Sentinel Owl - Public Affairs Insight: environment, science, foreign affairs, economics & the arts
 |
| Shutterstock |
Cardinal Robert Prevost of the United States has been picked to be the new leader of the Roman Catholic Church; he will be known as Pope Leo XIV.
Attention now turns to what vision the first U.S. pope will bring.
Change is hard to bring about in the Catholic Church. During his pontificate, Francis often gestured toward change without actually changing church doctrines. He permitted discussion of ordaining married men in remote regions where populations were greatly underserved due to a lack of priests, but he did not actually allow it. On his own initiative, he set up a commission to study the possibility of ordaining women as deacons, but he did not follow it through.
However, he did allow priests to offer the Eucharist, the most important Catholic sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, to Catholics who had divorced and remarried without being granted an annulment.
Likewise, Francis did not change the official teaching that a sacramental marriage is between a man and a woman, but he did allow for the blessing of gay couples, in a manner that did appear to be a sanctioning of gay marriage.
To what degree will the new pope stand or not stand in continuity with Francis? As a scholar who has studied the writings and actions of the popes since the time of the Second Vatican Council, a series of meetings held to modernize the church from 1962 to 1965, I am aware that every pope comes with his own vision and his own agenda for leading the church.
Still, the popes who immediately preceded them set practical limits on what changes could be made. There were limitations on Francis as well; however, the new pope, I argue, will have more leeway because of the signals Francis sent.
Francis initiated a process called “synodality,” a term that combines the Greek words for “journey” and “together.” Synodality involves gathering Catholics of various ranks and points of view to share their faith and pray with each other as they address challenges faced by the church today.
One of Francis’ favorite themes was inclusion. He carried forward the teaching of the Second Vatican Council that the Holy Spirit – that is, the Spirit of God who inspired the prophets and is believed to be sent by Christ among Christians in a special way – is at work throughout the whole church; it includes not only the hierarchy but all of the church members. This belief constituted the core principle underlying synodality.
Francis launched a two-year global consultation process in October 2022, culminating in a synod in Rome in October 2024. Catholics all over the world offered their insights and opinions during this process. The synod discussed many issues, some of which were controversial, such as clerical sexual abuse, the need for oversight of bishops, the role of women in general and the ordination of women as deacons.
The final synod document did not offer conclusions concerning these topics but rather aimed more at promoting the transformation of the entire Catholic Church into a synodal church in which Catholics tackle together the many challenges of the modern world. Francis refrained from issuing his own document in response, in order that the synod’s statement could stand on its own.
The process of synodality in one sense places limits on bishops and the pope by emphasizing their need to listen closely to all church members before making decisions. In another sense, though, in the long run the process opens up the possibility for needed developments to take place when and if lay Catholics overwhelmingly testify that they believe the church should move in a certain direction.
A pope, however, cannot simply reverse official positions that his immediate predecessors had been emphasizing. Practically speaking, there needs to be a papacy, or two, during which a pope will either remain silent on matters that call for change or at least limit himself to hints and signals on such issues.
In 1864, Pius IX condemned the proposition that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.” It wasn’t until 1965 – some 100 years later – that the Second Vatican Council, in The Declaration on Religious Freedom, would affirm that “a wrong is done when government imposes upon its people, by force or fear or other means, the profession or repudiation of any religion. …”
A second major reason why popes may refrain from making top-down changes is that they may not want to operate like a dictator issuing executive orders in an authoritarian manner. Francis was accused by his critics of acting in this way with his positions on Eucharist for those remarried without a prior annulment and on blessings for gay couples. The major thrust of his papacy, however, with his emphasis on synodality, was actually in the opposite direction.
Notably, when the Amazon Synod – held in Rome in October 2019 – voted 128-41 to allow for married priests in the Brazilian Amazon region, Francis rejected it as not being the appropriate time for such a significant change.
The belief that the pope should express the faith of the people and not simply his own personal opinions is not a new insight from Francis.
The doctrine of papal infallibility, declared at the First Vatican Council in 1870, held that the pope, under certain conditions, could express the faith of the church without error.
The limitations and qualifications of this power include that the pope be speaking not personally but in his official capacity as the head of the church; he must not be in heresy; he must be free of coercion and of sound mind; he must be addressing a matter of faith and morals; and he must consult relevant documents and other Catholics so that what he teaches represents not simply his own opinions but the faith of the church.
The Marian doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption offer examples of the importance of consultation. The Immaculate Conception, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854, is the teaching that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was herself preserved from original sin, a stain inherited from Adam that Catholics believe all other human beings are born with, from the moment of her conception. The Assumption, proclaimed by Pius XII in 1950, is the doctrine that Mary was taken body and soul into heaven at the end of her earthly life.
The documents in which these doctrines were proclaimed stressed that the bishops of the church had been consulted and that the faith of the lay people was being affirmed.
One of the main duties of the pope is to protect the unity of the Catholic Church. On one hand, making many changes quickly can lead to schism, an actual split in the community.
In 2022, for example, the Global Methodist Church split from the United Methodist Church over same-sex marriage and the ordination of noncelibate gay bishops. There have also been various schisms within the Anglican communion in recent years. The Catholic Church faces similar challenges but so far has been able to avoid schisms by limiting the actual changes being made.
On the other hand, not making reasonable changes that acknowledge positive developments in the culture regarding issues such as the full inclusion of women or the dignity of gays and lesbians can result in the large-scale exit of members.
Pope Leo XIV, I argue, needs to be a spiritual leader, a person of vision, who can build upon the legacy of his immediate predecessors in such a way as to meet the challenges of the present moment. He already stated that he wants a synodal church that is “close to the people who suffer,” signaling a great deal about the direction he will take.
If the new pope is able to update church teachings on some hot-button issues, it will be precisely because Francis set the stage for him.
Dennis Doyle, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, University of Dayton
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Earth’s cycles of light and dark profoundly affect billions of organisms. Events such as solar eclipses are known to bring about marked shifts in animals, but do they have the same effect on plants?
During a solar eclipse in a forest in Italy’s Dolomites region, scientists seized the chance to explore that fascinating question.
The researchers were monitoring the bioelectrical impulses of spruce trees, when a solar eclipse passed over. They left their sensors running to record the trees’ response to the eclipse – and what they observed was astonishing.
The spruce trees not only responded to the solar eclipse – they actively anticipated it, by synchronising their bioelectrical signals hours in advance.
This forest-wide phenomenon, detailed today in the journal Royal Society Open Science, reveals a new layer of complexity in plant behaviour. It adds to emerging evidence that plants actively participate in their ecosystems.
The research was led by Professor Alessandro Chiolerio of the Italian Institute of Technology, and Professor Monica Gagliano from Australia’s Southern Cross University, who is the lead author on this article. It also involved a team of international scientists.
A solar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes between the Sun and Earth, fully or partially blocking the Sun’s light.
An eclipse can inspire awe and even social cohesion in humans. Other animals have been shown to gather and synchronise their movements during such an event.
But scientists know very little about how plants respond to solar eclipses. Some research suggests the rapid transitions from darkness to light during an eclipse can change plant behaviour. But this research focuses on the responses of individual plants.
The latest study set out to discover if trees respond to a solar eclipse together, as a living collective.
Charged molecules travel through the cells of all living organisms, transmitting electrical signals as they go. Collectively, this electrical activity is known as the organism’s “electrome”.
The electrical activity is primarily driven by the movement of ions across cell membranes. It creates tiny currents that allow organisms, including humans, to coordinate their body and communicate.
The researchers wanted to investigate the electrical signals of spruce trees (Picea abies) during a partial solar eclipse on October 25, 2022. It took place in the Costa Bocche forest near Paneveggio in the Dolomites area, Italy.
The scientists set out to understand the trees’ electrical activity during the hour-long eclipse. They used custom-built sensors and wired them to three trees. Two were healthy trees about 70 years old, one in full sun and one in full shade. The third was a healthy tree about 20 years old, in full shade.
They also attached the sensors to five tree stumps – the remnants old trees, originally part of a pristine forest, but which were devastated by a storm several years earlier.
For each tree and stump, the researchers used five pairs of electrodes, placed in both the inner and outer layers of the tree, including on exposed roots, branches and trunks. The electrodes were connected to the sensors.
This set-up allowed the scientists to monitor the bioelectrical activity from multiple trees and stumps across four sites during the solar eclipse. They examined both individual tree responses, and bioelectrical signals between trees.
In particular, the scientists measured changes in the trees’ “bioelectrical potentials”. This term refers to the differences in voltage across cell membranes.
The electrical activity of all three trees became significantly more synchronised around the eclipse - both before and during the one-hour event. These changes occur at a microscopic level, such as inside water and lymph molecules in the tree.
The two older trees in the study had a much more pronounced early response to the impending eclipse than the young tree. This suggests older trees may have developed mechanisms to anticipate and respond to such events, similar to their responses to seasonal changes.
Solar eclipses may seem rare from a human perspective, but they follow cycles which can occur well within the lifespan of long-lived trees. The scientists also detected bioelectrical waves travelling between the trees. This suggests older trees may transmit their ecological knowledge to younger trees.
Such a dynamic is consistent with studies showing long-distance signalling between plants can help them coordinate various physiological functions in response to environmental changes.
The researchers also detected changes in the bioelectrical responses of the stumps during the eclipse, albeit less pronounced than in the standing trees. This suggests the stumps were still alive.
The research team then used computer modelling, and advanced analytical methods including quantum field theory, to test the findings of the physical experiment.
The results reinforced the experimental results. That is, not only did the eclipse influence the bioelectrical responses of individual trees, the activity was correlated. This suggests a cohesive, organism-like reaction at the forest scale.
These findings align with extensive prior research by others, highlighting the extent to which trees in forest ecosystems are connected.
These behaviours may ultimately influence the forest ecosystem’s resilience, biodiversity and overall function, by helping it cope with rapid and unpredictable changes.
The findings also underscore the importance of protecting older forests, which serve as pillars of ecosystem resilience – potentially preserving and transmitting invaluable ecological knowledge.
This research is featured in a documentary, Il Codice del Bosco (The Forest Code), premiering in Italy on May 1, 2025.
Monica Gagliano, Research Associate Professor in Evolutionary Biology, Southern Cross University and Prudence Gibson, Lecturer and Researcher in Plant Humanities, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
There’s no shortage of things to feel angry about these days. Whether it’s politics, social injustice, climate change or the cost-of-living crisis, the world can feel like a pressure cooker.
Research suggests nearly one-quarter of the world’s population feels angry on any given day. While anger is a normal human emotion, if it’s intense and poorly managed, it can quickly lead to aggression, and potentially cause harm.
Feeling angry often can also have negative effects on our relationships, as well as our mental and physical health.
So how should you manage feelings of anger to keep them in check? Our new research suggests mindfulness can be an effective tool for regulating anger and reducing aggression.
Mindfulness is the ability to observe and focus on your thoughts, emotions and bodily sensations in the present moment with acceptance and without judgement.
Mindfulness has been practised for thousands of years, most notably in Buddhist traditions. But more recently it has been adapted into secular programs to support mental health and emotional regulation.
Mindfulness is taught in a variety of ways, including in-person classes, residential retreats and through digital apps. These programs typically involve guided meditations, and practices that help people become more aware of their thoughts, feelings and surroundings.
Mindfulness is linked to a range of mental health benefits, including reduced anxiety, depression and stress.
Neuroscience research also suggests mindfulness is associated with reduced activity in brain regions linked to emotional reactivity, and greater activity in those involved in self-regulation (the ability to manage our thoughts, emotions and behaviours).
In this way, mindfulness could foster emotional awareness essential for the effective regulation of emotions such as anger. And when people are less overwhelmed by anger, they may be better able to think clearly, reflect on what matters and take meaningful action, rather than reacting impulsively or shutting down.
To better understand whether mindfulness actually helps with regulating anger and aggression, we conducted a meta-analysis. This is a study that combines the results of many previous studies to look at the overall evidence.
We analysed findings from 118 studies across different populations and countries, including both people who were naturally more mindful and people who were randomly assigned to take part in interventions aimed at increasing mindfulness.
People who were naturally more mindful were those who scored higher on questionnaires measuring traits such as present-moment awareness and non-judgmental thinking. We found these people tended to report less anger and behave less aggressively.
However, mindfulness isn’t just something you have or don’t have – it’s also a skill you can develop. And our results show the benefits of lower anger and aggression extend to people who learn mindfulness skills through practice or training.
We also wanted to know whether mindfulness might work better for certain people or in particular settings. Interestingly, our results suggest these benefits are broadly universal. Practising mindfulness was effective in reducing anger and aggression across different age groups, genders and contexts, including whether people were seeking treatment for mental health or general wellbeing, or not.
To manage feelings of anger, many people turn to strategies that are not supported by evidence.
Research suggests “letting off steam” while thinking about your anger is not a healthy strategy and may intensify and prolong experiences of anger.
For example, in one experiment, research participants were asked to hit a punching bag while thinking of someone who made them angry. This so-called “cathartic release” made people angrier and more aggressive rather than less so.
Breaking things in rage rooms, while increasingly popular, is similarly not an evidence-based strategy for reducing anger and aggression.
On the other hand, our research shows there’s good evidence to support mindfulness as a tool to regulate anger.
Mindfulness may reduce anger and aggression by helping people become more aware of their emotional reactions without immediately acting on them. It can foster a non-judgmental and accepting stance toward difficult emotions such as anger, which may interrupt the cycle whereby anger leads to aggressive behaviour.
All that said, it’s important to keep in mind that mindfulness is not a magic bullet or a quick fix. Like any new skill, mindfulness can be challenging at first, takes time to master, and works best when practised regularly.
It’s also important to note mindfulness may not be suitable for everyone – particularly when used as a standalone approach for managing more complex mental health concerns. For ongoing emotional challenges it’s always a good idea to seek support from a qualified mental health professional.
However, if you’re looking to dial down the impact of daily frustrations, there are plenty of accessible ways to give mindfulness a go. You can get started with just a few minutes per day. Popular apps such as Smiling Mind and Headspace offer short, guided sessions that make it easy to explore mindfulness at your own pace — no prior experience needed.
While mindfulness may not solve the problems that make us angry, our research shows it could help improve how we experience and respond to them.
Siobhan O'Dean, Research Fellow, The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney; Elizabeth Summerell, Lecturer, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, and Tom Denson, Professor of Psychology, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
 |
| Shutterstock |
 |
| (c) EarthDay.Org/Alexis Rockman |
Pope Francis has died on Easter Monday, aged 88, the Vatican announced. The head of the Catholic Church had recently survived being hospitalised with double pneumonia.
Cardinal Kevin Farrell’s announcement began:
Dear brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis. At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father.
There were many unusual aspects of Pope Francis’ papacy. He was the first Jesuit pope, the first from the Americas (and the southern hemisphere), the first to choose the name “Francis” and the first to give a TED talk. He was also the first pope in more than 600 years to be elected following the resignation, rather than death, of his predecessor.
From the very start of his papacy, Francis seemed determined to do things differently and present the papacy in a new light. Even in thinking about his burial, he chose the unexpected: to be placed to rest not in the Vatican, but in the Basilica of St Mary Major in Rome – the first pope to be buried there in hundreds of years.
Vatican News reported the late Pope Francis had requested his funeral rites be simplified.
“The renewed rite,” said Archbishop Diego Ravelli, “seeks to emphasise even more that the funeral of the Roman Pontiff is that of a pastor and disciple of Christ and not of a powerful person of this world.”
Straddling a line between “progressive” and “conservative”, Francis experienced tension with both sides. In doing so, his papacy shone a spotlight on what it means to be Catholic today.
Francis was deemed not progressive enough by some, yet far too progressive by others.
His apostolic exhortation (an official papal teaching on a particular issue or action) Amoris Laetitia, ignited great controversy for seemingly being (more) open to the question of whether people who have divorced and remarried may receive Eucharist.
He also disappointed progressive Catholics, many of whom hoped he would make stronger changes on issues such as the roles of women, married clergy, and the broader inclusion of LGBTQIA+ Catholics.
The reception of his exhortation Querida Amazonia was one such example. In this document, Francis did not endorse marriage for priests, despite bishops’ requests for this. He also did not allow the possibility of women being ordained as deacons to address a shortage of ordained ministers. His discerning spirit saw there was too much division and no clear consensus for change.
Francis was also openly critical of Germany’s controversial “Synodal Way” – a series of conferences with bishops and lay people – that advocated for positions contrary to Church teachings. Francis expressed concern on multiple occasions that this project was a threat to the unity of the Church.
At the same time, Francis was no stranger to controversy from the conservative side of the Church, receiving “dubia” or “theological doubts” over his teaching from some of his Cardinals. In 2023, he took the unusual step of responding to some of these doubts.
In many ways, the most striking thing about Francis was not his words or theology, but his style. He was a modest man, even foregoing the Apostolic Palace’s grand papal apartments to live in the Vatican’s simpler guest house.
He may well be remembered most for his simplicity of dress and habits, his welcoming and pastoral style and his wise spirit of discernment.
He is recognised as giving a clear witness to the life, love and joy of Jesus in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council – a point of major reform in modern Church history. This witness has translated into two major developments in Church teachings and life.
The first of these relates to environmental teachings. In 2015, Francis released his ground-breaking encyclical, Laudato si’: On Care for Our Common Home. It expanded Catholic social teaching by giving a comprehensive account of how the environment reflects our God-given “common home”.
Consistent with recent popes such as Benedict XVI and John Paul II, Francis acknowledged climate change and its destructive impacts and causes. He summarised key scientific research to forcefully argue for an evidence-based approach to addressing humans’ impact on the environment.
He also made a pivotal and innovative contribution to the climate change debate by identifying the ethical and spiritual causes of environmental destruction.
Francis argued combating climate change relied on the “ecological conversion” of the human heart, so that people may recognise the God-given nature of our planet and the fundamental call to care for it. Without this conversion, pragmatic and political measures wouldn’t be able to counter the forces of consumerism, exploitation and selfishness.
Francis argued a new ethic and spirituality was needed. Specifically, he said Jesus’ way of love – for other people and all creation – is the transformative force that could bring sustainable change for the environment and cultivate fraternity among people (and especially with the poor).
Francis’s second major contribution, and one of the most significant aspects of his papacy, was his commitment to “synodality”. While there’s still confusion over what synodality actually means, and its potential for political distortion, it is above all a way of listening and discerning through openness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
It involves hierarchy and lay people transparently and honestly discerning together, in service of the mission of the church. Synodality is as much about the process as the goal. This makes sense as Pope Francis was a Jesuit, an order focused on spreading Catholicism through spiritual formation and discernment.
Drawing on his rich Jesuit spirituality, Francis introduced a way of conversation centred on listening to the Holy Spirit and others, while seeking to cultivate friendship and wisdom.
With the conclusion of the second session of the Synod on Synodality in October 2024, it is too soon to assess its results. However, those who have been involved in synodal processes have reported back on their transformative potential.
Archbishop of Brisbane, Mark Coleridge, explained how participating in the 2015 Synod “was an extraordinary experience [and] in some ways an awakening”.
Francis’ papacy inspired both great joy and aspirations, as well as boiling anger and rejection. He laid bare the agonising fault lines within the Catholic community and struck at key issues of Catholic identity, triggering debate over what it means to be Catholic in the world today.
He leaves behind a Church that seems more divided than ever, with arguments, uncertainty and many questions rolling in his wake. But he has also provided a way for the Church to become more converted to Jesus’ way of love, through synodality and dialogue.
Francis showed us that holding labels such as “progressive” or “conservative” won’t enable the Church to live out Jesus’ mission of love – a mission he emphasised from the very beginning of his papacy.
Joel Hodge, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, Australian Catholic University and Antonia Pizzey, Postdoctoral Researcher Research Centre for Studies of the Second Vatican Council, Australian Catholic University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
