View Full Version : Pope Francis: Care of the Earth
His encyclical was officially published today. IMHO, he is spot on:
"Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals," Francis states. "Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximizing profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations?"
Any Catholics or interested non-Catholics have any view on it?
http://ncronline.org/news/theology/pope-francis-encyclical-urgent-call-prevent-world-debris-desolation-and-filth
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/world/pope-francis-climate-technology-encyclical/
Gosh.....he's such a good person!
I just read this in our local paper and "pray" that at least some of us will take heed. One of the things I liked about being raised Catholic was its emphasis on empathy for those less fortunate. All of the wealth in the world won't matter if we destroy our only home.
Interesting that his 'care of the earth' concerns are generating lots of media coverage, although the bits regarding 'care of the body' and 'care of the unborn'.....not so much.
It is enough to recognize that our body itself establishes us in a direct relationship with the environment and with other living beings. The acceptance of our bodies as God’s gift is vital for welcoming and accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home, whereas thinking that we enjoy absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation. Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology. Also, valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific gifts of another man or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a healthy attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it”.
Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away”.
catherine
6-18-15, 12:11pm
Interesting that his 'care of the earth' concerns are generating lots of media coverage, although the bits regarding 'care of the body' and 'care of the unborn'.....not so much.
Well those parts are no new news. Everyone knows the Church doesn't condone homosexuality and abortion. But the idea that the Church is making the care of the environment a moral imperative is new.
Well those parts are no new news. Everyone knows the Church doesn't condone homosexuality and abortion. But the idea that the Church is making the care of the environment a moral imperative is new.
Oh, I don't know about that. The Catholic Church has always advocated for environmental care, Francis quotes both Benedict XVI and St. John Paul II on this point to underscore the teaching that humans are stewards of creation and not its master. The Church has always warned against excessive consumerism and unequal consumption of resources, and called for Catholics to work for equity in both areas through personal action and example. In Laudato, Sí, Francis has used climate change as a hook to promote the broader Catholic environmental and economic agenda, just as other AGW advocates use it as a hook to advance their political causes, especially collectivism, redistribution of wealth, and global government.
But the idea that the Church is making the care of the environment a moral imperative is new.
Not really, John XXIII made a strong statement in Pacem in Terris back in the early sixties.
Not really, John XXIII made a strong statement in Pacem in Terris back in the early sixties.
I know… but that was before/at the cusp of the environmental movement. The other half of this equation is that many people are more receptive now, so it's bound to get more press.
I know… but that was before/at the cusp of the environmental movement. The other half of this equation is that many people are more receptive now, so it's bound to get more press.
it's not that Catholic doctrine has changed; As Alan points out, it's people appropriating parts of it without a lot of context because they think it will further their agenda.
Well those parts are no new news. Everyone knows the Church doesn't condone homosexuality and abortion.
I read that part of the statement as addressed partially at trans-folk.
I read that part of the statement as addressed partially at trans-folk.
You're right: I guess anything related to sexual orientation or gender identity.
"Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals," Francis states.
That's a good one- the pope criticizing "magical" conceptions. Of course the "market" is nothing more than a collection of individual decisions. Who would have guessed the pope would prefer central decision making to individual choices.
That's a good one- the pope criticizing "magical" conceptions. Of course the "market" is nothing more than a collection of individual decisions. Who would have guessed the pope would prefer central decision making to individual choices.
This one does. Having lived under the other system, JP2 was a bit more skeptical of command economies.
Yes, sorry if the sarcasm on my part wasn't clear. I was alluding to the centuries of conflict between Catholics and Protestants and the role of the central authority of the papacy. Maybe no surprise the pope prefers intermediation but I found it the parallel interesting.
His encyclical was officially published today. IMHO, he is spot on:
"Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals," Francis states. "Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximizing profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations?"
Any Catholics or interested non-Catholics have any view on it?
I got a more broad implication from the wording of his speech than your quote. He mentions a couple of times both production and consumption, which goes further than the profit motive, but lifestyle. He also mentions that those who benefit the most will suffer the least, where I can see a finger pointed at the more wealthy nations. I also thought he was not only addressing global warming, but a consumption oriented society.
"To blame population growth instead of an extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues," the pope writes. "It is an attempt to legitimize the present model of distribution, where a minority believes that it has the right to consume in a way which can never be universalized, since the planet could not even contain the waste products of such consumption."
I am non-catholic and don't fully understand some of the hierarchy, but this is more than just a speech or criticism, but a formal encyclical that goes to all the global leaders in the church and which the church members are expected to support. Of course it all comes down to personal and may not hold much more water than birth control or abortion statements.
The value I see of it as a non-catholic is that it is coming from a world leader who has no self-serving motives, unlike our politicians and big business who sometimes have suspicious motives. That would seem to add credibility to the issue and may go a ways in swaying the naysayers or fence riders.
ApatheticNoMore
6-19-15, 9:16pm
"To blame population growth instead of an extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues," the pope writes.
Oh for heavens sake let people (women mostly but regardless) use birth control already.:doh:
I don't think it's a way of refusing to face the issues, population growth is part of the problem.
Research shows that the education of girls results in less poverty and then lower birth rates. If we work on educating girls, maybe this will bring more equality to all levels of leadership, and women then will have access to and use birth control regardless of the pope's opinion.
It's always amazing to me that the pope has so much power in our world. It doesn't make sense to my secular mind.
Research shows that the education of girls results in less poverty and then lower birth rates. If we work on educating girls, maybe this will bring more equality to all levels of leadership, and women then will have access to and use birth control regardless of the pope's opinion.
It's always amazing to me that the pope has so much power in our world. It doesn't make sense to my secular mind.
Well, there are a billion+ Catholics in the world, so he does have a decent fan base. Actually Pope Francis' "fans" include non-Catholics as well, because of how he walks the walk of simplicity and inclusiveness and concern for the poor.
I don't think it's a way of refusing to face the issues, population growth is part of the problem.
I certainly agree that we are outgrowing the planet, but there are many like Charles Eisenstein who say that it's easy to target population growth, but if everyone just stopped consuming at such a ridiculous rate, that would go a long way toward solving these major environmental problems--it's easy to blame your neighbor with 4 kids while you drive back from the mall to your 4,000 sq.ft home in your gas-guzzling car. If we all lived a carbon net-zero life, the earth could sustain a whole lot of people.
I got a more broad implication from the wording of his speech than your quote.
I did, too, Rogar, but I just picked that one. I agree with you that it might just exert some influence and some people. (Although I love how the Catholic conservatives are going to completely toe the Church line when they run on "family values" but now they're treating the Pope as if he's just a nice man who doesn't know what he's talking about.)
Of course the "market" is nothing more than a collection of individual decisions.
Well, a whole lot of individual choices have built a monolithic unsustainable culture.
ApatheticNoMore
6-20-15, 11:46am
I certainly agree that we are outgrowing the planet, but there are many like Charles Eisenstein who say that it's easy to target population growth, but if everyone just stopped consuming at such a ridiculous rate, that would go a long way toward solving these major environmental problems--it's easy to blame your neighbor with 4 kids while you drive back from the mall to your 4,000 sq.ft home in your gas-guzzling car. If we all lived a carbon net-zero life, the earth could sustain a whole lot of people.
If the population of the earth was 2 billion it would also solve a lot of problems. And I think the person with 4 kids is more likely to be living in a bigger home and drive a bigger car, I mean think about it is the tiny home more comfortable for 2 people or 6?
"Easy". But really, I find something nightmarish in the vision of not allowing people to use birth control all by itself. That reality seems very poorly "faced" by these catholic men to me.
Of course the "market" is nothing more than a collection of individual decisions.
Well, a whole lot of individual choices have built a monolithic unsustainable culture.
I don't believe that it's entirely individual decisions that don't take place in a larger political context.
Our local paper is doing an online survey with the question, "do you agree with Pope Francis that modern society needs a "cultural revolution" to help address climate change". So far the vote is about 62% yes and 38% no with about 3,000 votes in. Other than general interest it probably doesn't have much value, but it would be interesting to do similar poll scientifically.
Gardenarian
6-21-15, 12:07am
I thought the encyclical was brilliant, blunt, and very clear.
I wish other world leaders would stand up for the truth, and for the very poor who are suffering the most from our wastefulness.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.