Rony Roller Circus. Image: Paolo Macorig via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
It was an operatic week in the Vatican. Well, maybe soap-operatic.
The week opened with an Italian animal rights group complaining about the literal circus Cardinal Konrad Krajewski – the papal almoner – put on for poor and needy people in Rome.
An outfit called the Organizzazione Internazionale Protezione Animali issued a press release the day after the circus event, in which OIPA’s president complained that the pope “isn’t on the side of the animals” and called the whole circus trade “contrary to the pope’s ‘ecological magisterium’.”
Oh, bother.
Among the 2,000-odd people Pope Francis and his charity czar treated were orphaned boys and girls, those who have fled war and hunger in their native lands, folks without a roof over their heads, those who are out of work or underemployed, and lots of others variously down-and-out or on the skids or just plain stuck with hardscrabble existence. Some reports said there were more than a hundred prostitutes among the invités.
“The circus offers a different look at life,” Italian papers quoted Krajewski as saying of the show. “What is impossible in human terms, is possible in the circus,” he also said. That’s it – and – that’s pretty much all of it. I mean, no one will accuse this scribbler of shilling for Francis, but if giving homeless people and working poor folk and orphans and refugees and even hookers an afternoon of wholesome fun is wrong, then I don’t want to be right.
About the complaint, one gets the feeling it was a case of carpe diem – a chance for OIPA to get itself in the papers – and it looks like it paid off.
The week closed with another red hat – the prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship, Cardinal Arthur Roche – getting hot under the collar over a Pillar analysis that wondered whether Roche wasn’t out of his lane in issuing rules for the implementation of Traditionis custodes that were more restrictive than the law itself, which already severely curtailed permissions to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass and other older rites.
“In recent months,” wrote JD Flynn – himself a trained canon lawyer – in a Feb 9th piece, “Roche has [told] at least some U.S. bishops that they do not have the authority to dispense from certain provisions of Traditionis custodes, even while – to the mind of many canonists – the papal text itself does not support that claim.”
“It is an absurdity,” the Where Peter Is blog quoted Roche as saying in response to request for comment, “to think that the prefect of a dicastery would do anything other than exercise the wishes of the Holy Father as clearly outlined in their mandate and the General Norms of [the Apostolic Constitution] Praedicate Evangelium [laying out the Vatican bureaucracy’s new organizational chart].”
“The article in the Pillar,” Roche went on to say, “is not really an attack on me but on the pope’s authority which for Catholics is an astonishing act full of hubris.”
Well, give me garlic and call me smelly.
For one thing, it is anything but absurd. Surely, Roche remembers as far back as 2017, when Pope Francis very publicly told Roche’s predecessor in the Vatican’s liturgy office, Cardinal Robert Sarah, to get back in his lane and stay there after Sarah presumed to interpret some just-issued rules regarding the approval of liturgical texts in translation. Roche should recall the contretemps, as he was secretary under Sarah at the time.
For another, Roche has done the thing Flynn said he’s done, and canonists have wondered whether Roche hasn’t overstepped. It may be a moot point, given that Francis does not seem displeased – for now – with Roche’s management of the Traditionis custodes business. Francis is the pope, and the pope holds all the cards. Nevertheless, it is an open question.
Ink-on-ink is far-and-away this Vatican watcher’s least favorite journalistic sub-genre, and Cardinals-on-ink isn’t far behind, but Roche’s solicited rejoinder is an object lesson in how not to do it. It’s just too good an object lesson to pass up. One is tempted to say that Roche almost illustrates the biblical wisdom: “Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding” (Prov. 17:28).
It’s not quite John Mitchell telling Carl Bernstein, “Katie Graham’s gonna get her [redacted] caught in a big, fat wringer,” if The Washington Post published their story linking him to the secret campaign fund that paid for the Watergate burglary. Still, it’s not a great look.
The WaPo published Mitchell’s remarks, and the rest is history. Watergate blew up, Nixon resigned, and several of his erstwhile henchmen — including Mitchell — got prison sentences. Ben Bradlee, at least, knew what he was doing. Roche’s remarks will not likely lead to more than eye rolls. All the same, it goes to show you: Ask. The worst you’ll get by way of response is crickets.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
A defining theme of Pope Francis’ papacy has been his urging of humanity to better care for the natural environment, which he has done most prominently in his landmark 2015 encyclical Laudato Si’ and numerous subsequent writings and speeches.
The pope’s emphasis on this topic — especially his foray into climate science via his recent encyclical Laudate Deum — has variously drawn both praise and consternation from Catholics in the United States, about half of whom do not share Pope Francis’ views on climate change, according to surveys.
In Laudate Deum, which was released in October as a continuation to Laudato Si’, Francis wrote that the effects of climate change “are here and increasingly evident,” warning of “immensely grave consequences for everyone” if drastic efforts are not made to reduce emissions. In the face of this, the Holy Father criticized those who “have chosen to deride [the] facts” about climate science, stating bluntly that it is “no longer possible to doubt the human — ‘anthropic’ — origin of climate change.”
The pope in the encyclical laid out his belief that there must be a “necessary transition towards clean energy sources, such as wind and solar energy, and the abandonment of fossil fuels.” This follows a call from Pope Francis in 2021 to the global community calling for the world to “achieve net zero carbon emissions as soon as possible.”
He further lamented what he called “certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions [on climate change] that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church.”
In light of the new encyclical — which extensively cites the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — Pope Francis was invited to speak at this week’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP28. Though the 86-year-old pope was forced to cancel his trip due to health issues, the Vatican has indicated that he aims to participate in COP28 this weekend in some fashion. It announced today that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin will represent the pope at the conference.
While various Catholic groups have welcomed the pope’s latest encyclical, some Catholics have reacted with persistent doubts, questioning whether the pope’s policy prescriptions would actually produce the desired effects.
How do Americans feel about climate change?
According to a major survey conducted by Yale University, 72% of Americans believed in 2021 — the latest available data year — that “global warming is happening,” and 57% believe that global warming is caused by human activity.
More recent polling from the Pew Research Center, conducted in June, similarly suggests that two-thirds of U.S. adults overall say the country should prioritize developing renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, over the expansion of the production of oil, coal, and natural gas. That same survey found that just 3 in 10 adults (31%) say the U.S. should completely phase out oil, coal, and natural gas. The Yale study found that 77% of U.S. adults support at least the funding of research into renewable energy sources.
Broken down by party affiliation, Pew found that a large majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning independents — 90% — favor alternative energy sources, while just under half, 42%, of Republicans and Republican-leaning adults think the same. Within the Republican cohort, however, 67% of Republicans under age 30 prioritize the development of alternative energy sources, compared with the 75% of Republicans ages 65 and older who prioritize the expansion of oil, coal, and natural gas.
In terms of the expansion of alternative energy sources, two-thirds of Americans think the federal government should encourage domestic production of wind and solar power, Pew reported. Just 7% say the government should discourage this, while 26% think it should neither encourage nor discourage it.
How do America’s Catholics feel about climate change?
Surveys suggest that Catholics in the United States are slightly more likely than the U.S. population as a whole to be skeptical of climate change, despite the pope’s emphatic words in 2015 and since.
A separate Pew study suggests that 44% of U.S. Catholics say the Earth is warming mostly due to human activity, a view in line with Pope Francis’ stance. About 3 in 10 (29%) said the Earth is warming mostly due to natural patterns, while 13% said they believe there is no solid evidence the planet is getting warmer.
According to the same study, 71% of Hispanic Catholics see climate change as an extremely or very serious problem, compared with 49% of white, non-Hispanic Catholics. (There were not enough Black or Asian Catholics in the 2022 survey to analyze separately, Pew said.)
One 2015 study from Yale did suggest that soon after Laudato Si’ was released, U.S. Catholics were overall more likely to believe in climate change than before. That same study found no change, however, in the number of Americans overall who believe human activity is causing global warming.
Pope Francis’ climate priorities
Beyond his groundbreaking writings, Pope Francis has taken many actions during his pontificate to make his own — admittedly small — country, Vatican City, more sustainable, including the recent announcement of a large order of electric vehicles, construction of its own network of charging stations, a reforestation program, and the continued importation of energy coming exclusively from renewable sources.
Francis has often lamented what he sees as a tepid response from developed countries in implementing measures to curb climate change. In Laudate Deum, he urged that new multinational agreements on climate change — speaking in this case specifically about the COP28 conference — be “drastic, intense, and count on the commitment of all,” stating that “a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact.”
The pope lamented what he sees as the fact that when new projects related to green energy are proposed, the potential for economic growth, employment, and human promotion are thought of first rather than moral considerations such as the effects on the world’s poorest.
“It is often heard also that efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and developing cleaner energy sources will lead to a reduction in the number of jobs,” the pope noted.
“What is happening is that millions of people are losing their jobs due to different effects of climate change: rising sea levels, droughts, and other phenomena affecting the planet have left many people adrift. Conversely, the transition to renewable forms of energy, properly managed, as well as efforts to adapt to the damage caused by climate change, are capable of generating countless jobs in different sectors.”
‘Leave God’s creation better than we found it’
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation think tank, told CNA that he has noticed a theme of frustration and confusion among many Catholics regarding the Holy Father’s emphasis on climate change.
A self-described outdoorsman and former president of Wyoming Catholic College, Roberts spoke highly to CNA of certain aspects of Laudato Si’, particularly the pope’s insights into what he called “human ecology,” which refers to the acceptance of each person’s human body as a vital part of “accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home.”
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation. Courtesy of Heritage Foundation.
“I like to think [Pope Francis] personally wrote that, because I could see him saying that,” Roberts said of the passage, which appears in paragraph 155 of the encyclical. Roberts said he even makes a point to meditate on that “beautiful and moving” passage during a retreat that he does annually.
That portion of Laudato Si’ notwithstanding, Roberts said he strongly believes that it detracts from other important issues, such as direct ministry to the poor, when Pope Francis elevates care for God’s natural creation as “seemingly more important than other issues to us as Catholics.” He also said he disagrees with Pope Francis’ policy prescriptions, such as a complete phasing out of fossil fuels, contained in Laudate Deum.
“We of course want to pray for him. We’re open to the teaching that he is providing. But we also have to remember as Catholics that sometimes popes are wrong. And on this issue, it is a prudential matter. It is not a matter of morality, particularly when he’s getting into the scientific policy recommendations,” Roberts said.
Roberts said the Heritage Foundation’s research and advocacy has focused not on high-level, multinational agreements and conferences to tackle the issues posed by climate change but rather on smaller-scale, more community-based efforts. He said this policy position is, in part, due to the historical deference such multinational conglomerates of nations have given to China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases overall.
He said agreements within the U.S. itself, with businesses and all levels of government working together, have produced the best results so far when it comes to improving the environment. He also pointed to examples of constructive action that don’t involve billions of dollars, such as families making the choice to spend more time outdoors or engaging in local activities that contribute to environmental conservation and community life, such as anti-litter campaigns and community gardening. The overarching goal, he said, should be to “leave God’s creation better than we found it.”
Roberts — who said he personally believes humans likely have “very little effect” on the climate — said he was discouraged to read other portions of Laudato Si’, as well as Laudate Deum, that to him read as though they had come “straight out of the U.N.” Despite his criticisms, Roberts urged his fellow Catholics to continue to pray for the Holy Father and to listen to the pope’s moral insights.
“I just think that the proposed solutions are actually more anti-human and worse than the purported effects of climate change,” he added.
‘A far more complex issue’
Greg Sindelar, a Catholic who serves as CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a conservative think tank that studies the energy industry, similarly expressed concerns to CNA about the potential impact of certain climate change mitigation policies on human flourishing.
Like Roberts, Sindelar spoke highly of certain aspects of the pope’s message while expressing reservations about some of the U.N.-esque solutions proposed in Laudate Deum.
“I think the pope is right about our duty as Catholics to be stewards and to care for the environment. But I think what we have to understand — what we have to balance this with — is that it cannot come at the expense of depriving people of affordable and reliable energy,” Sindelar said in an interview with CNA.
“There’s ways to be environmentally friendly without sacrificing the access that we all need to reliable and affordable energy.”
Greg Sindelar is CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a think tank in America’s leading energy-producing state. Courtesy of Texas Public Policy Foundation
Sindelar said TPPF primarily promotes cheap, reliable access to energy as a means of promoting human flourishing. The free-market-focused group is skeptical of top-down governmental intervention, both in the form of regulation and incentives or disincentives in certain areas of the energy sector.
When asked what he thinks his fellow Catholics largely think about the issue, Sindelar said many of the Catholics he hears from express the view that government policies and interventions rarely produce effective solutions and could potentially hinder access to energy for those in need.
“I think it’s a far more complex issue than just saying we need to cut emissions, and we need to transfer away from fossil fuels, and all these other things. What we need to do is figure out and ensure ways that we are providing affordable and reliable electricity to all citizens of the world,” he reiterated.
“When the pope speaks, when the Vatican speaks, it carries a lot of weight with Catholics around the world, [and] not just with Catholics … and I totally agree with him that we need to be thinking about the most marginalized and the poorest amongst us,” Sindelar continued.
“[But] by going down these policy prescription paths that he’s recommending, we’re actually going to reduce their ability to have access to that,” he asserted.
Sindelar, while disagreeing with Pope Francis’ call for an “abandonment of fossil fuels,” said he appreciates the fact that Pope Francis has spoken out about the issue of care for creation and has initiated so much public discussion.
“I think there is room for differing views and opinions on the right ways to do that,” he said.
Effective mitigation efforts
Susan Varlamoff, a retired biologist and parishioner at St. John Neumann Catholic Church in the Atlanta area, is among those Catholics who are committed to Pope Francis’ call to care for creation and to mitigate the effects of climate change. To that end, Varlamoff in 2016 created a peer-reviewed action plan for the Archdiocese of Atlanta to help Catholics put the principles contained in Laudato Si’ into action, mainly through smaller, more personal actions that people can take to reduce their energy usage.
Retired biologist Susan Varlamoff. Photo courtesy of Susan Varlamoff
The Atlanta Archdiocese’s efforts have since garnered recognition and praise, Varlamoff said, with at least 35 archdioceses now involved in an inter-diocesan network formed to exchange sustainability ideas based on the latest version of the plan from Atlanta.
“It’s fascinating to see what everybody is doing, and it’s basically based on their talents and imaginations,” Varlamoff said, noting that a large number of young people have gotten involved with their efforts.
As a scientist, Varlamoff told CNA it is clear to her that Pope Francis knows what he’s talking about when he lays out the dangers posed by inaction in the face of climate change.
“He understands the science, and he’s deeply concerned … he’s got remarkable influence as a moral leader,” she said.
“Part of what our religion asks us to do is to care for one another. We have to care for creation if we’re going to care for one another, because the earth is our natural resource system, our life support, and we cannot care for one another if we don’t have that life support.”
Responding to criticisms about the financial costs associated with certain green initiatives, Varlamoff noted that small-scale sustainable actions can actually save money. She offered the example of parishes in the Atlanta area that have drastically reduced their electric bills by installing solar panels.
“[But,] it’s not just about saving money. It’s also about reducing fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, and protecting the natural resources for future generations,” she said.
Moreover, Varlamoff said, the moral imperative to improve the natural environment for future generations is worth the investment. “When [Catholics] give money, for example, for a social justice issue like Walking with Moms in Need or special needs, the payback is improving lives. We’re improving the environment here,” she emphasized.
Pope Francis delivers Angelus message on Dec. 10, 2023. / Vatican Media
Rome Newsroom, Dec 10, 2023 / 10:40 am (CNA).
Pope Francis highlighted the importance of listening to God by embracing the example of John the Baptist, “the voice of … […]
Pope Francis speaks at his general audience in Paul VI Hall on Jan. 18, 2023. / Daniel Ibanez/CNA
Vatican City, Jan 18, 2023 / 06:05 am (CNA).
Pope Francis invited Christians on Wednesday to pray for the grace to have a “pastoral heart” like Je… […]
12 Comments
We read in the concluding line: “The worst you’ll get by way of response is crickets.”
Well, maybe etomology is more relevant than theology…it is recalled that the only thing to survive the 23 atomic bomb test blasts on Bikini Island was roaches.
You guys are bringing
too much politics into our catholic family to tear apart. Why not form your church or churches to promote your believes instead of creating choats and confusion in our beloved family because you can write. Keep away!
If the author of this snarky attack filled with clerical insider tidbits can take a deep breath long enough to pass on to casual readers of CWR what are “the other older rites” regulated by traditionis custodes, this would be helpful in understanding the whole controversy over the Pope’s bottom line on the proper place for all traditional practices.
Duh? Mr. Altieri fails to define and explain ‘older rites’ in the context of Traditionis Custodes and traditional practices, and this is a problem?? If this is the best criticism mounted against the article, one should understand that ostriches don’t always live with their heads in sand. Sometimes they come up for air, and that on their own initiative too.
P.S.: The Pope’s bottom line is only difficult to understand for those who do not see.
There’s an argument to be made that it applies to all the Latin Church’s liturgical rites except the Roman Missal of 1970/2002.
That includes the Tridentine rituals for Sacraments that are not the Mass (Confession, Baptism, Matrimony, Annointing, Holy Orders, Confirmation), funeral/graveside rituals, reception of Holy Communion outside of Mass, blessings, minor exorcisms, etc.
It also includes other liturgical Rites besides the Tridentine Rite as a whole. Such as: the old Dominican Rite, the Rite of Braga, the Mozarabic Rite, the Sarum Rite, the Roman Missal of 1955, and probably about a dozen others that I don’t recall. The Zaire Rite would probably be included as well, although it is even younger than the Novus Ordo, because it isn’t the Novus Ordo.
I checked out the Where Peter Is podcast. I thought I was reading The “Catholic” Reporter. I’ll stick with The Pillar, TYVM.
I say give Roche more rope.
As to the question implied by the website that calls itself WPI, “P” is buried under the altar in the basilica in Rome.
As to where “the-Pontiff-of-unintentional-idolatry” is, everyone can see.
As to the “Eminence Roche,” he is a very apt clone of the late “Excellency” Bugnini, chair-person of “the-committee-to-fabricate-a-NEW-MASS” (the NO called the great liturgical disaster by Adam DeVille, contributor to CWR), who was described by his reluctant committee subordinate Fr. Louis Bouyer as “a man as bereft of culture as he was of basic honesty.”
Just another pathetic week in “the-new-carnival-of Pontiff-Francis” of whom we could say: “WPIN.”
The ambitious, unscrupulous Roche is a figure we know, the courtier who will always do his master’s bidding, no matter how much evil it works. But one would think those who do not stand to gain riches and favors from blind obedience to illegitimate, arbitrary decrees would exhibit more Catholic sensibilities. “Where Papolatry Is” has now become an embarrassing parody of what Protestants believe of Catholics, that we lobotomize ourselves in the face of papal aberrations and obvious nastiness. But then, in the Catholic blogosphere, perhaps that is how you earn followers and financing after all…
We read in the concluding line: “The worst you’ll get by way of response is crickets.”
Well, maybe etomology is more relevant than theology…it is recalled that the only thing to survive the 23 atomic bomb test blasts on Bikini Island was roaches.
You guys are bringing
too much politics into our catholic family to tear apart. Why not form your church or churches to promote your believes instead of creating choats and confusion in our beloved family because you can write. Keep away!
If the author of this snarky attack filled with clerical insider tidbits can take a deep breath long enough to pass on to casual readers of CWR what are “the other older rites” regulated by traditionis custodes, this would be helpful in understanding the whole controversy over the Pope’s bottom line on the proper place for all traditional practices.
Duh? Mr. Altieri fails to define and explain ‘older rites’ in the context of Traditionis Custodes and traditional practices, and this is a problem?? If this is the best criticism mounted against the article, one should understand that ostriches don’t always live with their heads in sand. Sometimes they come up for air, and that on their own initiative too.
P.S.: The Pope’s bottom line is only difficult to understand for those who do not see.
Wishing you well, Jim.
There’s an argument to be made that it applies to all the Latin Church’s liturgical rites except the Roman Missal of 1970/2002.
That includes the Tridentine rituals for Sacraments that are not the Mass (Confession, Baptism, Matrimony, Annointing, Holy Orders, Confirmation), funeral/graveside rituals, reception of Holy Communion outside of Mass, blessings, minor exorcisms, etc.
It also includes other liturgical Rites besides the Tridentine Rite as a whole. Such as: the old Dominican Rite, the Rite of Braga, the Mozarabic Rite, the Sarum Rite, the Roman Missal of 1955, and probably about a dozen others that I don’t recall. The Zaire Rite would probably be included as well, although it is even younger than the Novus Ordo, because it isn’t the Novus Ordo.
More style than content.
I checked out the Where Peter Is podcast. I thought I was reading The “Catholic” Reporter. I’ll stick with The Pillar, TYVM.
I say give Roche more rope.
As to the question implied by the website that calls itself WPI, “P” is buried under the altar in the basilica in Rome.
As to where “the-Pontiff-of-unintentional-idolatry” is, everyone can see.
As to the “Eminence Roche,” he is a very apt clone of the late “Excellency” Bugnini, chair-person of “the-committee-to-fabricate-a-NEW-MASS” (the NO called the great liturgical disaster by Adam DeVille, contributor to CWR), who was described by his reluctant committee subordinate Fr. Louis Bouyer as “a man as bereft of culture as he was of basic honesty.”
Just another pathetic week in “the-new-carnival-of Pontiff-Francis” of whom we could say: “WPIN.”
The ambitious, unscrupulous Roche is a figure we know, the courtier who will always do his master’s bidding, no matter how much evil it works. But one would think those who do not stand to gain riches and favors from blind obedience to illegitimate, arbitrary decrees would exhibit more Catholic sensibilities. “Where Papolatry Is” has now become an embarrassing parody of what Protestants believe of Catholics, that we lobotomize ourselves in the face of papal aberrations and obvious nastiness. But then, in the Catholic blogosphere, perhaps that is how you earn followers and financing after all…
Great observation about papolatry.
Right on target! Thank you!
If further proof is needed that brevity is the soul of wit, I commend this piece to wit.