Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change

  • Thread starter Thread starter 4elise
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps not, but it implies that it is man-made, because if it didn’t what action could be employed to stop it?
Yep, as the trial lawyers say, it assumes facts not in evidence.
… the thread might as well say, “Putting Catholic faith into action on stopping earthquakes.”
Although I personally think the comparison is accurate - since I disbelieve in AGW - given that the scientific questions are as yet unanswered it is probably better to say it’s like "Putting Catholic faith into action on choosing heads or tails."

Ender
 
Perhaps not, but it implies that it is man-made, because if it didn’t what action could be employed to stop it? … the thread might as well say, “Putting Catholic faith into action on stopping earthquakes.”
Actually, that’s not true. There are a number of natural phenomena that we can affect positively by human action, and the list is likely to get longer.

Edwin
 
In my opinion, If Catholics and Christians off all denominations could become more attentive to the issues and not the politics we could make a real difference. As it stands our faith is blurred with the emotional. As I and a few others have pointed out, it is the ‘world’ system of politics which keeps us divided. If we pay more attention to the secular liberal/conservative media than we do to the sacred we loose sight of the real issues and start to think that what they propose is the choice between good and evil. The truth is the secular does not think about the sacred. They get more airtime and attention. We listen to it. We discuss it with our friends. We look for common ground to remain friends. We compromise. We loose sight of our faith. Our pride gets in the way. We fight for a political ideal that does not reflect our faith. We are all equally guilty of this same sin.
 
Holy See on Protecting Global Climate
“Educate in Ecological Responsibility”

NEW YORK, OCT. 28, 2008 - Here is the message Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, delivered today before the Second Committee of the 63rd session of the U.N. General Assembly on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind.

Mr Chairman,

My delegation is pleased to join this debate on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind, and wishes to express at the very outset its appreciation for the effective approach to this particular item of the General Assembly.

It is often said that we have to defend the environment. The term “defense” could mislead us to see a conflict between the environment and the human being. In this forum, we speak of “protection” or “safeguarding”. Indeed, in this case, protection encompasses more than defense. It implies a positive vision of the human being, meaning that the person is considered not a nuisance or a threat to the environment, but as its steward. In this sense, not only is there no opposition between the human being and the environment, but there is an established and inseparable alliance, in which the environment essentially conditions the human being’s existence and development, while the latter perfects and ennobles the environment by his creative activity.

The use of appropriate language is important when we speak of protecting the environment and climate change, so vital for the whole of humanity today.

Ever since international law began to embrace global commons and shared ecosystems, new concepts have taken shape with a view to rethinking the legal basis of the appropriation, use, safeguard, protection and equitable sharing of natural resources as well as ecosystems. Notwithstanding some divergence of opinion regarding their meaning and normative status, the principles of “common heritage of mankind”, “state responsibility”, “common but differentiated responsibilities”, “inter-generational and intra-generational equity”, have provided valuable perspectives and guidance for addressing the interrelations of environment, economic development and ultimately human rights.

In the same vein, the principle of “responsibility to protect”, though it may not have been able to generate precise juridical norms in itself, has been invoked by some as an essential aspect of the exercise of sovereignty at the national and international levels.

Applying this principle to environmental issues and associating it with the protection of the global climate, actually gives the international community an opportunity to reflect on different aspects that can help promote an authentic human development.

The responsibility to protect the climate requires us to further deepen the interactions between food security and climate change, focusing on the centrality of the human person, in particular on the most vulnerable populations, often located in rural areas of developing countries. The strategies to confront the challenges of food security and climate change, through synergic actions of adaptation and mitigation, must take into account the centrality of these populations, respecting their culture and traditional customs.

Secondly, the responsibility to protect the climate should be based on the alliance between the principles of subsidiarity and global solidarity. In a world so interconnected as today, we are witnessing the rapid expansion of a series of challenges in many areas of human life, from food crisis to financial turmoil. Such crises have revealed the limited national resources and capacities to deal with them adequately, and the increasing need for collective action by the international community. The current negotiations on the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are a good example of how responsibility to protect, subsidiarity and global solidarity are strongly intertwined with each other, a fact that we ought to take into account as we consider the protection of the global climate for present and future generations.

Thirdly, it should be borne in mind that the environmental question cannot be considered separately from other issues, like energy and economy, peace and justice, national interests and international solidarity. It is not difficult to perceive how issues of environmental protection, models of development, social equity and shared responsibility to care for the environment are inextricably linked.

Today’s society cannot respond adequately to the duty connected with the responsibility to protect the environment if it does not seriously review its lifestyle, its patterns of consumption and production. There is, therefore, an urgent need to educate in ecological responsibility, based on the fact that many ethical values, fundamental for developing a peaceful society, have a direct relationship to the environmental question. Conversely, the interdependence of the many challenges that the world faces today confirms the need for coordinated solutions based on a coherent moral vision of the world.

Such education cannot simply rest on political or ideological reasons, nor its purpose aim at the rejection of the modern world. It entails a genuine conversion and change in patterns of thinking and behavior and should be based on the value and dignity of the human person.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

 
Actually, that’s not true. There are a number of natural phenomena that we can affect positively by human action, and the list is likely to get longer.

Edwin
What’s not true? I never said man can’t influence his local environment, however man-made Global Warming is pure hogwash and the manner in which this nefarious piece of junk science has harmed society (such as mothers refusing to birth children so as to avoid more “carbon-footprints”) is more than obvious.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua
 
Holy See on Protecting Global Climate
“Educate in Ecological Responsibility”

NEW YORK, OCT. 28, 2008 - Here is the message Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, delivered today before the Second Committee of the 63rd session of the U.N. General Assembly on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind.

Mr Chairman,

My delegation is pleased to join this debate on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind, and wishes to express at the very outset its appreciation for the effective approach to this particular item of the General Assembly.

It is often said that we have to defend the environment. The term “defense” could mislead us to see a conflict between the environment and the human being. In this forum, we speak of “protection” or “safeguarding”. Indeed, in this case, protection encompasses more than defense. It implies a positive vision of the human being, meaning that the person is considered not a nuisance or a threat to the environment, but as its steward. In this sense, not only is there no opposition between the human being and the environment, but there is an established and inseparable alliance, in which the environment essentially conditions the human being’s existence and development, while the latter perfects and ennobles the environment by his creative activity.

The use of appropriate language is important when we speak of protecting the environment and climate change, so vital for the whole of humanity today.

Ever since international law began to embrace global commons and shared ecosystems, new concepts have taken shape with a view to rethinking the legal basis of the appropriation, use, safeguard, protection and equitable sharing of natural resources as well as ecosystems. Notwithstanding some divergence of opinion regarding their meaning and normative status, the principles of “common heritage of mankind”, “state responsibility”, “common but differentiated responsibilities”, “inter-generational and intra-generational equity”, have provided valuable perspectives and guidance for addressing the interrelations of environment, economic development and ultimately human rights.

In the same vein, the principle of “responsibility to protect”, though it may not have been able to generate precise juridical norms in itself, has been invoked by some as an essential aspect of the exercise of sovereignty at the national and international levels.

Applying this principle to environmental issues and associating it with the protection of the global climate, actually gives the international community an opportunity to reflect on different aspects that can help promote an authentic human development.

The responsibility to protect the climate requires us to further deepen the interactions between food security and climate change, focusing on the centrality of the human person, in particular on the most vulnerable populations, often located in rural areas of developing countries. The strategies to confront the challenges of food security and climate change, through synergic actions of adaptation and mitigation, must take into account the centrality of these populations, respecting their culture and traditional customs.

Secondly, the responsibility to protect the climate should be based on the alliance between the principles of subsidiarity and global solidarity. In a world so interconnected as today, we are witnessing the rapid expansion of a series of challenges in many areas of human life, from food crisis to financial turmoil. Such crises have revealed the limited national resources and capacities to deal with them adequately, and the increasing need for collective action by the international community. The current negotiations on the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are a good example of how responsibility to protect, subsidiarity and global solidarity are strongly intertwined with each other, a fact that we ought to take into account as we consider the protection of the global climate for present and future generations.

Thirdly, it should be borne in mind that the environmental question cannot be considered separately from other issues, like energy and economy, peace and justice, national interests and international solidarity. It is not difficult to perceive how issues of environmental protection, models of development, social equity and shared responsibility to care for the environment are inextricably linked.

Today’s society cannot respond adequately to the duty connected with the responsibility to protect the environment if it does not seriously review its lifestyle, its patterns of consumption and production. There is, therefore, an urgent need to educate in ecological responsibility, based on the fact that many ethical values, fundamental for developing a peaceful society, have a direct relationship to the environmental question. Conversely, the interdependence of the many challenges that the world faces today confirms the need for coordinated solutions based on a coherent moral vision of the world.

Such education cannot simply rest on political or ideological reasons, nor its purpose aim at the rejection of the modern world. It entails a genuine conversion and change in patterns of thinking and behavior and should be based on the value and dignity of the human person.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

Thank you for posting this complete address -
God Bless,
 
What’s not true? I never said man can’t influence his local environment, however man-made Global Warming is pure hogwash and the manner in which this nefarious piece of junk science has harmed society (such as mothers refusing to birth children so as to avoid more “carbon-footprints”) is more than obvious.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua
Obviously, such a disordered ‘choice’ wouldn’t be putting Catholic faith into action on the issue. - using climate change as an excuse to remain selfish would be replaced with some other reason if a women is willing to refuse to birth children - here in light of the issue it is another opportunity for the Catholic Church to teach the real pro life message. ALL life is sacred.
 
NEW YORK, OCT. 28, 2008 - Here is the message Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, delivered today before the Second Committee of the 63rd session of the U.N. General Assembly on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind.
This message is presented as if -morally - it mattered. It contains no more moral significance than if the same message was presented by a news columnist or a local politician. Separating the comments about global warming from everything else - which have no bearing on this topic - his statement mandates no particular response on the part of any Catholic and deserves no special consideration. He has his opinion, I have mine and I am no more obliged to heed his than he is to heed mine.

Ender
 
This message is presented as if -morally - it mattered. It contains no more moral significance than if the same message was presented by a news columnist or a local politician. Separating the comments about global warming from everything else - which have no bearing on this topic - his statement mandates no particular response on the part of any Catholic and deserves no special consideration. He has his opinion, I have mine and I am no more obliged to heed his than he is to heed mine.

Ender
Hi Ender!

Haven’t spoken with you for awhile. One has to admire your integrity. Even though we have opposing viewpoints.

For everyone else…whether MMCC/AGW is a real phenomena or not it is important that we listen to our clergy about taking care of the planet. Something is happening to it and after all, I don’t know of any place else right now to live.

Pushing for alternative ‘clean’ fuels and cleaning up the environment is ‘commonsensical’ 😛 (that;s bush-ism!) It will create new jobs and create a better future for our children. I think that the main focus is that the Vativan recognizes that we need to do something. Whether it is just turning off a few extra lights, recycling or even turning garbage into fuel.

How to turn garbage into fuel
newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.environment/2008-02/msg00034.html
 
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.” -St. Thomas Aquinas :highprayer:

I dont know if the clergy are “gifted” with scientific learning. But I doubt it.
 
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.” -St. Thomas Aquinas :highprayer:

I dont know if the clergy are “gifted” with scientific learning. But I doubt it.
Well, just like any college, there are several curriculum’s. Catholic clergy doesn’t get to ‘make it’ to clergy by just saying, “I am one”. You gotta go to school. And it is more than just learning how to say Mass and listen to folks from behind the confessional.
 
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.” -St. Thomas Aquinas :highprayer:

I dont know if the clergy are “gifted” with scientific learning. But I doubt it.
But of course, the majority of those gifted with scientific learning do believe that climate change is caused by humans. (Claims to the contrary have not been substantiated–I posted a list of many very eminent scientists who signed on to a rather dire letter of warning about climate change, and nothing to match that can be shown on the other side.)

Furthermore, as a matter of fact there are priests who are scientifically educated–Fr. Stanley Jaki, for instance. (I do not know what Fr. Jaki thought about climate change–a quick Google did not help, though it did remind me that Fr. Jaki died recently–may he rest in peace.)

Edwin
 
For everyone else…whether MMCC/AGW is a real phenomena or not it is important that we listen to our clergy about taking care of the planet.
Bill - (and everyone else)

I was careful in my post to separate the valid concern for care of the environment from the speculation about whether man is responsible for global warming. Those are two separate issues and it is not appropriate to blur the lines between them. There are things that can, should, and are being done to minimize our negative impact on the environment but this has nothing whatever to do with the unanswered question of whether man is affecting the climate.

Since AGW is a scientific question the personal opinions of random clergy are utterly irrelevant. If a priest happens to be a scientist then his opinion carries weight not because he is a priest but because he is a scientist and the strength of his position is determined not by his moral purity but by his technical acumen. Since there is no moral question involved with the determination of scientific fact the opinion of the Church on this issue … does not exist.

Ender
 
These are “open course” facts which are given and taught at Notre Dame University itself!

ocw.nd.edu/theology/catholic-social-teaching/unit-xi-catholic-social-teaching-on-the

“Although the **Bishops acknowledge the scientific uncertainty and controversy **surrounding concerns for accelerated rates of climate change, diminishing biodiversity, deforestation, and the implications of widespread dependencies on fossil fuels, they nonetheless identify environmental integrity as a moral imperative for today.”

Furthermore, “The Bishops acknowledge that Catholic social thought does not contain a fully developed ecological ethics.” So obviously there must be no “Gifted” Priest or Catholic individual, or at least one who has come to fully understand the issue to this point. If one or any such individual/s comes in the future, they would complete the Catholic stance on ecological ethics…

The Clergy can and has explained the significance of caring for environment as our Catholic obligation, (which I think is great) but that is as far as it can go…Morally.
 
So, it is agreed then. There is no absolute statement by the Catholic church as to whether climate change is man made. Yet, we have an obligation to take care of our home.

Or something like that…

We’re almost to a thousand posts anyway. isn’t that usually the limit? Or can we keep saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over…
 
So, it is agreed then. There is no absolute statement by the Catholic church as to whether climate change is man made. Yet, we have an obligation to take care of our home.

Or something like that…

We’re almost to a thousand posts anyway. isn’t that usually the limit? Or can we keep saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over…
I agree. Let’s quit.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top