Pope Francis marked the anniversary of the beginning of the war in Israel after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack by calling a day of prayer and fasting for peace.

On October 6, Francis presided over a rosary for peace, without mentioning that the anniversary coincides with another significant event in the history of inter-religious relations.

During the Counter-Reformation, popes gave the rosary a role in explaining the triumph of Christians in the Holy League over the superior Ottoman forces at the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, an event still evoked today by neo-traditionalists opposing Islam.

In 1572, Pius V established the feast of Our Lady of Victories on October 7 to give thanks for the victory, and in 1573, Gregory XIII dedicated the day to the Virgin of the Rosary, merging her iconography with that of the Virgin of Victory.

There was much that Pope Francis could not mention.

And there was something that he should not have mentioned in his "Letter to Catholics in the Middle East," for example, the passage from the Gospel of John 8:44, which some consider the single most antisemitic line in the New Testament.

This is just one example of the disastrous effects of the events of October 7, 2023, and their aftermath on relations between Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Globalisation and the future of Catholicism

The war also impacts church politics. The war in the Middle East since October 2023 has amplified the effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

It has brought to the forefront three Italian cardinals on the international stage: Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican secretary of state; Cardinal Matteo Zuppi of Bologna and Francis' special envoy for peace in Ukraine; and Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Whatever happens between now and the next conclave, there is an Italianisation of the leading figures in the Catholic Church dealing with these major international crises.

Between the end of the Middle Ages and the early modern age, the Italianisation of the papacy and the Roman Curia was a response to the challenges brought to the church by the European powers and their support for schismatic demands.

We will see how the cardinals in the next conclave will respond to the challenges coming from the 21st-century world disorder.

"Having more cardinals from "the peripheries" means a college of cardinals more representative of the global Church, but also means a much higher number of cardinals physically distant from Rome and therefore potentially less able to advise the pope and the Curia."

The second effect is on the institutional responses of the Catholic Church and the Vatican in this age of geopolitical uncertainties. The globalisation of Catholicism means also a de-Europeanisation of the historical and religious narratives on the character and identity of the Church.

There have been previous phases of internationalization of the leadership of the Church in the College of Cardinals, especially since the 19th century, but today's diversification takes place in a situation Church in the Americas, especially in the United States.

This is visible in the list of the 21 new cardinals that Pope Francis will create in his tenth consistory of December 8.

This list sends strong signals to the countries that influence the destinies of the world: for example, creating as a cardinal Belgian missionary Dominique Joseph Mathieu, OFM Cap., archbishop of Tehran-Ispahan in Iran — a clear gesture to the United States and Israel at this time of serious risk of all-out war between Iran and an Israel supported by the United States.

But this internationalisation of the College of Cardinals also means the risk of overstretching the global institutional capacity of Catholicism.

Having more cardinals from "the peripheries" means a college of cardinals more representative of the global church, but also means a much higher number of cardinals physically distant from Rome and, therefore, potentially less able to advise the Pope and the Curia.

The strain on inter-religious relations

The third, most delicate, and disastrous series of effects concerns the future of the relations between the Catholic Church, Judaism and Islam.

This war in the Middle East broke out during the pontificate of Pope Francis, who is trying to do for the relations between the Church and Islam what John Paul II did for the relations with Judaism.

But now Catholicism must face the reality that institutionalised Christianity has been replaced as a source of antisemitism by some radical groups within Islam.

On the other side, there are Israel's political and constitutional trajectories under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In many ways, the State of Israel now faces the challenge of developing a modernity that reconciles religion and politics, a challenge that became more evident after the Holy See and Israel established full diplomatic relations in 1993.

Netanyahu's response to October 7 and his framing of relations between the Jewish state and Judaism are cementing a political theology of enmity between Jews and Muslims.

This challenges the post-Vatican II project of dialogue between the three Abrahamic religions as fundamental for peace-building, not only in the Middle East but as a paradigm for a new world order.

Vatican II set Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the context of European history, but that context is no longer the dominating working frame for interreligious relations, and not even for Jewish-Catholic relations.

The issue is not only that the moral lessons of World War II are now being sidelined or sometimes disregarded in secular post-colonial and de-colonial discourse.

In inter-religious dialogue, Jews and Muslims strongly committed to dialogue with the Catholic Church now feel that there is a growing set of issues that are not being acknowledged and understood in Rome.

This is paradoxically one of the fruits of the de-Europeanisation of the Vatican and global Catholicism. Vatican II set Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the context of European history, but that context is no longer the dominating working frame for inter-religious relations and not even for Jewish-Catholic relations.

On the other hand, the suffering of Palestinians and Christians in Gaza and Lebanon serves as yet another reminder of the challenges to fostering a culture of peace in today's high-tech warfare, where so-called pinpoint precision often accompanies indiscriminate bombings, leading to more innocent victims.

It also casts a dark shadow on the viability of the theology of liberation in the face of 21st-century state power and in the midst of wars and occupations where religion is manipulated into a "clash of civilizations."

The war unleashed by the events of October 7, 2023 risks squandering the journey made since the Second Vatican Council.

These events are happening during a time of the minimisation, in militant Catholic circles, of the theology of inter-religious dialogue within a Catholic Church that is more global but also far removed from Vatican II after 60 years.

After the conciliar declaration Nostra Aetate and especially after John Paul II, it was a common assumption that fighting antisemitism was an entry-level requirement for Catholics.

Sadly, this is no longer always true. It is not only the theology of new Catholic influencers but a broader process of de-theologisation and deculturation that reveals the marginalisation of Vatican II and its key documents on inter-religious relations, including Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae on religious liberty.

Impact of the war on the Catholic Church

One enormous problem is posed by radical traditionalist Catholic groups, but there are also the progressive Catholics who think that Vatican II is passé, the last gasp of a Church not inclusive enough, too Catholic to be modern.

There are some parallels between today's leftist progressivism and the blindness of socialists, communists, and radicals to antisemitism in the 20th century.

In many Western universities, the way administrators have handled the conflict and its aftermath has revealed that the religious diversity of Jews and Muslims and their protected status as minorities often does not align with the prevailing focus framed as sexual diversity and in ethnic-racial terms, particularly in the fight against "white supremacy," which tends to overlook religious considerations.

"One enormous problem is posed by radical traditionalist Catholic groups, but there are also the progressive Catholics who think that Vatican II is passé, the last gasp of a church not inclusive enough, too Catholic to be modern."

There is an irresponsible complacency that takes Vatican II for granted, but at times, there is also a programmatic liquidation of that chapter of our magisterial and theological tradition, becoming particularly problematic when on display in Catholic schools and universities.

Nostra Aetate and Christian-Jewish relations built many bridges in the post-Vatican II period, but many of these bridges now need to be inspected and, in some cases, rebuilt, also within Catholicism.

This war redefines the contours of what Karma Ben-Johanan, a professor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, called in her 2022 book on Christian-Jewish relations after Vatican II "the new covenant between Jews and Christians as the edict of the hour".

The new war in the Middle East represents a critical moment for that new covenant. October 7, 2023, and its aftermath affect the Catholic Church at the most profound institutional, theological and religious levels, with internal, international, and diplomatic dimensions that we have just begun to see.

• First published in La Croix International
• Massimo Faggioli is an Italian academic, Church historian, professor of theology and religious studies at Villanova University, columnist for La Croix

"We must not forget that 735 million people are in a state of chronic hunger and more than 2 billion are in a state of food insecurity, while we produce enough to feed the entire planet."

So says French researcher Sébastien Abis, associated with the Institute of International and Strategic Relations.

He's also the author of the just published book Do we want to feed the world?: Crossing the food Everest in 2050 (Veut-on nourrir le monde?: Franchir l'Everest alimentaire en 2050) to understand what part of the future of the world is at stake.

"The equation is all the more delicate as we are in an unstable geopolitical context that also risks increasing the cost of food and restricting access to it," he told La Croix's Camille Richir in a recent interview.

La Croix: In recent weeks, we have witnessed significant protests from the agricultural sector. What does this say about the relationship between society and those who feed it?

Sébastien Abis: The issue of food has been neglected politically for too long and needs to regain strategic attention.

"Among the claims made by the agricultural world, few are completely new. They primarily reflect a lack of mutual trust. On one side, farmers feel that neither the state nor the European Union trusts them; at the same time, they themselves are wary of the ability of leaders and consumers to be consistent.

"The tensions are also related to the lack of consistency in policies.

"Agricultural time is a long time: when experimenting, it takes several months before results are seen and lessons can be learned, then tests must be conducted differently the following year.

"When new regulations are constantly introduced in the meantime, creating uncertainties, these standards are very poorly received.

But given the climate emergency and the rapid erosion of biodiversity, transitioning our food systems appears to be a necessity. Is a dialogue on the subject possible?

"The challenge will be to unite in order to change. While we are fortunate to be in a democracy, we struggle to accept disagreements and diversity of opinion.

"Those who defend the environment are accused of not believing in human development and the economy. And those who emphasise the issue of production and food security are labeled as enemies of the environment.

"would benefit from bringing these worlds together. We have lost a lot of time in recent years opposing systems and models. It's a constellation of solutions that needs to be implemented.

"The need to unite is also true at the European and international levels. Yet since the Covid crisis, then the war in Ukraine, and facing the climate challenge, we have entered an era of "every man for himself."

In your book, you warn of the risk of retrenchment at a time of a triple demographic, climate, and food security crisis.

"We must not forget that 735 million people are in a state of chronic hunger and more than 2 billion are in a state of food insecurity, while we produce enough to feed the entire planet.

"In the 21st century, humanity is challenged to reconcile ecology and food security, as demographic growth will reach an unprecedented peak in the second half of the century. The UN anticipates the population will grow from eight to 10.4 billion people on Earth by 2086, all of whom will need to be fed.

"At the same time, agriculture will have to face increasingly severe and frequent shocks related to climate change... The equation is all the more delicate as we are in an unstable geopolitical context that also risks increasing the cost of food and restricting access to it.

"In parallel, agriculture will have to decarbonise. It has its share of responsibility in climate change since it represents about 20% of greenhouse gas emissions.

"The challenge goes beyond the simple issue of CO2! For example, half of the agricultural soils are in a degraded state."

What are the implications in terms of free trade? Food production is extremely globalised, and these imports weigh heavily on our carbon footprint.

"During their mobilisation, European farmers were right to raise the issue of imports and free trade agreements. It's normal to import commodities that are not produced on European soil, otherwise, we wouldn't have coffee or chocolate!

"However, facilitating the importation of products with lower environmental and social standards than in the European Union is incomprehensible to farmers who are pushed to do better.

"Once again, it's a question of coherence! Leaders must understand that free trade agreements, like the one being negotiated with Mercosur countries, are no longer politically acceptable in this new context of fighting climate change, whereas they might have been a decade ago.

"At the same time, we also benefit from free trade. We export wine, cheese, cereals, and even milk powder... to the point of being accused of competing with certain local industries.

"That's why the answer is more complex than simply retreating into ourselves. In France, exports also allow some sectors to remain competitive at the national level.

"In the future, geopolitical and climate shocks will be such that we may sometimes have to rely on each other for food supplies. Europe cannot be in a bubble, separate from the rest of the world.

"When we consume imported products, let's not forget that we are also creating economic and social development abroad, provided that the supply chains are fair.

You also alert in your book to the necessity of thinking about the future of agricultural employment.

"I'm tired of hearing that farmers should be assured of a "minimum."

"Why such a miserabilist discourse? Farmers are entrepreneurs and must earn their living. If they do better, they should earn more, which seems to be taboo.

"Then, we must question what we want in terms of agriculture: we have lost 100,000 agricultural holdings in ten years.

"Should we replace all of them and find the necessary labour? Or accept having larger, more mechanised, and more competitive farms capable of producing on a large scale? Once again, the solution lies in the diversity of models."

Faced with climate change, what choices will the sector have to make? For example, will it be necessary to give up part of the yields to reduce emissions related to fertilisers, or reduce pressure on biodiversity?

"Agriculture has already made tremendous progress. Practices are modernising, technological innovation is advancing... Of course, there will be choices to make, such as which crops: what we can grow today in some regions may not be possible tomorrow.

"That said, we have already put a lot of pressure on the transition of the sector compared to others."

But the reduction of agriculture's emissions remains low, around 13 percent in thirty years, and is mainly due to the reduction in cattle stock. How to think about a real transition of the sector in this context?

"Agriculture cannot be compared with other economic and industrial sectors.

"In the environmental transition, we need to think in terms of priorities: is it better to have an industrial production - albeit partly decarbonised - of certain "unnecessary" products? Or a production of food, a bit more emitting, but vital?

"That being said, farmers are well aware that the sector needs to work on decarbonisation. But faced with the very ambitious objectives set at the European level, they note that they have neither a roadmap on how to get there, nor the means."

What is the responsibility of the consumer?

"It's an important lever: we cannot ask farmers to decarbonise if the demand is not there.

"Yet the inconsistency of consumers strikes the agricultural world. Neither the prices practiced nor our food expenses are in coherence with the values and injunctions we advocate in Europe.

"Ultimately, food inflation has had a positive aspect: it has given value back to food, and made people aware of the investment it represents. Even if at the same time it raises a real social issue."

What lessons can be drawn from the demonstrations of recent weeks, in the face of the challenges that await us?

"was missed in the narrative in recent years. The transition must be made with the farmers, not against them. We must be clear about the difficulties but continue to cultivate enthusiasm!

"Faced with the challenge ahead, we cannot afford to be fatalistic. Because food is an ecological issue but also one of pleasure, health, and, I insist, human security."

• First published in La Croix International. Republished with permission.
• Camille Richir is a journalist at La Croix whose focus is on the environment.

These Asian giants have not been alone. In much of Europe, North America, East Asia and elsewhere, the average number of children born to women during the course of their childbearing years has fallen to unprecedentedly low levels.

Our new book, The Global Spread of Fertility Decline: Population, Fear, and Uncertainty (Yale University Press, 2013) analyzes these trends and the demographic, political and economic consequences and uncertainties as low fertility has become a global phenomenon. Like other facets of globalization, low fertility rates are by no means universal: High fertility persists in sub-Saharan Africa and in parts of the Middle East, but elsewhere low fertility is more the rule than the exception. These underlying trends in childbearing mean that in the near future the rate of population growth both in Europe and Asia are likely to decline. The world is not on a path of unrestrained demographic growth, as some believe. People all over the world have hit the brakes.

Thirty years ago only a small fraction of the world's population lived in the few countries with fertility rates substantially below the "replacement level" - the rate at which the fertility of a hypothetical cohort of women would exactly replace itself in the next generation - normally set at 2.1 children per woman for populations with low mortality conditions. Fast forward to 2013, with roughly 60 percent of the world's population living in countries with such below-replacement fertility rates. Continue reading

Sources

• YaleGlobal Online
• Image: The Economist

Breaking with a tradition first established by Paul VI, the Holy Father delivered one general discourse to all ambassadors present, which focused on themes close to the Pope's heart; our growing interdependence in the era of globalization and in parallel our increased shared responsibility for mankind and creation.

He said today we must all be aware that "we are all responsible for everything" and that we must pursue the common good by promoting solidarity among generations, protecting the dignity of every human being and protecting nature. And without the fear that this common responsibility clashes with religious and cultural differences.