Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change

[Al_Masetti]

We are not members of the USCCB church. We are Catholics, right? The USCCB is neither necessary nor required by the Church. Is it not a group that is independent of the Vatican, and whose only ecclesial authority is advisory in nature? Good Catholics should abide by the teaching and pronouncements of the universal Church, correct? I do notice that the climate-related statements originating in the Vatican are decidedly more measured and reasoned, and less strident in nature. That is exactly as it should and must be.

When the USCCB can agree that it is not prudent to honor the most pro-abortion president in history, I will consider giving them some credibility. They could not reach consensus (or did not even try) on that important issue. The organization needs to be cleaned up or disbanded IMO. I pray for the American Bishops, as they most certainly need prayer.

Seems to me the USCCB jumps from one subject to another.

Abortion is one of the few offenses against God that incurs automatic excommunication … so it is a major sin. AND YET, instead of picketing every abortion mill in the country continually until the practice of abortion stops, the USCCB just jumps to another topic.

 

[Brendan]

I wouldn’t expect to see anything in a moral theology textbook about climatology - but exactly what I understand is the statements of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change - that we need to keep the needs of the poor at the heart of the discussion … that is where i believe the morality exists.

Exactly, that is why if there is no appreciable human element to climate change, we should not be wasting time and effort on such things and focus on the real needs of the poor, such a food, medicine and gainful employment.

 

[Corki]

Exactly, that is why if there is no appreciable human element to climate change, we should not be wasting time and effort on such things and focus on the real needs of the poor, such a food, medicine and gainful employment.

Even is there is a human element, the Bishops seem to have a legitimate concern that efforts to address global warming will have a negative impact on the poor. An example is the statement from the Bishop to the Congress regarding yesterday’s vote (there’s another thread on this). Although he seems in favor of government effort to address GW, he pointed out that if it results in higher prices (which virtually every agrees it will) this will be disproportionately hard for the poor. The G8 statement that 4elise linked makes some of the same observations.

 

[po18guy]

I wouldn’t expect to see anything in a moral theology textbook about climatology - but exactly what I understand is the statements of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change - that we need to keep the needs of the poor at the heart of the discussion … that is where i believe the morality exists.

Ah, but this is the timeless message of the Church itself! This is Jesus’ message. We hear it during mass. We read it in scripture. What do we think the “Peter’s Pence” collection was for? We need not divert our attention into the tangential issue of “climate change”, especially since warming increases food production! Forget the scientists - those who actually grow the food tell us this.

Why do we fear increased food production, unless because it will increase the human population? At some level, all such groups either have an ulterior motive, or they are doing the bidding of someone who has such a motive. And the main secular motive of climate change activists is population control. If you can dupe well-meaning Catholics into doing your heavy lifting, why not? I know that you are greatly concerned about climate change. However, we live not for this life, but for the next. We are commanded to take good care of this earth while we inhabit it and trust in God’s mercy.

All the billions of dollars spent on climate change when billions of souls are at risk of starvation! Does this make any sense at all? Hunger’s cause is 100% known and the cure is 100% known and undisputed. The subject of climate change remains controversial in the purest sense of the word. Theories abound as to causes and solutions, but they remain theories. The main focus of the activist group is climate change, which nearly everyone can agree on. So, why is hunger priority #2? This is not justice - we must respond to the primary problem first. To have one’s attention diverted by and into an activist group will only cloud your vision, IMO. If we stick with the teaching of the Church on all matters, rather than the canard of activist interests, we cannot go wrong.

 

[Corki]

As you say a Bishop may not direct such extreme actions “they have to drive hybrid cars or freeze to death in order to not use their coal burning furnaces” - because obviously that fails to consider the common good and would impact people who do not have the resources to comply.

Even if it was something that considered the common good, they can’t dictate how people live thier daily lives. Bishops are shepherds, not taskmasters.

For clarity do I understand that you are saying that one bishop (perhaps as a member or chair of one committee from the USCCB) would be able to express an opinion on climate change, and then have that committee join forces with an organization like the Catholic Coalition for Climate Change - and then list the USCCB as a sponsoring organization without the knowledge and acceptance of all or a majority of the bishops? If this is the case they really need to reform this because it is very misleading.

I think it is only misleading if you look at the USCCB as a layer in the Church’s heirarchy. Many people think that the individual Bishops are controlled by the USCCB and the USCCB is controlled by the Vatican. That’s a model most of us recognize since that’s the way most corporations work. But that’s not what the role of Bishop is nor the role of the USCCB. Instead of thinking of the USCCB as one layer in a hierarchy, it might be better to think of it as similar to a Chamber of Commerce in a city. Each member has some common goals, some common background but the Chamber doesn’t tell its members how to run thier stores and businesses. They support each other and share resources but each Bishop “reports” to the Pope directly, not to the USCCB.

If you look closely at the CCCC website, it doesn’t look like the whole USCCB is listed as a partner but rather that within the USCCB there are two committees that have partnered with it. There are other groups listed as partners that are similar in “authority” to the USCCB committees listed. For example, the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities does not speak for each college individually nor have the power to bind any college. The Leadership Conference of Women Religious does not speak for each order of nuns/sisters nor have the power to bind any order. Etc.

The USCCB doesn’t vote on all of the activities of each of its committees. For one thing, the USCCB only meets twice a year and can’t make decisions in between meetings. The committees would never get anything done if they had to wait for a USCCB vote for each decision or statement. Second most of the USCCB committees act very much like a clearing house for more local versions of the same committees. For example, I chair my parish Respect Life Committee and get resources and support from the diocisan Respect Life Committee who in turn gets support from the USCCB Pro Life Activities Committee. We don’t have to re-invent the wheel when it comes to eduation material, training programs, literature, speakers, etc. The Office of Justice and Peace is set up the same way and to a certain extent the Office of Religious Education is too. If you have ever been part of a professional association, you might be familiar with this style of organization where there is a national, state and local chapter of the organization.

Because t by doing so there is an implication of support -

Also - I still haven’t seen a ‘Catholic’ organization that doesn’t embrace the need to speak for the poor in the discussions on climate change —

That’s true. Even if there was a Catholic organization that was working to debunk the Global Warming theory, it would still (hopefully) do it with a committment to protecting the poor and vulnerable.

There are secular or ecuminical organizations that may have a strong Catholic presence, but since the member list of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change includes such a great number of leadership groups it would lead me to believe that this is where the Church is providing leadership. Climate change is real, there are man made factors - and we should all be striving to do something about it - AND keep the most vulnerable at the heart of the discussion

Leadership to whom? The CCCC does not have any affect or real influence on Catholics as individuals. It surely could serve as a good resource especially to educate people about the issue.

I’m curious. If the Bishops were able to directly tell Catholics what to do about global warming, what do you think they would (or should) say?

 

[4elise]

I’m curious. If the Bishops were able to directly tell Catholics what to do about global warming, what do you think they would (or should) say?

Again - thanks for the thoughtful reply.

For my part I would look for a strong call to personal changes we can make that will make a difference

 

[4elise]

I think it is only misleading if you look at the USCCB as a layer in the Church’s heirarchy. Many people think that the individual Bishops are controlled by the USCCB and the USCCB is controlled by the Vatican. That’s a model most of us recognize since that’s the way most corporations work. But that’s not what the role of Bishop is nor the role of the USCCB. Instead of thinking of the USCCB as one layer in a hierarchy, it might be better to think of it as similar to a Chamber of Commerce in a city. Each member has some common goals, some common background but the Chamber doesn’t tell its members how to run thier stores and businesses. They support each other and share resources but each Bishop “reports” to the Pope directly, not to the USCCB.

If you look closely at the CCCC website, it doesn’t look like the whole USCCB is listed as a partner but rather that within the USCCB there are two committees that have partnered with it. There are other groups listed as partners that are similar in “authority” to the USCCB committees listed. For example, the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities does not speak for each college individually nor have the power to bind any college. The Leadership Conference of Women Religious does not speak for each order of nuns/sisters nor have the power to bind any order. Etc.

The USCCB doesn’t vote on all of the activities of each of its committees. For one thing, the USCCB only meets twice a year and can’t make decisions in between meetings. The committees would never get anything done if they had to wait for a USCCB vote for each decision or statement. Second most of the USCCB committees act very much like a clearing house for more local versions of the same committees. For example, I chair my parish Respect Life Committee and get resources and support from the diocisan Respect Life Committee who in turn gets support from the USCCB Pro Life Activities Committee. We don’t have to re-invent the wheel when it comes to eduation material, training programs, literature, speakers, etc. The Office of Justice and Peace is set up the same way and to a certain extent the Office of Religious Education is too. If you have ever been part of a professional association, you might be familiar with this style of organization where there is a national, state and local chapter of the organization.

Like you - not having to re-invent the wheel for education material, I think this too is the point of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change - presenting information that can be used by individuals and parishes.

I would not say that I had seen the bishops answering to the USCCB – but rather the USCCB presenting the unified voice of the bishops on vital issues of our time - so when I see that they are listed as a sponsoring organization of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change, even if it is a committee of the USCCB, it seems to me to be the unified voice of the bishops. As you say, individuals may disagree on these issues since we are individuals, but from what I can see it is being presented as a moral issue because of the impact on the poor and most vulnerable. I think there can be discussions on what actions should and should not be taken, because some outcomes are hard to realize with the many variables - but I think this is where there can be constructive discussion.

That’s true. Even if there was a Catholic organization that was working to debunk the Global Warming theory, it would still (hopefully) do it with a commitment to protecting the poor and vulnerable.

I think this is one of the things that has been frustrating in this discussion (not with you) If Catholics who have a commitment to advocate for the poor and vulnerable put our heads in the sand and say Global Climate Change isn’t so - when the vast majority of people are making decisions to address it - then our voice isn’t heard - we gag ourselves.

Leadership to whom? The CCCC does not have any affect or real influence on Catholics as individuals. It surely could serve as a good resource especially to educate people about the issue.

Exactly - a good resource for Catholics, and that is the point - many disagree with this issue, so don’t think the information is valid.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Nobody’s stopping anyone on this thread from recycling toilet paper, if that’s what makes you feel good.

I draw the line at a government that puts itself above God, and that pays ‘experts’ to agree with them.

 

[Corki]

Like you - not having to re-invent the wheel for education material, I think this too is the point of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change - presenting information that can be used by individuals and parishes.

I would not say that I had seen the bishops answering to the USCCB – but rather the USCCB presenting the unified voice of the bishops on vital issues of our time - so when I see that they are listed as a sponsoring organization of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change, even if it is a committee of the USCCB, it seems to me to be the unified voice of the bishops. As you say, individuals may disagree on these issues since we are individuals, but from what I can see it is being presented as a moral issue because of the impact on the poor and most vulnerable. I think there can be discussions on what actions should and should not be taken, because some outcomes are hard to realize with the many variables - but I think this is where there can be constructive discussion.

I think it is important to understand that the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change is not an official part of the Church. The Bishops, individually or as the USCCB, aren’t going to defer teaching authority to an outside organization.

The USCCB document of 2001, Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence, and the Common Good, actually says everything you want the Bishops to say. It calls on governments to act in ways that always keep the poor and vulnerable at the heart of the discussion, it reaffirms Catholic Social Teaching regarding the poor and regarding stewardship for the earth, and it calls on Catholic individuals to personal conversion and responsibility, to conserve energy and limit consumption. It is presented as a moral issue of our time.

 

[4elise]

I think it is important to understand that the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change is not an official part of the Church. The Bishops, individually or as the USCCB, aren’t going to defer teaching authority to an outside organization.

The USCCB document of 2001, Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence, and the Common Good, actually says everything you want the Bishops to say. It calls on governments to act in ways that always keep the poor and vulnerable at the heart of the discussion, it reaffirms Catholic Social Teaching regarding the poor and regarding stewardship for the earth, and it calls on Catholic individuals to personal conversion and responsibility, to conserve energy and limit consumption. It is presented as a moral issue of our time.

Thank you for that… usccb.org/sdwp/international/globalclimate.shtml
Here is a link to that document.

If we are called to conserve energy and limit consumption… as a response to Global Climate Change what I hear in this is that my actions (or lack of actions) can make a difference. Blessings!

 

[human_being]

The Pope and the Bishops have both said we should be concerned about climate change. Are they wrong? We quote them on every other secular or religious issue but this one.

No we only listen to them if they agree with FOXNEWS. Sorry,but I couldn’t resist.Ban me if you must.

I’m editing this now: If I was to believe FOXNEWS on most things Obama is doing, he would be the most anti-christian leader ever… But the more I read and view church teachings…I find he is actually trying to do alot of things the way I’ve seen as solutions. Solutions that the church has seen work before…Very extreme but is it because things have gotten so extreme?

Of course I view his abotion policies and the gay-marriage stuff as wrong, but as far as some of the economics and stuff. I don’t think he’s far off from trying to do things right.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

No we only listen to them if they agree with FOXNEWS. Sorry,but I couldn’t resist.Ban me if you must.

I’m editing this now: If I was to believe FOXNEWS on most things Obama is doing, he would be the most anti-christian leader ever… But the more I read and view church teachings…I find he is actually trying to do alot of things the way I’ve seen as solutions. Solutions that the church has seen work before…Very extreme but is it because things have gotten so extreme?

Of course I view his abortion policies and the gay-marriage stuff as wrong, but as far as some of the economics and stuff.*** I don’t think he’s far off ***from trying to do things right.

 

[RobbyS]

Of course. The big debate occurs over what exactly that means in practice, especially in terms of taxation and federal spending.

It seems that this is really an effort to use uncertainty in order to accumulate power at the federal level. Nothing that the USCCB says about such matters should be accepted as
pronouncements by the Church. I am displeased by the footdragging by the bishops on the abortion issues, and the efforts to conceal that the Democratic Party is totally at odds with Catholic teachings on this matter. These seem to be based on the sympathy of liberal bishops with the social/political agenda of the Democratic Party. So much so that they are willing to put the social instruments of the Church at the disposal of the State. The Democrats will do whatever they can to shut down Catholic schools and hospitals unless these are made adjunct of the State educational and medical system. The liberals at USCCB are willing to let
taxes rise and private donations dry up, so long as they can get a handout from the state.

 

[RobbyS]

No we only listen to them if they agree with FOXNEWS. Sorry,but I couldn’t resist.Ban me if you must.

I’m editing this now: If I was to believe FOXNEWS on most things Obama is doing, he would be the most anti-christian leader ever… But the more I read and view church teachings…I find he is actually trying to do alot of things the way I’ve seen as solutions. Solutions that the church has seen work before…Very extreme but is it because things have gotten so extreme?

Of course I view his abotion policies and the gay-marriage stuff as wrong, but as far as some of the economics and stuff. I don’t think he’s far off from trying to do things right.

You can believe what you will. I certainly don’t like the way that the Democrats are trying to rush through all these measures as if the world would end tomorrow if they were not passed,
Do YOU know what is in the cap-and-trade bill that ws just passed by the House? But of course not, because the bill does not, as a document exist. The Majority voted in favor of a concept, not an actual bill.

 

[human_being]

You can believe what you will. I certainly don’t like the way that the Democrats are trying to rush through all these measures as if the world would end tomorrow if they were not passed,
Do YOU know what is in the cap-and-trade bill that ws just passed by the House? But of course not, because the bill does not, as a document exist. The Majority voted in favor of a concept, not an actual bill.

I do agree that it is extreme.And it is fast. But do we know everything they know. Are we,or are we not on the brink of economic collapse? I don’t know. And who can I really trust and believe. And why are republicans signing on also? I will show a couple things that seem to show that there,in some ways, are agreements through an encylical which has nothing to do with today’s politicians or bishops.

 

[human_being]

I don’t know if all of this will post and I realise that it doesn’t have to do with the environment but some of Obama’s plans may actuallys knowingly,or unknowingly lead in part in these directions(I think I found something on the environment someewhere and when I find it I will post it). This is from Pope John Paul II in 1991 on an encyclical written by Pope Leo XIII in the late 1800’s:

15. Rerum novarum is opposed to State control of the means of production, which would reduce every citizen to being a "cog" in the State machine. It is no less forceful in criticizing a concept of the State which completely excludes the economic sector from the State's range of interest and action. There is certainly a legitimate sphere of autonomy in economic life which the State should not enter. The State, however, has the task of determining the juridical framework within which economic affairs are to be conducted, and thus of safeguarding the prerequisites of a free economy, which presumes a certain equality between the parties, such that one party would not be so powerful as practically to reduce the other to subservience.43

In this regard, Rerum novarum points the way to just reforms which can restore dignity to work as the free activity of man. These reforms imply that society and the State will both assume responsibility, especially for protecting the worker from the nightmare of unemployment. Historically, this has happened in two converging ways: either through economic policies aimed at ensuring balanced gand full employment,rowth or through unemployment insurance and retraining programmes capable of ensuring a smooth transfer of workers from crisis sectors to those in expansion.

Furthermore, society and the State must ensure wage levels adequate for the maintenance of the worker and his family, including a certain amount for savings. This requires a continuous effort to improve workers’ training and capability so that their work will be more skilled and productive, as well as careful controls and adequate legislative measures to block shameful forms of exploitation, especially to the disadvantage of the most vulnerable workers, of immigrants and of those on the margins of society. The role of trade unions in negotiating minimum salaries and working conditions is decisive in this area.

Finally, “humane” working hours and adequate free-time need to be guaranteed, as well as the right to express one’s own personality at the work-place without suffering any affront to one’s conscience or personal dignity. This is the place to mention once more the role of trade unions, not only in negotiating contracts, but also as “places” where workers can express themselves. They serve the development of an authentic culture of work and help workers to share in a fully human way in the life of their place of employment.44

The State must contribute to the achievement of these goals both directly and indirectly. Indirectly and according to the principle of subsidiarity, by creating favourable conditions for the free exercise of economic activity, which will lead to abundant opportunities for employment and sources of wealth. Directly and according to the principle of solidarity, by defending the weakest, by placing certain limits on the autonomy of the parties who determine working conditions, and by ensuring in every case the necessary minimum support for the unemployed worker.45

The Encyclical and the related social teaching of the Church had far-reaching influence in the years bridging the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This influence is evident in the numerous reforms which were introduced in the areas of social security, pensions, health insurance and compensation in the case of accidents, within the framework of greater respect for the rights of workers
Do you see the parts about not allowing one party to have more power than others? Solution: save the UAW because the unions are in trouble today. It wouldn’t be good for capitalism,should such a formally powerful union to fall.

I think this wierd philosophy of creating a new "green country" may also be an attempt at keeping people from being unemployed as shown above. The State should do some things to avoid unemployment.Wether it'll work or not is yet to be seen. But maybe it is an attempt to achieve some of the goals above. We have heavy unemployment right now and there have been times in history where the socialists pop up as somekinfd of answer to unemployment. The encyclicals were written against socialism and they do state that the State should be invoved in some things to encourage a capitalism that works. Do I agree with everything the president is doing? I don't think so. But he needs to try something because the capitalism which has been practiced recently has not been working very well. There is a new encyclical relating to this type of stuff being released tommorrow or sometime soon,there are posts in the forums now.

Wow I just realised how long that was . Sorry but there it is. It isn’t the U.S. constitution. But it is written by Popes.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_01051991_centesimus-annus_en.html

 

[human_being]

I think this story says the bishops suppurt the cap n trade thing:catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=60334

 

[human_being]

As far as my personal observation of the climate stuff: I watch the weather channel regularly in the winter because I work outside all night. And they show alot of weather facts,some of them dated before the industrial revolution. And I think some extreme changes in temperatures were happening even before the combustion engine. Sometimes record highs and sometimes record lows for particular days of the year even before the so-called environmental damage. So,who knows?

 

[Calliso]

As far as my personal observation of the climate stuff: I watch the weather channel regularly in the winter because I work outside all night. And they show alot of weather facts,some of them dated before the industrial revolution. And I think some extreme changes in temperatures were happening even before the combustion engine. Sometimes record highs and sometimes record lows for particular days of the year even before the so-called environmental damage. So,who knows?

The thing is you have to look at the over all trend…not record lows or record highs on particular days. What you are describing is weather not climate.

 

[JimG]

I think this story says the bishops suppurt the cap n trade thing:catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=60334

The story concerns two bishops, not “the bishops.”

“By pointing to the ways in which the legislation could harm the economic interests of the poor and the non-profit sector, Bishop Hubbard and Ken Hackett demonstrated that they were aware of the bill’s economic costs. But their letter to Congressmen betrayed no concern at all about how the bill would affect ordinary American families above the poverty level.”
I wonder if these particular bishops have any concern at all that the massive economic impact of such a bill could not help but affect the poor globally. Destroying the U.S. economy only makes poverty worse globally.