June 19--Some sermons make you think or feel, some leave you itching to take action. And some sermons cause slight bruising because you've been called out for not doing enough of the aforementioned.
We suspect Pope Francis won't mind if you feel chagrined after taking in his extraordinary manifesto on protecting the earth. The pope's encyclical letter to Catholics on the environment, a likely topic of sermons at churches this weekend, is a broad defense of "our common home," a plea to clean up the air and water and a bold endorsement of the science that demands action on climate change.
"A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system," Francis wrote, setting up his ambitious ask: "Humanity is called upon to recognize the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption."
It's a clear, strong statement from a religious leader with 1.2 billion followers who is also a global statesman and, you can't help but notice, a trained chemist. That's because his letter, the first ever papal encyclical devoted entirely to the environment, quickly gets into the nitty-gritty of climate science. In the early pages of the 184-page document, released Thursday, Francis explains the greenhouse effect, notes that volcanic activity is also a factor in global warming and warns of the destruction of species and rising seas.
In his call for a "cultural revolution" to protect the earth, Francis shocks and shames his audience while pushing nations to reduce emissions of the carbon dioxide gases responsible for global warming. He presses for a deal on carbon reductions, to be negotiated at a U.N. climate summit in Paris in December, and takes a shot at Western consumerism for its wasteful habits.
"The earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth," he wrote.
The pope's argument is based on his preaching in protection of the world's poor. They are dependent on natural resources and have no financial means to adapt to climate change or deal with natural disasters, he said. "There is widespread indifference to such suffering, which is even now taking place throughout our world."
This, though, is where Francis runs headlong into the great debate about whether an answer to global warming can come without sharply disrupting the economic growth that lifts the poor ... and everyone else. This is where he may find a lukewarm reception from Brasilia to Bangalore.
The pope isn't buying the idea of balancing competing interests. "Halfway measures simply delay the inevitable disaster," he wrote.
But the developing world, from China to India to Brazil, has resisted international negotiations on climate change. Their argument: Wealthy nations had centuries to get rich through industrialization that polluted the skies. Now those same nations want to change the rules and hamper our economic growth? Some developing nations believe they deserve different treatment than wealthy nations on the environmental rules that would respond to global warming.
The pope is not a big fan of capitalism, but living standards have risen as developing nations have reaped the benefits of globalization. Worldwide, the number of people living in extreme poverty, subsisting on $1.25 a day or less, was reduced by half from 1990 to 2011, according to World Bank figures. There are still a staggering 1 billion people on the planet who live below that line.
Standards of living have risen, but at a grim cost. Beijing and New Delhi vie for the unwanted title of most polluted city in the world. Significantly stricter environmental regulation in those nations would improve the health of their poor -- of all their citizens.
The Paris climate change conference represents the U.N.'s best effort to secure a global pledge to reduce carbon emissions. The U.S. and other powers are on board.
An agreement emanating from Paris would pick up the pieces from the failed effort at Kyoto in 1997. Kyoto ultimately collapsed, in large part, because developing nations refused to make the same commitment as wealthy nations to cut their emissions.
Count us among the confirmed: The scientific evidence behind global warming, and its pernicious impact on the planet, is strong. The question is how to build an international consensus that doesn't choose economic winners and losers and limits economic harm.
That's still a delicate deliberation. China agreed last year to cap its greenhouse emission ... by 2030, a distant and nonenforceable target date. India hasn't made any pledge. Time is ticking, on the Paris summit and the world's health.
Will the pope's encyclical have a significant impact? Well, no one's asking him to count votes in Paris. His role is to make it more difficult for everyone to duck, and he has done that.
