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

[Ammi]

The laws of death penalty given to the rulers of the Hebrews were during their movement through the desert. I think circumstance was very relative to the command.

Jesus obviously did not desire to continue the practice. He ushered in a new covenant based on His own death (mercy/forgiveness) as atoning for the requirement of death.

You would need to apply the command of death to each reason given by the law, if you are going to use it to uphold it in any given society in the age of the new covenant.

I think the only justified application is to safeguard a serious threat of murder. Which falls under self defence. So unless the offender cannot be safely incarcerated, capital punishment is not morally justified.

 

[Ammi]

That’s the thing, it’s already expressed as a duty for man to treat the earth, plants, and animals with respect and care. So further defining isnt a problem. But this “sin naming” seems to be more than further defining offenses against the 7th commandment, even as creating a new category of offense.

 

[graciew]

It is a school, and they use the caps
Keep recycling, (name removed by moderator). Don t give up…

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

That’s pretty offensive and racist towards ancient man

Please tell me you’re joking. I’ve never seen you do it so I’m not sure if I haven’t just seen it.

If not, what race is he being racist toward? You can’t just use that word any old place you like and have it make sense. Likewise, who exactly is he offending? Good grief.

 

[Jen7]

So unless the offender cannot be safely incarcerated, capital punishment is not morally justified.

I tend to agree with you. But that’s not what’s being said anymore, is it?? It’s now being called inadmissible. Ever. I have a problem with that. The CCC to guides people’s choices, how they vote, etc. Or am I the only one?! Changing the morality of a hot button issue like the death penalty is a big deal in my book. For me there’s a big difference between “it’s okay within certain strict limits” and “it’s up there with abortion - we don’t condone it EVER.” How can something jump from one category to the other?!

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Two previous issues that people have tried to have banned from definition in the Catechism are EENS and the death penalty. The point is that even though the Church has held these tenets as seeds that allowed the human conscience to be formed from their fundamental meaning, unfortunately some Catholics regard them as divine

So you are saying the Church is changing its teaching on no salvation outside the Catholic Church and that teaching is not divine?

I’m sorry, but in all charity, you are very wrong. There is NO salvation outside the Church. That is Church dogma. It doesnt change.

 

[Ammi]

I will try to share my thoughts and understanding of the point.

Some teachings that come from the papacy are not binding on Catholics!

This is what Pope Benedict said about St JPII’s position on the death penalty.

“There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics… but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.”

This valid statement reinforces the efforts of many Catholics (including Cardinals, Bishops, priests, canon lawyers, theologians, and laymen) who request formal statements from Pope Francis regarding topics which he attempts to take issue with over the Church.

You see, if the Pope wants to weigh in on issues which concern universal jurisdiction and expect assent of faith, then he must Teach from the Chair of Peter. If he does not, then he has no more authority than his fellow Bishops.

So he consistently engages in controversial issues without preaching in a universal capacity. This creates frustration and confusion. Then compound that with the fact that he even makes off the cuff comments which Vatican tries to spin away from direct contradiction of Catholic teaching.

 

[Tolle_Lege]

Is the Catholic Church reduced to a political organization reacting to the winds of the day? Or is the Catholic Church the faithful bride of Christ that proclaims Christ to humanity?

The Vatican currently operates under the former premise.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

 

[CatholicELATeacher]

Neo-pantheism. It’s all the rage.

 

[Tolle_Lege]

It’s now being called inadmissible.

Just more un-Catholic blathering that can be safely ignored by the faithful.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

 

[Minks]

“That’s pretty offensive and racist towards [sic] ancient man who in many ways had more ecological wisdom than we ever had.”

GOOD GRIEF! Must every aspect of life be high drama?

With all the psuedo moments of life critically hanging in the balance, how will we recognize true danger? Why would anyone take any warning seriously with so much ado about . . .

 

[Randolph]

Is the Catholic Church reduced to a political organization reacting to the winds of the day? Or is the Catholic Church the faithful bride of Christ that proclaims Christ to humanity?

Sadly and more precisely, the target for political retribution are those who are faithful to Christ and the Magisterium—the so-called “rigid fundamentalists” or the “modern day Pharisees”. These people have been mocked, ridiculed, dismissed, and brushed aside. It seems very personal, petty and vindictive. The “progressives” want to radically and quickly transform the Church into a political mechanism where they can manipulate to advance their personal and political agenda. All operated under the false sense of ecumenism, love, mercy and compassion—the “going with the times” syndrome.

Of course, under this political mechanism, the Church, as the progressives want her to be, would no longer be the Catholic Church—a Church which Christ reigns, and a Church which Christ entrusted Peter with the responsibility to feed His sheep and to hold the key to Heaven.

 

[twf]

No this is not new to Pope Francis. Stewardship of the environment has always been a Church teaching.

 

[blackforest]

Why does the prospect of responsible stewardship to the earth spawn so much moral outrage?

 

[twf]

See above…
Interestingly, “conservative” Pope Benedict also was a big proponent of environmental stewardship… he even bought a forest in Eastern Europe to offset the Vatican’s carbon footprint. Somehow the American Conservatives forgave this because he aligned with them in other areas. With Pope Francis, they mock and deride the Vatican for doing the same thing.

Note that I am using the word conservative, not traditional. The opposition to this teaching is not “traditionalist”. Not authentically. It’s rooted in American conservatism, not Catholicism.

 

[jesusmademe]

I just hope he does not endorse flygskam (flight shame). He probably won’t.
I rather read or listen to popes Benedict XVI or JP2. Francis has way of talking that I cannot relate to at all.

 

[blackforest]

See above…

You accuse the Holy See of being materialistic… yet the only reason conservative Americans defy the Church on this topic is because they want to accumulate as many goods as possible, blast the AC as much as possible, drive as many big vehicles as possible… there is no other explanation for the passionate defiance.

Yea, but I don’t know if stereotypes are very helpful to this conversation. I know a lot of exceptions - conservatives who opt for the simple life, and plenty of materialistic “liberals.”

I suspect that some believe that they are “supposed” to be morally outraged because progressive-this and conservative-that. The default is to move toward partisan identity. But we’re not a partisan Church, and environmental stewardship is not (or at least should not be) a partisan concept.

Not to worry, folks. I promise that sorting your recycling, planting a tree, and shopping with reusable bags won’t turn you into Che Guevara. Or even Joe Biden.

 

[Ammi]

Certainly doesnt outrage me.

Because it’s in the Catechism.

Adding a new label “sin against ecology” is strange for a couple reasons.

First, like acononlawyer mentioned, ecology is a study. And secondly, environmental stewardship has a pretty large section already.

So some of us are curious why does Francis feel the need to add the sin label? So much of his interests and pursuits require more explanation and education than he provides.