On the final Saturday of April 2025, the 266th pope was given a “low-key” funeral and laid to rest in Rome. That it be low-key was one of Francis’ last wishes.
He wanted a simpler process incurring lower costs, with The Holy See’s coffers untroubled. The choice of final resting place as the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome, rather than Saint Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, also reflected the man’s modesty.
Of course, a truly low-key funeral may be unrealistic for any pontiff. Around 250,000 people attended the funeral mass, amongst them delegations from 130 countries, 50 of which were led by heads of state.
We saw President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy sitting knee-to-knee with his United States counterpart, Donald Trump, in St Peter’s Basilica, followed by Trump shaking hands outside with the French president, Emmanuel Macron. In the front row sat President Milei of Argentina, Pope Francis’ homeland.
In the Chinese-language world, coverage of the pope’s death and funeral was muted – certainly low-key. But as we prepare to celebrate the 10-year anniversary of the Paris Agreement and hail the importance of continued multilateralism, I think we in the Chinese-language world must remember the vital contribution that Pope Francis made to that deal.
2015: ‘On care for our common home’
Pope Francis became head of the Catholic church in 2013. In May 2015, he published an encyclical (a papal letter to the church’s bishops) titled Laudato Si (Praise be to you).
Its subtitle, “On care for our common home”, signalled its environmental focus. That year was an important one for climate negotiations. By the end of it, the world was due to agree on new climate change cooperation arrangements “applicable to all parties”.
Though this was the pope’s second encyclical, his first had primarily continued his predecessor’s work. The 2015 encyclical was not only the first to represent Pope Francis’ own views, but the first ever to focus on the planet rather than just humanity. This decision made a big impact.
Responses came in from around the world. Scientists were particularly welcoming. In October of that year, the scientific journal Nature Climate Change paid tribute to the pope in a special issue. Science and religion, as the pope had advocated, set aside their differences and started to talk.
The encyclical, which is 184 pages long, gets stuck into the environmental crisis immediately after the preamble. It also covers air and water pollution and biodiversity loss, but gives the climate crisis a special focus.
The letter does not reference the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) by name, but paragraphs 23 and 24 mention the “very solid scientific consensus” that the climate is changing unnaturally quickly, primarily due to human activity. This alludes to the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) published a few months prior.
The encyclical goes on to look at the impacts and risks of global heating, and the implications for global justice. It emphasises the disproportionate harms to the poor and the Global South, the risk of forcing people into migrating, and of war over access to resources.
The letter is also clear on the climate being a global common good. There is therefore a moral duty to take strong action in response to climate change, it argues. Let us think back to the 2014 debate over the wording of AR5’s Mitigation of Climate Change Summary for Policymakers.
There was fierce disagreement over whether or not the climate could be called a “global commons problem”. In the end, the term was moved from the main text into a footnote, with a clarification that this was unrelated to any “effort-sharing”. The pope, however, does not need to take the opinion of others into account. Francis could say what he thought, directly.
Chapter 2 of the encyclical refers at length to the Bible as it discusses the intrinsic value of all forms of life. And the pope was not entirely unaware of practical concerns: chapters 3 to 6 review the roots of the climate crisis and our response in terms of political economy, technology, society and culture.
Much ink is spent criticising the “technocratic paradigm” – a mindset that views technology and human control over nature as the primary means of progress. For the pope, this belief forgets what is essential, and drives endless extraction of the earth’s resources in pursuit of limitless growth.
On the economy, the pope criticised the maximisation of profit driven by instrumental reasoning. On the contrary, the pope recommended “decreased growth in some parts of the world, in order to provide resources for other places to experience healthy growth.”
He considered growth without advances in social justice and morality inappropriate. He also criticised the merit of market forces in solving environmental problems, arguing we can never truly know the value of the environment.
On lifestyles, the pope’s heartache over the immoderate “buy and throw away” consumption driven by capital and manufacturing – and the associated individualism – can be sensed in every chapter. Not all economists will agree and technological experts may be opposed. But it speaks to me.
Critics said the pope’s hopes of encouraging moral reasoning and cultural transformation to tackle climate change were unrealistic. Huge political and social mobilisation would be necessary, they said. Nor did the encyclical discuss the links between sustainable development and demographic growth.
My own reading found many words of wisdom and a strong philosophical basis, but perhaps a slight hollowness and lack of pragmatism.
This gave the document somewhat limited policy-making value. It did, however, go a long way towards bringing morality – something technologists and scientists overlook in their research – back into the debate. That was a huge contribution.
The encyclical, the Paris Agreement and the IPCC
In late September 2015, Pope Francis attended the UN Summit on Sustainable Development in New York, giving an important speech that restated the spirit of his encyclical. Humanity’s endless pursuit of power and material pleasures was causing the misuse of natural resources and the exclusion of the poor and the vulnerable, he said, and it was time for us to acknowledge the “rights of nature”.
In December 2015, the UN climate conference COP21 passed the Paris Agreement, which came into effect the following year. This was another milestone for global climate governance.
For the first time, the emotive idea of “Mother Earth” appeared in a legal UN text. Pope Francis is said to have acted as a mediator during negotiations on key issues, such as long-term goals. That may or may not be true, but the impact of his encyclical is undeniable. Since then, the post-Paris climate story has been a complex and unpredictable one, but Pope Francis’ voice was always clearly heard.
The encyclical was a powerful part of a growing awareness of the social aspect to climate change mitigation. Its impact on the IPCC’s scientific assessments is also clear to see. From the start of work on the IPCC’s next Assessment Report, AR6, sociological science was embedded into policy research.
The AR6 Mitigation of Climate Change report included a whole new chapter, titled “Demand, Services and Social Aspects of Mitigation”. It covers sustainable production and consumption, development models and metrics, the role of culture, social norms and behaviour change, sharing and the circular economy, and policy measures to promote sustainable lifestyles.
2023: Exhortation on climate change
In October 2023, with the climate crisis worsening and the COP28 round of talks about to start in Dubai, Pope Francis spoke out again. His apostolic exhortation, Laudate Deum (Praise God) was subtitled “To all people of good will on the climate crisis”. This update on the 2015 encyclical was 17 pages long and focused more particularly on the climate.
After an introduction lamenting the increasing frequency of climate disasters, Pope Francis regretfully pointed out that the “technocratic paradigm” was only worsening – artificial intelligence being the prime example – and there was still no limit to the growth of human power. The point of no return was close. He went on: the existing multilateral mechanisms were not strong enough to tackle climate change and new decision-making and implementation mechanisms were needed.
While the 2015 encyclical did not refer to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the newer message dedicated two chapters (4 and 5) to a review of milestone COPs and an expression of solemn hopes for COP28: that it would see a change of direction (paragraph 54) and in particular act on the energy transition (54 and 59), and encourage parties to make rapid and powerful responses and stick to their commitments.
Pope Francis had intended to be at COP28, but illness prevented his attending. Instead, a message was read out for him. He hoped attendees would move beyond national and business interests and think about the planet and future generations, showing political foresight rather than conservatism.
COP28 successfully completed the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement, with a particular emphasis on the energy transition, where the content was very encouraging.
The Vatican’s first biennial transparency report
In July and September 2022, the Vatican ratified the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, respectively. Its first climate action plan, or Nationally Determined Contribution, was to reduce emissions by 20 per cent from its 2011 level by 2030, and to hit net-zero emissions by 2050.
In late 2024, the Vatican and other parties to the Paris Agreement submitted their first biennial transparency reports, as required. According to its report, the city state’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2022 were 15,890 tonnes of CO2-equivalent, a per capita average of 16 tonnes. Down 17.8 per cent on 2011, this was achieved mainly through electrification, big drops in the use of fossil fuels and cleaner air conditioning.
An unusual pope
Pope Francis was known as the “green pope” or the “climate pope”, but the New York Times also described him as a “dividing line”, who made key contributions to modernising the Catholic church.
Before becoming pope, he was archbishop of Buenos Aires, where he was known for remaining close to the ordinary people, and often seen on public transport. After becoming a contender for the papacy, his “election” pitch was simple: the Catholic church had to do more than just open doors and windows to let fresh air in – it had to go out to where it was needed.
The papal name he chose was after Saint Francis of Assisi, who was known for his humility. Alongside being a sustained voice on climate change, Pope Francis worked hard to help the poor and migrants, and to end war. He also showed more tolerance and acceptance of homosexuals than previous popes.
He was a reformer too, giving more decision-making power to priests from Africa, Asia and Latin America. Much of this was opposed by traditionalists within the Catholic church, but Pope Francis’s status and influence remained strong. This speaks to his leadership skills. The Catholic church’s hierarchy is an awe-inspiring thing, and those who climb it will be tested. Not all are able to retain their principles during their ascent.
I hope the new Pope will carry on the work of his predecessor and use the voice of the Catholic church to speak out on climate change.
This article was originally published on Dialogue Earth under a Creative Commons licence.
