A Radical Vatican? - Naomi Klein

[cbayer]

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-visit-to-the-vatican

JULY 10, 2015

BY NAOMI KLEIN


CREDIT PHOTOGRAPH BY RICCARDO DE LUCA/AP

JUNE 29TH—PACKING

When I was first asked to speak at a Vatican press conference on Pope Francis’s recently published climate-change encyclical, “Laudato Si’,” I was convinced that the invitation would soon be rescinded. Now the press conference and, after it, a two-day symposium to explore the encyclical is just two days away. This is actually happening.

As usual ahead of stressful trips, I displace all of my anxiety onto wardrobe. The forecast for Rome in the first week of July is punishingly hot, up to ninety-five degrees Fahrenheit. Women visiting the Vatican are supposed to dress modestly, no exposed legs or upper arms. Long, loose cottons are the obvious choice, the only problem being that I have a deep-seated sartorial aversion to anything with the whiff of hippie.

Surely the Vatican press room has air-conditioning. Then again, “Laudato Si’ ” makes a point of singling it out as one of many “harmful habits of consumption which, rather than decreasing, appear to be growing all the more.” Will the powers that be make a point of ditching the climate control just for this press conference? Or will they keep it on and embrace contradiction, as I am doing by supporting the Pope’s bold writings on how responding to the climate crisis requires deep changes to our growth-driven economic model—while disagreeing with him about a whole lot else?

To remind myself why this is worth all the trouble, I reread a few passages from the encyclical. In addition to laying out the reality of climate change, it spends considerable time exploring how the culture of late capitalism makes it uniquely difficult to address, or even focus upon, this civilizational challenge. “Nature is filled with words of love,” Francis writes, “but how can we listen to them amid constant noise, interminable and nerve-wracking distractions, or the cult of appearances?”

more at link

[skepticscott]

1. Sorry, Naomi

You're being conned and used. Used to lend legitimacy to a brazen PR stunt. Deep down, I suspect you realize that, or you wouldn't be resorting to sophistry like "embrace contradiction". WTF does that even mean?

Are you really convinced that the RCC is your best vehicle for promoting action and change on this issue? Seriously? Try advocating the use of artificial contraception during this symposium as a sure-fire means to control population growth (a major contributor to global warming) and see how that flies. Everyone knows you won't...whether you realize it or not, you've been muzzled and all you can do is try to rationalize it. You've made a devil's bargain. And a shameful one.

[Lordquinton]

2. Best case scenario

He really does effect some change in the world regarding this stuff, but then what? Will we see any more change in the church? or will he quit and we get another traditional pope and we can all forget about more progress because, hey, you just got Francis, what more do you want?

[locks]

3. I am thankful for people like Naomi Klein

(and my Catholic friends) who have worked so long to not only reform the church but to build a society based on principles of peace, justice, equality, and protection of our planet. Francis is supporting these people around the world, whether of faith or no faith, and speaking the "real gospel", which many leaders do not want to hear.
The mayor of my city, Boulder, has been invited along with many US leaders to a conference at the Vatican on ideas at the local level to stop human trafficking and reduce carbon. I think these efforts are what most progressives want to be part of.

[skepticscott]

4. No he isn't

He is in rabid opposition to people around the world who advocate for equality for homosexuals, and so is the church he leads.

[AtheistCrusader]

5. You forgot abortion, contraceptives, family planning, same sex marriage and a few other things that

The wonderpope is vocally opposed to, and encourages your fellow Catholics to vote to ban them.