Laudato Si

  • Thread starter Thread starter Justin_Mee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Justin_Mee

Guest
Can I totally disregard our Pope’s encyclical if it does not regard faith and morals and remain a true Catholic?
 
I think your question is a moot point. This encyclical does address faith and morals and, as far as I can tell, does not depart from the Catholic faith.

Here’s how we are to treat it:
Vatican II:
This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.
Click to expand...
Read the encyclical. It explains our moral duties towards creation and the reason for and source of those duties. It applies that doctrine to apparent problems in the world and invites dialogue and discussion to reach effective solutions within the bounds of that morality. As I read it, for the most part, his manner of speaking is more encouraging and explaining, than definitively demanding assent or commanding.
 
A papal encyclical is historically a teaching letter, and I don’t think it has the weight of infallible dogma or that it represents the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff in the way a definitively proclaimed doctrine, stated as such and concerning faith and morals would. But I could be wrong.

I believe the issue really concerns accepting the teachings of the Pope, who was elected by the conclave of bishops through the power of the Holy Spirit. So, this teaching ought to be received entirely apart from one’s political persuasion, I think.

There have been popes through the years that have had what could be viewed as differing points of view about various issues, but perhaps this should be considered in the context of the era during which those teachings were promulgated. In others words, what might have been the better course of action in 1750 might not, for instance, necessarily be so today. Trust in the Holy Spirit and, though it might seem mysterious, have faith that there were very good reasons why Pope Francis was elected pope at the historical moment he was.
 
You have no obligation to read this encyclical but you should not say that you “totally disregard” any papal encyclical.
 
PaulfromIowa said:
You have no obligation to read this encyclical but you should not say that you “totally disregard” any papal encyclical.
Click to expand...
This was bad sentence construction on my part. Of course I don’t disregard the part of the encyclical regarding abortion, etc. Just the part where he gets into climate, immigration and world governance. My belief on climate does not matter here. You would never change my mind so let’s not get into the matter.
 
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...
There seem to be a certain number of Catholics today who dissent from one or more Catholic teachings?
 
We must always give deference to our Holy Father’s statements and writings, as he is the successor of St Peter. Any encyclical should be treated with due consideration and respect.

Still, an encyclical in itself is not considered an ex cathedra statement and the faithful are not obligated to agree with the contents thereof in it’s entirety.

For any statement by the Pope to be infallible and binding on the faithful, it must still meet the requirements for an ex cathedra pronouncement.

I didn’t see any of that language in the Pope’s encyclical to indicate it is ex cathedra, even though I happen to agree with it for the most part.
 
Please ignore the media reporting on this. They have no clue. Readit yourself and consult Catholic media for interpretation. Unlike all other climate change guru sources there is no “agenda” this is a teaching document.
 
hadulzo said:
Please ignore the media reporting on this. They have no clue. Readit yourself and consult Catholic media for interpretation. Unlike all other climate change guru sources there is no “agenda” this is a teaching document.
Click to expand...
Good thought.
 
Johann_du_Toit said:
Still, an encyclical in itself is not considered an ex cathedra statement and the faithful are not obligated to agree with the contents thereof in it’s entirety.
Click to expand...
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?
 
Hans_W said:
No, because it deals with our moral obligations.
Click to expand...
So then there are parts of this; that deals with morals. That can be labeled “infallible”? I am just trying to understand this encyclical, bull, faith and morals and so on.
 
billcu1 said:
So then there are parts of this; that deals with morals. That can be labeled “infallible”? I am just trying to understand this encyclical, bull, faith and morals and so on.
Click to expand...
Let me explain. For most it goes like this:

Things I like = Infallible

Things I dont like = Not Infallible / Pope’s opinion

😃
 
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...
You need to read and understand it first. I have very firm beliefs on global warming and if it truly exist but I haven’t found anything Pope Francis wrote that I outright disagree with yet. So many people are making assumptions about what is in the encyclical and reading secular media reports on it but not taking the time to find out themselves.

Therefore you may NOT disregard anything until you have read 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...
You are not obliged to believe in something environmental and political just because he does.
 
Lormar said:
You are not obliged to believe in something environmental and political just because he does.
Click to expand...
Unless he says there is a moral imperative to alter behaviors that lead to global warming, reckless consumerism, declines in biodiversity, etc.

Its gonna be fun seeing so many more cafeteria catholics, except now, from the conservative side.
 
Birdpreacher said:
Unless he says there is a moral imperative to alter behaviors that lead to global warming, reckless consumerism, declines in biodiversity, etc.

Its gonna be fun seeing so many more cafeteria catholics, except now, from the conservative side.
Click to expand...
It’s not going to happen if people actually read the document. There is no specific instruction that you must do this or you can’t believe this. It is very well written full of suggestions, love and mercy.

All the reports trashing the encyclical have been overblown. I was nervous when this was coming out and somewhat fearful but I am ashamed I didn’t put more trust in the Church leaders and Pope Francis. What the encyclical really does is add a religious voice to the political and scientific voices that we need to be good stewards of our resources.

It’s hard to argue against that really.
 
WT1 said:
What the encyclical really does is add a religious voice to the political and scientific voices that we need to be good stewards of our resources.

It’s hard to argue against that really.
Click to expand...
Exactly; and even if climate change proves to be a hoax, what possible harm can come from being good stewards, eliminating waste, ensuring our water supplies remain safe and plentiful, and our air clean to breathe?

God gave us dominion over our world, not the right to plunder it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top