Pope Francis Would Be a Lousy New York Times Columnist

Pope Francis: A nattering nabob of negativism? (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Why didn’t “Laudato Si” include more good news about the environment? That’s what David Brooks, an Op-Ed columnist at The New York Times, wants to know. In his Tuesday column—“Fracking and the Franciscans,” an alliterative crime he probably is not responsible for—Brooks calls the encyclical “surprisingly disappointing” and full of “1970s-style doom-mongering about technological civilization.” (My America colleague Nathan Schneider points out that another Times columnist, Ross Douthat, is also unenthusiastic about the pope’s call for climate justice.)

“You would never know from the encyclical that we are living through the greatest reduction in poverty in human history,” Brooks writes, as if it’s simply bad manners to examine how this reduction in poverty has been achieved. We can surmise from his past columns that Brooks would not be happy if we reduced poverty by redistributing wealth and doing away with the incentive to work. Raising the global standard of living through environmental destruction—producing cheap, throwaway goods; building homes in areas that guarantee the waste of electricity and water; employing people in factories that spew toxins, and requiring long commutes by car—is at least as problematic. The ends don’t wipe away the means.


“You would never know that in many parts of the world, like the United States, the rivers and skies are getting cleaner,” he says of the encyclical. Well, then. If “Laudato Si” had come out four months ago, Brooks wouldn’t have needed to write a response at all. He could have simply disproved global warming by posing with a snowball, easily obtainable in New York at the time. Some rivers in America are getting cleaner; therefore the earth can’t be getting dirtier.

Brooks also disapproves of the pope’s “overdrawn” language—in particular, “The earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth.” That’s a little too blunt for the opinion pages of The New York Times. It’s almost as distasteful as the president of the United States uttering a racial slur in discussing our fixation with racial slurs. Couldn’t the pope have just said, “The earth, our home, could use a visit from the cleaning lady”?

Pope Francis would not make a good New York Times columnist, or centrist politician, in the United States. The gatekeepers of respectable discourse, such as Brooks, demand reassurances that the ruling class has our best interests at heart. Incremental, even imperceptible, solutions to global problems will get us by. Too much negativity can lead to protest marches, which is bad for business confidence. Rather than issue encyclicals for all to read, the pope might have expressed his concerns about environmental destruction in “quiet rooms,” as Mitt Romney once suggested is the proper forum to discuss wealth distribution.

As Francis will discover when he visits the United States this fall, bluntness does not play well among establishment journalists and politicians. It’s impolite, for example, to wonder aloud whether there’s something wrong with our attitude toward guns, even after something like the mass shooting of congregants at an African-American church in South Carolina last week. “At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries,” said President Obama about massacres by men with guns, in yet another example of his “politicizing” a tragedy. Why didn’t he talk about that one time in South Africa when, according to Breitbart Big Government, “a parishoner stopped a mass shooting by a black nationalist group” by firing a revolver?  Why not point out that for every 34 criminal gun homicides in the U.S., there is one “justifiable” killing in self-defense? There’s a clean river for you.

Because of the Charleston massacre, the Confederate flag is finally losing respectability, since being associated with current white supremacists is a little more troubling than being associated with long-dead ones. But for decades, the moderate, non-divisive attitude toward the flag was to respect those who just wanted to “respect” Southern heritage. So South Carolina compromised by flying the Confederate flag next to, not in front of, its state Capitol. If you were an African-American citizen of that state, you could simply turn your head from the dirty river and look at the pretty building. (South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley this week called for the flag to be removed from Capitol grounds altogether.)

No, there’s something not quite American about negativity. Earlier this week, Rick Perry objected when Fox News host Chris Wallace said, as if it were a bad thing, that 21 percent of Texans lacked health insurance when Perry was governor. “That’s not how we keep score,” Perry said. “I think it’s a fallacy to say access to health care is about insurance.” It’s true that people without health insurance can go to the emergency room if they’re desperate enough, and then worry whether and how much they’re going to be billed for treatment. By that score, access to health care was no problem in Texas.

There’s life even in a dirty river. The pope will get better publicity on op-ed pages if he lightens up and acknowledges that if you can’t stop progress, you might as well be a bit happier about it.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Joshua DeCuir
3 years 6 months ago
"The ends don’t wipe away the means." So let me understand your argument: unless the means are perfect, we should refrain from a flawed means that otherwise yields good ends? So the poor should be content being poor until we find this perfect means? "We can surmise from his past columns that Brooks would not be happy if we reduced poverty by redistributing wealth and doing away with the incentive to work." The only thing to surmise from this is that you don't read very many of Brooks' columns, because it's pretty clear he has no problem with "investing" (to use Pres. Obama's term) in government measures to reduce inequality & address climate change.
MJ Painter
3 years 6 months ago
What irked me most about David Brooks's column was that he objected to the fact that Pope Francis was not a "moral realist." Well, neither was Jesus. They both teach that people should do the right thing for the right reason, and the reason is as important as the thing itself. Mr. Brooks pretty much negated all the moralizing he has been doing himself over the past months in his column.
Richard Murray
3 years 6 months ago
Good point, Mr. Painter.
Jim MacGregor
3 years 6 months ago
This article deserves the "Tripple Yawn" award.
3 years 6 months ago
Steven Van Pelt
3 years 6 months ago
Thank you for a witty and insightful article, Mr. Sullivan.
Joseph Manta
3 years 6 months ago
I have read the comments with interest in how they seem to reflect more of a political division. I have no problem with the theology of Laudato Si but I do have problems with the rest of it. The Pope's view on economics is a reflection of the fact he is from a third world South American country and he carries all those biases with him. He may understand South American capitalism but not the capitalism we know. And that is not to say capitalism in the US has no faults. But to paraphrase Churchill - it is the worst system except for all the others that have been tried. The fact is that the free market has brought more people out of poverty than socialism or any other "ism". And who can ever say science is settled? So the encyclical is a combination of good theology but bad science and economics.
Richard Murray
3 years 6 months ago
Churchill was a racist and a zionist, Mr. Manta, and he was wrong about a number of things. The award-winning documentary "Inside Job" describes the unfettered greed of banks, bankers, and Wall Street types that led to the global meltdown of 2008, which we are still suffering from, and which pulverized the poor of the U.S. and of the world. "Inside Job" also describes the de-regulation that began in Reagan's presidency, and which led to the stripping of controls and regulations and restraints for the markets. This is the prelude to the 2008 bubble bursting. Even as greed-centric a person as George Soros says that the markets need regulation. Pope Francis sees this, and more. In Evangelii Gaudium, he says that the purpose of the economy is to help human beings. What an amazing idea! This is exactly the sort of thoughtful tweaking and adjustment-making that our economy and markets need today. We need to reevaluate what the markets are about. In Laudato Si', the Pope is continuing with this necessary appraisal of systems, seeking to improve them. He also wants us to wake up so that we can save our planet.
Chuck Kotlarz
3 years 6 months ago
None of the nine worst US economic collapses since 1856 started while Glass-Steagall banking regulation was in effect (1933-1999).
Richard Murray
3 years 6 months ago
Great observation, Chuck Kotlarz. That's good to know.
Chris Miller
3 years 6 months ago
What type of capitalism are you talking about? Or don't you distinguish? Because if you are using American capitalism as the normative "best form", then I would invite you to Scandinavia. US capitalism might make the most money for corporate owners, but it does not work equally well for ALL Americans. Scandinavian socialist -capitalist mixed economy produces people with a much higher level of overall satisfaction, and a standard of living that, I believe, on average is producing a result which is fairer and more equitable for ALL their citizens. They have few Bill Gates' but they don't have the bottom fifth of their nation as far below average as we do. I think Pope Francis recognizes both the positive benefits of capitalism, as well as the negative, unjust results of the sort of capitalism which abets the few at the cost of the many. PR Chris
Richard Booth
3 years 6 months ago
Well, then, I guess it's a good thing the Pope never intended to be a columnist!! It is enough that he is a leader who is stirring the waters.


The latest from america

I have found that praying 15 minutes every day is an important form of self-care.
Michael R. Lovell January 16, 2019
Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl, Washington's retired archbishop, apologized Jan. 15 for what he called a "lapse of memory," clarifying that he knew of at least one abuse allegation against former U.S. Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, but he had "forgotten" about it.
Pope Francis meets with the leadership of the Chilean bishops' conference at the Vatican on Jan. 14 to talk about the sex abuse crisis affecting the church in Chile. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)
The pope wants the February summit “to be an assembly of pastors, not an academic conference—a meeting characterized by prayer and discernment, a catechetical and working gathering.”
Gerard O’ConnellJanuary 16, 2019
This week on “Inside the Vatican,” we explore the topic of women deacons.
Colleen DulleJanuary 16, 2019