"Pope considering adding ‘sin against ecology’ to Church’s catechism"

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But why is he delving into more “sin” talk (as though it’s a new category), when there is so much confusion in the Church about what already exists???

I personally have talked with more than one priest, who admittedly dont know much about canon law and applying what is already taught into their pastoral guidance.

In important topics and situations, they just defer people to “other specialists” because they feel incompetent to take any sort of position as a pastor!!
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
40.png
Weserthy:
This could be OK…but the question is, how would “sins against ecology” be defined?
Click to expand...
A lot of sin has ambiguity attached to it. It may explain why we see so many is-this-a-sin threads on CAF. Wherever there’s gray areas, we consult with our confessors. That’s how it’s been since the birth of our Church.

If the Pope follows through with this, then we follow through, too. We’re Catholics and, as such, take Magisterial authority seriously.
Click to expand...
Really? Do you actually talk to average, everyday Catholics? I do. And they are a mixed bag. Most dont take Church Teaching very serious at all!
 
And that why the elites who promote it don’t change their own ways.
 
Re “confessing to plants” (?!?):

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Btw, love your nom de plume. 👍
 
Confessing to plants? Interesting, because Protestants don’t believe in confession.

Maybe they’ll have to start believing in sacramental ordination whereby only plants can be ordained to dispense the sacraments. Wouldn’t surprise me given what happens in Mainline Protestantism.

I wonder how a plant is able to provide sacramental absolution?
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
We’re Catholics and, as such, take Magisterial authority seriously.
Click to expand...
Ideal vs. reality. We should. We don’t always.
Ammi said:
But why is he delving into more “sin” talk (as though it’s a new category), when there is so much confusion in the Church about what already exists???
Click to expand...
He’s not inventing a new sin. He’s claiming that there’s one that exists but needs more openly acknowledged and better articulated by the Church. Sure, that “stewards of the earth” thing has been spelled out, but I like how he clarifies it with greater detail on how we shouldn’t fall prey to the unfettered materialism of the “throwaway culture.”

Just because it’s confusing doesn’t mean it isn’t the truth.
 
Emeraldlady said:
Ah, loose-leaf catechism books. Gotta love 'em!
Click to expand...
I hope you will take that as tongue-in-cheek as I intended it.

Certainly the Church has to deal with some different scenarios in different generations. Few people anymore have to be concerned with who has the rights to wild animals on their farmland — “my farm, but the King’s deer” — but on the other hand, people 100 years ago didn’t have to be concerned with the ethics of pirated software or copyrights on downloaded books or movies.

I was referring more to the fact that basic morality never changes, and constantly-changing texts could give the impression that it does, that faith and morality are dependent upon the times and what’s been taught “most recently”. I do believe there is a real danger of falling into the mindset of “recentism”. Time and again you will hear “modern” Catholics say “the teaching on X will eventually change, the Church will come around sooner or later and catch up with the times”. That’s the impression people have.
Emeraldlady said:
I would love to see people give themselves over to the teaching authority of the Church and see how they are transformed by it. I know how much I have changed since Pope Francis has blessed us with his unique charisms.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying, but I cannot entirely subscribe to the concept of “we need to be most concerned about what the present Pope is most concerned about” and “we need not to worry about the things that the present Pope doesn’t worry about”. I am not suggesting that you are saying this, but some do.

I have been deeply inspired by some things Pope Francis has done — reinforcing the current judgment of the Church that capital punishment can’t be justified in today’s world, given our ability to detain and possibly rehabilitate even the worst criminals, his reiteration of the truth of Humanae vitae, and his very generous treatment of the SSPX. The “pachamama” incident does concern me. There are other things I could cite as well, and I’m not the only one. Many terabytes of cyber-journalism have been burnt up over it.

And for what it’s worth, I’m not on board with the Luminous Mysteries and I never have been. I have never recited them except when forced to, when I would visit my son’s classroom. I don’t deny the Pope’s authority to promulgate them, and I’m not suggesting that they are in any way heterodox, I just choose not to pray them myself. The fifteen-decade rosary has a certain balance and harmony to it, and I disliked seeing it tampered with.
Click to expand...
 
Pope Francis is not heading towards being understood as a Pope who brings clarity and understanding.

He isnt exactly an educational pastor.

He has ideas and agendas, and likes to forge them, without making sure others understand and are settled in conscience.

The Catechism is not confusing to most Catholics, if they want to study and learn it.

Canon law, is a different matter.

He is speaking to canon lawyers here, right?

Are they on the same page?

Bishops arent. Lay Catholics arent.

Maybe that’s what he should be focusing on. Because they have questions, THAT HE DOES NOT ADDRESS!
 
Margaret_Ann said:
Re “confessing to plants” (?!?):

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Btw, love your nom de plume. 👍
Click to expand...
I am 3/4 of the way through the current Catechism of the Catholic Church…it’s a long slog…now if they start changing things I gotta go back and start at the beginning…I do feel like Charlie Brown!
 
Last edited:
Weserthy said:
This could be OK…but the question is, how would “sins against ecology” be defined? Defining concepts and theological explanations are not Pope Francis’ strong suit. This could mean any number of things. Is it an ecological sin to dump toxic waste into rivers, lakes, and oceans? Yes, probably. Is it an ecological sin to keep your house at a comfortable temperature in the summer with your AC? Well, we may soon find out.
Click to expand...
Some things are intrinsically evil, but for the most part this isn’t a whole lot different from most other sins: gluttony, sloth, vanity, pride, etc. At what point is the line drawn between taking some valuable R&R and becoming lazy? At what point does something constitute gluttony or intemperance? Or vanity? When is something about upholding personal dignity and when is it about pride? For all of these things a person needs discernment and maturity and it’s not necessarily easy or crystal clear, not even for a priest or other person who is spiritually mature. Life is complicated.

Since the world is more interconnected than the past it was only a matter of time before the Church started to better clarify the subject of ecology. If it doesn’t happen today it will inevitably happen in the near future either way, whether if it’s with this Pope or the next one. Our current Pope has some level of scientific background so I suppose it’s appropriate he would be the one to pursue it.
 
Last edited:
Mostly just Jeffrey Sachs (an economist, not a lawyer, but that’s who is setting the pace), George Soros and the like. Jeffrey Sachs goes around lecturing religious orders on ‘enviro-sins’.

I wish I could find that video I saw from a couple of years ago by a woman trying to do something about abortion at the Vatican. It was run by those Jeffrey Sachs type groups, the biggest female proponent of abortion in Italy, Planned Parenthood type groups, bankster type groups, etc.

All these things are just some sort of new global-homo religion stuff. Pachamama is an earth goddess, an earth mother, and the people in the region are well aware of that.
 
Last edited:
I’d bet a dime to a dollar on this scenario:

First, the liberals will applaud Pope Francis on this issue (if they haven’t already).

Second, they’ll say that having children is a “sin against ecology”.

Third, poor Pope Francis (who has condemned abortion repeatedly) will be asked if having children is a “sin against ecology”.

Fourth, the Vatican Press Office will issue a statement stating that the Holy Father was misunderstood, abortion is still a sin etc.

Fifth, the liberals will put their best ultramontane faces on and remind the Vatican Press Office that Pope Francis said there’s “sin(s) against ecology”, and that having children eats up natural resources ergo, having children is a “sin against ecology”. Etc.

Please God it doesn’t happen this way. 🙏
 
Last edited:
We ought to act regardless of time frame since their are 2 sources of energy, renewable and non-renewable. We use oil far faster than oil can form. Lets pretend climate scientists are wrong, we brought the future of energy to today.
 
vz71 said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
Because we need to recognise our complacency on the issue and not just pay meaningless lip service to it.
Click to expand...
That’s the thing.
If things are a sin now, and have been, any further language is quite literally paying lip service.
Click to expand...
Church language has been undergoing refinement for 20 centuries.

You can find rudimentary teachings related to stewardship in the 3rd century but it’s much better for the contemporary Church to spell it out to the audience that is alive right now. People in the 3rd century don’t grapple with identical things as people in the 21st century do.
 
Last edited:
Pope considering adding ‘sin against ecology’ to Church’s catechism

You know If I didn’t know better, I could swear the Vatican is taking cues from Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio…but maybe it’s just me.
 
Everyone is already aware of the sin? Someone forgot to tell the earth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top