when they cease their activities and withdraw, leaving large human and environmental damage, such as unemployment, lifeless villages, depletion of some nature reserves, deforestation, depletion of local animals and plants, craters, devastated hills, polluted rivers, and that any social work can no longer support.” [30 Bishops of the Region Patagonia-Comahue (Argentina), Mensaje de Navidad (December 2009), 2.]

52. The external debt of poor countries has become an instrument of control, but the same thing does not happen with the ecological debt. In many ways, the people in the developing world, where there are the most important reserves of the biosphere, continue to fuel the development of the richest countries at the price of their present and their future. The land of the poor South is rich and less polluted, but access to ownership of assets and resources to meet their essential needs is forbidden by a system of trade relations and structurally perverse property. It is necessary that developed countries contribute to solving this debt limit so important to the consumption of non-renewable energy, and bringing resources to the countries most in need to promote policies and programs for sustainable development. The regions and the poorest countries are less likely to adopt new models for reducing environmental impact, because they do not have the preparation to develop the necessary processes and cannot cover its costs. Therefore, we must keep a clear conscience that in climate change there are different responsibilities and, as Bishops of the United States said, it is appropriate to point “especially at the needs of the poor, weak and vulnerable in a debate often dominated by the interests of more powerful”. [31 Conference of Catholic Bishops of the United States, Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence and the Common Good (15 June 2001).] We must strengthen the awareness that we are one human family. There are no political or social borders and barriers that allow us to isolate ourselves, and for that reason there is not even space for the globalization of indifference.

VI. The weakness of the reactions

53. These situations cause the cries of sister earth, which are joined to the cries of the abandoned in the world, with a lament that demands from us another route. We never mistreated and insulted our common home as in the last two centuries. Instead, we are called to be instruments of God the Father because our planet is what he has dreamed of creating it and responds to his project of peace, beauty and fullness. The problem is that we do not have yet the culture needed to address this crisis and we need to build leadership indicating routes, trying to meet the needs of current generations including all without compromising future generations. It is essential to create a regulatory system that includes inviolable limits and provides protection to ecosystems, before the new forms of power derived from the techno-economic paradigm end up destroying not only politics but also freedom and justice.

54. Also of note is the weakness of the international political reaction. The submission of politics to technology and finance proves the failure of world summits on the environment. There are too many special interests and very easily the economic interests get to prevail over the common good and to manipulate information so as not to see their plans affected. In this vein, the Aparecida Document calls “interventions on natural resources are not overridden by the interests of economic groups that irrationally destroy the sources of life”[32 V General Conference of Latin American Bishops, Aparecida Document (June 29, 2007), 471.] The alliance between economics and technology ends up leaving out anything that is not part of their immediate interests. So you might expect only a few superficial proclamations and isolated philanthropy, and even efforts to show sensitivity to the environment, while in reality any attempt of social organizations to change things will be seen as a disorder caused by romantic dreamers or as an obstacle to circumvent.

55. Gradually some countries can show significant progress, the development of more efficient competition controls and a more sincere fight against corruption. Environmental awareness of the people has grown, although not enough to change harmful habits of consumption, which do not seem to recede, but extend and develop. That’s what happens, to give just one simple example, with the growing increase in the use and intensity of air conditioners: the markets, looking for immediate profit, stimulate even more demand. If someone was observing from outside the planetary society, he would be stupefied in the face of such behavior that sometimes seems suicidal.

56. In the meantime, the economic powers continue to justify the current world system, in which speculation and a pursuit for financial rent which tends to ignore each context and the effects on human dignity and the environment prevail. So clearly it reveals that environmental degradation and human and ethical degradation are intimately connected. Many will say that they are not aware of engaging in immoral action, because the constant distraction takes away the courage to realize the reality of a limited and finite world. To this day, “anything that is fragile, like environment, remains defenseless against the interest of the deified market, transformed into absolute rule.” [33 Apost. ap. Evangelii gaudium (24 November 2013), 56: AAS 105 (2013), 1043.]

57. It is expected that, in the face of the depletion of some resources, one would be creating a favorable scenario for new wars, disguised with lofty claims. War always causes serious damage to the environment and the cultural wealth of the peoples, and the risks become huge when you think of nuclear energy and biological weapons. In fact, “despite international agreements that prohibit chemical, bacteriological and biological warfare, the fact is that in laboratory research there continues to develop new offensive weapons capable of altering the balance of nature.” [34 John Paul II, Message for the Day World Peace 1990, 12: AAS 82 (1990), 154.] It requires greater attention from policy to prevent and address the causes that can give rise to new conflicts. But the power connected with finance is one that resists this effort, and political designs often lack breadth of vision. Who holding power today wants to be remembered for his failure to intervene when it was urgent and necessary to do so?

58. In some countries there are examples of positive results in improving the environment, as the recovery of some rivers that were polluted for many decades, the recovery of native forests, or the beautification of landscapes with works of environmental recovery, or construction projects of great aesthetic value, progress in the production of non-polluting energy, improving public transport. These actions do not solve global problems, but confirm that the human being is still able to intervene positively. Having been created to love, in the midst of his limits there inevitably sprout gestures of generosity, solidarity and care.

59. At the same time, there grows a superficial or apparent ecology, which consolidates a certain lethargy and a carefree irresponsibility. As often happens in times of deep crisis, that require courageous decisions, we are tempted to think that what is happening is not certain. If we look superficially, beyond some visible signs of pollution and degradation, it seems that things are not so severe and that the planet could remain for a long time under current conditions. We need this evasive behavior to maintain our lifestyles, production and consumption. It is the way in which the human being arranges to feed all self-destructive vices: trying not to see them, struggling to not recognize them, putting off important decisions, acting as if nothing had happened.

VII. Diversity of opinions

60. Finally, we recognize that different views and ways of thinking about the situation and possible solutions have developed. From one extreme, some argue at all costs the myth of progress and say that environmental problems will be solved simply by new technical applications, without ethical or fundamental changes. On the other extreme, others believe that the human species, with whatever his intervention, can only be a threat and compromise the global ecosystem, so it should reduce its presence on the planet and prevent any kind of intervention. Between these extremes, reflection should identify possible future scenarios, because there is not only one way of solution. This would leave room for a variety of contributions that could enter into dialogue with a view to integral responses.

61. On many concrete issues the Church has no reason to propose a definite word and realizes it must listen and promote honest debate among scientists, respecting differences of opinion. But we only look at reality with sincerity to see that there is a great deterioration of our common home. Hope invites us to recognize that there is always a way out, we can always change course, we can always do something to solve the problems. However, it seems we are experiencing symptoms of a breaking point, because of the great speed of change and degradation, which occur both in regional natural disasters as well as in social or even financial crises, since the problems of the world can not be analyzed nor explained in isolation. There are regions which are already particularly at risk and, beyond any catastrophic prediction, it is certain that the current world system is unsustainable from different points of view, because we have stopped thinking about the purpose of human action: “If you look along regions of our planet, one realizes immediately that humanity has disappointed God’s expectations”. [35 Id., Catechesis (17 January 2001), 3: L’Osservatore 24/1 (2001), 178.]

Graphing cumulative emissions, the U.S.-China trajectory becomes more readliy apparent, as the combined carbon footprint continues to grow rapidly through 2050. The carbon budget is used up by the two nations’ pollution alone by 2035.

Even if the rest of the world follows the US and China lead with commitments to stop emissions growth by 2030, there will be a high risk of catastrophic global warming. Assuming the US and China meet their targets and the rest of the world follows suit, humanity will burn through the Russian-roulette chance at staying below 2C warming before 2025.

For small-island nations, coral reefs, global forests, Arctic ice, permafrost, and global ice sheets — and quite possibly the rest of human civilization — to have a long-term chance of survival, limiting warming to 1.5C looks to be needed. (This would require a rapid transition to a fossil-free economy with massive reforestation to reduce existing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million or lower, the inspiration for the name of the climate organization 350.org.)

A higher tolerance for catastrophic warming — by raising the risk of 2C warming from 20 percent to 50 percent — gives the world a more leeway for pollution, but not enough to make the announced US-China targets “safe”. The global budget for a 50-50 chance of 2C warming will be exhausted before 2040.

The insufficiency of these newly announced targets — and the howls of outrage heard from the Republican Party in the United States — reflect the dangerous power the global fossil-fuel industry has over our future, at a time when our species’ collective power should be directed at building a fossil-free civilization.

In Richmond, the San Francisco suburb home to a major Chevron refinery which exploded in 1989, 1999, and 2012, a five-member progressive slate for mayor and city council won decisive victory over the Chevron-supported candidates. The progressives, supported by Richmond Working Families (ACCE Action, APEN Action, SEIU 1021), and by the Richmond Progressive Alliance, overcame $3 million in spending by the oil giant, a 60 to one spending ratio.

Fracking opponent Kristy Pagan, a first-time candidate, won election in Michigan’s state House 21st District.

In one of the few national races to swing unexpectedly for Democrats, Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska, a major Keystone XL backer, lost to Democratic challenger Brad Ashford, who has also expressed support for the pipeline but was endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters.

In another local victory against industrial interests, a ban on genetically engineered crops in Maui County, Hawaii, narrowly passed, overcoming $8 million in spending from opponents such as Monsanto and Dow, who profit from the treatment of food as intellectual property. The failed opposition outspent advocates 87 to 1. GMO-labeling measures failed under a similar spending onslaught in Colorado and Oregon.

“Their wins aren’t wins just for their communities — they are wins for all of us pushing back against the fossil fuel industry and for a climate safe future,” Oil Change International’s David Turnbull wrote. “They are bright spots in an otherwise dim night.”