Climate Change Communication: A Politicized Landscape within the U.S. Catholic Church’s Hierarchy

Introduction

Amidst increasing political polarization and the urgent need to address climate change, the intersection of politics and religion has become a landscape of profound significance and controversy in the United States. At the heart of this complex interplay lies the Catholic Church’s stance on environmentalism, headed by Pope Francis and clearly voiced in his 2015 ecological-focused encyclical, Laudato Si’. As the world’s moral authority, Pope Francis has continued to express an outspoken stance on climate change, facing both praise and criticism for mediating between religion and science. Contrary to misconceived notions, he urges that “science and religion, with their distinctive approaches to understanding reality, can enter into an intense dialogue fruitful for both” (Laudato Si’ par. 62). In the eight years since Laudato Si’, political affiliations, even among Catholics, have altered climate change perceptions.

There is reason to question whether U.S. politics, increasingly defined by affective and asymmetric polarization, has infiltrated the Catholic Church’s hierarchy of communication on climate change. On October 4, 2023, the feast of St. Francis of Assisi, Pope Francis released an apostolic exhortation titled Laudate Deum, a follow-up to his enduring messages in Laudato Si’. His document criticizes “deniers” of climate change and addresses the culture of “resistance and confusion” taking place. He wrote, “I feel obliged to make these clarifications, which may appear obvious, because of certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church” (Laudate Deum par. 14). His acknowledgement of humanity’s inadequate response to the climate crisis should not be taken lightly by the laity nor clergy.

Indifference and resistance to our planet’s falling state is largely driven by politics. Research suggests that “politics may trump religion in influencing climate change beliefs even among religious leaders” (Danielsen, et al. 1). This study seeks to explore the comparative relationship between the politicization and reception of climate views within the U.S. Catholic Church’s hierarchy, using the long-term impact of Laudato Si’ as a reference point. The central aim of this paper is motivated by suspected dissonance within the Church and curiosity about its dissemination of climate change teachings. Pope Francis’ messages in Laudato Si’ have lacked follow-up at parish levels; hence, my research question: how does the U.S. political landscape affect climate change communication (or lack thereof) within the Catholic Church’s hierarchy? More specifically, why aren’t U.S. bishops more vocal on climate change?

Methodology

In order to fully understand the divergences within the U.S. Catholic Church’s views on climate change, internally and externally, one must understand the impact of American politics in shaping public perceptions, and therefore receptions, of the Church’s hierarchical communication. Relative to its traditional authority structure and current times, ecclesiology defines the Church’s mission of collegiality and synodality between bishops and the Pope, calling for universal-minded, collaborative efforts. Religious-environmental studies indicate both resistance and support toward Laudato Si’ among U.S. Catholics. Social science research points to partisanship as the main predictor of climate beliefs, revealing fragmented U.S. public perceptions of Laudato Si’ and Pope Francis’ credibility. By delving into these areas of interest, this research ventures to shed light on apparent resistance within the Catholic Church’s hierarchy in promoting its mainstream social teachings on environmental stewardship. The varying, politicized landscape at-large will provide a basis for comparison when looking at smaller-scale dispositions, such as those at the parish level.

This empirical research is prompted by a recent study conducted by sociologists at Creighton University, which discovered a correlation between political conservatism and U.S. Catholic bishops’ silence and climate change denialism around the time of Laudato Si’. In this paper, I will investigate three areas: 1) political affiliation’s influence on climate change perceptions; 2) politicized religion’s influence on climate change perceptions; and 3) Church hierarchy and climate change. Unlike the vast majority of existing research, this scholarship will merge all three ideas together, bringing new insights to bear on the question of whether America’s climate change politicization has shaped clerical voices (e.g., bishops) in the U.S. Catholic Church. Broadly, this will help speculate about increased religious partisanship on matters of climate change within the Church’s hierarchy, eminently drawing attention to the need for greater collegiality and synodality in the episcopal conference of the U.S. Catholic Church.

Political Affiliation’s Influence on Climate Change Perceptions

Roughly speaking, American Catholics are evenly split between Republican and Democratic lines. According to Gallup, the Catholic vote in the 2020 election, estimated by the AP VoteCast, shows that 49% of Catholics voted for Biden and 50% for Trump (Newport). The partisan divide over climate change, as sharply polarized in the broader U.S. public, is apparent among identifying Catholics in the United States.

Social science research points to the fact that political identity and ideology serve as the biggest predictors of climate beliefs (Danielsen, et al. 1). Recent public polling conducted by Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan fact tank, has shown this proposition to be true. To better understand U.S. Catholics’ feelings about climate change, Pew Research Center carried out an online survey in 2022 through the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), randomly sampling 10,156 U.S. adults. According to the polling, “Catholics are no more likely than Americans overall to view climate change as a serious problem [identical share of 57%]” (Diamant). Fitting to our stereotypical assumptions of polarized politics, Democrats or Democratic-leaning Catholics (82%) are more likely to say global climate change is an extremely or very serious problem than Republican or Republican-leaning Catholics (25%), who tend to be more skeptical (Diamant). Furthermore, “just over half of Catholics (54%) say the Earth is warming mostly due to human activity – in line with the pope’s stance” (Diamant). The breakdown of this percentage point reveals another partisan rift: Democratic Catholics (70%) are more likely to say the Earth is warming due to anthropogenic activities than Republican Catholics (18%) (Diamant). These discrepancies are indications of politically-motivated denialism and right-wing resistance. Climate change is not a conjecture; it’s a scientifically-backed reality that can be opposed but not justifiably denied. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact” (qtd. in “Scientific Consensus”). In October 2022, Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation wrote, “Despite all attempts to deny, conceal, gloss over or relativize the issue, the signs of climate change are here and increasingly evident” (Laudate Deum par. 5). Doubting the anthropic origin of climate change “is no longer possible” (par. 11). Authorities in both realms of science and religion have acknowledged the climate crisis’ conclusive nature, and yet, people are still viewing scientific findings “through the lens of their political identities” (qtd. in Landrum and Vasquez 2). Polarity is noticeably visible among laypeople’s climate beliefs.

Traditional Authority Structure within the Church

Shifting our focus from receivers of the Church’s teachings to the clergy entails deepening our knowledge of the traditional authority structure within the Church. Historically, given their unique voice, position, and moral authority, popes have shaped the Church’s primary stance in the environmental movement, mainly through encyclicals. In the 1980s, St. John Paul II made a strong case for environmentalism, linking the Church’s commitment to the will of God and the creation narratives in the Book of Genesis (Diamant). Following in succession, Pope Benedict XVI wrote a social encyclical titled Caritas in Veritate, expounding on the idea of humanity’s “responsible stewardship over nature” and the “pressing moral need for renewed solidarity” to ensure dignity among all (Caritas in Veritate par. 48-49). In our present day, Pope Francis has shown devotion to climate activism through a moral imperative of “integral ecology.” As he addressed in Laudato Si’, “We are faced not with two separate crises, one environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental” (par. 139). In acknowledgement of those who are disproportionately affected by the climate crisis, Pope Francis’ ministry has embraced the “preferential option for the poor” – a prominent theme in Catholic social teaching centered around the Church’s intimate care and concern for the well-being of the poor. Laudato Si’ is intended to address “every living person on this planet” under the shared purpose of caring for “our common home” (par. 3). The Pope’s authority over the Catholic constituency, and therefore posture towards certain issues like climate change, becomes a substantial part of the Church’s environmental advocacy.

Be that as it may, the context of climate change communication in the Catholic Church does not fall solely on the Pope’s outward stance. From the top down, the Church’s hierarchy is composed of different levels of authority: the pope, cardinals, archbishops, bishops, priests, deacons, religious orders, and the laity. The hierarchy is believed to have been established by Jesus Christ and His apostles, who “instituted a variety of ministries in His Church for the People of God” (Lumen Gentium par. 18). Its structure serves as a means of preserving and transmitting the faith, maintaining doctrinal and moral authority, providing spiritual guidance and governance, and perpetuating unity and discipline within the Church (“Catholic Church Hierarchy”). Guided by the Holy Spirit, the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, known as the Magisterium, is made up of the Pope and all bishops in communion with him. While the hierarchy remains rooted in tradition, apostolic succession, and the Church’s infallible teachings, it has evolved over time to meet the changing needs of the universal Church and modernity.

Vatican II: Collegiality

In the 1960s, the Church underwent major reforms under the Second Vatican Council as a means of “opening up” to the modern world. Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church by Pope Paul VI, is recognized as one of the most central documents to emerge from Vatican II. Focusing on the nature of the Church, it emphasizes “that the Church is the People of God, not just a purely hierarchical institution” (“Lumen Gentium and Vatican II”). As stated, “It is the duty of the ecclesiastical hierarchy to regulate the practice of evangelical counsels by law, since it is the duty of the same hierarchy to care for the People of God and to lead them to most fruitful pastures” (Lumen Gentium par. 236). The three evangelical counsels include: chastity dedicated to God, poverty, and obedience. As this paper will underline, the latter can be applied to bishops, who “should be shepherds of His Church even to the consummation of the world” (Lumen Gentium par. 18). Lumen Gentium delves into the concept of collegiality within the Church, accentuating the role of bishops and their collective authority with respect to the Pope. Overall, the Second Vatican Council “laid the foundation for the ecclesiology of the local/particular Church, collegiality of bishops, and synodality” (Bujak 147). The Church’s shifted understanding of authority and decision-making processes involving the episcopacy led to the development of modern Catholic ecclesiology and the increasing prominence of collegiality and synodality.

Hierarchical Role of Bishops

Bishops are indispensable figures in spreading the faith “as teachers for doctrine, priests for sacred worship, and ministers for governing” (Lumen Gentium par. 20). In relation to the Pope as the voice of the Church, they are entrusted with the responsibility of leading dioceses around the world as a “visible source and foundation of unity of faith and communion” (Lumen Gentium par. 18). The Pope and bishops form a single collegial body; therefore, “the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter at its head” (Lumen Gentium par. 22). The Pope ultimately has power over all, but the “hierarchical communion with the head and the members of the college” is intended to be “whole and intact” (Lumen Gentium par. 21; 22). Bishops are allotted portions of the People of God to care for; they do not exercise their governance over the universal Church. However, as members of the episcopal college and successors of the apostles, they are “obliged by Christ’s institution and command to be solicitous for the whole Church…” (Lumen Gentium par. 23). In preserving and passing on the faith, they are to uphold obedience to papal instruction.

Emphasis on Synodality

What we are seeing today among bishops in the United States is a sense of dissonance over climate change; they have not reflected a great deal of concordance with the Pope’s vocalization. Said to be a vision of Vatican II, the notion of synodality in the life and mission of the Church has manifested itself under Pope Francis’ papacy. However, a true “coming together” over environmental matters is yet to be communicated by Church leaders in the U.S. The Synod of Bishops was formed as a permanent institution in 1965 by Pope Paul VI; it refers to the regular assembly of bishops, who gather with the Pope “to share information and experiences, in the common pursuit of pastoral solutions which have a universal validity and application” (“The Synod”). This includes all matters of urgent pastoral importance, including discernment of controversial issues, such as the role of women in ministry, LGBTQ+ inclusivity, optional priestly celibacy, etc. The environment is no exception. Pope Francis has welcomed help in governing the universal Church. His “teaching on synodality and strengthening the Church at local and regional levels” (Bujak 147) is an opportunity for the Pope, bishops, and the laity to listen to each other. Synodality is needed at three levels of the Church: communion between the local, regional, and universal. This is foundational to understanding the importance of U.S. bishops’ communication on climate change. According to an article published in the Polish journal Collectanea Theologica, “By its nature, every authentic manifestation of synodality requires the exercise of the collegial ministry of the bishops” (Bujak 156). Climate change communication within the U.S. Catholic Church’s hierarchy, for the most part promulgated by Pope Francis, relies on the obedience and subsequent application of bishops.

Politics and Religion: Competing Influences on Values

Taking into account the traditional authority structure within the Church, including modern movement toward collegiality and synodal collaboration, we would expect the Pope’s support for climate activism to be upheld across the Catholic community. However, in a country divided over global climate change, Pope Francis’ widespread influence and framing of climate change as a moral issue has not swayed skeptic, indifferent, and/or resistant perceptions in the United States. Further evidence of polarization among Catholics is mirrored in the partisan reception of Laudato Si’. Existing research on climate change communication, representative of political and Catholic affiliation, revolves around Laudato Si’ and its imprint on climate change perceptions, as well as papal credibility. In a trans-disciplinary literature review published in WIREs Climate Change, communication scholars at Texas Tech University and Boston College ruled out the possibility of a “Francis Effect” – whether Pope Francis was able to change certain climate attitudes through Laudato Si’ – maintaining that “Pope Francis was not able to influence politically conservative climate change deniers” (Landrum and Vasquez 10). His messages in Laudato Si’ did not generate consensus among Catholic Conservatives, allusively showing that American Catholics are closely affiliated with their political party.

Politicized Religion’s Influence on Climate Change Perceptions

Equally important to understanding the gap between U.S. Catholics’ feelings about climate change is to consider the perceptions of Pope Francis as a religious figure. Because Pope Francis is generally perceived as being more “left-leaning,” some experts believe the Pope’s credibility in the U.S. is highly politicized. In a scoping review found in Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology, scholars looked at a five-year-old body of research around Laudato Si’ and reached a similar conclusion: “Conservative participants (Catholics as well as non-Catholics) … who were aware of the encyclical, granted the Pope less credibility. Initially unconcerned about climate change they were found to express less concern about it and engage less in activism behaviors” (qtd. in Nche, et al. 131). This finding cited Landrum’s research, as well as an investigation using nationally-representative surveys that argued, “Cross-pressured by the inconsistency between Francis’ view and those of their political allies, conservative Catholics devalued the Pope’s credibility on climate change” (Li 367). Pope Francis’ messages in Laudato Si’ were not echoed among Catholic Conservatives. Although appealing to moral foundations can “be effective for climate communication,” his calls for action via the “traditional, top-down format” were met with reactance. Skeptics, who already questioned the reality or importance of combating climate change (e.g., U.S. Conservatives), “were resistant to top-down messages communicating the scientific consensus surrounding climate change” (qtd. in Landrum and Vasquez 4). These findings are unsurprising given the context of America’s political polarization. People are less likely to resonate with messages that don’t reinforce their existing views. Religion, when up against politics, is a competing influence on values.

The Pope vs. U.S. Catholic Conservatives

Empirical evidence of this nature, notably situated in the U.S., inevitably raises questions about whether climate change communication is reaching its desired impact from the Church’s hierarchical standpoint. The Vatican’s influence in the United States has become associated with underlying Conservative implications. In fact, Pope Francis has commented there is a “strong reactionary” element in the U.S. Catholic Church. According to an article on the USCCB website, when a Jesuit brother asked the Pope about his critics (including bishops) in the United States, Pope Francis replied, “In the United States the situation is not easy: There is a very strong reactionary attitude. It is organized and shapes the way people belong, even emotionally” (qtd in. Wooden). During that same meeting in Portugal, he said, “I would like to remind those people [U.S. Catholics] that ‘indiestrismo’ [being backward-looking] is useless…” (qtd. in Wooden). Marked by tensions with Conservatives, who disagree on issues like climate change, Pope Francis once informally said, “For me it’s an honor they attack me, the Americans” (qtd. in Doane). Political interpretations of the Pope and climate change have arguably altered Pope Francis’ “unique ability to raise a moral voice and to mobilize social action” in the United States (Campbell 88). In a journal article titled The Perils of Polarized Religion, Notre Dame Professor David Campbell wrote, “The key to religion’s prophetic potential is not to be perceived as being on one side or the other” (Campbell 100). Unfortunately, politicized religion has compromised the Pope’s outreaching influence on climate change perceptions. This contributes to a greater understanding of “tensions in religious environmentalism,” as referenced in the book Religious Environmental Activism: Emerging Conflicts and Tensions in Earth Stewardship (Koehrsen 3). Environmental commitments voiced by religious leaders are a “messy and embattled process” (Koehrsen 14), partially explaining why politicized religion intersects with Americans’ views on the environment.

Church Hierarchy and Climate Change

If partisan identity is taking precedence over religious views of laypeople, what is happening among the clergy? Research on the impact of Pope Francis’ Laudato Si’ demonstrates that cues from religious elites “may promote new consensus over divisive issues but could also stoke latent internal divisions over religion and politics” (Buckley 3). Ongoing disagreements over the Church’s environmental engagement has uncovered “frictions within the institution” (Koehrsen 3). Although Pope Francis “assumed an explicit environmental position with his encyclical, many of its segments (e.g., national churches, Bishops, members) disagreed with its contents, questioned the relevance of this call, and only backed it to varying extent” (qtd. in Koehrsen 1). Climate change discourse in the Church’s hierarchy embodies diversity of opinion and conflict, but it may also resemble the effects of political polarization. A recent study conducted by sociologists at Creighton University analyzed 12,077 diocesan columns by U.S. Catholic bishops around the time of Laudato Si’ and identified a correlation between political conservatism and U.S. Catholic bishops’ silence and denialism on climate change. As a group, most bishops were silent about climate change. However, those who mentioned climate change either: 1) diminished or distanced themselves from Church teaching; 2) downplayed parts of the encyclical that conflicted with political Conservatism; or 3) emphasized parts of the encyclical that aligned with Conservative views (Danielsen, et al. 1). Emergent research of this type suggests that “politics may trump religion in influencing climate change beliefs even among religious leaders” (Danielsen, et al. 1).

Inconsistent Communication

Should this be the case, climate change communication’s “spotty receptivity at the parish level” could be explained by political affiliation’s overwhelming influence. In the months that ensued the release of Laudato Si’, a writer for Scientific American noted, “There has not been a consistent response across the American Catholic Church to the pope’s call for action or even the dissemination of his social teaching from church pulpits” (Vyawahare). In fact, at a USCCB meeting in July 2015, only “40 out of 250 bishops … attended a workshop on the encyclical” (Vyawahare). The hierarchical rank that should be the most receptive to the Pope’s messages about climate change (i.e., bishops) has not prioritized environmental discourse. Quantitative data from Pew Research Center’s 2022 survey, asking how often Catholic respondents hear about climate issues in sermons, reflects this continued disparity. Consensus among U.S. Catholics who attend Mass at least monthly indicates “that climate change is not discussed frequently from the pulpit” (Diamant). Forty-one percent of regular Mass attendees reported there is no discussion of climate change while 50% said there is either some or little; only 8% noted a great deal or quite a bit of discussion (Diamant). In the same survey, 78% answered “a little/none” in response to talking about climate change with people at their congregation (Alper). Climate change receives relatively negligible attention in U.S. religious congregations, suggesting inconsistent or lacking communication from clergy members, perhaps in part to political interferences with the Pope.

Of course, not every U.S. bishop has allegedly defied Pope Francis’ stance or ignored the Church’s call for urgent climate action. For instance, the Catholic Climate Covenant, an organization based in Washington D.C. inspiring care for creation and the poor, compiled an incomprehensive list of supportive statements and postings of 110 bishops in the United States celebrating the release of Laudato Si’. Other noteworthy disseminations have been displayed as well. For instance, Bishop Robert McElroy in San Diego created an “Action Plan” and “Creation Care Teams” to address climate change at the parish level (“Diocese’s Action Plan”). Comparably, Cardinal Wilton Gregory in the Archdiocese of Washington created a Laudato Si’ Action Plan, similar to the one he launched while Archbishop of Atlanta (“Archdiocese Launches New”). Even with these exceptions, it is argued that Pope Francis’ encyclical has seemingly “fallen on deaf ears” in a considerable number of U.S. dioceses.

Beyond the political realm, there are several individual and systemic barriers that could account for the insufficient clerical engagement on environmental issues, such as lacking knowledge, perceived unimportance, disinterest, or irrelevance, over-packed schedules, financial constraints, or perhaps even fear of backlash from parishioners (Wilkins). However, climate change’s religious partisanship and assumed influence on bishops raises the utmost concern when pinpointing the place of questioning, resistance, and independent action in the U.S. Catholic Church. Holy obedience is structured hierarchically under the Pope’s power of primacy. The Church teaches that all Catholics should give religious assent, just as the consecrated are called to practice obedience through submission to the Pope. If the official place of obedience in the Church (i.e., the Magisterium) is shaken by politics, how can we expect followers of the faith to “come together” on important issues like climate change?

This is integral to carrying on conversation about the Church’s need for unified diocesan responses on creation care efforts. A Synod report submitted by the Catholic Climate Covenant to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) addressed bishops’ avoidance of Church teaching on creation care, sharing a plea “for more institutional Church support and help for care of creation efforts” (Gaona). By and large, lay Catholics looking to safeguard the environment “feel little to no support from clergy, bishops and dioceses, and in some cases direct opposition” (Roewe). There has been an unfolding message from the laity that climate change is not widely prioritized across U.S. dioceses but rather resisted within the Church.

Conclusion

Based on speculation, America’s political landscape has shaped climate change communication between bishops and the Pope in the U.S. Catholic Church. Paired with political affiliation, the ever-present culture of politicization has influenced climate change perceptions among both laypeople and clergy, ostensibly disrupting the impact of the Church’s long-standing commitment to social and environmental issues. Disparaging views, even within the Church’s governing body, have failed to see beyond the sphere of politics in recognizing climate change’s moral and ethical imperatives. The gap between Pope Francis’ urgency in tackling this social-environmental crisis and bishops’ wavering reception attests to dissonant communication in the Church’s hierarchy.

Ideals of dialogue and consensus between bishops and the Pope should reflect Vatican II’s principles of collegiality and synodality, so as to foster the Church’s adherence to collective decision-making and alignment in addressing global challenges, such as climate change. What should be happening under the traditional authority structure of the Church, in terms of obedience and synodality, is not happening in the context of climate change communication. Spotty receptivity of the Pope’s environmental teachings, combined with political resistance, underscore the importance of collaborative and constructive dialogue, as well as the need for unity between U.S. bishops and the Pope in addressing the state of our common home. As Pope Francis wrote in Laudate Deum, “There are no lasting changes without cultural changes, without a maturing of lifestyles and convictions within societies, and there are no cultural changes without personal changes” (par. 70). Until the culture of politicization changes in the United States, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church will find itself in the middle of the partisan divide. “Our world has become so multipolar and at the same time so complex that a different framework for effective cooperation is required,” wrote Pope Francis (Laudate Deum par. 42). With the climate crisis steadily worsening, greater cooperation is needed between the Holy See and the U.S. episcopal conference to encourage unified movements going forward. Further studies should consider where this is likely to go in such a politicized landscape; that is, how will the application of papal doctrine need to change in order to be prioritized by dioceses?