Saint Kateri Tekakwitha
Conservation Center
Saint Kateri Tekakwitha
Conservation Center
The Saint Kateri Tekakwitha Conservation Center, Inc. is a not-for-profit, tax-exempt charitable organization (tax identification
number 46-1437406) under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Donations are tax-deductible as allowed by law.
Copyright © 2000, 2018 Saint Kateri Tekakwitha Conservation Center, Inc.
Our Collection
Catholic Quotes,
Statements & Writings
Saint Kateri Tekakwitha
Saint Francis of Assisi
Saint Thérèse of Lisieux
News & Stories
Coming soon
Giving
Coming soon
On Care For Our Common Home: Laudato Si’, page 4
(continued from previous page)
117. Neglecting to monitor the harm done to nature and the
environmental impact of our decisions is only the most striking
sign of a disregard for the message contained in the structures
of nature itself. When we fail to acknowledge as part of reality
the worth of a poor person, a human embryo, a person with
disabilities – to offer just a few examples – it becomes difficult
to hear the cry of nature itself; everything is connected. Once
the human being declares independence from reality and
behaves with absolute dominion, the very foundations of our
life begin to crumble, for “instead of carrying out his role as a
cooperator with God in the work of creation, man sets himself
up in place of God and thus ends up provoking a rebellion on
the part of nature”.[95]
118. This situation has led to a constant schizophrenia, wherein
a technocracy which sees no intrinsic value in lesser beings
coexists with the other extreme, which sees no special value in
human beings. But one cannot prescind from humanity. There
can be no renewal of our relationship with nature without a
renewal of humanity itself. There can be no ecology without an
adequate anthropology. When the human person is considered
as simply one being among others, the product of chance or
physical determinism, then “our overall sense of responsibility
wanes”.[96] A misguided anthropocentrism need not
necessarily yield to “biocentrism”, for that would entail adding
yet another imbalance, failing to solve present problems and
adding new ones. Human beings cannot be expected to feel responsibility for the world unless, at the same time,
their unique capacities of knowledge, will, freedom and responsibility are recognized and valued.
119. Nor must the critique of a misguided anthropocentrism underestimate the importance of interpersonal
relations. If the present ecological crisis is one small sign of the ethical, cultural and spiritual crisis of modernity,
we cannot presume to heal our relationship with nature and the environment without healing all fundamental
human relationships. Christian thought sees human beings as possessing a particular dignity above other
creatures; it thus inculcates esteem for each person and respect for others. Our openness to others, each of whom
is a “thou” capable of knowing, loving and entering into dialogue, remains the source of our nobility as human
persons. A correct relationship with the created world demands that we not weaken this social dimension of
openness to others, much less the transcendent dimension of our openness to the “Thou” of God. Our relationship
with the environment can never be isolated from our relationship with others and with God. Otherwise, it would be
nothing more than romantic individualism dressed up in ecological garb, locking us into a stifling immanence.
120. Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification
of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however
troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is
uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is
lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away”.[97]
121. We need to develop a new synthesis capable of overcoming the false arguments of recent centuries.
Christianity, in fidelity to its own identity and the rich deposit of truth which it has received from Jesus Christ,
continues to reflect on these issues in fruitful dialogue with changing historical situations. In doing so, it reveals its
eternal newness.[98]
Practical relativism
122. A misguided anthropocentrism leads to a misguided lifestyle. In the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,
I noted that the practical relativism typical of our age is “even more dangerous than doctrinal relativism”.[99]
When human beings place themselves at the centre, they give absolute priority to immediate convenience and all
else becomes relative. Hence we should not be surprised to find, in conjunction with the omnipresent technocratic
paradigm and the cult of unlimited human power, the rise of a relativism which sees everything as irrelevant unless
it serves one’s own immediate interests. There is a logic in all this whereby different attitudes can feed on one
another, leading to environmental degradation and social decay.
123. The culture of relativism is the same disorder which drives one person to take advantage of another, to treat
others as mere objects, imposing forced labour on them or enslaving them to pay their debts. The same kind of
thinking leads to the sexual exploitation of children and abandonment of the elderly who no longer serve our
interests. It is also the mindset of those who say: Let us allow the invisible forces of the market to regulate the
economy, and consider their impact on society and nature as collateral damage. In the absence of objective truths
or sound principles other than the satisfaction of our own desires and immediate needs, what limits can be placed
on human trafficking, organized crime, the drug trade, commerce in blood diamonds and the fur of endangered
species? Is it not the same relativistic logic which justifies buying the organs of the poor for resale or use in
experimentation, or eliminating children because they are not what their parents wanted? This same “use and
throw away” logic generates so much waste, because of the disordered desire to consume more than what is really
necessary. We should not think that political efforts or the force of law will be sufficient to prevent actions which
affect the environment because, when the culture itself is corrupt and objective truth and universally valid
principles are no longer upheld, then laws can only be seen as arbitrary impositions or obstacles to be avoided.
The need to protect employment
124. Any approach to an integral ecology, which by definition does not exclude human beings, needs to take
account of the value of labour, as Saint John Paul II wisely noted in his Encyclical Laborem Exercens. According to
the biblical account of creation, God placed man and woman in the garden he had created (cf. Gen 2:15) not only
to preserve it (“keep”) but also to make it fruitful (“till”). Labourers and craftsmen thus “maintain the fabric of the
world” (Sir 38:34). Developing the created world in a prudent way is the best way of caring for it, as this means
that we ourselves become the instrument used by God to bring out the potential which he himself inscribed in
things: “The Lord created medicines out of the earth, and a sensible man will not despise them” (Sir 38:4).
125. If we reflect on the proper relationship between human beings and the world around us, we see the need for
a correct understanding of work; if we talk about the relationship between human beings and things, the question
arises as to the meaning and purpose of all human activity. This has to do not only with manual or agricultural
labour but with any activity involving a modification of existing reality, from producing a social report to the design
of a technological development. Underlying every form of work is a concept of the relationship which we can and
must have with what is other than ourselves. Together with the awe-filled contemplation of creation which we find
in Saint Francis of Assisi, the Christian spiritual tradition has also developed a rich and balanced understanding of
the meaning of work, as, for example, in the life of Blessed Charles de Foucauld and his followers.
126. We can also look to the great tradition of monasticism. Originally, it was a kind of flight from the world, an
escape from the decadence of the cities. The monks sought the desert, convinced that it was the best place for
encountering the presence of God. Later, Saint Benedict of Norcia proposed that his monks live in community,
combining prayer and spiritual reading with manual labour (ora et labora). Seeing manual labour as spiritually
meaningful proved revolutionary. Personal growth and sanctification came to be sought in the interplay of
recollection and work. This way of experiencing work makes us more protective and respectful of the environment;
it imbues our relationship to the world with a healthy sobriety.
127. We are convinced that “man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life”.[100]
Nonetheless, once our human capacity for contemplation and reverence is impaired, it becomes easy for the
meaning of work to be misunderstood.[101] We need to remember that men and women have “the capacity to
improve their lot, to further their moral growth and to develop their spiritual endowments”.[102] Work should be
the setting for this rich personal growth, where many aspects of life enter into play: creativity, planning for the
future, developing our talents, living out our values, relating to others, giving glory to God. It follows that, in the
reality of today’s global society, it is essential that “we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady
employment for everyone”,[103] no matter the limited interests of business and dubious economic reasoning.
128. We were created with a vocation to work. The goal should not be that technological progress increasingly
replace human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity. Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of life on
this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfilment. Helping the poor financially must always
be a provisional solution in the face of pressing needs. The broader objective should always be to allow them a
dignified life through work. Yet the orientation of the economy has favoured a kind of technological progress in
which the costs of production are reduced by laying off workers and replacing them with machines. This is yet
another way in which we can end up working against ourselves. The loss of jobs also has a negative impact on the
economy “through the progressive erosion of social capital: the network of relationships of trust, dependability,
and respect for rules, all of which are indispensable for any form of civil coexistence”.[104] In other words,
“human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions always involve human costs”.[105] To
stop investing in people, in order to gain greater short-term financial gain, is bad business for society.
129. In order to continue providing employment, it is imperative to promote an economy which favours productive
diversity and business creativity. For example, there is a great variety of small-scale food production systems
which feed the greater part of the world’s peoples, using a modest amount of land and producing less waste, be it
in small agricultural parcels, in orchards and gardens, hunting and wild harvesting or local fishing. Economies of
scale, especially in the agricultural sector, end up forcing smallholders to sell their land or to abandon their
traditional crops. Their attempts to move to other, more diversified, means of production prove fruitless because of
the difficulty of linkage with regional and global markets, or because the infrastructure for sales and transport is
geared to larger businesses. Civil authorities have the right and duty to adopt clear and firm measures in support
of small producers and differentiated production. To ensure economic freedom from which all can effectively
benefit, restraints occasionally have to be imposed on those possessing greater resources and financial power. To
claim economic freedom while real conditions bar many people from actual access to it, and while possibilities for
employment continue to shrink, is to practise a doublespeak which brings politics into disrepute. Business is a
noble vocation, directed to producing wealth and improving our world. It can be a fruitful source of prosperity for
the areas in which it operates, especially if it sees the creation of jobs as an essential part of its service to the
common good.
New biological technologies
130. In the philosophical and theological vision of the human being and of creation which I have presented, it is
clear that the human person, endowed with reason and knowledge, is not an external factor to be excluded. While
human intervention on plants and animals is permissible when it pertains to the necessities of human life, the
Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that experimentation on animals is morally acceptable only “if it remains
within reasonable limits [and] contributes to caring for or saving human lives”.[106] The Catechism firmly states
that human power has limits and that “it is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die
needlessly”.[107] All such use and experimentation “requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation”.[108]
131. Here I would recall the balanced position of Saint John Paul II, who stressed the benefits of scientific and
technological progress as evidence of “the nobility of the human vocation to participate responsibly in God’s
creative action”, while also noting that “we cannot interfere in one area of the ecosystem without paying due
attention to the consequences of such interference in other areas”.[109] He made it clear that the Church values
the benefits which result “from the study and applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines
such as genetics, and its technological application in agriculture and industry”.[110] But he also pointed out that
this should not lead to “indiscriminate genetic manipulation”[111] which ignores the negative effects of such
interventions. Human creativity cannot be suppressed. If an artist cannot be stopped from using his or her
creativity, neither should those who possess particular gifts for the advancement of science and technology be
prevented from using their God-given talents for the service of others. We need constantly to rethink the goals,
effects, overall context and ethical limits of this human activity, which is a form of power involving considerable
risks.
132. This, then, is the correct framework for any reflection concerning human intervention on plants and animals,
which at present includes genetic manipulation by biotechnology for the sake of exploiting the potential present in
material reality. The respect owed by faith to reason calls for close attention to what the biological sciences,
through research uninfluenced by economic interests, can teach us about biological structures, their possibilities
and their mutations. Any legitimate intervention will act on nature only in order “to favour its development in its
own line, that of creation, as intended by God”.[112]
133. It is difficult to make a general judgement about genetic modification (GM), whether vegetable or animal,
medical or agricultural, since these vary greatly among themselves and call for specific considerations. The risks
involved are not always due to the techniques used, but rather to their improper or excessive application. Genetic
mutations, in fact, have often been, and continue to be, caused by nature itself. Nor are mutations caused by
human intervention a modern phenomenon. The domestication of animals, the crossbreeding of species and other
older and universally accepted practices can be mentioned as examples. We need but recall that scientific
developments in GM cereals began with the observation of natural bacteria which spontaneously modified plant
genomes. In nature, however, this process is slow and cannot be compared to the fast pace induced by
contemporary technological advances, even when the latter build upon several centuries of scientific progress.
134. Although no conclusive proof exists that GM cereals may be harmful to human beings, and in some regions
their use has brought about economic growth which has helped to resolve problems, there remain a number of
significant difficulties which should not be underestimated. In many places, following the introduction of these
crops, productive land is concentrated in the hands of a few owners due to “the progressive disappearance of small
producers, who, as a consequence of the loss of the exploited lands, are obliged to withdraw from direct
production”.[113] The most vulnerable of these become temporary labourers, and many rural workers end up
moving to poverty-stricken urban areas. The expansion of these crops has the effect of destroying the complex
network of ecosystems, diminishing the diversity of production and affecting regional economies, now and in the
future. In various countries, we see an expansion of oligopolies for the production of cereals and other products
needed for their cultivation. This dependency would be aggravated were the production of infertile seeds to be
considered; the effect would be to force farmers to purchase them from larger producers.
135. Certainly, these issues require constant attention and a concern for their ethical implications. A broad,
responsible scientific and social debate needs to take place, one capable of considering all the available information
and of calling things by their name. It sometimes happens that complete information is not put on the table; a
selection is made on the basis of particular interests, be they politico-economic or ideological. This makes it
difficult to reach a balanced and prudent judgement on different questions, one which takes into account all the
pertinent variables. Discussions are needed in which all those directly or indirectly affected (farmers, consumers,
civil authorities, scientists, seed producers, people living near fumigated fields, and others) can make known their
problems and concerns, and have access to adequate and reliable information in order to make decisions for the
common good, present and future. This is a complex environmental issue; it calls for a comprehensive approach
which would require, at the very least, greater efforts to finance various lines of independent, interdisciplinary
research capable of shedding new light on the problem.
136. On the other hand, it is troubling that, when some ecological movements defend the integrity of the
environment, rightly demanding that certain limits be imposed on scientific research, they sometimes fail to apply
those same principles to human life. There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when
experimentation is carried out on living human embryos. We forget that the inalienable worth of a human being
transcends his or her degree of development. In the same way, when technology disregards the great ethical
principles, it ends up considering any practice whatsoever as licit. As we have seen in this chapter, a technology
severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its own power.
CHAPTER FOUR
INTEGRAL ECOLOGY
137. Since everything is closely interrelated, and today’s problems call for a vision capable of taking into account
every aspect of the global crisis, I suggest that we now consider some elements of an integral ecology, one which
clearly respects its human and social dimensions.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ECOLOGY
138. Ecology studies the relationship between living organisms and the environment in which they develop. This
necessarily entails reflection and debate about the conditions required for the life and survival of society, and the
honesty needed to question certain models of development, production and consumption. It cannot be emphasized
enough how everything is interconnected. Time and space are not independent of one another, and not even atoms
or subatomic particles can be considered in isolation. Just as the different aspects of the planet – physical,
chemical and biological – are interrelated, so too living species are part of a network which we will never fully
explore and understand. A good part of our genetic code is shared by many living beings. It follows that the
fragmentation of knowledge and the isolation of bits of information can actually become a form of ignorance,
unless they are integrated into a broader vision of reality.
139. When we speak of the “environment”, what we really mean is a relationship existing between nature and the
society which lives in it. Nature cannot be regarded as something separate from ourselves or as a mere setting in
which we live. We are part of nature, included in it and thus in constant interaction with it. Recognizing the reasons
why a given area is polluted requires a study of the workings of society, its economy, its behaviour patterns, and
the ways it grasps reality. Given the scale of change, it is no longer possible to find a specific, discrete answer for
each part of the problem. It is essential to seek comprehensive solutions which consider the interactions within
natural systems themselves and with social systems. We are faced not with two separate crises, one environmental
and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental. Strategies for a
solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same
time protecting nature.
140. Due to the number and variety of factors to be taken into account when determining the environmental
impact of a concrete undertaking, it is essential to give researchers their due role, to facilitate their interaction,
and to ensure broad academic freedom. Ongoing research should also give us a better understanding of how
different creatures relate to one another in making up the larger units which today we term “ecosystems”. We take
these systems into account not only to determine how best to use them, but also because they have an intrinsic
value independent of their usefulness. Each organism, as a creature of God, is good and admirable in itself; the
same is true of the harmonious ensemble of organisms existing in a defined space and functioning as a system.
Although we are often not aware of it, we depend on these larger systems for our own existence. We need only
recall how ecosystems interact in dispersing carbon dioxide, purifying water, controlling illnesses and epidemics,
forming soil, breaking down waste, and in many other ways which we overlook or simply do not know about. Once
they become conscious of this, many people realize that we live and act on the basis of a reality which has
previously been given to us, which precedes our existence and our abilities. So, when we speak of “sustainable
use”, consideration must always be given to each ecosystem’s regenerative ability in its different areas and
aspects.
141. Economic growth, for its part, tends to produce predictable reactions and a certain standardization with the
aim of simplifying procedures and reducing costs. This suggests the need for an “economic ecology” capable of
appealing to a broader vision of reality. The protection of the environment is in fact “an integral part of the
development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it”.[114] We urgently need a humanism capable of
bringing together the different fields of knowledge, including economics, in the service of a more integral and
integrating vision. Today, the analysis of environmental problems cannot be separated from the analysis of human,
family, work-related and urban contexts, nor from how individuals relate to themselves, which leads in turn to how
they relate to others and to the environment. There is an interrelation between ecosystems and between the
various spheres of social interaction, demonstrating yet again that “the whole is greater than the part”.[115]
142. If everything is related, then the health of a society’s institutions has consequences for the environment and
the quality of human life. “Every violation of solidarity and civic friendship harms the environment”.[116] In this
sense, social ecology is necessarily institutional, and gradually extends to the whole of society, from the primary
social group, the family, to the wider local, national and international communities. Within each social stratum, and
between them, institutions develop to regulate human relationships. Anything which weakens those institutions
has negative consequences, such as injustice, violence and loss of freedom. A number of countries have a
relatively low level of institutional effectiveness, which results in greater problems for their people while benefiting
those who profit from this situation. Whether in the administration of the state, the various levels of civil society,
or relationships between individuals themselves, lack of respect for the law is becoming more common. Laws may
be well framed yet remain a dead letter. Can we hope, then, that in such cases, legislation and regulations dealing
with the environment will really prove effective? We know, for example, that countries which have clear legislation
about the protection of forests continue to keep silent as they watch laws repeatedly being broken. Moreover, what
takes place in any one area can have a direct or indirect influence on other areas. Thus, for example, drug use in
affluent societies creates a continual and growing demand for products imported from poorer regions, where
behaviour is corrupted, lives are destroyed, and the environment continues to deteriorate.
II. CULTURAL ECOLOGY
143. Together with the patrimony of nature, there is also an historic, artistic and cultural patrimony which is
likewise under threat. This patrimony is a part of the shared identity of each place and a foundation upon which to
build a habitable city. It is not a matter of tearing down and building new cities, supposedly more respectful of the
environment yet not always more attractive to live in. Rather, there is a need to incorporate the history, culture
and architecture of each place, thus preserving its original identity. Ecology, then, also involves protecting the
cultural treasures of humanity in the broadest sense. More specifically, it calls for greater attention to local cultures
when studying environmental problems, favouring a dialogue between scientific-technical language and the
language of the people. Culture is more than what we have inherited from the past; it is also, and above all, a
living, dynamic and participatory present reality, which cannot be excluded as we rethink the relationship between
human beings and the environment.
144. A consumerist vision of human beings, encouraged by the mechanisms of today’s globalized economy, has a
levelling effect on cultures, diminishing the immense variety which is the heritage of all humanity. Attempts to
resolve all problems through uniform regulations or technical interventions can lead to overlooking the
complexities of local problems which demand the active participation of all members of the community. New
processes taking shape cannot always fit into frameworks imported from outside; they need to be based in the
local culture itself. As life and the world are dynamic realities, so our care for the world must also be flexible and
dynamic. Merely technical solutions run the risk of addressing symptoms and not the more serious underlying
problems. There is a need to respect the rights of peoples and cultures, and to appreciate that the development of
a social group presupposes an historical process which takes place within a cultural context and demands the
constant and active involvement of local people from within their proper culture. Nor can the notion of the quality
of life be imposed from without, for quality of life must be understood within the world of symbols and customs
proper to each human group.
145. Many intensive forms of environmental exploitation and degradation not only exhaust the resources which
provide local communities with their livelihood, but also undo the social structures which, for a long time, shaped
cultural identity and their sense of the meaning of life and community. The disappearance of a culture can be just
as serious, or even more serious, than the disappearance of a species of plant or animal. The imposition of a
dominant lifestyle linked to a single form of production can be just as harmful as the altering of ecosystems.
146. In this sense, it is essential to show special care for indigenous communities and their cultural traditions.
They are not merely one minority among others, but should be the principal dialogue partners, especially when
large projects affecting their land are proposed. For them, land is not a commodity but rather a gift from God and
from their ancestors who rest there, a sacred space with which they need to interact if they are to maintain their
identity and values. When they remain on their land, they themselves care for it best. Nevertheless, in various
parts of the world, pressure is being put on them to abandon their homelands to make room for agricultural or
mining projects which are undertaken without regard for the degradation of nature and culture.
III. ECOLOGY OF DAILY LIFE
147. Authentic development includes efforts to bring about an integral improvement in the quality of human life,
and this entails considering the setting in which people live their lives. These settings influence the way we think,
feel and act. In our rooms, our homes, our workplaces and neighbourhoods, we use our environment as a way of
expressing our identity. We make every effort to adapt to our environment, but when it is disorderly, chaotic or
saturated with noise and ugliness, such overstimulation makes it difficult to find ourselves integrated and happy.
148. An admirable creativity and generosity is shown by persons and groups who respond to environmental
limitations by alleviating the adverse effects of their surroundings and learning to orient their lives amid disorder
and uncertainty. For example, in some places, where the façades of buildings are derelict, people show great care
for the interior of their homes, or find contentment in the kindness and friendliness of others. A wholesome social
life can light up a seemingly undesirable environment. At times a commendable human ecology is practised by the
poor despite numerous hardships. The feeling of asphyxiation brought on by densely populated residential areas is
countered if close and warm relationships develop, if communities are created, if the limitations of the environment
are compensated for in the interior of each person who feels held within a network of solidarity and belonging. In
this way, any place can turn from being a hell on earth into the setting for a dignified life.
149. The extreme poverty experienced in areas lacking harmony, open spaces or potential for integration, can lead
to incidents of brutality and to exploitation by criminal organizations. In the unstable neighbourhoods of mega-
cities, the daily experience of overcrowding and social anonymity can create a sense of uprootedness which
spawns antisocial behaviour and violence. Nonetheless, I wish to insist that love always proves more powerful.
Many people in these conditions are able to weave bonds of belonging and togetherness which convert
overcrowding into an experience of community in which the walls of the ego are torn down and the barriers of
selfishness overcome. This experience of a communitarian salvation often generates creative ideas for the
improvement of a building or a neighbourhood.[117]
150. Given the interrelationship between living space and human behaviour, those who design buildings,
neighbourhoods, public spaces and cities, ought to draw on the various disciplines which help us to understand
people’s thought processes, symbolic language and ways of acting. It is not enough to seek the beauty of design.
More precious still is the service we offer to another kind of beauty: people’s quality of life, their adaptation to the
environment, encounter and mutual assistance. Here too, we see how important it is that urban planning always
take into consideration the views of those who will live in these areas.
151. There is also a need to protect those common areas, visual landmarks and urban landscapes which increase
our sense of belonging, of rootedness, of “feeling at home” within a city which includes us and brings us together.
It is important that the different parts of a city be well integrated and that those who live there have a sense of the
whole, rather than being confined to one neighbourhood and failing to see the larger city as space which they
share with others. Interventions which affect the urban or rural landscape should take into account how various
elements combine to form a whole which is perceived by its inhabitants as a coherent and meaningful framework
for their lives. Others will then no longer be seen as strangers, but as part of a “we” which all of us are working to
create. For this same reason, in both urban and rural settings, it is helpful to set aside some places which can be
preserved and protected from constant changes brought by human intervention.
152. Lack of housing is a grave problem in many parts of the world, both in rural areas and in large cities, since
state budgets usually cover only a small portion of the demand. Not only the poor, but many other members of
society as well, find it difficult to own a home. Having a home has much to do with a sense of personal dignity and
the growth of families. This is a major issue for human ecology. In some places, where makeshift shanty towns
have sprung up, this will mean developing those neighbourhoods rather than razing or displacing them. When the
poor live in unsanitary slums or in dangerous tenements, “in cases where it is necessary to relocate them, in order
not to heap suffering upon suffering, adequate information needs to be given beforehand, with choices of decent
housing offered, and the people directly involved must be part of the process”.[118] At the same time, creativity
should be shown in integrating rundown neighbourhoods into a welcoming city: “How beautiful those cities which
overcome paralyzing mistrust, integrate those who are different and make this very integration a new factor of
development! How attractive are those cities which, even in their architectural design, are full of spaces which
connect, relate and favour the recognition of others!”[119]
153. The quality of life in cities has much to do with systems of transport, which are often a source of much
suffering for those who use them. Many cars, used by one or more people, circulate in cities, causing traffic
congestion, raising the level of pollution, and consuming enormous quantities of non-renewable energy. This
makes it necessary to build more roads and parking areas which spoil the urban landscape. Many specialists agree
on the need to give priority to public transportation. Yet some measures needed will not prove easily acceptable to
society unless substantial improvements are made in the systems themselves, which in many cities force people to
put up with undignified conditions due to crowding, inconvenience, infrequent service and lack of safety.
154. Respect for our dignity as human beings often jars with the chaotic realities that people have to endure in city
life. Yet this should not make us overlook the abandonment and neglect also experienced by some rural
populations which lack access to essential services and where some workers are reduced to conditions of
servitude, without rights or even the hope of a more dignified life.
155. Human ecology also implies another profound reality: the relationship between human life and the moral law,
which is inscribed in our nature and is necessary for the creation of a more dignified environment. Pope Benedict
XVI spoke of an “ecology of man”, based on the fact that “man too has a nature that he must respect and that he
cannot manipulate at will”.[120] It is enough to recognize that our body itself establishes us in a direct relationship
with the environment and with other living beings. The acceptance of our bodies as God’s gift is vital for welcoming
and accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home, whereas thinking that we enjoy
absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation.
Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine
human ecology. Also, valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able
to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific
gifts of another man or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a healthy
attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it”.[121]
© Copyright 2015 Libreria Editrice Vaticana
CONTINUE TO PAGE 5 ->
Catholics conserving nature and protecting life.™
Featuring a searchable library of quotes on Catholic ecology since 2000
Pro-Catholic, Pro-nature, and Pro-life.
