The “International Theological Commission, has published a new document. The title: “Prendersi cura della nostra Casa comune’: Risposta responsabile e fraterna al Dio trinitario.” In English: “Caring for Our Common Home”: A Responsible and Fraternal Response to the TriuneGod”. The document is available only in Italian on the Vatican’s website.
In this article, I will discuss a few aspects of the document rather than analyze the entire document. The document was translated with AI from the Italian and revised by the author.
Other Religions
The document lists various religions and attempts to construct a common mission for climate protection based on these religions.
The section on Buddhism states:
“137. [Buddhism]. The Buddhist tradition calls for a profound respect for all living beings, inviting us to approach them with compassion and loving-kindness. It is said that, upon attaining enlightenment, the Buddha perceived the radical interconnectedness of all natural phenomena: an experience that in some ways brings him closer to the perception of cosmic brotherhood and sisterhood experienced by Saint Francis of Assisi, as recalled and explored in ‘Laudato si’.”
Just last week, I published an article on the site marking the 800th anniversary of the death of Saint Francis of Assisi. It is perfectly clear from contemporary sources, such as Thomas of Celano’s biography of Saint Francis, that Francis was a devout Catholic and repeatedly warned against hell. He met with Sultan Al-Kamil to preach to him about the Catholic faith. He would have protested immediately if anyone had accused him of having ties to a pagan religion.
After discussing the various religions, the following conclusion is reached:
“Religious traditions that acknowledge the existence of a creative principle, each in its own way, emphasize the fundamental importance of the relationship with God and with creation. Clearly, compassion and care for creation—or for the existing world, in cases where there is no concept of creation—cannot be separated from merciful concern for one’s neighbor.”
It has occurred to Prevost and the others in the Vatican that some other religions do not believe in an act of creation at all. Hindus, for example, do not believe in an act of creation, but rather in recurring cycles.
So now even the term “creation” is being thrown out the window, if necessary, in order to accommodate the “false” religions a little further.
“With different nuances and approaches, the various traditions that embrace the idea of a transcendent Creator emphasize the decisive role of three fundamental relationships for the full fulfillment of human life and for the good of the planet. Many of these aspects, at their fundamental ethical core, are compatible with the Christian vision.”
False religions may contain two kinds of truths: truths of natural law (e.g., murder is immoral) or fragments of divine revelation (e.g., Moses was a prophet). But these few true elements do not exist in a vacuum; rather, they are mixed with many, many false elements, thus forming a false religion.
“Therefore, from the perspective of the Christian faith, the doors are open to interreligious collaboration in the common task of respectfully caring for all of creation, in service to the flourishing of life and communion with the Transcendent, who is the origin and foundation of all life.”
It may be that other religions contain some truths regarding the “care of creation.” However, “interreligious cooperation” is not the Church’s task. The solution is simple: The Catholic Church can simultaneously urge politicians to uphold ethical principles and proclaim the Gospel.
There is an even greater problem here. God is replaced in the document with “the Transcendent.” The word is also capitalized in the original Italian text. This is a concept with which no religion has a problem, since all religions deal with the supernatural. But when the very existence of God is presented as negotiable, that marks a new low point. To present even the existence of God as negotiable marks a new low.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to dismiss the idea that we are living in the great apostasy preceding the Antichrist.
Panentheism
A troubling section of the document concerns the view of the world and God’s relationship to it.
The Church has always taught that God is pure Spirit, completely transcends the world, and is separate from it. The First Vatican Council expresses it this way:
„The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church believes and confesses that there is one true and living God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth, Almighty, Eternal, Immense, Incomprehensible, Infinite in intelligence, in will, and in all perfection, who, as being one, sole, absolutely simple and immutable spiritual substance, is to be declared as really and essentially distinct from the world, of supreme beatitude in and from Himself, and ineffably exalted above all things which exist, or are conceivable, except Himself. This one only true God, of His own goodness and almighty power, not for the increase or acquirement of His own happiness, but to manifest His perfection by the blessings which He bestows on creatures, and with absolute freedom of Counsel, created out of nothing, from the very first beginning of time, both the spiritual and the corporeal creature, to wit, the angelical and the mundane, and afterwards the human creature, as partaking, in a sense, of both, consisting of spirit and of body.” (Dei Filius, here)
The document discusses other perspectives: immanentism, panentheism, and pantheism. Immanentism is the idea that there is no God independent of the world, and pantheism holds that the entire cosmos is God. Although the document rejects immanentism and pantheism, it presents panentheism as a possible alternative without condemning it:
“Other philosophical schools of thought and a portion of contemporary theology lean more toward panentheism. According to this perspective, the world exists within God, while God, at the same time, transcends it.[111] Unlike classical theism, which often emphasizes the distinction between God and creation, and pantheism, which identifies God with the world, panentheism combines divine immanence and transcendence. This perspective offers an interpretive framework for understanding how God can be intimately present in every aspect of reality without coercively determining it. God, in his gratuitous mercy, makes room for a creation that is genuinely distinct from him, while at the same time continuing to be the foundation that sustains it.” (52)
Fasting redefined
The document redefines fasting: The focus is now on reducing the consumption of resources on the planet.
“124. Although fasting is practiced in many religious traditions,[197] the current situation of overexploitation of our planet imposes on all of us a moral duty to voluntarily restrict our consumption and the exploitation of resources, especially in wealthy countries. We have not yet become aware, on a global level, of the fact that we live in a world with finite and limited resources (LS 56).”
In the Church’s 2,000-year-old tradition, fasting was about mortifying the flesh and doing penance for sins. Not once was it suggested that fasting had anything to do with resource consumption.
Saint Francis de Sales writes in his famous book “Philothea”, a guide to the spiritual life for laypeople:
“If you are able to fast, you will do well to observe some days beyond what are ordered by the Church, for besides the ordinary effect of fasting in raising the mind, subduing the flesh, confirming goodness, and obtaining a heavenly reward, it is also a great matter to be able to control greediness, and to keep the sensual appetites and the whole body subject to the law of the Spirit; and although we may be able to do but little, the enemy nevertheless stands more in awe of those whom he knows can fast.” (p. 86)
The Eucharist
“108. [The Eucharist as an Ecological School]. From the Eucharist flows a spirituality capable of supporting and encouraging the ecological conversion that we so urgently need to undertake as a human family (cf. LS 236). In it, we recognize God’s gifts in nature.”
The Eucharist is something entirely different from an “ecological school.” I am quoting here from John Laux, an American priest and religion teacher, from his book “Mass and the Sacraments”:
“The Mass Is a Real Sacrifice because it has all the conditions required for a true sacrifice:
a) The Victim is Jesus Christ Himself under the appearances of bread and wine;
b) The oblation takes place at the Consecration, when Christ, at the words of the priest: This is my Body—This is my Blood becomes present on the altar under the separate species of bread and wine. The separate species represent the death of Christ, the separation of His Blood from His Body;
c) By this most perfect oblation God is adored and honored in the most perfect manner, and the fruits of the Sacrifice of the Cross are applied to our souls.”
Later on he writes:
“There are four things we owe, as creatures, to God: adoration, satisfaction for sin, thanksgiving for favors received, and petition. These were the ends for which the sacrifices of the Old Law were offered; they must also be the ends of the Sacrifice of the Mass, which has taken the place of the sacrifices of the Old Law. […] The Sacrifice of the Mass, being the same as the Sacrifice of the Cross, is in a special manner a sacrifice of propitiation. As such it obtains for us, according to the teaching of the Church, the grace of repentance, and contrition for the forgiveness of our sins, as well as the remission of the temporal punishment we deserve for them.”
“Our intellect opens itself to the transparency of God in creation. Nature reveals its intrinsic epiphanic dimension.”
The word “Epiphany” means an appearance of God. “Epiphany” is also a holiday on January 6, when we celebrate the visit of the three wise men from the East.
When the document claims that nature has an “epiphanic dimension,” it suggests that nature is somehow divine.
I could share even more quotes, but that would go beyond the scope of this article.
“These are gifts we need to live, beginning with food. But material food acquires its full meaning when it is neither isolated nor set in opposition to the food that nourishes the spirit. For this reason, a purely instrumental view of creation diminishes our humanity; it impoverishes it. The Eucharist is a banquet of communion, a common table to be shared. For this reason, it builds up the community.”
This is pure Protestantism. In reality, the Eucharist is a holy sacrifice that the priest offers to God “in persona Christi.” It is the bloodless renewal of the sacrifice of the Cross.