[PGR88]

I read this, and compared Laudato Si to Pius XI’s “Casti Cannubii.”

Casti Cannubii, which I read only recently, was wonderful. Its logic was impeccable - it laid out the obvious truths of the natural world, basics of the Catholic faith, and together wove a highly reasoned and timeless moral argument about the sanctity of marriage, why Catholics oppose birth-control, and the evil of abortion and eugenics,

It was written in response to a specific event - the Anglicans allowing birth control at their Lambeth conference, but Casti Cannubii could have been written in 1430 as easily as in 1930 - and it will be clear and relevant in 2430 as well. It is truly what an “encyclical” should be.

I contrast it with Laudato Si, which seems emotive, muddled and relevant only a fad political and social thinking of these recent years.

[livius]

This is not an encyclical, it’s a manifesto. And like all manifestoes, it’s irrational, sophomoric and embarrassing to read.

[piusv]

I contrast it [Casti Connubii] with Laudato Si, which seems emotive, muddled and relevant only a fad political and social thinking of these recent years.

You compared apples and oranges for sure. One is Catholic written by a Catholic man. The other was not Catholic and written by a heretic.

[defconw]

Agreed. It was unreadable, almost.