Laudato Si Paragraphs 60-64: Broadening the dialog

                                                     

                  
                                             

Today I will reflect on a transition stage of this document: The last 2 paragraphs of chapter 1, and the first three of chapter 2.  It's a wonderful transition from the wordly importance of dialog  to the important spiritual role religion can play in such dialog.

We end chapter one on a positive note. We have just spent many paragraphs looking at the unpleasant reality of  the crisis we face. Being an ambassador of hope, the Pope now works on reminding us that our response to this crisis should highlight the full glory of our human capacity to work together through dialog. Francis tackles this subject rather creatively by presenting us with two different extreme positions: One that celebrates (but is also unrealistic about) human activity and creativity, and one that condemns it. He introduces the first with yet another controversial phrase: The myth of progress. (60) Before you get angry and excited and start yelling at the screen,let's clarify what he means by this term (hardly a term that he came up with himself. Many authors have explored it over the years!) He's not saying progress is bad, but that it has taken on such a mythical status for some people, that they are convinced that 'it' can solve any problem, even the ecological one. We just have to keep building newer, smarter machines that will fix this problem for us.  We don't have to change who we are, or how we live. Nor do we need 'ethical standards' to shape our actions. Let's just invent the right tools to fix our problems. THAT'S...the myth of progress. This unrealistic understanding of what progress (especially technological progress) can actually do. 

On the other side of things, is an ideology that is just as bad, if not worse:  Those who would  reduce all human contribution to creation to a single word: Threat.  As if all of human creativity, love and passion could be summarized only by the negative impact we've had on the rest of creation. Truth be told, both of these positions would be frustrating for anyone to deal with. The are both a little closed minded, and would probably affect us in such a negative way that we too would become a little closed minded as well if we were to dialog with them.

 In his own way, Francis explores what our response to closed mindedness should be as we deepen our experience of how a healthy dialog could help us find middle ground solutions to our ecological predicament. People of faith especially need to pay attention here, because there is indeed quite a challenge ahead for those of us who are religious, and turn to our faith for inspirations in how to connect with creation.  We do need to work with all kinds of people along the way, not just with those who are like minded. This means that along the way, we could be trying to dialog and work with people who would normally be inclined to spit upon, mock, or disregard our deeply held religious convictions and our spirituality.They may be just as concerned as we are for our planet, but they simply operate from a different lens.

But the point Francis really wants to make is that, when our common home is in disrepair,  when so many regions of our world at high risk of  threats from natural disasters and the detrimental social consequences that often come with such disasters (61), can we really afford to quibble about our differences? It would seem that we don't have the luxury to look at the world in isolation ('you stay in your community, I'll stay in mine, and never do we have to confront each other again'). On the contrary, we owe it to ourselves and to future generations to encounter, and listen attentively (and spiritually!) to  people who have different experiences of our world than we do, even the ones that go against our beliefs. Through these exchanges, not only can our own traditions/understanding be enriched, but we will be drawing closer to that crucial point when we can claim that we've found a solution to this crisis,that is relevant, authentic and meaningful to all peoples of the earth.

A large part of that process for people of faith is of course, to return to the source of our beliefs which should shape the way we dialog: Scripture.  We must remember that care care for the earth is not a 21st century message. It's a deep part of our experience of religion. And if we all lived this part of our faith, how wonderful of an impact would this community of the faithful have on the world! Francis certainly believes in the potential of this happening, which is why he moves from the importance of dialog, to a new chapter on  the importance of understanding this foundation from which the Judeo-Christian tradition can dialog, and the wisdom it brings to the table. He refers more specifically to our ability to working with science and spirituality together. This is one area the secular world, and the ecological movement is a little more weak in. Some people in this movement seem to rely entirely on the ways science could deal with all our problems ( that would mean such people are not that different from the adherents of the myth of progress!) They don't always take the time to look at spiritual solutions to it. It may not be fair to say that this is failure on the part of the ecological movement,but we at least have should reflect on Francis' premise that this problem we're 
confronted with is so large that no forms of wisdom should be left out of our efforts to address this devastating crisis that has so impacted our whole era (63)).

In the coming week on this blog, I've invited a few collaborators to speak on the wisdom of the Bible. I look forward to engaging with them on the spiritual gifts our faith can bring to this important dialog we must undertake with the world.

blessings on your weekend.

Brother Dan