Cardinal George Pell, a former archbishop of Sydney who has been placed in charge of the Vatican’s budget, is a climate change sceptic who has been criticised for claiming that global warming has ceased and that if carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were doubled, then “plants would love it”. theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/27/pope-francis-edict-climate-change-us-rightwing
climate change is some leftist, commie conspiracy to raise taxes. Besides, it was really cold this morning!
This is coming from the Guardian, so who knows if it is accurate. But it no doubt contains grains of truth if not 100% accuracy. Do we know when we can expect the encyclical to come out? Should be interesting…sometimes I feel like Francis is a little bit of a bull fighter with the so-called conservatives - sounds like another big red flag is about to unfurl here. On this one, I am stuck firmly in the middle, maybe leaning Francis a little bit. Should be verrry interrresting…
Love the Pope and always will. Respectfully on global warming he is wrong _in my opinion.
I think climate change is a real thing. I’m just not sure if it’s caused by human activity. I think that living simply is a good thing as it helps people become closer to God. It also is pretty healthy for the environment. If living simply becomes a requirement, it has the potential to do good.
I cant imagine the message will be anything new from the Pope and the Church.
Share with the poor
Treat the earth and its creatures with dignity
Maybe that’s fleshed out a bit more but what else can it be?
The Church won’t be making any “get off of fossil fuel” proclamations. It won’t be saying that we should support population “control” (reduction) efforts…
I’d put my money on announcements regarding how Christians should live while outlining how the Church should help efforts in poorer countries.
Anything more than that (or anything taking sides) would just be strange and, frankly, out of line.
I’m a skeptic myself who doesn’t think the Church has a place in supporting a side since. In fact, supporting the “deniers” would just be spun into “dark age reasoning” while expressing support in the ManMade Climate Change theory would alienate deniers (who, IMHO, tend to be more moderate.)
Not so sure on the “fossil fuel proclamations”-it is the direction of the pope asking the UN to fight global warming.
Well said. I honestly don’t know what to believe, whether the earth is warming, or whether mankind is causing it. I agree though that it is completely obvious what industrialization and development are doing to the earth’s resources and the environment in which we live, say, compared to even 100 years ago, let alone 2000 years. I don’t think you can possibly argue that unbridled consumerism and materialism are compatible with Christianity. There have to be responsible checks and balances. If this is where he is going, I am there. I have often wondered if a simpler life such as people lived up to, say, the industrial revolution (attached to one place in a family and local community/economy for life), is actually much healthier and richer than how we live today, the frantic pace of modern life, the restlessness, the barrage of choices that don’t really amount to much.
Living conditions prior to the Industrial Revolution were terrible. The poor faced centuries of starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of the Industrial Revolution were the first chance the poor had ever had to survive. As proof—the enormous growth of the European population during the nineteenth century, a growth of over 300 per cent, as compared to the previous growth of something like 3 per cent per century.
If you want to return to the “olden days”…be my guest.
Has it been confirmed that climate change will be mentioned and/or discussed in the encyclical?
I don’t want to turn back the clock. I want to try to localize things more. Use what we have in a different way.
I am not a scientist, not even close, but I would say that the climate is always changing and that we, humans, do have an effect on the climate and since we seem to be the only species that is not totally driven by instinct, this “effect” could very well be disruptive to the natural order of the ecosystem .
I don’t see how anyone could possibly say that we do not have an effect on the climate.
In the time that I have been on planet earth, I have seen much degradation in nearby water systems and these “degradations” are partly, if not wholly, direct from our “activity” on planet earth.
Like it or not, the ecosystem of planet earth is interdependent and we may very well be the “monkey wrench” thrown into the system.
If you want to embrace such a down-to-nature existence, go ahead, but do not attempt to have it forced upon me and do not try to make it a holy obligation. It is not.
This is a controversial subject. Assuming the science right, the ethics and morality would be correct. However, there is strong evidence that the science is wrong and contaminated by politics and self-interest. In my most humble opinion, the Holy Father would best avoid this subject until it proves itself worthy of his attention.
Is it global warming or climate change which we are supposed to believe in?
If global warming is truly a threat then why are we trying to sign trade deals with countries that have little if any environmental regulations? Answer = It’s not
Try “Global Change” or how about “No matter what happens this theory accounts for it change”?
Anyone who doubts global warming should just look at what women have been wearing for the past 50 years or more. It leaves little doubt - “Is it hot in here or is it just me?”
Great-- a global-warming modesty thread!!!
It’s fun to watch certain types get their panties in a twist either way. I have a feeling Pope Francis may be something of a kindred spirit in that aspect.