To the global warming nay-sayers

  • Thread starter Thread starter AllSeasons
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bzkoss236 said:
I will not say whether I agree with GW or not, but it is a matter of science, and not faith or morals, so the Church would have no official position on it. Therefore, Catholics can still choose to agree or disagree with the idea behind GW.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying the Pope’s position is not official? I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t want to be the one to tell Pope Benedict/Francis that he’s wrong.
 
AllSeasons said:
So you’re saying the Pope’s position is not official? I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t want to be the one to tell Pope Benedict/Francis that he’s wrong.
Click to expand...
Not on a matter of science. If the Pope thinks that there is GW, that is his belief based on the scientific facts that he has seen. Others may come to different conclusions based on their own research. The infallibility of the Pope, bishops, and Church only applies to faith and morals. The Church leaves scientific research up to the scientists of the world. There have been convincing studies on both sides of the GW argument. To my knowledge, the only binding belief that could come from the Pope is if he made a Church Law that the members of the Church should do whatever they can, within their power, to combat harming the environment, and to promote greener living. The Pope cannot say that we must believe GW is true.
 
AllSeasons said:
So you’re saying the Pope’s position is not official? I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t want to be the one to tell Pope Benedict/Francis that he’s wrong.
Click to expand...
The Pope’s have never endorsed GW period.

What many Popes have done is to repeatedly call every Christian to be a GOOD Steward of our home “planet earth” which is entirely reasonable and has no bearing on any theory. :rolleyes:
 
bzkoss236 said:
Not on a matter of science. If the Pope thinks that there is GW, that is his belief based on the scientific facts that he has seen. Others may come to different conclusions based on their own research. The infallibility of the Pope, bishops, and Church only applies to faith and morals. The Church leaves scientific research up to the scientists of the world. There have been convincing studies on both sides of the GW argument. To my knowledge, the only binding belief that could come from the Pope is if he made a Church Law that the members of the Church should do whatever they can, within their power, to combat harming the environment, and to promote greener living. The Pope cannot say that we must believe GW is true.
Click to expand...
I knew you were going to bring up infallibility. The fact is that popes very rarely speak ex cathedra. The definition of official position is not limited to infallibility. According to your logic, the Church’s stance against sex abuse is not “official,” either. I think a lot of people would take issue with that.
 
Check the current temperature in southeast Michigan and explain it to me.

Peace,
Ed 🙂
 
The Pope did not say that global climate change is caused by humans and the Pope specifically avoided endorsing a particular course of action with regards to global climate change. What the Vatican says is that a change in climate will unavoidably be a social justice issue that Catholics may not ignore.

IOW, it doesn’t matter whether or not this or that activity can be blamed, but it does matter a lot whether this or that activity is going to give one group or another an advantage at the cost of suffering to someone else. Since it is possible that suffering can be abated by looking at what changes may be happening in the climate in the future, Catholics cannot ignore the possibility that they may be asked to undertake prudent courses of actions before the worst disaster strikes.

We don’t have to agree, provided we are being honest about what the science may be saying. We do have to care, and we do have to care about someone other than ourselves. We have to care about taking care of God’s creation and we have to care about how our actions affect that creation and our fellow human beings. We also have to care about how our public policies affect our fellow human beings. This is all very important, and a moral issue. That doesn’t mean that the Vatican is saying that there is only one course of action that a moral person or a moral nation can support.
 
I have only one thing to say to truebeliever about GW: There is no arguing with a true believer! No matter what facts are presented or the logic used, you will never convince them.
 
AllSeasons said:
I knew you were going to bring up infallibility. The fact is that popes very rarely speak ex cathedra. The definition of official position is not limited to infallibility. According to your logic, the Church’s stance against sex abuse is not “official,” either. I think a lot of people would take issue with that.
Click to expand...
No, this is not true. My logic is only that the Pope cannot make an official scientific statement. The sex abuse is an official position because it involves morals, but also it involves members of the clergy. It isn’t a matter of science, but both of morals and authority of office (that is, the Pope as an over seer to the bishops, and the bishops to the priests, priests to deacons, etc.).
 
bzkoss236 said:
Not on a matter of science. If the Pope thinks that there is GW, that is his belief based on the scientific facts that he has seen. Others may come to different conclusions based on their own research. The infallibility of the Pope, bishops, and Church only applies to faith and morals. The Church leaves scientific research up to the scientists of the world. There have been convincing studies on both sides of the GW argument. To my knowledge, the only binding belief that could come from the Pope is if he made a Church Law that the members of the Church should do whatever they can, within their power, to combat harming the environment, and to promote greener living. The Pope cannot say that we must believe GW is true.
Click to expand...
OK, but if the Pope had told the Church that the bubonic plague was spread by fleas carried by rats, would that mean a Catholic of good conscience could ignore the possibility? Or maybe he thought something else caused it that didn’t cause it. In either case, I think what a Catholic could not do would be to ignore that someone might be able to give them information about how bubonic plague was spread. Yes, a good Catholic could say, “I don’t think it is rats” or else “I don’t think it is this other thing the Pope says that it is, I think it is fleas on rats”, but I don’t think Heaven will be impressed with, “Well, the Pope is no scientist, and since he wasn’t speaking ex cathedra, I decided the problem of bubonic plague was no worry of mine.”

IOW, the Pope might not be the authority to tell you what causes bubonic plague, but the Pope could tell you that as a Catholic bubonic plague is your problem to concern yourself with, even if your village hasn’t seen any yet, and you’d better have a very good reason for ignoring him.
 
I am curious why you bring up this question. Is it your experience that Catholics are neglectful on environmental issues. It is my opinion that following the humble life, which includes good stewardship would be better than the anxious striving to reduce one’s “carbon footprint” by the affluent. Al Gore and his gas-eating jet?

I used to love how Mother Teresa used to say, “Don’t come visit me; save the money from your airplane ticket and give it to the poor in your community.” She most likely did not know about global warming but she sure understood about conservation and shopping local.
 
George_Stegmeir said:
I have only one thing to say to truebeliever about GW: There is no arguing with a true believer! No matter what facts are presented or the logic used, you will never convince them.
Click to expand...
Forty years ago (the 1970’s) it was the ‘big freeze’, now it’s the ‘big hot dry’, same true believers through. :confused: 😃 😛
 
bzkoss236 said:
No, this is not true. My logic is only that the Pope cannot make an official scientific statement. The sex abuse is an official position because it involves morals, but also it involves members of the clergy. It isn’t a matter of science, but both of morals and authority of office (that is, the Pope as an over seer to the bishops, and the bishops to the priests, priests to deacons, etc.).
Click to expand...
That is inaccurate. There is no separation of Church, State or science. The types of abuse had to be defined, not just morally, but legally and scientifically. It would be like saying that the the Church is against embryonic stem cell research because it only has a moral objection. The fact is, the Church has to understand the science behind it in order to make any type of statement.

Read the following carefully:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/vatican-stem-cell-event-aims-for-wide-cultural-impact/

The Vatican is putting money into Adult Stem Cells.

Peace,
Ed
 
AllSeasons said:
If the Pope or the Catholic Church publicly advocated its stance to combat global warming, would you still deny it?

Catholic Church Goes Green To Counter Global Warming
Click to expand...
These " Pontifical Commissions " do not make authoritative statements about anything Catholic, not Faith, not morals, and not science. But to be absolutely clear, not even the Pope can make authoritative statements about anything beyond Faith and Morals. If he thinks man made climate change is a scientific fact, he is most certainly wrong and there are plenty of Catholics who will tell him so. Neither he nor any member of the Catholic Church has the right to speak authoritatively on such things. They may state their opinions but they should do so as private persons and not as influential figures in the Church. Linus2nd
 
tabycat said:
Having one of your spring snow storms, are you? (Use to live in Michigan) :D:p
Click to expand...
The U.P. had snow this weekend…it’s been the longest winter in the region in many years and waaay below average as well.
 
Anyway, I think there is an important distinction that needs to be made and is many times forgotten:
One thing is the fact that thermometers around the globe record rising temperatures and another is what theory different scientists come up with to explain why that is happening.

Sure, there could be inaccuracy or improper methods of collecting the data, but generally the big differences are not there, but in the theories.

The pope can say what he believes to be the more convincing scientific theory. If it is not faith or morals, you may disagree with him and still be a good Catholic.
 
skigirl1689 said:
The U.P. had snow this weekend…it’s been the longest winter in the region in many years and waaay below average as well.
Click to expand...
I used to live in Michigan, albeit under the bridge. Maybe this year was a bit colder in your area, but it may very well be localized and not representative of the overall trend.

And really, global warming or not, spewing out pollution from cars and factories cannot be good for the environment and people’s health, regardless of its effects on temperature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top