“Care for the Common Home”: Responses to Pope Francis’s Encyclical Letter

  • Claude-Hélène MayerEmail author
  • Wolfgang M. George
  • Elmar Nass
Original Paper


This article aims to build awareness of the growing global crisis in social, economic and environmental terms from different disciplinary approaches. The authors respond to the message of Pope Francis presented in his Encyclical Letter published in 2015. The article provides a short current overview of the discourse and presents three hypotheses anchored in the disciplines of Psychology, Health and Theology for a deeper discussion of Pope Francis’s viewpoints on the challenges to humankind and how to address them. It thereby contributes to the discourse on health and religion with regard to the Pope’s message to the world community. The article leads to an interdisciplinary conclusion and directions for future research and practice.


Global crisis Health Thanatology Human ecology Salutogenesis Encyclica 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors do not have any conflict of interest.

Human and Animals Rights

The research does not involve human participants or animals.

Informed Consent

It is a document analysis—therefore no informed consent is needed.


  1. Althammer, J. (2014). Welche Wirtschaft tötet? Anmerkungen zum Rundschreiben Evangelii gaudium aus wirtschaftsethischer Perspektive. Köln: Bachem Medien.Google Scholar
  2. Antonovsky, A. (1979). Health, stress and coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (2016). Die Metamorphose der Welt. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  4. Berne, E. (1964). Games people play: The psychology of human relationship. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
  5. Boff, L. (2016). Die Erde wird den Kapitalismus besiegen. Online Magazine Lebenshaus Schwäbische Alb. Retrieved June 14, 2017
  6. Brudermann, T., Holländer, R., Pastres, R., Posch, A., & Schot, P. (2017). Integrating interdisciplinarity and internationality in sustainable development education. GAIA- Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society,26(4), 360–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carroll, J. (2017). The renewed importance of Pope Francis’s encyclical on climate change. The New Yorker, June, 2, 2017, (18.6.2018).
  8. Cavanagh, G. F. (2016). Pope Francis and the United Nations: Planet partners. Journal of Corporate Citizenship,64, 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cilliers, F. (2001). The role of sense of coherence in group relations training. Journal of Industrial Psychology,27(3), 13–18.Google Scholar
  10. Francis P (2015a). Encylical Letter Laudato Si. On care for our common home. Retrieved July 2, 2018,
  11. Francis, P. (2015b). Pressemitteilung. In P. Francis (Ed.), Öko-Enzyklika. Laudato Si. Über die Sorge für das gemeinsame Haus. Liberia Editrice Vaticana: Vatican.Google Scholar
  12. Franco, G. (2016). Economia senza etica? Il contributo di Wilhelm Röpke all’etica dell’economia e al pensiero sociale Cristiano. Soveria Manelli: Rubbettino.Google Scholar
  13. Fromm, E. (1979). Haben oder Sein. München: dtv.Google Scholar
  14. George, W. (2017). Laudato Si’: Wissenschaftler antworten auf die Enzyklika von Post Franziskus. Gießen: Psychosozial Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harper, C., & Snowden, M. (2017). Environment and society. Human perspectives on environmental issues (6th ed.). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heimbach-Steins, M., & Stockmann, N. (2015). “Pope for Planet”? Laudato Si als “eindringliche Einladung zum Dialog” (LS 14) und das weltweite Echo auf die Enzyklika. ICS AP Nr. 3. Münster: University Münster.Google Scholar
  17. Hoffmann, A. (2016). Pope Francis as a messenger. Finding purpose: Environmental stewardship as a personal calling (Vol. 1, pp. 115–122). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kastenbaum, R., & Aisenberg, R. (1972). The psychology of death. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  19. Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt (2017). Ökonomie als Theorie und Praxis öko-sozialer Verantwortung. Wissenschaftliches Symposium mit öffentlichem Diskussionsabend am 12.5.2017. Retrieved May 25, 2018
  20. Lin, A. (2018). Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment as private environmental governance. George Washington Journal of Energy & Environmental Law. Retrieved June 16, 2018,
  21. Lorenz, K. (1973). Die acht Todsünden der zivilisierten Menschheit. München: Pieper-Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Lyon, A. J., Gustafson, C. A., & Manuel, P. C. (2018). Pope Francis as a global actor. Where politics and theology meet. Cham: Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maibach, E., Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Myers, T., Rosenthal, S. & Feinberg, G. (2015) The Francis effect: How Pope Francis changed the conversation about global warming. George Mason University and Yale University. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication.
  24. Mayer, C.-H. (2011). The meaning of sense of coherence in transcultural management. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  25. Mayer, C.-H. (2017). Salutogene Perspektiven—Zur Entstehung und Förderung von Gesundheit in der Enzyklika. In W. George (Ed.), Laudato Si’. Wissenschaftler antworten auf die Enzyklika von Papst Franziskus (pp. 285–295). Gießen: Psychosozial Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mayer, C.-H., & Krause, C. (2012). Exploring mental health: Theoretical and empirical discourses on salutogenesis. Lengerich: Pabst Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Mayer, C.-H., Viviers, R., Flotman, A.-P., & Schneider-Stengel, D. (2016). Enhancing sense of coherence and mindfulness in an ecclesiastical, intercultural group training context. Journal of Religion and Health,55(6), 2023–2038. Scholar
  28. Mazo, J. (2015). The pope’s divisions. Survival,57(4), 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mohr, H. (2014). Evolutionäre Ethik. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Myers, J. E. (1992). Wellness, prevention, development: The cornerstone of the profession. Journal of Counselling and Development,71(2), 136–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Porter, M. E. & Heppelmann, J. E. (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 12, 96–114.Google Scholar
  32. Posener, A. (2018). Reich Gottes auf Erden. Welt am Sonntag, 20.5.2018. 42.Google Scholar
  33. Stubbings, C. (2018). Workforce of the future: The competing forces shaping 2030. Price Waterhouse Coopers report. Retrieved January 24, 2019,

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial Psychology and People ManagementUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa
  2. 2.Institut für therapeutische Kommunikation und SprachgebrauchEuropa Universität ViadrinaFrankfurt (Oder)Germany
  3. 3.TransMIT Project Division for Health Services Research and ConsultingGießenGermany
  4. 4.Department Ethik und PhilosophieWilhelm Löhe HochschuleFürthGermany

Personalised recommendations