“We do not react enough”: the appeal of Laudate Deum (17 October 2023, Global)

The original version of this article authored by Paolo Foglizzo from Aggiornamenti Sociali, one of the lead partners of the FOWLS Project, was published in Italian.

“We do not react enough”: the appeal of the Laudate Deum

Paolo FOGLIZZO

Laudate Deum (LD) is a short text, Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation on the climate crisis was published on 4 October 2023, the feast of St Francis of Assisi. It contains 73 paragraphs, compared to 273 in Laudato si’ (LS), the 2015 encyclical to which it explicitly refers. This simple fact alone is enough to show that LD cannot be considered a revision of LS, it goes beyond it and, by updating it, making it obsolete: the disparity in length makes it clear that the new document has a much narrower object.

This is clear from the title of the two documents: if LS is dedicated to the care of the common home, the subject of LD is the climate crisis, in which the care of the common home is only a chapter. Moreover: the abundance of references and quotations from LS within LD confirms that the latter would not even be conceivable without the richness and depth of analysis contained in the former. It is the text of LD itself that makes it clear from the outset in what relationship it stands with LS: “The reflection and information that we can gather from these past eight years allow us to clarify and complete what we were able to state some time ago” (LD, no. 4). LD then adds the new evidence that the evolution of the situation and the advancement of scientific research have made it possible to gather, but above all it focuses on the more specific and more urgent issue of climate change.

The reason for LD’s increased focus is very clear: the issue of climate change, and its impact on the planet and on the lives of the poorest, has taken on far more dramatic dimensions than could have been expected even just eight years ago, making the search for solutions urgent. Reality has exceeded even the bleakest forecasts. The cry of the earth and of the poor is even more shrill: “the world in which we live is collapsing and may be nearing the breaking point. In addition to this possibility, it is indubitable that the impact of climate change will increasingly prejudice the lives and families of many persons […] This is a global social issue and one intimately related to the dignity of human life” (LD, nos. 2-3).

The cause is one, identified with great precision: ‘we do not react enough’ (LDS, n. 2). The affirmation of human responsibility, particularly of those who are in charge of making decisions for the common good, points to the existence of an opportunity for change: it is the COP28, scheduled to take place in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, from 30 November to 12 December. For LD, the fate of the world depends on that appointment: ‘we cannot give up dreaming that COP28 will lead to a decisive acceleration of the energy transition, with effective commitments that can be permanently monitored. This Conference can be a turning point’ (LD, no. 54). To the urgency of the situation and the denunciation of human responsibility – “It is no longer possible to doubt the human – “anthropic” – origin of climate change” (LD, no. 11) – continues to be matched, as in LS, by the hope that change is possible and the exhortation to achieve it with all the necessary commitment.

Influencing COP28, starting from the preparatory negotiations already underway, is thus the real goal of LD, which explains both its publication timing and its very structure: of the six short chapters, no less than three (the third, fourth and fifth) are expressly dedicated to dealing with the subject of climate change from the perspective of international politics. The fifth, in particular, is expressly dedicated to COP 28, while the fourth retraces the history of the many failures of the previous negotiations, inviting a change of pace, and the third recovers and deepens a point on which the Church’s social doctrine has been insisting for at least sixty years, ever since the publication of John XXIII’s encyclical Pacem in Terris in April 1963: the need for forms of authority that can effectively take care of the universal common good, that is, of the whole of humanity, of which the climate is clearly a part.

This is the root of the call for a reconfiguration of multilateralism (LD, nos. 37-43). This is a chapter of great interest, because it shows very well that for Pope Francis the prophetic call for radical change never trespasses into a sterile utopia, but is always combined with extreme realism: the main international organisations and diplomacy have so far failed – this statement could not be clearer -, but they remain instruments that we cannot do without in the promotion of the universal common good: although they are limited, we have no more valid ones, and that is why it makes sense to continue to insist on their reform.

This focus on the appointment in Dubai does not erase the attention to the many initiatives that have arisen also thanks to the publication of LS and that have helped many people, also within the Christian community, to grow in awareness of the ecological issue and to begin to change their lifestyle. Realism leads one to recognise that these efforts, which are of great importance as a driving force for cultural change (cf. LDS, no. 71), must however be flanked by more energetic action in the strictly political sphere: “I cannot deny that it is necessary to be honest and recognize that the most effective solutions will not come from individual efforts alone, but above all from major political decisions on the national and international level” (LDS, no. 69). This is an invitation to commitment also for the many organisations that in society and also in the Church bring attention to the issue of lifestyles: if the commitment does not also reach the more properly political level, the commitment remains one-sided.

The first recipients of the apostolic exhortation are undoubtedly those in positions of power in climate-related decision-making processes. To the powerful LD repeats a scathing question: “What would induce anyone, at this stage, to hold on to power, only to be remembered for their inability to take action when it was urgent and necessary to do so?” (no. 60, with a quotation from LS, no. 57). But the discourse does not only concern them: the very considerations on the importance and limits of choices made at the individual or family level indicate how the many forms of activism present in civil society need to set themselves the objective of influencing political decisions more forcefully. Responsibility for the common good is not a monopoly of politicians, especially in democratic regimes where they are accountable to the electorate. No one can call himself or herself out of the duty to act for change.

In this regard, it is interesting to note how the planetary nature of the climate emergency leads the Pope to address ‘all people of good will’, without any religious or confessional characterisation. The choice already made by LS is thus confirmed and the configuration of a sort of “global magisterium” of the Pope continues, the implications of which for the Church-world relationship and the role of the Holy See, also with respect to ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue, will need to be studied in depth.

The size of what is at stake and the urgency of the task are probably at the root of an increasingly decisive parrhesia. It is not difficult to foresee how much controversy will be aroused, particularly in some countries, by what LD No. 72 states: “If we consider that emissions per individual in the United States are about two times greater than those of individuals living in China, and about seven times greater than the average of the poorest countries, we can state that a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact. As a result, along with indispensable political decisions, we would be making progress along the way to genuine care for one another”. This is a timely application of the well-established principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, one of the cornerstones of international environmental law, which explicitly puts the lifestyle of the West in the dock and, above all, identifies where the most incisive changes need to be made. All this concerns us closely, because it clearly indicates the perspective with which to welcome the apostolic exhortation Laudate Deum also in our country.

1. Foglizzo P., «Un’idea integrale di pace. I sessant’anni della Pacem in terris», in Aggiornamenti Sociali, 4 (2023) 241-246.

This article was originally published in Italian at the website of Aggiornamenti Sociali:

«Non reagiamo abbastanza»: l’appello della Laudate Deum (aggiornamentisociali.it)