Clearly, this is not some narrow agenda for the greening [of] the Church or the world. It is a vision of care and protection that embraces the human person and the human environment on all possible dimensions.
When we hear that people have meetings about how to preserve creation, we can say: ‘No they are the greens!’ No! They are not the greens! This is ‘our response to the first creation’ of God—and our responsibility. A Christian who does not protect Creation, who does not let it grow, is a Christian who does not care about the work of God.
Many liberals and some conservatives I know will be frustrated by the lack of acknowledgement that population matters—and particularly that boosting access to family planning is an important way to cut social vulnerability to climate (and other) hazards in the world’s poorest regions.
If Francis really wants to be credible—not just within the religious community, but outside it—he must confront his Church’s own responsibility for degrading the environment by encouraging unmitigated population growth. If Francis were to recognize that ‘artificial’ means of birth control are now in keeping with the imperatives of nature, he would do more for the welfare of this planet than any of his predecessors. . . . He must now think through the ultimate consequences of where any such symposium must inevitably lead.
By blaming anti-Semitism on Christianity, scholars have badly misled their readers. In nineteenth and early twentieth century Germany it was not Christianity that was, nor Christians who were by virtue of their faith, anti-Semitic. Rather it was neo-pagans both within and without the Church, who had an intense dislike of Christianity precisely because it was Semitic.