September 8th entry by Cathy Wright (paragraphs 13-16)

Summary of paragraphs 13-16 of the introduction: 

Pope Francis’ call to protect our common home and to “ unite the whole human family together (and) seek a sustainable and integral development” certainly resonates for many in our world today.(LS13)  As Canadian environmental activist and author Naomi Klein recently stated in an article, such statements may seem new for the Church, but are more common, and regular for environmentalists. Today's entry by Cathy Wright will reflect a little on what does make this document unique for many environmentalists ( here's a clue: It's one word, and it starts with the letter H...and this is something that is also not new for the Church!!)

 

In this section, Pope Francis takes the time to celebrate “all those striving in countless ways to guarantee the protection of the home which we share”...especially for the world’s poorest whose lives have been impacted by climate change. (LS 13) He also states that because the ecological challenge affects us all, there should be a global conversation about this crisis that involves everyone. (LS 14). He does recognize that this has happened already, but also that we have with very little to show for it. This is why a new kind of solidarity is required where people of faith can work hand in hand with others to respond to the climate change (LS14)

To approach this task, Pope Francis lays out the scope of his entire encyclical in paragraphs 15 and 16. A brief survey of that scope will show us see that his main goal is to “provide a concrete foundation for the ethical and spiritual itinerary that follows... (which will help)render our commitment to the environment more coherent.” This is not just pretty ideas: His encyclical will also contain proposals that could encourage both dialogue and action from all people and even (here’s where his usual optimism really kicks in!!) affect international policy, all the while, ensuring that the Christian spiritual experience can have an influence on this process. (LS 15) He follows up this optimism with an overview of themes that will be revisited throughout the whole document ( themes like " the intimate relationship between the poor and the fragility of the planet;...the critique of new paradigms and forms of power derived from technology etc...) (LS16) He reminds us that his words are not the final words on these themes.Instead, they should be considered as an honest attempt to explore our current narrative  and to earnestly improve upon it.

Today's actual blog entry comes to you from a Canadian expat working in the US!! :Catherine Wright, B.Sc, B.Ed., M.Div., PhD (in short, she's a smart cookie!)

Former science and math teacher & high school chaplain, Catherine is a Catholic ecotheologian, wife, and mother who is now working as an Assistant Professor of theology and ethics at Wingate University, NC. Enjoy reading and commenting!

                                                                           

(source: Catholic voices)

Laudato Si recognizes the ecological crisis for what it is: the immense, wanton destruction of
Earth and human ecologies due to distorted and atrophied human economics, behaviors,
emotions, patterns of thinking, spiritual lives and ways of understanding the world around us.

Paragraph’s 13-16 are crucial to this document and contain much to ruminate on: they temper the urgent tone of the document with realistic hopefulness ( something that is almost foreign to many ecological groups, and that has inspired many of them about this document!!); they name the maladies countering faithful and lifesaving action; they unequivocally establish the authority of this pastoral ‘grassroots’ document within the long tradition of Catholic social teaching, and artfully delineate the foundational themes of the document for readers to follow.

What I appreciate in paragraph 13 is how Pope Francis’ is able to celebrate with great hope
God’s saving activity in the world but not to the detriment of humanity’s efforts at building our
common home. This balance counters two extremes: overly other-worldly visions of salvations
(and thus passivity or paralyzing helplessness) as well as unfounded optimism and complete
reliance on human technicians for salvation (which breeds a type of laid back optimism that
maintains the status quo or worse accelerates current destructive trends). Pope Francis uses the
distinctive phrase “sustainable and integral development” to describe the goal of the efforts of so
many. He uses it early in the document and often, which signals its central place in the vision
Pope Francis unfurls. This phrase also demonstrates how much the Earth-centered language has
been cultivated in the wisdom offered by preceding saints, Patriarchs, and papal antecedents (see
3-12). But in a remarkable way, this document is not satisfied with the legacy of the giants
preceding us (whose shoulders we stand on); each and every planetary citizen is called to
participate in this cooperative endeavor (paragraph 14) for much is at stake.

Paragraph 14 is a plea for a more inclusive conversation concerning a better future,
something demanded by those who are most invested in getting this right – young people. He
recognizes the “world wide ecological movement” (and if you want a fabulous look at the
evolution of this movement see Paul Hawken’s Blessed Unrest) and the “obstructionist attitudes”
of people (even believers!) that are inhibiting the effects of the work being done by these many
Earth centered organizations: denial; indifference; nonchalant resignation; blind confidence in
technology. This declaration is a glimpse of Pope Francis’ fortitude. As the encyclical unfolds,
he wades purposefully – and prophetically -- into the turbulent waters of modern patterns of
thinking and challenges seemingly unquestionable ‘truths’ (e.g., the principle of maximization of
profits (195); “deified markets” (55); unlimited material progress made possible by technological
innovation (78); international policies privileging the wealthy and “compulsively” consumptive
developed countries (203)). In paragraph 14 however, Pope Francis establishes that his critiques,
observations, and action paths are not theoretical nor purely his own ideas; the authority of his
statements come from the living experiences of people of faith throughout the world via pastoral
letters, statements, and other documents crafted by bishops shepherding their faithful – beginning
with the Bishops of South Africa that he names here. These include the Bishops of South Africa,
Latin American and Caribbean Bishops, Bishops of the Philippians, Bolivian Bishops, German
Bishops, the Bishops of Patagonia-Comahue, Bishops of Japan, Bishops of Brazil, Dominican
Bishops, the New Zealand Bishops, Bishops of Paraguay, the Confederation of Asian Bishops,
Portuguese Bishops, Mexican Bishops, US and Canadian Catholic Bishops, and Australian
Bishops. Each group represents countless individual believers and the parishes they reside. This
purposeful privileging of the non-European (and mostly non-North American) ‘grassroot’ voices
alongside the acknowledgement of this Encyclical’s authoritative place in Catholic Social
teaching (paragraph 15) is a powerful manifestation of ecclesial servant leadership. Alleluia! But
it also serves another purpose; the weight of the personal, professional, and vocational
experiences of congregations often at the margins, calls into question the legitimacy of the
smaller number of voices -- economists, academics, transnational corporations, wealthy and
powerful elites -- who benefit from the status quo and flex their power to obstruct change that
could transform the lives of so many in the present and future.

As a teacher, I hold a special place in my heart for paragraph 15 and 16; paragraph 15 is an
eloquent table of contents for the encyclical and Pope Francis’ vision of the path to ecological
conversion in light of the urgency of our historical moment. A must read! However, in paragraph
16 Pope Francis offers a thematic overview which acts as the threads that hold the tapestry of
this encyclical together. Over and over in the pages of Laudato Si, empirical scientific data and
insights of the Christian tradition are offered to heighten readers’ awareness of the intimate
relationship between the poor and Earth; the inter-connectivity of all Earth’s life systems; the role
of technology in destructive power dynamics; the need for new ways to honestly deliberation on
what “economy” and “progress” means and the need for more responsible and just international
business policies; the proper value of each creature; and the need to re-imaging how to live and
love in the twenty-first century. These threads of brilliant hues are deftly woven together and if
readers carefully follow each intertwining thread, much wisdom will be revealed.

These paragraphs prime the pump; readers are given the tools to meaningfully engage with the
materials in subsequent paragraphs. But alas, one concern remains for this reader: the failure to
use inclusive language (albeit is more infrequent than other encyclicals). Paragraph 13 holds one
example: “The Creator does not abandon us; he never forsakes his loving plan or repents of
having created us.” Perhaps the recognition of the proper value of all creatures and the
interconnectivity of all of creation can be the springboards to the incorporation of inclusive
language in all encyclicals, theological documents and liturgical practice. This will add a depth
of meaning to the term “universal solidarity” (14) for how can we love our brothers and sisters of
other species when the consistent and exclusive use of the male pronoun silences the experiences
of our human sisters as modes of revelation. The literary exclusivity of God as male
unfortunately leads to the understanding that males are god and blocks so many from
experiencing true table fellowship and solidarity within our human faith communities.

Environmentalist Stephen Scharper wrote that he was always struck by a particular pithy
comment made by Gustavo Gutiérrez: “Unless you know the names of a poor person, you are not
in solidarity with them.” Scharper applies this to our Earth community: “unless you know the
names of certain species, learn how to communicate with them, spend time with ecosystems,
with rivers, discern the patterns of animals that move across your life course, your ravines, you
are not in solidarity.” (For Earth’s Sake, 2013). Perhaps exclusive language – prophetically
naming She Who Is (See the text with this same title by Elizabeth Johnson, 2002) -- when
referring to our generous and prolific Creator God will move our human family towards
universal solidarity, the cornerstone of ecological conversion.