1 JANUARY 2010
IF YOU WANT TO CULTIVATE PEACE,
PROTECT CREATION
1. At the beginning of this New Year, I wish to offer
heartfelt greetings of peace to all Christian communities, international
leaders, and people of good will throughout the world. For this XLIII
World Day of Peace I have chosen the theme: If You Want to Cultivate
Peace, Protect Creation. Respect for creation is of immense
consequence, not least because “creation is the beginning and the
foundation of all God’s works”,[1]
and its preservation has now become essential for the pacific coexistence
of mankind. Man’s inhumanity to man has given rise to numerous threats to
peace and to authentic and integral human development – wars,
international and regional conflicts, acts of terrorism, and violations of
human rights. Yet no less troubling are the threats arising from the
neglect – if not downright misuse – of the earth and the natural goods
that God has given us. For this reason, it is imperative that mankind
renew and strengthen “that covenant between human beings and the
environment, which should mirror the creative love of God, from whom we
come and towards whom we are journeying”.[2]
2. In my Encyclical
Caritas in Veritate, I noted that integral human
development is closely linked to the obligations which flow from man’s
relationship with the natural environment. The environment must be
seen as God’s gift to all people, and the use we make of it entails a
shared responsibility for all humanity, especially the poor and future
generations. I also observed that whenever nature, and human beings in
particular, are seen merely as products of chance or an evolutionary
determinism, our overall sense of responsibility wanes.[3]
On the other hand, seeing creation as God’s gift to humanity helps us
understand our vocation and worth as human beings. With the Psalmist, we
can exclaim with wonder: “When I look at your heavens, the work of your
hands, the moon and the stars which you have established; what is man that
you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?” (Ps
8:4-5). Contemplating the beauty of creation inspires us to recognize
the love of the Creator, that Love which “moves the sun and the other
stars”.[4]
3. Twenty years ago,
Pope
John Paul II devoted his
Message for the World Day of Peace to the theme: Peace with God the
Creator, Peace with All of Creation. He emphasized our relationship,
as God’s creatures, with the universe all around us. “In our day”, he
wrote, “there is a growing awareness that world peace is threatened … also
by a lack of due respect for nature”. He added that “ecological
awareness, rather than being downplayed, needs to be helped to develop
and mature, and find fitting expression in concrete programmes and
initiatives”.[5] Previous Popes
had spoken of the relationship between human beings and the environment.
In 1971, for example, on the eightieth anniversary of
Leo XIII’s
Encyclical
Rerum Novarum,
Paul VI
pointed out that “by an ill-considered exploitation of nature (man) risks
destroying it and becoming in his turn the victim of this degradation”. He
added that “not only is the material environment becoming a permanent
menace – pollution and refuse, new illnesses and absolute destructive
capacity – but the human framework is no longer under man’s control, thus
creating an environment for tomorrow which may well be intolerable. This
is a wide-ranging social problem which concerns the entire human family”.[6]
4. Without entering into the merit of specific
technical solutions, the Church is nonetheless concerned, as an “expert in
humanity”, to call attention to the relationship between the Creator,
human beings and the created order. In 1990
John
Paul II had spoken of an “ecological crisis” and, in highlighting its
primarily ethical character, pointed to the “urgent moral need for a new
solidarity”.[7] His appeal is
all the more pressing today, in the face of signs of a growing crisis
which it would be irresponsible not to take seriously. Can we remain
indifferent before the problems associated with such realities as climate
change, desertification, the deterioration and loss of productivity in
vast agricultural areas, the pollution of rivers and aquifers, the loss of
biodiversity, the increase of natural catastrophes and the deforestation
of equatorial and tropical regions? Can we disregard the growing
phenomenon of “environmental refugees”, people who are forced by the
degradation of their natural habitat to forsake it – and often their
possessions as well – in order to face the dangers and uncertainties of
forced displacement? Can we remain impassive in the face of actual and
potential conflicts involving access to natural resources? All these are
issues with a profound impact on the exercise of human rights, such as the
right to life, food, health and development.
5. It should be evident that the ecological crisis
cannot be viewed in isolation from other related questions, since it is
closely linked to the notion of development itself and our understanding
of man in his relationship to others and to the rest of creation. Prudence
would thus dictate a profound, long-term review of our model of
development, one which would take into consideration the meaning of
the economy and its goals with an eye to correcting its malfunctions and
misapplications. The ecological health of the planet calls for this, but
it is also demanded by the cultural and moral crisis of humanity whose
symptoms have for some time been evident in every part of the world.[8]
Humanity needs a profound cultural renewal; it needs to
rediscover those values which can serve as the solid basis for
building a brighter future for all. Our present crises – be they economic,
food-related, environmental or social – are ultimately also moral crises,
and all of them are interrelated. They require us to rethink the path
which we are travelling together. Specifically, they call for a lifestyle
marked by sobriety and solidarity, with new rules and forms of engagement,
one which focuses confidently and courageously on strategies that actually
work, while decisively rejecting those that have failed. Only in this way
can the current crisis become an opportunity for discernment and new
strategic planning.
6. Is it not true that what we call “nature” in a
cosmic sense has its origin in “a plan of love and truth”? The world “is
not the product of any necessity whatsoever, nor of blind fate or chance…
The world proceeds from the free will of God; he wanted to make his
creatures share in his being, in his intelligence, and in his goodness”.[9]
The Book of Genesis, in its very first pages, points to the wise
design of the cosmos: it comes forth from God’s mind and finds its
culmination in man and woman, made in the image and likeness of the
Creator to “fill the earth” and to “have dominion over” it as “stewards”
of God himself (cf. Gen 1:28). The harmony between the Creator, mankind
and the created world, as described by Sacred Scripture, was disrupted by
the sin of Adam and Eve, by man and woman, who wanted to take the place of
God and refused to acknowledge that they were his creatures. As a result,
the work of “exercising dominion” over the earth, “tilling it and keeping
it”, was also disrupted, and conflict arose within and between mankind and
the rest of creation (cf. Gen 3:17-19). Human beings let themselves be
mastered by selfishness; they misunderstood the meaning of God’s command
and exploited creation out of a desire to exercise absolute domination
over it. But the true meaning of God’s original command, as the Book of
Genesis clearly shows, was not a simple conferral of authority, but
rather a summons to responsibility. The wisdom of the ancients had
recognized that nature is not at our disposal as “a heap of scattered
refuse”.[10] Biblical
Revelation made us see that nature is a gift of the Creator, who gave it
an inbuilt order and enabled man to draw from it the principles needed to
“till it and keep it” (cf. Gen. 2:15).[11]
Everything that exists belongs to God, who has entrusted it to man, albeit
not for his arbitrary use. Once man, instead of acting as God’s co-worker,
sets himself up in place of God, he ends up provoking a rebellion on the
part of nature, “which is more tyrannized than governed by him”.[12]
Man thus has a duty to exercise responsible stewardship over creation, to
care for it and to cultivate it.[13]
7. Sad to say, it is all too evident that large numbers
of people in different countries and areas of our planet are experiencing
increased hardship because of the negligence or refusal of many others to
exercise responsible stewardship over the environment. The
Second Vatican Ecumenical Council reminded us that “God has destined
the earth and everything it contains for all peoples and nations”.[14]
The goods of creation belong to humanity as a whole. Yet the current pace
of environmental exploitation is seriously endangering the supply of
certain natural resources not only for the present generation, but above
all for generations yet to come.[15]
It is not hard to see that environmental degradation is often due to the
lack of far-sighted official policies or to the pursuit of myopic economic
interests, which then, tragically, become a serious threat to creation. To
combat this phenomenon, economic activity needs to consider the fact that
“every economic decision has a moral consequence”
[16] and thus show increased
respect for the environment. When making use of natural resources, we
should be concerned for their protection and consider the cost entailed –
environmentally and socially – as an essential part of the overall
expenses incurred. The international community and national governments
are responsible for sending the right signals in order to combat
effectively the misuse of the environment. To protect the environment, and
to safeguard natural resources and the climate, there is a need to act in
accordance with clearly-defined rules, also from the juridical and
economic standpoint, while at the same time taking into due account the
solidarity we owe to those living in the poorer areas of our world and to
future generations.
8. A greater sense of intergenerational solidarity
is urgently needed. Future generations cannot be saddled with the cost of
our use of common environmental resources. “We have inherited from past
generations, and we have benefited from the work of our contemporaries;
for this reason we have obligations towards all, and we cannot refuse to
interest ourselves in those who will come after us, to enlarge the human
family. Universal solidarity represents a benefit as well as a duty.
This is a responsibility that present generations have towards those of
the future, a responsibility that also concerns individual States and
the international community”.[17]
Natural resources should be used in such a way that immediate benefits
do not have a negative impact on living creatures, human and not, present
and future; that the protection of private property does not conflict with
the universal destination of goods;[18]
that human activity does not compromise the fruitfulness of the earth, for
the benefit of people now and in the future. In addition to a fairer sense
of intergenerational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need for a
renewed sense of intragenerational solidarity, especially in
relationships between developing countries and highly industrialized
countries: “the international community has an urgent duty to find
institutional means of regulating the exploitation of non-renewable
resources, involving poor countries in the process, in order to plan
together for the future”.[19]
The ecological crisis shows the urgency of a solidarity which embraces
time and space. It is important to acknowledge that among the causes
of the present ecological crisis is the historical responsibility of the
industrialized countries. Yet the less developed countries, and emerging
countries in particular, are not exempt from their own responsibilities
with regard to creation, for the duty of gradually adopting effective
environmental measures and policies is incumbent upon all. This would be
accomplished more easily if self-interest played a lesser role in the
granting of aid and the sharing of knowledge and cleaner technologies.
9. To be sure, among the basic problems which the
international community has to address is that of energy resources and the
development of joint and sustainable strategies to satisfy the energy
needs of the present and future generations. This means that
technologically advanced societies must be prepared to encourage more
sober lifestyles, while reducing their energy consumption and improving
its efficiency. At the same time there is a need to encourage research
into, and utilization of, forms of energy with lower impact on the
environment and “a world-wide redistribution of energy resources, so that
countries lacking those resources can have access to them”.[20]
The ecological crisis offers an historic opportunity to develop a common
plan of action aimed at orienting the model of global development towards
greater respect for creation and for an integral human development
inspired by the values proper to charity in truth. I would advocate the
adoption of a model of development based on the centrality of the human
person, on the promotion and sharing of the common good, on
responsibility, on a realization of our need for a changed life-style, and
on prudence, the virtue which tells us what needs to be done today in view
of what might happen tomorrow.[21]
10. A sustainable comprehensive management of the
environment and the resources of the planet demands that human
intelligence be directed to technological and scientific research and its
practical applications. The “new solidarity” for which
John
Paul II called in his
Message for the 1990 World Day of Peace
[22] and the “global
solidarity” for which I myself appealed in my
Message for the 2009 World Day of Peace
[23] are essential attitudes
in shaping our efforts to protect creation through a better
internationally-coordinated management of the earth’s resources,
particularly today, when there is an increasingly clear link between
combatting environmental degradation and promoting an integral human
development. These two realities are inseparable, since “the integral
development of individuals necessarily entails a joint effort for the
development of humanity as a whole”.[24]
At present there are a number of scientific developments and innovative
approaches which promise to provide satisfactory and balanced solutions to
the problem of our relationship to the environment. Encouragement needs to
be given, for example, to research into effective ways of exploiting the
immense potential of solar energy. Similar attention also needs to be paid
to the world-wide problem of water and to the global water cycle system,
which is of prime importance for life on earth and whose stability could
be seriously jeopardized by climate change. Suitable strategies for rural
development centred on small farmers and their families should be
explored, as well as the implementation of appropriate policies for the
management of forests, for waste disposal and for strengthening the
linkage between combatting climate change and overcoming poverty.
Ambitious national policies are required, together with a necessary
international commitment which will offer important benefits especially in
the medium and long term. There is a need, in effect, to move beyond a
purely consumerist mentality in order to promote forms of agricultural and
industrial production capable of respecting creation and satisfying the
primary needs of all. The ecological problem must be dealt with not only
because of the chilling prospects of environmental degradation on the
horizon; the real motivation must be the quest for authentic world-wide
solidarity inspired by the values of charity, justice and the common good.
For that matter, as I have stated elsewhere, “technology is never merely
technology. It reveals man and his aspirations towards development; it
expresses the inner tension that impels him gradually to overcome material
limitations. Technology in this sense is a response to God’s command to
till and keep the land (cf. Gen 2:15) that he has entrusted to
humanity, and it must serve to reinforce the covenant between human beings
and the environment, a covenant that should mirror God’s creative love”.[25]
11. It is becoming more and more evident that the issue
of environmental degradation challenges us to examine our life-style and
the prevailing models of consumption and production, which are often
unsustainable from a social, environmental and even economic point of
view. We can no longer do without a real change of outlook which will
result in new life-styles, “in which the quest for truth, beauty,
goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the
factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments”.[26]
Education for peace must increasingly begin with far-reaching decisions on
the part of individuals, families, communities and states. We are all
responsible for the protection and care of the environment. This
responsibility knows no boundaries. In accordance with the principle of
subsidiarity it is important for everyone to be committed at his or
her proper level, working to overcome the prevalence of particular
interests. A special role in raising awareness and in formation belongs to
the different groups present in civil society and to the non-governmental
organizations which work with determination and generosity for the spread
of ecological responsibility, responsibility which should be ever more
deeply anchored in respect for “human ecology”. The media also have a
responsibility in this regard to offer positive and inspiring models. In a
word, concern for the environment calls for a broad global vision of the
world; a responsible common effort to move beyond approaches based on
selfish nationalistic interests towards a vision constantly open to the
needs of all peoples. We cannot remain indifferent to what is happening
around us, for the deterioration of any one part of the planet affects us
all. Relationships between individuals, social groups and states, like
those between human beings and the environment, must be marked by respect
and “charity in truth”. In this broader context one can only encourage the
efforts of the international community to ensure progressive disarmament
and a world free of nuclear weapons, whose presence alone threatens the
life of the planet and the ongoing integral development of the present
generation and of generations yet to come.
12. The Church has a responsibility towards creation,
and she considers it her duty to exercise that responsibility in public
life, in order to protect earth, water and air as gifts of God the Creator
meant for everyone, and above all to save mankind from the danger of
self-destruction. The degradation of nature is closely linked to the
cultural models shaping human coexistence: consequently, “when ‘human
ecology’ is respected within society, environmental ecology also
benefits”.[27] Young people
cannot be asked to respect the environment if they are not helped, within
families and society as a whole, to respect themselves. The book of nature
is one and indivisible; it includes not only the environment but also
individual, family and social ethics.[28]
Our duties towards the environment flow from our duties towards the
person, considered both individually and in relation to others.
Hence I readily encourage efforts to promote a greater
sense of ecological responsibility which, as I indicated in my Encyclical
Caritas in Veritate, would safeguard an authentic “human ecology”
and thus forcefully reaffirm the inviolability of human life at every
stage and in every condition, the dignity of the person and the unique
mission of the family, where one is trained in love of neighbour and
respect for nature.[29] There
is a need to safeguard the human patrimony of society. This patrimony of
values originates in and is part of the natural moral law, which is the
foundation of respect for the human person and creation.
13. Nor must we forget the very significant fact that
many people experience peace and tranquillity, renewal and reinvigoration,
when they come into close contact with the beauty and harmony of nature.
There exists a certain reciprocity: as we care for creation, we realize
that God, through creation, cares for us. On the other hand, a correct
understanding of the relationship between man and the environment will not
end by absolutizing nature or by considering it more important than the
human person. If the Church’s magisterium expresses grave misgivings about
notions of the environment inspired by ecocentrism and biocentrism, it is
because such notions eliminate the difference of identity and worth
between the human person and other living things. In the name of a
supposedly egalitarian vision of the “dignity” of all living creatures,
such notions end up abolishing the distinctiveness and superior role of
human beings. They also open the way to a new pantheism tinged with
neo-paganism, which would see the source of man’s salvation in nature
alone, understood in purely naturalistic terms. The Church, for her part,
is concerned that the question be approached in a balanced way, with
respect for the “grammar” which the Creator has inscribed in his handiwork
by giving man the role of a steward and administrator with responsibility
over creation, a role which man must certainly not abuse, but also one
which he may not abdicate. In the same way, the opposite position, which
would absolutize technology and human power, results in a grave assault
not only on nature, but also on human dignity itself.[30]
14. If you want to cultivate peace, protect creation.
The quest for peace by people of good will surely would become easier if
all acknowledge the indivisible relationship between God, human beings and
the whole of creation. In the light of divine Revelation and in fidelity
to the Church’s Tradition, Christians have their own contribution to make.
They contemplate the cosmos and its marvels in light of the creative work
of the Father and the redemptive work of Christ, who by his death and
resurrection has reconciled with God “all things, whether on earth or in
heaven” (Col 1:20). Christ, crucified and risen, has bestowed his Spirit
of holiness upon mankind, to guide the course of history in anticipation
of that day when, with the glorious return of the Saviour, there will be
“new heavens and a new earth” (2 Pet 3:13), in which justice and peace
will dwell for ever. Protecting the natural environment in order to build
a world of peace is thus a duty incumbent upon each and all. It is an
urgent challenge, one to be faced with renewed and concerted commitment;
it is also a providential opportunity to hand down to coming generations
the prospect of a better future for all. May this be clear to world
leaders and to those at every level who are concerned for the future of
humanity: the protection of creation and peacemaking are profoundly
linked! For this reason, I invite all believers to raise a fervent prayer
to God, the all-powerful Creator and the Father of mercies, so that all
men and women may take to heart the urgent appeal: If you want to
cultivate peace, protect creation.
From the Vatican, 8 December 2009
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
[1]
Catechism of the
Catholic Church, 198.
[2] Benedict
XVI,
Message for the 2008 World Day of Peace, 7.
[3] Cf.
No.48.
[4] Dante
Alighieri, The Divine Comedy, Paradiso, XXXIII, 145.
[5]
Message for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 1.
[6]
Apostolic Letter
Octogesima Adveniens, 21.
[7]
Message for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 10.
[8] Cf.
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 32.
[9]
Catechism of the
Catholic Church, 295.
[10]
Heraclitus of Ephesus (c. 535 – c. 475 B.C.), Fragment 22B124, in H. Diels-W.
Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Weidmann, Berlin,1952, 6th ed.
[11] Cf.
Benedict XVI,Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 48.
[12] John
Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Centesimus Annus,
37.
[13] Cf.
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 50.
[14]
Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes, 69.
[15] Cf.
John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Sollicitudo Rei
Socialis, 34.
[16]
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 37.
[17]
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace,
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 467; cf. Paul VI,
Encyclical Letter
Populorum Progressio, 17.
[18] Cf.
John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Centesimus Annus,
30-31, 43
[19]
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 49.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Cf.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, S. Th., II-II, q. 49, 5.
[22] Cf.
No. 9.
[23] Cf.
No. 8.
[24] Paul
VI, Encyclical Letter
Populorum Progressio, 43.
[25]
Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 69.
[26] John
Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Centesimus Annus,
36.
[27]
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 51.
[28] Cf.
ibid., 15, 51.
[29] Cf.
ibid., 28, 51, 61; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Centesimus Annus,
38, 39.
[30] Cf.
Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate, 70.
