Pope Francis: zealous guardian of the Common Home

We wrote a while ago that, given the patron saint who inspired his name –Saint Francis of Assisi–, Pope Francis would have everything in his favor to become the great promoter of a world ecological project. It has to be him, because, as we face the threats affecting the common destiny of the Earth and the human family, sadly, we lack leaders with the authority and convincing words and deeds to awaken humanity, especially the governing elites, and the sense of collective and individual responsibility to safeguard it for all.

This wish was fully realized with the publication of the encyclical, «Laudato si’: to care for the Common Home». Pope Francis offers us a wide-ranging text of rare intellectual and spiritual beauty – of holistic ecology, uniting that which was so valuable to Saint Francis of Assisi, and is to Francis of Rome: an attitude of caring for sister and Mother Earth and a preferential love for the condemned of the Earth.

This connection runs through the entire text like a conducting cable. There is no true ecology, of any kind, be it environmental, social, mental or holistic, if it does not rescue the humiliated of humanity, the impoverished millions of our times, for whom the Earth Mother is most gravely attacked and degraded. Pope Francis appears as a zealous guardian of the Common Home. He is very much in line with the Latin American liberation Church, with its theology of the preferential option for the poor, against poverty and in favor of their liberation and social justice. The opposite of poverty is not wealth, it is rectification of the structural and worldwide injustices. The best way to confront this anti-reality is a holistic ecology that reflects “both the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor,” (n.49).

Ecology is more than mere administration of the scarce goods and services of nature. It represents a new life style, a new art of inhabiting the Common Home differently, such that all may fit in her. Not just humans, which would constitute the anthropocentrism so harshly criticized by the encyclical (nn.115-121), but all beings living and inert, especially the great community of life that is enduring a serious erosion of biodiversity, caused by the predominance of technocracy. There is another name for the principal cause of the global ecological crisis: the productive and consumerist fury. Let us speak a phrase the Pope does not use: the savage capitalism that seeks unlimited accumulation, at the price of the devastation of nature, the impoverishment of the people, and the risk of a mega socio-ecological catastrophe. This system imposes on everyone, as Pope Francis clearly says, a behavior that “appears suicidal” (n. 55).

This link between The Great Poor (the Earth) and the poor, as was seen very early by the theologians of liberation, is justified because we live in times of extreme urgency: the ecological capacity of the Earth has already been surpassed by more than the 30%. The Earth needs one and one half years to replenish what we, with our consumption, subtract during one year.

This data posits to us the question of our collective survival. We have to change if we want to avoid the abyss. Therefore, the central question the encyclical poses is: how should we relate with nature and with Mother Earth? The answer is with caring, universal fraternity, respect for every being, because each possesses intrinsic value, and with acceptance of the interrelation of all with all.

In this, Francis of Rome sought inspiration in an actual rather than a theoretical source: in Francis of Assisi. Explicitly Pope Francis says: ”I believe that Francis is the example of excellence in caring for everything that is weak, and of a holistic ecology lived with joy and authenticity,” (n.10).

All the biographers of his time (Thomas of Celano, Saint Bonaventure, quoted in the encyclical), gave testimony to “his very tender affection that nourished all creatures”; “he gave them the sweet name of brothers and sisters, whose secrets he divined, as beings that already enjoyed the freedom and the glory of the children of God”. He would free the small birds from their cages, care for all the wounded little animals and would even ask the gardeners to leave a little corner free from cultivation, so that the weeds could grow there, because they all “also announce the most beautiful Father of all beings”.

Pope Francis warns that this is not “irrational romanticism, because it has consequences for the choices that determine our behavior,” (n. 11). If we do not use the language of enchantment, fraternity and beauty in relation to the world, “our attitudes will be those of those who dominate, of the consumer, or of the very exploiter of our resources, incapable of limiting his immediate interests” (n. 11).

Here is visible another mode of being in the world, different from the one of technocratic modernity. In that mode, the human being is above all things, as the one who possesses and dominates them. Francis of Assisi’s mode-of-being is to situate one’s self next to them, to live together as brothers and sisters at home. He mystically intuited what we know now through science: that we all are carriers of the same basic genetic code; this is why we are united by a link of consanguinity that makes us relatives, cousins, brothers and sisters of each other; from this derives the importance of mutual respect and love for each other and of never using violence amongst ourselves or against any other beings, our brothers and sisters. This mode of being could open up a path for us to overcome the global ecological crisis.

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Pope Francis: a Church emerging: from what to what?

Still celebrating the extraordinary encyclical on “caring for the Common Home”, we reflect again on an important perspective of Pope Francis, a true expression of his understanding of the Church as “a Church emerging.” This phrase carries a veiled criticism of the previous model of the Church. It was a “jailed” Church, given the various moral and financial scandals that forced Pope Benedict XVI to resign, a Church that had lost her most important asset: morality and credibility among Christians and the secular world.

But the concept of a “jailed Church” has a deeper meaning, made possible because it comes from a Pope outside the institutional sectors of the old and tired European Christianity. This had encased the Church in an understanding that had rendered it unacceptable to the moderns, a hostage to fossilized traditions and with a message that did not address the problems of Christians and the world today. The “Church emerging” marks a break with that state of affairs. The word “break” annoys the representatives of the ecclesiastic establishment, but that does not make it less true. Then the question comes: “emerging” from what and to what?

Let’s examine some steps:

-Emerging from a Fortress-Church that shielded the faithful from modern liberties to a Field-Hospital-Church that cares for all those who come to her, without regard to moral or ideological matters.

-Emerging from a self-centered Absolutist Institution-Church, towards a Movement-Church, open to universal dialogue with other Churches, religions and ideologies.

-Emerging from a Hierarchy-Church, creator of inequalities, towards a People of God-Church that turns everyone into brothers or sisters: an immense fraternal community.

-Emerging from an Ecclesiastic Authority-Church, distanced from the faithful or even denying them, towards a Pastor-Church that walks among the people, merciful, and with the odor of sheep.

-Emerging from a Papal Church of all Christians and Bishops, that governs with rigorous canonical right, to become a Bishop of Rome-Church, who presides in charity and only from that charity does he become Pope of the universal Church.

-Emerging from a Teacher of Doctrines and Norms-Church, to a Church of surprising practices and affectionate encounters with people beyond their religious, moral or ideological affiliations. The existential peripheries gain centrality.

-Emerging from a Church of sacred power, pomp and circumstance, pontifical palaces and Renaissance nobility titles, towards a Church of and for the poor, divested of symbols of honor, a servant, and prophetic voice against the system of accumulation of wealth, the idol that causes suffering and misery, and kills people.

-Emerging from a Church that speaks of the poor, to a Church that goes to the poor, talks with the poor, embraces and defends the poor.

-Emerging from a Church-equally distant from the political and economic systems towards a Church that takes sides in favor of the victimized, and calls out by name those responsible for the injustices, and invites representatives of world social movements to Rome, to discuss with them how to find alternatives.

-Emerging from a Self-magnifying and uncritical-Church towards a Church that is truthful about herself and against those Cardinals, Bishops and theologians who are jealous of their status but with a “vinegar or Good Friday” face, “sad as if they were going to their own funeral”; to a Church that is at last comprised of human beings.

-Emerging from a Church of order and rigor towards a Church of the revolution of tenderness, mercy and caring.

-Emerging from a Church of the devout, as those who appear in television programs, with performing priest artists of the religious market, towards a Church committed to social justice and the liberation of the oppressed.

-Emerging from a Church-obedience and reverence towards a Church-joy from the Gospel and still with hope for this world.

-Emerging from a Church-without the world that allowed the appearance of a world without a Church, towards a Church-World, sensitive to the problems of ecology and the future of our Common Home, Mother Earth.

These and other examples show that the Church is not reduced to being just a religious mission, stuck in a small part of reality. The Church also possesses a socio-political mission in the best sense of the term, as a source of inspiration for the needed transformations that may lift humanity towards a civilization of love and compassion, one less individualistic, materialistic, cynical and lacking in solidarity.

This Church-on her way out has returned joy and hope to Christians and regained the sense of being a spiritual home. For her simplicity, divesting and welcoming with love and tenderness, she has gained the affection of many people of other confessions, of common citizens of the world and even of heads of State who admire the figure of Pope Francis and his surprising practices in favor of peace, dialogue among the peoples, of the renunciation of all violence and war.

More than doctrine and dogma, the Tradition of Jesus is comprised of unconditional love, mercy and compassion, that is actualized and reveals its inexhaustible humanizing energy through Him. Truly, among other things, this is the central message of Jesus, acceptable to all people from all corners of the world.
Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

To preserve Pope Francis’ singular perspective: holistic ecology

Pope Francis has effected enormous change in the ecological discourse by moving from environmental ecology to holistic ecology. Holistic ecology includes socio-political, mental, cultural, educational, ethical, and spiritual ecology. The danger exists that this holistic vision may be assimilated into the usual environmental discourse, without noticing that all things, knowledge, and events are interrelated. That is, global warming results from industrial excesses, the poverty of large portions of humanity is related to the means of production, distribution and consumption, violence against the Earth and her ecosystems derives from the paradigm of domination that has underlain the predominant civilization for four centuries already, anthropocentrism is a consequence of the illusory belief that we own all things and that they only have meaning to the degree that they serve our pleasure.

That cosmology (groupings of ideas, values, projects, dreams and institutions) moves Pope Francis to say: “never have we offended and mistreated our Common Home as we have done in the last two centuries” (nº 53).

How can we overcome that dangerous path? Answers the Pope: “by changing direction,” and still more, with the disposition to “delineate great paths of dialogue that help us emerge from the spiral of self-destruction in which we are submerging ourselves (163). If we do nothing, we could encounter the worst. But the Pope trusts in the creative capacity of humans, who together will be able to formulate the great ideal: “a single world in a common project” (164).

The prevailing imperial vision of those who control the finances and destinies of world politics is very different: “Only one world and only one empire”.

To address the many critical aspects of our situation the Pope proposes holistic ecology. And he gives it the right foundation: “Given that all are intimately related and that the present problems require a vision that takes into account all the factors of the world crisis, I propose that we stop now to think of the different aspects of a holistic ecology that clearly incorporates the human and social dimensions” (137).

The theoretical proposal derives from the new cosmology, quantum physics, and the new biology, in a word, from the contemporary paradigm deriving from the theory of complexity and chaos (destructive and generative). Along those lines, Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of quantum physics, would repeat: “all has to do with all, at all points and in all moments; all is relationship and nothing exists outside of the relationship”.

The Pope repeats this innumerable times, forming the tonus firmus of his statements. We find in nº 92 what is surely the most beautiful and poetic of his formulations: “All is related, and all human beings are together as brothers and sisters in a marvelous pilgrimage, intertwined by the love that God has for each and every one of His creatures and that also binds us, with tender love, to Brother Sun, to Sister Moon, to Brother River and to Mother Earth”.

That vision has existed for almost a century already, but could never insert itself into politics or the field of social and human problems. We all continue as hostages of the old paradigm that isolates problems and seeks a specific solution for each, without realizing that a solution for one can magnify another problem. For example, the problem of the soils’ infertility is addressed with chemical nutrients that, once used, penetrate the Earth into the water tables and aquifers, poisoning them.

The encyclical can serve as an educational instrument to help us make our own that inclusive and holistic vision. For example, as the encyclical affirms: “When one speaks of the «environment» particular mention is made of the relationship that exists between nature and the society that inhabits it. This makes us understand nature as something apart from us, or merely as the framework for our life. But we are included in her, we are part of nature” (139).

And it continues, giving us convincing examples: “The present analysis of the environmental problems is inseparable from the analysis of the human, family, labor, urban contexts, and the relationship of each person with him or herself, that creates a certain mode of relating with others and with the environment” [115].

If everything is relationship, then human health itself depends of the health of the Earth and her ecosystems. All events are intertwined, for better or worse. That is the texture of reality, neither opaque nor level, but complex and highly interrelated.

If we thought of our national problems as the interplay of inter-retro-relationships, we would not have so many contradictions between ministries and governmental actions. Pope Francis suggests paths that are certain and can free us from the anxious state in which we now find ourselves, facing our common future.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was right when he wrote in the 1930s: “the era of nation-states has already passed. The task before us, if we don’t perish, is to build the Earth.” Caring for the Earth with tender and fraternal affection in the spirit of Saint Francis of Assisi and Francis of Rome, we can continue “walking and singing” as the encyclical ends, filled with hope.

We still have a future, and we will shine.

Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU

To preserve Pope Francis’ singular perspective: holistic ecology

Pope Francis has effected enormous change in the ecological discourse by moving from environmental ecology to holistic ecology. Holistic ecology includes socio-political, mental, cultural, educational, ethical, and spiritual ecology. The danger exists that this holistic vision may be assimilated into the usual environmental discourse, without noticing that all things, knowledge, and events are interrelated. That is, global warming results from industrial excesses, the poverty of large portions of humanity is related to the means of production, distribution and consumption, violence against the Earth and her ecosystems derives from the paradigm of domination that has underlain the predominant civilization for four centuries already, anthropocentrism is a consequence of the illusory belief that we own all things and that they only have meaning to the degree that they serve our pleasure.

That cosmology (groupings of ideas, values, projects, dreams and institutions) moves Pope Francis to say: “never have we offended and mistreated our Common Home as we have done in the last two centuries” (nº 53).

How can we overcome that dangerous path? Answers the Pope: “by changing direction,” and still more, with the disposition to “delineate great paths of dialogue that help us emerge from the spiral of self-destruction in which we are submerging ourselves (163). If we do nothing, we could encounter the worst. But the Pope trusts in the creative capacity of humans, who together will be able to formulate the great ideal: “a single world in a common project” (164).

The prevailing imperial vision of those who control the finances and destinies of world politics is very different: “Only one world and only one empire”.

To address the many critical aspects of our situation the Pope proposes holistic ecology. And he gives it the right foundation: “Given that all are intimately related and that the present problems require a vision that takes into account all the factors of the world crisis, I propose that we stop now to think of the different aspects of a holistic ecology that clearly incorporates the human and social dimensions” (137).

The theoretical proposal derives from the new cosmology, quantum physics, and the new biology, in a word, from the contemporary paradigm deriving from the theory of complexity and chaos (destructive and generative). Along those lines, Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of quantum physics, would repeat: “all has to do with all, at all points and in all moments; all is relationship and nothing exists outside of the relationship”.

The Pope repeats this innumerable times, forming the tonus firmus of his statements. We find in nº 92 what is surely the most beautiful and poetic of his formulations: “All is related, and all human beings are together as brothers and sisters in a marvelous pilgrimage, intertwined by the love that God has for each and every one of His creatures and that also binds us, with tender love, to Brother Sun, to Sister Moon, to Brother River and to Mother Earth”.

That vision has existed for almost a century already, but could never insert itself into politics or the field of social and human problems. We all continue as hostages of the old paradigm that isolates problems and seeks a specific solution for each, without realizing that a solution for one can magnify another problem. For example, the problem of the soils’ infertility is addressed with chemical nutrients that, once used, penetrate the Earth into the water tables and aquifers, poisoning them.

The encyclical can serve as an educational instrument to help us make our own that inclusive and holistic vision. For example, as the encyclical affirms: “When one speaks of the «environment» particular mention is made of the relationship that exists between nature and the society that inhabits it. This makes us understand nature as something apart from us, or merely as the framework for our life. But we are included in her, we are part of nature” (139).

And it continues, giving us convincing examples: “The present analysis of the environmental problems is inseparable from the analysis of the human, family, labor, urban contexts, and the relationship of each person with him or herself, that creates a certain mode of relating with others and with the environment” [115].

If everything is relationship, then human health itself depends of the health of the Earth and her ecosystems. All events are intertwined, for better or worse. That is the texture of reality, neither opaque nor level, but complex and highly interrelated.

If we thought of our national problems as the interplay of inter-retro-relationships, we would not have so many contradictions between ministries and governmental actions. Pope Francis suggests paths that are certain and can free us from the anxious state in which we now find ourselves, facing our common future.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was right when he wrote in the 1930s: “the era of nation-states has already passed. The task before us, if we don’t perish, is to build the Earth.” Caring for the Earth with tender and fraternal affection in the spirit of Saint Francis of Assisi and Francis of Rome, we can continue “walking and singing” as the encyclical ends, filled with hope.

We still have a future, and we will shine.

Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU..