"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.
Of course changes are needed. If the pope wanted to change the catechism to talk about marriage, or abortion the conservatives would applaud. Well the sins against ecology are being ignored. I applaud this change.
 
Tolle_Lege said:
In most instances, Church leaders do not have the fortitude to warn the faithful about sexual morality today, so instead they want to latch onto a topic more palatable to the majority left-wing, progressive secular media. And “the environment” is the topic du jour, one the Church can use to seem relevant and “with it” to the world, garnering the admiration of those who otherwise hate the Church and everything she stands for. Furthermore, many in the Church will claim that “the environment,” as such an urgent issue, takes precedence over other matters. This is how they will retain Humanae Vitae on paper, but in practice and a “between-the-lines” manner will implicitly claim there are too many souls on earth. It’ll be a tactic of saying, yes, the Lord wants us to be fruitful and multiply, but we need to clean up our planet first! (btw, Jesus never seemed to mind “overfishing,” as He often intervened to allow the apostles to pull in heaping nets of seafood).
Click to expand...
This is also my conviction. I think issues that affect the strength of the family and marriage Sacrament are being attacked by the enemy of God.

If married couples were focussing on their relationship and overcoming the sin of contraception and civil divorce (which leads to floods of annulment petitions) then respect for their environment will follow.

The family is the domestic Church. When that breaks down, society decays, and becomes what the Lord calls “the world”.

I’m not free from my shortcomings in my family. But Church leaders do not know how to handle these struggles in the married lives of the faithful, even though the Catechism and canon law are a great resource and guide to do so.

Just look at canon law regarding separation of spouses and justification to file civil divorce. Pastors are NOT using these Church laws to handle these situations.
 
Last edited:
The changes which need to happen are in pastoring, fraternal correction, change of hearts, and Church discipline.

The Catechism and canon law are sufficient to draw upon to deal with environmental issues and family life.

Our leaders just need to apply it in pastoral guidance
 
I dont have much to do with the Pope.

The Bishops and Cardinals do. They need to be on the same page, so that my Bishop is, and then my pastors.
 
I don’t think all the bishops and cardinals have ever been on the same page as a Pope. Is the Church a democracy?
 
Last edited:
The dubia has nothing to do with this! The pope is the vicar of Christ and our leader. He is Catholic and worthy of our respect, trust and obedience. The dubia has been answered, just not the way some who aren’t Pope would like. And in keeping with the theme on here, the catechism deals with the dubia already. Why comment further.
 
Ammi said:
Pope Francis is not heading towards being understood as a Pope who brings clarity and understanding.
Click to expand...
Based on what?
Ammi said:
He isnt exactly an educational pastor.
Click to expand...
Based on what?
Ammi said:
He has ideas and agendas, and likes to forge them, without making sure others understand and are settled in conscience.
Click to expand...
Examples?
Ammi said:
He is speaking to canon lawyers here, right?

Are they on the same page?

Bishops arent. Lay Catholics arent.
Click to expand...
Our Church is not a democracy. It speaks the Truth, which simply isn’t up for popular vote.
Ammi said:
Maybe that’s what he should be focusing on. Because they have questions, THAT HE DOES NOT ADDRESS!
Click to expand...
Far be it from me to stymie all of the papal bashing, which seems to have become an Olympic sport on CAF, but unsupported generalizations like this are not helpful to this conversation.
 
Tolle_Lege said:
In most instances, Church leaders do not have the fortitude to warn the faithful about sexual morality today, so instead they want to latch onto a topic more palatable to the majority left-wing, progressive secular media. And “the environment” is the topic du jour,
Click to expand...
This is uncharitably cynical. I can’t stomach a mentality that unfettered consumerism that harms the planet is OK because, gee, at least no one is engaging in sexual immorality.

The earth matters. That issue was settled by Laudato Si. It’s our mission and duty as Catholics to go out and live it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tolle_Lege said:
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences is just an advisory group to the Vatican, so its work does not constitute the “history of Catholic teaching on the environment” as you claim. Neither do mere statements or speeches given by popes. So despite the rich history of the 9-year-old World Day of Peace statement you provided, “sins of the environment” are not official Church teachings. But surely you would know that, being such a staunch Vatican watcher.
Click to expand...
Looks like it’s time for a bit of a ‘history of the Church’ lesson for you.

‘Laudato Si’ meaning Praise Be, is a line from St Francis Canticle of Creatures composed in 1225. The first 3 parts of the canticle are dedicated to praising God through the natural elements. “Sister Mother Earth / who sustains and governs us.”

(In 1979 Pope St John Paul II made St Francis the patron Saint of ecologists as a consequence.)

In 1971 Pope St Paul VI wrote Octogesima Adveniens (A Call to Action) defining 11 modern social problems the Church needed to address including the environment.

21. While the horizon of man is thus being modified according to the images that are chosen for him, another transformation is making itself felt, one which is the dramatic and unexpected consequence of human activity. Man is suddenly becoming aware that by an ill-considered exploitation of nature he risks destroying it and becoming in his turn the victim of this degradation. Not only is the material environment becoming a permanent menace - pollution and refuse, new illness and absolute destructive capacity - but the human framework is no longer under man’s control, thus creating an environment for tomorrow which may well be intolerable. This is a wide-ranging social problem which concerns the entire human family.

The Christian must turn to these new perceptions in order to take on responsibility, together with the rest of men, for a destiny which from now on is shared by all.
 
In 1972 he thenaddressed the United Nations Conference on the Environment.

Today, indeed, there is a growing awareness that man and his environment are more inseparable than ever. The environment essentially conditions man’s life and development, while man, in his turn, perfects and ennobles his environment through his presence, work and contemplation. But human creativeness will yield true and lasting benefits only to the extent to which man respects the laws that govern the vital impulse and nature’s capacity for regeneration. Both are united, therefore, and share a common temporal future. So man is warned of the necessity of replacing the unchecked advance of material progress, often blind and turbulent, with new-found respect for the biosphere of his global domain, which, to quote the fine motto of the Conference, has become “one Earth”, to quote the fine motto of the Conference.

In the first place intelligence can apply its discoveries as means of destruction, as in the case of atomic, chemical and bacteriological arms and so many other instruments of war, large and small, for which moral conscience can feel only horror. But how can we ignore the imbalances caused in the biosphere by the disorderly exploitation of the physical reserves of the planet, even for the purpose of producing something useful, such as the wasting of natural resources that cannot be renewed; pollution of the earth, water, air and space, with the resulting assaults on vegetable and animal life? All that contributes to the impoverishment and deterioration of man’s environment to the extent, it is said, of threatening his own survival. Finally, our generation must energetically accept the challenge of going beyond partial and immediate goals in order to prepare a hospitable earth for future generations.

…“But all technical measures would remain ineffectual if they were not accompanied by an awareness of the necessity for a radical change in mentality. All are called to clear-sightedness and courage.”

Pope Paul calling us to a “radical change in mentality” regarding environmentalism 47 years ago!
 
I had another page of citations from the Church but for some reason it got zapped. It included. More addresses by Pope Paul VI, Pope JohnPaul II and Pope Benedict the Green Pope and the USCCB dating back to the 70s.

If you are interested in seeing those as well I will recompile what was lost but I think the main point is that it is not embarrassing for the Church to be addressing the environment as a moral obligation. It’s been doing it for a very long time! In fact, it calls you today to the same “radical change of mentality”!
 
Last edited:
I can honestly say, I’m not really against it. I’m not exactly an environmentalist, but the fact that I see garbage all over the side of the road out in the country, in this beautiful part of South Carolina where I live, makes me very sad. I think we should start by actually enforcing the laws on it, before we put it in the catechism.
 
spiritualsamurai said:
Additionally, almost everyone agrees that we should be trying to reduce climate change. How we do this is disagreed upon. It is not really a moral debate, but a debate on which solutions are the most effective at stopping climate change but also burden people’s lives and take away their rights the least. The Vatican should be focused on combating heresies and misconceptions in the Church. They should be fighting Modernism.
Click to expand...
This is one of the main thing that concerns me in all this talk. I thought the Church focused on Faith and morals? Perhaps Pope Francis may wish to step down as Pope and run for a political position someplace instead? In any event, the only proclamation I would love to see in all this is one stating that openness to life & the embracing of humans at all stages of development is NEVER an ecological sin. That’s just me though.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
I can honestly say, I’m not really against it.
Click to expand...
I can understand that.
My biggest issue here is that the sins are already in the catechism. In adding them again it creates the impression that they were not there already, which is an error. Or it creates the impression that since the sins are already listed it must be addressing something else entirely, which is another error.

Either way, it creates confusion among the faithful.
 
So is your argument that the sins are in the catechism already so reemphasising them is a waste of paper in the catechism and therefore a sin?

I have no idea why people are so against everything Francis does on a Catholic site.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top