Laudato Si

  • Thread starter Thread starter Justin_Mee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Justin_Mee said:
I don’t dissent from ANY Catholic teachings. Just politics.
Click to expand...
I understand. The encyclical may not be political in nature but it will be an influence in voting decisions possibly pitting supporting climate change candidates that are pro abortion against candidates that deny climate change but are anti abortion. Is climate change equal to abortion when forming our consciences?
 
johnnyc176 said:
I understand. The encyclical may not be political in nature but it will be an influence in voting decisions possibly pitting supporting climate change candidates that are pro abortion against candidates that deny climate change but are anti abortion. Is climate change equal to abortion when forming our consciences?
Click to expand...
Did the Holy Father say it is? I think not.
 
I can’t imagine any Pope would write anything that has nothing to do with faith or morals. He’s not going to write an encyclical on what pizza toppings he likes.
 
Like was said, you don’t have to read it. It will also fade into distant memory fairly quick.

Infallibility is irrelevant, what matters is whether or not it is authoritative and binding upon the faithful. Some parts probably are. If there are changes that you have to make in your life due to this encyclical, your bishop will let you know. Other than that, don’t worry about it.
 
Justin_Mee said:
Can I totally disregard our Pope’s encyclical if it does not regard faith and morals and remain a true Catholic?
Click to expand...
God Bless our Pope! He’s doing some great work! Pope Francis is rocking the boat just as Jesus Christ did some 2000 years ago. I’m most sure that Christ got his share of "I disagree with everything that Jesus guy said. Just as I’m reading on this post.
 
You should read it. I’m currently working through it myself, and - regardless of whether you believe climate change is occurring - it has a lot of thought-provoking and challenging aspects to it.

And there’s a lot of stuff that’s impossible to dispute: we shouldn’t be dumping harmful chemicals into our water; the poor tend to be harmed most by pollution; etc.

It’s definitely not what the liberal media has been playing it up to be. But you shouldn’t disregard anything you haven’t read because other people are misrepresenting it.
 
Tomdstone said:
This is the argument that some Catholics use to dissent from the teaching on artificial birth control. They say that Humanae Vitae is not covered by infallibility?
Click to expand...
Humanae Vitae affirmed the position that has been upheld by the Magisterium for thousands of years, namely that artificial birth control is a sin, and thus can be seen as the Pope exercising his infallible authority during the course of his Ordinary Magisterium.

Coincidentally ALL Christian Churches upheld the principal that artificial contraception is morally wrong (Luther, Calvin, Wesley all believed in it) until 1930, when the Anglican Church allowed in certain limited circumstances (which later evolved to ALL circumstances).
 
I don’t understand the big deal. Creation is certainly within something man has relation with and the Pope can speak on it. I think, however, that no one will remember this. Because the right does not want anything to do with being in bed “environmental” types And the left wants nothing to do with giving encyclicals weight. If they did that, we would not have a "c"atholic left…
 
Tomdstone said:
This is the argument that some Catholics use to dissent from the teaching on artificial birth control. They say that Humanae Vitae is not covered by infallibility?
Click to expand...
The infallible Church doctrine on artificial birth control is in the CCC.

For your information we are bound by both infallible and non-infallible teachings so its irrelevant if anyone asks if a teaching is infallible or not because it makes no difference, meaning rejecting either is a sin of grave matter, but rejecting or having obstinate doubts about an infallible teaching is additionally heresy.
 
Tomdstone said:
This is the argument that some Catholics use to dissent from the teaching on artificial birth control. They say that Humanae Vitae is not covered by infallibility?
Click to expand...
idk about infallibility but it’s definitely faith and morals. So I guess it applies.
 
white_sheep said:
Like was said, you don’t have to read it. It will also fade into distant memory fairly quick.

Infallibility is irrelevant, what matters is whether or not it is authoritative and binding upon the faithful. Some parts probably are. If there are changes that you have to make in your life due to this encyclical, your bishop will let you know. Other than that, don’t worry about it.
Click to expand...
I agree with this position but caution must always be taken. I often give the example of Populorum Progressio which was a valid encyclical but grossly misunderstood, even by bishops and priests.
 
Justin_Mee said:
Can I totally disregard our Pope’s encyclical if it does not regard faith and morals and remain a true Catholic?
Click to expand...
Totally disregarding the Holy Father’s environmental encyclical would amount to disregarding St. Francis of Assisi, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, JPII, BXVI and a great number of Catholic theologians.

I’d say it’s a free country, so disregard whoever you wish. I myself disregard much of what is written on the CAF threads pertaining to climate change, since folks here are not climate scientists and don’t know about it enough to make valid judgments. For climate science I go to the climate scientists. For what to do about the problem, I go to the Catholic Church.

However, I know quite a few people hate Catholics & Catholicism. Nothing new there. I was even brought up to hate Catholics and Catholicism, but when I became an adult in the late 60s, I made my own choice to convert to Catholicism. Even at that time when I knew I was called to the faith, I wasn’t sure if it was just myself being called or everyone. It seems it was just myself. Catholicism is clearly not for everyone. It’s a tough and stringent religion. Most people it seems can’t hack it. I’m not going to judge.
 
lynnvinc said:
Totally disregarding the Holy Father’s environmental encyclical would amount to disregarding St. Francis of Assisi, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, JPII, BXVI and a great number of Catholic theologians.

I’d say it’s a free country, so disregard whoever you wish. I myself disregard much of what is written on the CAF threads pertaining to climate change, since folks here are not climate scientists and don’t know about it enough to make valid judgments. For climate science I go to the climate scientists. For what to do about the problem, I go to the Catholic Church.

However, I know quite a few people hate Catholics & Catholicism. Nothing new there. I was even brought up to hate Catholics and Catholicism, but when I became an adult in the late 60s, I made my own choice to convert to Catholicism. Even at that time when I knew I was called to the faith, I wasn’t sure if it was just myself being called or everyone. It seems it was just myself. Catholicism is clearly not for everyone. It’s a tough and stringent religion. Most people it seems can’t hack it. I’m not going to judge.
Click to expand...
Many people it seems disregard Thomism. I talked to a Catholic on here concerning progression of the persons within the Godhead. Straight from the Summa. He argued up and down there was no progression in or of God.

Bill
 
billcu1 said:
Many people it seems disregard Thomism. I talked to a Catholic on here concerning progression of the persons within the Godhead. Straight from the Summa. He argued up and down there was no progression in or of God.

Bill
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are talking about. Please spell it out, bec I have been confused when God answered my prayer that he lead me to the right religion, and that turned out to be Catholicism. But I’ve never been sure if it is the right religion for everyone (I think it is), or it is just the right religion for me…that issue wasn’t part of my prayer, only something I’ve wondered about since.

However, I do know people find Catholicism very strict, too strict for them. They not only have to practice chastity, with sex only in marriage and no contraception or abortion, and many other restrictions and duties, but they have to reduce their environmental harms to others – they have to humbly accept they are causing those harms, then do something about them.

“19. … Our goal is not to amass information or to satisfy curiosity, but rather to become painfully aware, to dare to turn what is happening to the world into our own personal suffering and thus to discover what each of us can do about it” (Laudato Si)

I have been on that page for over 25 years, it was like a painful “ecological conversion” (JPII) experience back in 1990, but once I converted to acknowledging my own part in the environmental harms of the world, including global warming, and after a 1990 Lent of very fervent and painful prayer, God helped me find many solutions, which we’ve been implementing ever since, reducing our GHGs by over 60% and other concomitant pollution and harms, AND saving us $1000s. What I learned is if one seeks first the kingdom of God and its righteousness, ALL things will be added unto that person – GUARANTEED!!!

However, it is very hard for people to go thru that ecological conversion, that first step, which entailed being brought down low into the dust of humility, shame, guilt, remorse, sorrow…to be raised up by God Himself.

That is the problem I see and why many people cannot (or will not) be fully Catholic, and will not even take the first steps to reduce their harms.

Pope Francis, BXVI, JPII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John XXIII, St. Kateri Tekakwitha, St. Therese, St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Jesus, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Joseph, St. Mary we need your prayers.
 
The_Serpent said:
msn.com/en-us/news/us/american-recycling-is-stalling-and-the-big-blue-bin-is-one-reason-why/ar-AAbTqGM?ocid=UP97DHP

A current and relevant news article on recycling.😃
Click to expand...
That’s just another problem we have to own and strive to do something about so it makes at least ecological/life sense if not economic sense.

I think one problem is we used to recycle a lot of aluminum cans (which was profitable), but now they make those cans from combined aluminum and plastic, which is much less profitable (except the pull tabs). The other materials are not that profitable to recycle and some entail net loss, without much environmental benefit (e.g., glass). Another problem is that products now are a mix of several materials and not so easily recyclable. This needs to be corrected, so we can recycle more easily.

However, recycling is somewhat low on the list of what we need to do.

The first principle is REDUCE, which can partly be achieved thru efficiency & conservation (e.g., xeriscape so as to reduce watering the garden). There are 100s, 1000s of things that could be done.

The second principle is REUSE. I loved reading that the Pope as Cardinal in Argentina would save all the rubber-bands from his newspapers & return them each month to the newspaper man. It is the Little Way of Environmental Healing … There is nothing too small we can’t offer in love to God.

The third principle is RECYCLE (and making sure our recycled materials get taken and processed in a way that makes ecological sense).

After that BUY RECYCLED, GO ON ALT ENERGY when feasible, and plant trees, etc.

Selecting some 100 of those many 1000s of things should help us to reduce our impact by over 60% without lowering our living standards, but a true Catholic should also be willing to sacrifice a little for the sake of the life of the world. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top