Pope Francis speaks in St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican on June 14, several days before he issued his encyclical on climate change. (Gregorio Borgia, The Associated Press)
Re: “A quixotic quest by Pope Francis,” June 21 editorial.
Thank you to the editorial board for responding to Pope Francis’ encyclical “On Care of Our Common Home.” The holy father has, in his words, opened a “dialogue with all people about our common home,” and he reaches out to people of all faiths: “All of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents.” In particular, he states, “The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all.” He notes that climate change is destabilizing the food supply, undermining biodiversity, and affecting the livelihood of the poor.
Pope Francis’ encyclical is timely, as more than 800 Citizens’ Climate Lobby volunteers from around the country (including 34 Coloradans) head to Washington to urge Congress to take meaningful action on climate change. Itap time for the U.S. to become world leaders in solving our common climate crisis.
Susan Secord, Boulder
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.Perhaps it would be quixotic (defined as “hopeful or romantic in a way that is not practical”) if Pope Francis simply called for cultural transformation without clear analysis and thoughtful options. But that is neither the tone nor the substance of his marvelous encyclical.
Drawing on multiple sources — science and scripture, economics and history — the pope makes a strong case that our civilization is in crisis, and he describes an “integral ecology” that is a hopeful option to business as usual.
The encyclical’s lengthy section dealing with strategies for action proposes dialogue with five sectors of human society. Francis’ clearly stated goal is “a conversation which includes everyone,” a pragmatic dialogue that includes morality along with economics. It is an ongoing negotiation toward big changes that really work.
Quixotic? Thatap what I’d call The Postap enormous confidence in technology and a growing GDP as the path to social and ecological healing.
Rev. Peter Sawtell, Denver
The writer is executive director of Eco-Justice Ministries.
The Post has it backwards. Don Quixote tilted against windmills. His holiness is all for them, as well as solar.
Kevin Sampson, Denver
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.The editorial board is too polite. Pope Francis’ encyclical in fact discloses his ever-more-in-the-open brand of Argentine Marxism.
Were he truly concerned with the world’s poor, Francis could start selling the mansions of the bishops, archbishops and cardinals. These “princes of the church” and their accompanying regal lifestyles beg the obvious question of why the pope needs to look outside his own domain to find obnoxious consumption.
Next to go would be the Vatican’s paintings. Not many souls saved or mouths fed with those adorning the hallowed walls.
With the remainder of his obviously spare time, Francis could figure out a way to actually create wealth.
When my copy of the encyclical letter arrives, it will immediately be stamped “Return to Sender.”
Bud Markos, Grand Junction
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.Re: “Pope Francis’ call for action on climate change (2 letters),” June 22 letters to the editor.
Letter-writer Peter Bruno points out that climate change is not a “settled science.” Are we then to sit back and do nothing? I’m sure that Pope Francis also knows that the true source(s) of climate change may never be firmly established. The point is that it doesn’t matter whose “fault” it is: it is up to us to take every step we can to be good stewards of our environment. Letap not hide behind the uncertainty of its origin to let ourselves off the hook.
As a non-Catholic, I appreciate the Pope taking this opportunity to remind us of our responsibility to try to make the world safer and healthier, for not only ourselves but for our descendants as well.
Anne Culver, Denver
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.The pope neglected the single most important fact in destruction of the Earth — too many people.
Every person since the Rev. Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834) has been correct in predicting that human population would sooner or later outstrip the planetap ability to support us. Scientific farming and other discoveries have only postponed the inevitable.
Reducing population growth is the single most important act that humans can take to save our planet. Absent controlling our population sensibly, the diseases and wars will eventually do it for us.
Dave Miller, Sedalia
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.Pope Francis’ encyclical is an insightful, easily read document. Don’t accept any punditap slanted view of it. Read it for yourself and make up your own mind if it makes sense to take care of the home of everyone you know.
Christopher J. Gaul, Thornton
This letter was published in the June 28 edition.
Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
