Pope Francis's much-anticipated encyclical on the environment, issued June 18, was received with both relief and concern, as it raised important questions to all of us—Christian or not, Catholic or otherwise.
Francis's 184-page document (PDF) had several purposes. First, it was meant to legitimize the Church's worldwide role in relation to climate change and other environmental problems. It presented itself as an appeal to humanity issued by one of its most respected and influential leaders, and not only to Christians or Catholics in particular.
Even its most theologically oriented section (chapter two, "The Gospel of Creation") was posited as a place to explain its author's motivations and beliefs, but not as a framework through which its arguments should be read.
Second, the document repeats, with great eloquence and conviction, the notion that "technoscience," left to its own devices, fails to establish a moral compass.
While that is a familiar argument in religious literature addressing science and technology, the pope presented it in significantly more interesting and sophisticated ways, declaring that "… technological products are not neutral, for they create a framework which ends up conditioning lifestyles and shaping social possibilities along the lines dictated by the interests of certain powerful groups. Decisions which may seem purely instrumental are in reality decisions about the kind of society we want to build." (107)
Adding to a traditional framework that locates religious views as necessary to provide a moral compass for the evolving science, the encyclical posits the Church as the voice of the poor and questions the inequality inherent in contemporary scientific production.
This orientation toward the poor and toward issues of justice and equality constitute the document's most important contribution, and frames the questions that it poses to all of us.
The pope declared that ecological problems must be seen through the lens of inequality, poverty, and historical relations in a post-colonial world.
"Today," he wrote, "… we have to realize that a true ecological approach always becomes a social approach; it must integrate questions of justice in debates on the environment, so as to hear both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor." (49)
For Pope Francis, the root of the problem lies in consumerist systems that engender waste and unsustainability. He condemns a model of distribution "where a minority believes that it has the right to consume in a way which can never be universalized, since the planet could not even contain the waste products of such consumption." (50)
This unjust distribution has significant historical roots in the colonial and postcolonial relations between the global north and global south: "A true 'ecological debt' exists, particularly between the global north and south, connected to commercial imbalances with effects on the environment, and the disproportionate use of natural resources by certain countries over long periods of time." (51)
The encyclical goes further to hint at the current global economy of technological production, where industries with higher environmental and labor costs are shifted to the global south using lax regulations and population poverty "in ways they could never do at home" (51).
The encyclical was not the first time Rome spoke about environmental issues. Indeed, it opened by citing statements by Pope Saint John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope Saint Jean Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI on issues related to environmental degradation.
It accepted, with no ambiguity, the scientific consensus on the existence and causes of climate change, and embraced most of the well-known solutions—from enhancing public transportation, to recycling, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and moving to renewable energy resources. It coupled an emphasis on human responsibility for creation and human uniqueness with an insistence on the importance of biodiversity for its own sake.
Yet the thrust of the document is its insistence on justice as a central way to manage and design global solutions to environmental degradation. In the past, there has been a focus on the needs of producers and consumers in the global north, but little attention has been paid to how crises as well as solutions can impact the global scene. The pope has now put at the heart of the debate an issue many activists and scholars have discussed but that has remained largely on the fringes of political discourse.
So how significant was this encyclical? On one hand, it did not reveal any new positions or suggest solutions that were not hitherto known. On the other hand, it more forcefully than before reiterated the acceptance of one of the world's largest religious institutions of the scientific consensus on climate change, its causes, and the scientific basis of its solutions.
Many scientists and activists who hope that this encyclical should contribute to shifting the political landscape, especially in the United States, received the Church's support with enthusiasm and delight.
At another level, the encyclical reinforced the Church's support for the poor—a message adopted by Pope Francis—and forcefully suggested that global environmental justice and ecological debts should be at the heart of any global solution, which is a view that had been advocated by many activists for a long time.
The question remains as to whether the impact of this encyclical will flow from Rome to the millions of parishes and congregations, and whether or how it will impact the environmental consciousness of the millions of Catholics.
The pope wrote: "Obstructionist attitudes, even on the part of believers, can range from denial of the problem to indifference, nonchalant resignation or blind confidence in technical solutions. We require a new and universal solidarity."
If the encyclical can become a rallying cry to end these different levels of obstructionism, on the part of some believers and beyond, the impact can be enormous.
—by Ahmed Ragab, Richard T. Watson Assistant Professor of Science and Religion at HDS and director of the Science, Religion, and Culture Program