Given the damage which climate change is causing and will continue to cause to human beings and the earth, it is unfortunate that the Vatican has been slow to engage with climate change debate. In the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, which was published in 2004, the topic merited only one paragraph, No 470. Three years later in April 2007, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace hosted a Study Seminar in Rome which gave a platform to many prominent climate sceptics. In July 2007, Monsignor James M. Reinert of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace could tell Francis X. Rocca of religiousnews.com that “we realise that climate change is a fact but we are not going to speak about global warming, or how or why. We’re convinced that we still don’t know.”
The Fate of Mountain Glaciers in the Anthropocene published on May 11, 2011 by the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences will hopefully mark a huge breakthrough in the Vatican’s approach to climate change. It states that the warming of the Earth is unequivocal . The working party which produced the report included glaciologists, climate scientists, meteorologists, hydrologists, physicists, chemists, mountaineers and lawyers.
The document states that “Human-caused changes in the composition of the air and air quality result in more than 2 million premature deaths worldwide every year and threatens water and food security – especially among those bottom 3 billion people. “ It stresses that bold action is needed immediately. “We appeal to all nations to develop and implement, without delay, effective and fair policies to reduce the causes and impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems including mountain glaciers and their watersheds, aware that we all live in the same home.” Everyone on the planet has some responsibility to deal with climate change, but those who caused the problem in the first place, by burning large quantities of fossil fuel for the past 150 years, must act first.
The document employs the phraseology of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which states that “by acting now, in a spirit of common but differentiated responsibility,” we accept our duty to one another and the stewardship of a planet blessed with the gift of life, In the UNFCCC discussions the U.S. has been vigorously opposed to the phrase “common but differentiated responsibility.” The U.S. wants everyone, especially what are called the emerging economies of China, India, Brazil and South Africa, to bear the same burdens. Their argument is that if the burden sharing is not equal, this will give emerging economies an advantage in attracting industry and boosting their economies at the expense of others.
Embedded in the title to the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences’ report is the claim that the best way to describe what human beings are doing to the planet is to use a geological perspective. The authors use the term ANTHROPOCENE which was coined by the Nobel Laureate, Paul Cruzen, to accurately capture what human activity has done to the planet in the past 200 years.
The first person I heard using this kind of language was Fr. Thomas Berry. Fr. Tom argued that the changes which human beings have brought about in the biosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1750 are of a geological order of magnitude. In just over two centuries human activity has brought about changes which, at other times in the history of the planet, took millions of years to accomplish. For example, the last time a serious extinction spasm occurred was at the end of the Cretaceous geological period, 65 million years ago. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that a 3 degree Celsius rise in average global temperatures could lead to the extinction of between one-third and one-half of all life forms on Earth.
The Vatican document claims that already the Earth has warmed by 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1900 AD. According to the report, the “temperature guardrail for avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference” is now proposed to be set at 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. Many scientists now argue that a 1.5 degree rise is a safer upper limit. The document ends by calling on nations and individuals to act to stabilise the climate as quickly as possible to avoid irreversible damage to life on earth.
Despite this plea there are still some prominent climate sceptics in the Catholic Church. The most prominent by far is Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney. In his articles in The Sunday Telegraph and the Catholic Weekly, Cardinal Pell has been dismissing climate change. In a public lecture in February 2006, delivered in the U.S. he said that:
Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
Earlier in 2011, Dr Greg Ayers, head of the Bureau of Meteorology in Australia painstakingly examined the scientific claims which Cardinal Pell made in a letter written tabled at a Senate hearing. Critics of Cardinal Pell point out that his climate scepticism is based on the work of a geologist called Ian Plimer. But Plimer’s data has been thoroughly debunked by Professor Ian Enting who is a mathematician at the University of Melbourne and also by one of Plimer’s own colleagues, Professor Barry Brook. Instead of responding to Dr. Greg Ayers’ critique of his arguments Pell accuses Ayers of being a “hot-air specialist” even though Ayers has 140 peer-reviewed articles to his name and Pell does not have any peer-reviewed scientific paper.
On October 26th 2011, Cardinal Pell will deliver a paper questioning climate change for the Nigel Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation. The lecture is scheduled to be held at Westminster Cathedral Hall. If the data in the Pontifical Academy’s document is correct, then one has the right to ask those in charge of Westminister Cathedral Hall, why are they giving a platform to Cardinal Pell? If someone asked for the Hall to give a lecture promoting contraception, I am sure that the request would be denied. The executives of petrochemical companies must be rubbing their hands with glee, that a prominent cardinal in the Catholic Church, is spreading their erroneous and horrendously damaging message. It is particularly reprehensible to host such a talk one month before the UN Framework Conference on Climate Change in Durban, South Africa. This is the make or break conference for climate change. If agreement is not reached the Kyoto Protocol on carbon emissions will run out and there will be no international agreement limiting greenhouse gas emission. This will inevitably lead to a catastrophe, especially for the poor, not just those living today but all future generations.
