Cardinal Pell and Hypocrisy -- Il-Kardinal Pell u l-Ipokrisija

Cardinal Pell and Hypocrisy

 

A number of journals around the world, as well as the past issue (no. 107) of The Voice of the Maltese, reported an interview with Cardinal George Pell on the Financial Times of the past 16th July.

 

In this interview, the cardinal is reported to have said that Pope Francis' encyclical (letter to the churches) Laudato Si' on the environment, although having many interesting elements, the Church has no mandate by God to pronounce itself on scientific matters as it is not expert on science.  “We”, continued the cardinal, who was probably including himself in that personal pronoun, “believe in the autonomy of science”.1

 

Such a declaration by a cardinal of the church is quite surprising, on many levels.

 

The encyclical2 refers to what is happening around the world, including the environmental impact on pollution, the throw-away culture, climate change, the problem of access to water and the loss of biodiversity.  It also talks about effects on humanity such as immigration, the reduction in the quality of life, inequalities of individuals and peoples, the injustice of rich countries which benefitied from the resources of poor countries while expeting the latter to pay more than they can to get themselves out of their situation.

 

In many places, the encyclical refers to and accepts the advice of scientists and ecological organisations.  It declares that the church cannot offer definitive opinions and acknowledges divergent views even amongst experts.  Nonetheless it draws attention to signs that the world is moving towards the brink, with many natural disasters, social and financial crises that cannot be analysed or explained in isolation.3

 

The Pope continues to make the biblical and Christian case for the obligation of mankind to treat the world as a gift of God and how it was given a mandate to live off the land and take good care of it.4

 

The encyclical remarks that we cannot expect the market or technology to solve the problems we're creating ourselves.  It exhorts us to look after employment, diversity, ethics, indigenous communities and that when searching for solutions to environmental crises also look holistically at solutions to social crises.  It encourages us to ensure that people have a roof over their head, adequate transport, asking whether we're living too fast a life where we're leaving problems to be resolved by the next generation.

 

Finally, the encyclical augurs that a consensus be found between countries to resolve problems that are beyond a single country to resolve, such as the global use today of energy from fossilised resourced.  It also draws attention to the Rio Declaration of 1992 that a lack of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse to postpone solutions for environmental damage.

 

In this encyclical, I don't see any pronouncement on scientific matters.  Such pronouncements have been and are being made by scientist and other organisations.  The Pope, after noting these, is showing that man is obliged to take action and, if Christian, is providing biblical and Christian principles why this is so.  This is a moral and political position, and not scientific.

 

It's interesting to note a speech made by the Cardinal to the Global Warming Policy Foundation, at London's Westminster Cathedral in 2011.5  Here he not only asked whether the science of climate change was established and whether there really was a consensus, but also rebutted this consensus by quoting from the mathematicial Lorenz on the impossibility of predicting the future, a number of scientists that don't form part of this consensus by not accepting the computer modelling that is quoted, complains that the influence of the sun and volcanic activity are not given their due importance and mentions many other uncertainties to throw doubt on the conclusion that mankind is the cause of the current change in climate.

 

I'm not here entering the merits of the case, as this is not the scope of my article.  However the intervention by the Cardinal in 2011, eloquent, wide-ranging and not without interest, was purely scientific.  Therefore is it only Cardinal Pell, in the Catholic Church, who can talk about and pronounce himself on the subject?  Did he not then believe in the autonomy of science?  This is nothing except hypocrisy.

 

It's difficult for me to understand how someone with the cardinal's intelligence ends up accusing his superior of doing that which he himself does.

 

Perhaps the answer can be found in paragraph 217 of the encyclical, where the Pope remarks that 'some committed and prayerful Christians, with the excuse of realism and pragmatism, tend to ridicule expressions of concern for the environment.'  These words can be seen to apply perfectly to the current Federal government of Australia, led by Mr Tony Abbott, which ever since taking power has done everything possible so that the use of fossilised sources of energy continues and possibly increases, and investment in sustainable sources reduces.  

 

Just last week, the Prime Minister was bemoaning the the Federal Court's invalidation of approval for a new coal mine in Queensland due to the lack of consideration of endangered species, calling it “tragic for the wider world”.6

 

This is the opposite of what is in the encyclical.

 

By coincidence, the Prime Minister is a personal friend of Cardinal Pell.  Perhaps His Eminence felt the need to come to his defence.

 

 

Il-Kardinal Pell u l-Ipokrisija

 

Diversi ġurnali madwar id-dinja, kif ukoll il-ħarġa li għaddiet (nru. 107) ta' The Voice of the Maltese, irrappurtaw intervista tal-Kardinal George Pell fuq il-Financial Times tas-sittax ta' Lulju li għadda.

 

F'din l-intervista, l-kardinal ġie rrappurtat li qal li l-enċiklika (ittra lill-knejjes) Laudato Si' tal-Papa Franġisku fuq l-ambjent, għalkemm kellha ħafna elementi interessanti, il-knisja m'għandha l-ebda mandat minn Alla biex tippronunzja ruħha fuq affarijiet xjentifiċi peress li m'hix esperta tax-xjenza.  “Aħna”, kompla jgħid il-kardinal, li f'dak il-pronom personali kien preżumibbilment qed jinkludi lilu nnifsu, “nemmnu fl-awtonomija tax-xjenza”.1

 

Stqarrija bħal din minn kardinal tal-knisja hija sorprendenti għall-aħħar, fuq ħafna livelli.

 

L-enċiklika2 tirreferi għal dak li qiegħed jiġri madwar id-dinja, li jinkludi l-impatt ambjentali tat-tniġġis, il-kultura tar-rimi u t-tibdil fil-klima, il-problema tal-aċċess għall-ilma, u t-telfa tal-biodiversità.  Titkellem ukoll kif qed tiġi affettwata l-umanità inkluż immigrazzjoni, it-tnaqqis tal-kwalità tal-ħajja, l-inugwaljanza ta' individwi u popli u l-inġustizzja ta' pajjiżi għonja li stagħnew fil-passat minn fuq dahar riżorsi li ġew minn pajjiżi foqra filwaqt li jistennew lill-pajjiżi foqra jħallsu iktar milli jistgħu biex joħorġu mis-sitwazzjoni.

 

F'ħafna postijiet, l-enċiklika tirreferi u taċċetta l-pariri tax-xjenzati w organizzazzjonijiet ekoloġiċi.  Tistqarr li l-knisja ma tistax toffri opinjoni definittiva u li hemm veduti diverġenti anke fost l-esperti.  Madankollu tiġbed l-attenzjoni għal sinjali li d-dinja qed tittarraf, b'ħafna diżastri naturali u kriżijiet soċjali u finanzjarji li ma jistgħux jiġu analizzati jew spjegati waħedhom.3

 

Il-Papa jkompli billi jagħmel il-każ bibbliku u nisrani ta' x'inhu l-obbligu tal-bniedem biex iħares id-dinja bħala rigal ta' Alla u kif ingħata mandat biex jgħix minnha u jindukraha.4

 

L-enċiklika tirrimarka li ma nistgħux nistennew li s-suq jew it-teknoloġija jsolvu l-problemi li qed noħolqu aħna stess.  Teżortana biex inħarsu l-impjiegi, id-diversità, l-etika, il-komunitajiet indiġeni u li meta nfittxu soluzzjonijiet għal kriżijiet ambjentali nħarsu b'mod ħolistiku wkoll lejn soluzzjonijiet għal kriżijiet soċjali.  Tinkoraġġina li nagħtu każ li n-nies ikollhom saqaf fuq rashom, trasport adekwat, ssaqsi jekk wasalniex biex ngħixu ħajja mgħaġġla wisq fejn il-problem nħalluhom għall-ġenerazzjoni ta' warajna.

 

Fl-aħħar, l-enċiklika tawgura li jintlaħaq kunsens bejn il-pajjiżi biex jissolvew problemi li huma kbar wisq għal pajjiż wieħed, bħall-użu llum globalment mifrux ta' enerġija minn sorsi ffossilizzati.  Tiġbed l-attenzjoni għad-dikjarazzjoni ta' Rio fl-1992 li n-nuqqas ta' ċertezza xjentifika m'għandhiex tintuża bħala skuża biex soluzzjonijiet għal-ħsara ambjentali jiġi pospost.

 

Jien f'din l-enċiklika, ma rajt l-ebda pronunzja fuq affarijiet xjentifiċi.  Il-pronunzji saru u qed isiru minn xjenzjati u organizzazzjonijiet oħra.  Il-Papa, wara li jinnutahom, qiegħed juri li hemm obbligu tal-bniedem biex jieħu azzjoni, u jekk hu nisrani, jagħti r-raġunijiet bibbliċi u l-prinċipji nsara għaliex għandu jagħmel dan.  Din hija pożizzjoni morali u politika, u mhux xjentifika.

 

Huwa interessanti li ninnutaw taħdita li ta l-Kardinal lill-Fundazzjoni fuq il-Politika tat-Tibdil tal-Klima, fil-katidral ta' Westminster f'Londra, fl-2011.5  Fiha mhux biss jistaqsi jekk ix-xjenza dwar it-tibdil tal-klima hijiex stabbilita u kemm hemm kunsens fuqha, imma jirribattiha billi jikkwota lill-matematiku Lonrenz fuq l-impossibilta' li tipprevedi l-futur, lil diversi xjentisti li ma jiffurmawx parti minn dan il-kunsens li ma jaċċettawx l-immudellar bil-kompjuter li jiġi kkwotat, igerger li l-influwenzi tax-xemx u tal-vulkani ma jingħatawx importanza, u jsemmi ħafna u ħafna inċertezzi oħra biex jitfa dubju fuq il-konklużjoni li l-bniedem huwa l-kaġun tat-tibdil preżenti fil-klima.

 

Jien m'inix se nidħol fil-mertu, għax dan mhux l-iskop tal-artiklu tiegħi.  Imma l-intervent tal-kardinal fl-2011, elokwenti, wiesgħa u mhux nieqes mill-interess, kien wieħed purament xjentifiku.  Allura huwa l-Kardinal Pell biss, fil-Knisja Kattolika, li jista' jitkellem u jippronunzja ruħu fuq is-suġġett?  Dakinhar ma kienx jemmen fl-awtonomija tax-xjenza?  Din mhi xejn ħlief ipokrisija.

 

Huwa diffiċli biex nifhem għalfejn xi ħadd bl-intelliġenza tal-kardinal jasal li jgħajjar lis-superjur tiegħu b'dak li jagħmel hu.  

 

Forsi r-risposta qegħda f'paragrafu 217 tal-enċiklika, fejn il-Papa jirrimarka li xi nsara devoti, bl-iskuża tar-realiżmu u l-pragmatiżmu, għandhom il-ħabta li jirredikolaw stqarrijiet ta' tħassib dwar l-ambjent.  Dawn il-kliem japplikaw perfettament għall-gvern preżenti Awstraljan, immexxi mis-Sur Tony Abbott, li kemm ilu li tela' għamel minn kollox biex l-użu tas-sorsi ffossilizzati tal-enerġija jitkompla u possibilment jitqawwa, u jnaqqas l-investiment f'sorsi sostenibbli tal-enerġija.

 

Il-ġimgħa l-oħra biss, il-Prim Ministry kien qed jiddeplora deċiżjoni tal-Qorti Federali li waqqfet l-approvazzjoni ta' minjiera ġdida tal-faħam f'Queensland minħabba nuqqas ta' kunsiderazzjoni ta' żewġ speċji ta' annimali fil-periklu, deċiżjoni li sejħilha “traġika għad-dinja”.6

 

Dan huwa l-oppost ta' dak li hemm fl-enċiklika.

 

B'kumbinazzjoni, il-Prim Ministru huwa ħabib personali tal-Kardinal Pell.  Forsi l-Eminenza ħass li kellu jaqbeż xi ftit għalih.

1http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7f429c28-2bc6-11e5-acfb-cbd2e1c81cca.html#axzz3iMYiWgeL, retrieved 10/8/2015

2Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' - On Care For Our Common Home, Holy Father Francis, Holy See

3Ibid., para. 61

4Ibid., para. 67

5http://www.sydneycatholic.org/people/archbishop/addresses/2011//20111026_1463.shtml, retrieved 10/8/2015

6http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tragic-for-the-wider-world-tony-abbott-decries-court-ruling-against-adani-coal-mine-20150807-gitp64.html, retrieved 16/8/2015