Francis, Is That You? The Grand Return of Ecolatry in the Vatican

It is becoming increasingly difficult to defend Pope Leo as he morphs into Francis 2.0. This was not quite as bad as Pachamama, but it comes close!

From The European Conservative

By Gaetano Masciullo

Trying at all costs to unite the devil and holy water, that is, progressive ideologies and Catholic doctrine, ultimately drains the holy water.

On October 3rd, the event “Raising Hope for Climate Justice” concluded in Castel Gandolfo, the historical summer residence of popes. It was organized by CIDSE (International Cooperation for Development and Solidarity), a Francophone international network of Catholic organizations committed to social justice. The three-day gathering marked the tenth anniversary of Pope Francis’s encyclical Laudato si’—or, more precisely, his Green Manifesto.

CIDSE is, of course, headquartered in Brussels—the very city that hosts the main institutions of the European Union. A coincidence, perhaps. Yet it’s not hard to discern, behind this proximity, an increasingly pronounced ideological convergence between the transnational environmentalist agenda and the pressures exerted on the Vatican in recent decades.

According to Vatican News, over 1,000 individuals—including political and religious leaders as well as so-called climate experts—gathered for the conference. Among them were Pope Leo XIV and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the well-known American actor and former governor of California, who long styled himself as an unconventional Republican. A staunch advocate of environmental policies involving steep taxes and sweeping restrictions, Schwarzenegger proudly presented his new book, Be Useful, in which he urges politicians to endorse and replicate his eco-prohibitionist agenda elsewhere.

Naturally, the event enjoyed full sponsorship and enthusiastic support from the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development—an office of the Curia created ad hoc by Pope Francis to serve as a sounding board within the Catholic Church for globalist agendas driven by socialist and prohibitionist impulses. Radical environmentalism, centralized economy, healthcare planning, deregulated immigration: every key term of major international bodies such as the UN and the European Union finds here its precise theological-pastoral translation, often detached from doctrinal discernment and oriented toward a Church increasingly aligned with the narratives of the dominant power in today’s ailing West.

On the first day of the conference, the pope took part in a rather awkward staging—one he might well have avoided so as not to further diminish the dignity of the papacy. Invited to “bless the waters,” Prevost stood and silently placed his hand on a block of ice the size of a carry-on suitcase, a symbol—according to the organizers—of “the planet’s fragility in the face of the climate crisis.”

He invoked God for intentions left deliberately vague. The end of global warming? A fiscal crackdown on industry? Or perhaps reform of the statist regimes in Asia—among the world’s worst polluters? That last scenario, however relevant, seems to have no place in the UN’s agenda—and, by extension, in the pseudo-liturgical script of these tragicomic times.

The pope then recited a prayer, presumably prewritten by the aforementioned Dicastery: “Lord of Life, bless this water. May it awaken our hearts, cleanse our indifference, soothe our grief, and renew our hope.”

“Creation awaits our conversion,” proclaimed a reader. Meanwhile, before the assembly gathered in silent contemplation, the block of ice began to melt. It had been brought from the Greenlandic fjord Nuup Kangerlua to Rome by artist Olafur Eliasson and geologist Minik Rosing. How many tons of CO₂ were required to transport it and keep it at the ideal temperature? A question worth answering—especially in a context that claims to speak of sustainability.

But it didn’t end there. Shortly afterward, the attendees—including Schwarzenegger and the Brazilian cardinal Jaime Spengler—waved a blue cloth, symbolizing the oceans. The moment verged on ritual, inevitably recalling the Pachamama scene in the Vatican Gardens six years ago: a pseudo-liturgical aesthetic turned spectacle, one that raises more questions than certainties.

The speech delivered by the pope at the conference raised further concerns. He called on “society, through non-governmental organizations and advocacy groups,” to “put pressure on governments to develop and implement more rigorous regulations, procedures, and controls.” He then warned that “citizens need to take an active role in political decision-making at national, regional and local levels. Only then will it be possible to mitigate the damage done to the environment.”

Curiously, no mention was made of transnational or supranational structures such as the European Union or the United Nations. As if all responsibility lay with local entities—even municipal ones—while the major global institutions remained shielded from scrutiny. Indeed, they appeared to be cast as the sole guarantors of ecological order.

The impression is clear: only international leadership is deemed capable of addressing these alleged problems. And indeed, to seal the message, the pope expressed hope that the upcoming global summits—COP30, the FAO session on food security, and the 2026 UN Water Conference—will be able to “hear the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor, of families, of indigenous peoples, of involuntary migrants.”

In these very recent weeks, we have witnessed what appears to be a gradual retreat from Prevost’s original intentions. The Prevost of the early months—who seemed intent on reining in Bergoglian ecolatry within a proper framework of balance and creatureliness—now seems to have vanished, crushed by the pressures of a Curia that remains Francis’s, not Leo’s. 

The liturgical formulary for the Mass for the Protection of Creation, approved last June 8th, stood as the clearest evidence of that initial effort: a text which, despite its modern language, firmly placed man as lord and steward of creation and God as the sole legitimate object of worship.

This confirms—and it’s worth stating plainly—what previous analyses have repeatedly emphasized: trying at all costs to unite the devil and holy water, that is, progressive ideologies and Catholic doctrine, ultimately drains the holy water. Traditional doctrine and worldly agendas cannot coexist; in such cases, it is always the latter that prevails.

In the Catholic Church, liturgy and the sacraments serve a supernatural purpose, oriented toward the glory of God and the sanctification of souls. When worldly, political, or ideological aims are superimposed onto these acts, the sacramental meaning becomes obscured: divine worship is subordinated to a human end. At the very least, the faith of the people is thrown into confusion. The agenda of worldly powers is always relative, contingent, and adaptable to the interests of the moment.

Meanwhile—just to name one example—Christians in Africa are being persecuted and massacred by jihadist groups with unmatched frequency. Yet there appear to be no significant statements or gestures from the pope on the matter. Instead, the focus shifts to climate crisis and migration driven by meteorological events. But what scientific documents actually support such claims? Populations said to be emigrating “due to extraordinary climate” remain an assertion without verifiable evidence. We are truly in the realm of faith—yes, but not the Christian kind.