Catholic support for a price on carbon dioxide emissions was on display during a weekend climate change conference, where two bishops, an environmental leader and former Vatican ambassador touted it as a critical climate solution that is both effective and “eminently doable.”
Bishops John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, and Robert McElroy of San Diego both backed the idea of a carbon tax on coal, oil and gas companies, which would be redistributed to Americans in the form of a dividend.
McElroy said it is the responsibility of people of faith to “raise the alarm” about climate change and demand real solutions from public officials.
“The carbon tax is a central element of that, because it’s a way of ensuring, in an economically sound manner, that the carbon we put into the atmosphere is reduced in the years to come,” he said.
Just as important, he added, “it’s eminently doable….”
The comments came during an online conference May 15 held by Citizens Climate Lobby, a nonpartisan climate solutions advocacy organization that for years has pushed for Congress to put a price on carbon….
McElroy, in his video message, echoed Francis’ encyclical “Laudato Si’, on Care for Our Common Home,” stressing that despite the ecological destruction facing the planet, people still have the ability to act. “It’s not that we can’t do anything to stop this; we can. We just aren’t choosing to do so.”
“There are smart ways to rescue the climate, and to stop climate change and to reverse it. But we have to act now, because the damage is building upon itself with every passing year,” McElroy said.
Francis Rooney, a Vatican ambassador under President George W. Bush and a former Florida Republican congressman who co-sponsored one of the first carbon fee bills, praised Francis and Laudato Si’ for putting science at the forefront along with the how global warming impacts the poor.
Rooney said his support for the environment is part of his overall pro-life advocacy: “You can’t be pro-life in one way and not be pro-life in other ways. And the number of people who are going to have their life threatened in their environment, severely threatened by the radical climate change over the next 40 or 50 years, is quite disheartening….”
The above comes from a May 17 story in the National Catholic Reporter.
People who don’t work for a living advocating higher expenses for those who do. Imagine that.
How about this: a tax on bloviating bishops and priests such that their non-doctrinal statements and commentary result in a 10% reduction in offertory for every occurrence.
Sirs, stuff your liberal politics and open your churches.
What’s next. Is McElroy going to tell me what color tie to wear? Shoemaker, stick to your last!
Don’t you just love how “climate change” is the new reason for everything? Illegal immigration? Caused by climate change. Climate change is a national security threat. Climate change is a pro-life issue. Climate change, climate change, climate change. It’s as much a lie as was the coronavirus pandemic. All stirred up by elites to control the little people. They have no idea what the climate is doing nor what the situation will be in 50 years nor whether carbon emissions do anything. What they do know is they can scare enough people with climate change fearmongering to build their new society.
And now they have the roadmap as to how to control a population using fear – thanks to the Wuhan virus. Even more so when it comes to something that is loosely defined and hard to observe firsthand – like what climate will be like decades from now. Wait, wasn’t the world supposed to have ended already, according to Al Gore 1.0?
Millions of souls are being lost to Hell.
And these guys want to talk about carbon emissions.
So now, some bishops fancy themselves tax and climate experts?
As I’ve written before: When bishops are failing to lead and teach in matters of faith and morals, why are some venturing into politics, where they don’t belong?
I might as well make tax proposals. How about a Church tax on dissent from the teachings of Christ and another one on words used by clergy in public that have nothing to do with faith and morals?
That might help some of our parishes suffering financial shortfalls due to COVID restrictions.
And, bishops could help the planet by reducing fossil fuel use. They can stop jet-setting around for national audiences and serve the faithful in their dioceses.
A pleasure to read your comments!
How about churches start paying taxes for carbon emisdions
Now, now, guys. Laudato Si is a papal encyclical. It’s the magisterium. It’s authentic teaching. The Francis pontificate is developing the church’s doctrine. If you’re going to quote Evangelium Vitae to say that pro-choice politicians should be denied communion, you need to uphold the church’s environmental justice doctrines too. Maybe in the future politicians who oppose carbon emission reductions will be denied communion. Just sayin’.
Feel free to join YFC on the ash heap of failed comment providers. Your shared blindness is remarkable.
Now, now, Martin….Climate Change, as advocated by the left, is not a certainty. There is considerable doubt about these proclamations, as climate involves many variables, and the forecasts advanced by the Global Warming groups are more political than scientific.
There may be some authentic teaching in there, in terms of general principles. But when bishops and popes wander into prudential matters in which they have no particular competence, much less spiritual authority, their opinions are just that, and no more valid than mine. Probably less in this instance.
Since when are Encyclicals Church Doctrine? Only when a Pope speaks Ex Cathedra, are his positions Church Doctrine which must be adhered to by Catholics. If you want to read Church Doctrine, then read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. As for McElroy, he seems to have missed his vocation. Apparently, he was meant to be a politician of the Nancy Pelosi variety. One is left to wonder how many Catholics in the Diocese of San Diego have abandoned their Catholic Faith because of McElroy. How many other Catholics have stopped donating?
Since always. Ex cathedra is reserved for infallible definitions of dogma. Popes and bishops can teach doctrine authentically without invoking infallibility. Do you realize how many times papal encyclicals are quoted in the Catechism? Read the footnotes. So your advice to read the Catechism for doctrine implicitly undercuts your argument that encyclicals do not teach nor contain doctrine.
The ignorance on this board from the staunch conservatives is so sad. So many people speak without knowing what they are talking about, yet they condescendingly believe they have the truth to the exclusion of others.
Insular, bubble, ghetto, closed-minded Catholicism is not the future.
All Church teaching doesn’t rise to the level of dogma or doctrine. An encyclical is a letter. Popes write them for various reasons. Pope Pius XII wrote Humani Generis, an encyclical, in 1950 and addressed the authority of encyclicals.
“Nor must it be thought that what is contained in an encyclical letter does not of itself demand assent, on the pretext that the popes do not exercise in them the supreme power of their teaching authority. Rather, such teachings belong to the ordinary magisterium, of which it is true to say: ‘He who hears you, hears me’ (Lk 10:16); for the most part, too, what is expounded and indicated in encyclical letters already appertains to Catholic doctrine for other reasons.”
These guys and you are bananas.
Bananas. Or nuts.
Martin Just saying denying the climate change lie, will not damn a soul to Hell, but killing babies will. Martin you will never win a convert on this site.
Martin, there is a difference between things that are intrinsically evil and matters of prudential judgment. The Church teaches that.
Would you agree that killing an innocent baby (always wrong) is different than driving a non-electric car to the grocery store or the doctor?
(And, for the sake of the question, let’s ignore the fact that the electricity for e vehicles has to come from some power plant, most likely generated by fossil fuels.)
If you don’t, do you ever drive a car or take public transportation?
Of course, we should be good stewards of the earth. But, using electricity is not the same as killing babies.
That’s why the bishops have stated that life is the preeminent issue (and Pope Francis confirmed that when they raised it with him during their ad limina visits).
It is the content of an encyclical that makes it magisterium, not the mere fact that it is an encyclical.
Nothing a pope says or writes is magisterial if the subject is anything other than Catholic Dogma or the Moral Law.
CCC 2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.
Arthur McGowan, that is really not correct. If the magisterium says to pray the Rosary, while it is not binding, it is still a valuable suggestion. Humanae Vitae was a very important encyclical that is still being talked about today.
There is nothing in an encyclical that you should ignore. Perhaps you do not agree with something in it. Usually, it will state the level of obedience that is necessary in some way.
Encyclicals are from the Pope but it will say if it in union with the bishops.
We are not cafeteria Catholics. We do not pick and choose what we agree to believe.
Often things from encyclicals and other documents are taken out of context or misunderstood.
Pray to the Holy Spirit as you read them. He will enlighten you.
I truly wish that Bishop McElroy would be quiet about such matters. This is important for equity. He’s just another white guy who’s demonstrating his racism.
Bishop Lives Matter
No they dont
Maybe these guys could just leave the priesthood and run for office.
Or maybe these guys could just leave the priesthood.
Clean coal technology would have been accomplished by now if the Obama administration had not made coal plants too expensive to operate with taxes and regulations.
Think about long term solutions rather than just what looks good on paper or what makes you look good to whoever you are trying to look good to.
Talk to real people-engineers and operators had the solutions and were working on the fine details. All stopped in 2008.
Let’s stipulate that the Bishops are not climate scientists or tax experts. That was easy! Now consider a few other easy concepts. Our climate is changing, it always does. We the people are making it change quicker than it might on its own. We can reduce the negative effects of our contribution to climate change with little effort if we try. That change is not a political issue, but pretty good science. Coal, even unachievable clean coal, puts billions of particles of toxins in the air every day. If we reduce reliance on coal, we can contribute to cleaner air. Oil and gas put fumes by the billions into the air. If we reduce the use of oil and gas, we put fewer fumes in the air. Nothing about these ideas is political. It is common sense. So, it is not political to suggest that we use more solar energy, more wind energy, or use appliances and tools that require less energy. It is common sense. Ford introduced an electric Ford 150 truck that has better performance than its gas models. Most car companies are introducing electric cars because they see that as the future of cars. That isn’t a political decision, but a free market decision. Clean air is good for Republicans and Democrats, conspiracy theorists and realists, Catholics and Protestants. Why would someone argue against clean air?
“Why would someone argue against clean air? I will tell you why Bob One because it has nothing to do with clean air. It has to do with leftist control over the world so usher in the great reset, So unaccountable bureaucrats can achieve ever more power and take more money from the citizens. You casually state we should reduce the use of oil and gas. with out ever once thinking about the job loss that working men and women would suffer and not just in those respective industries but also every ancillary business that connected to oil and gas..ie Millions of jobs… You speak true coastal elitist, that’ why I pray for the peaceful breakup of the United States into a confederation so we dont have to deal with each other.
The USA has about 9.8 million jobs in the Oil and Gas industries. There are already about 3.0 million jobs in the Renewable Energy industries. When we transferred from coal being the main source of energy, people lost their jobs but found employment in other fields. The only market for coal today is electric plants and China. Electric companies aren’t building coal plants anymore, they are building wind farms and giant solar arrays. Think of the jobs that will be created when they build 50,000 charging stations across the country. None of this is about conspiracy theories about big somethings taking over the world. It is about clean air and cheaper energy. Homes in our area that have solar on the roof are paying $0 each month for all the electricity they need. I drove a Prius for about 10 years. I used about 10 gallons of gas a month.
Coal is also used in the production of chemicals for manufacturing. It is an abundant resource in the US and the technology exists to clean it up.
If the hack of the pipeline and the damage of wind turbines by the tornadoes and hurricanes in Texas taught us anything, it is that every thing is vulnerable. Even solar.
We should use everything God has given us well and properly.
Let’s not stipulate all that–because anthropogenic “climate change” or “global warming” is a complete hoax. We don’t need to discuss man’s “contribution” to it because–it isn’t happening.
The idiocy of these Bergoglian bishops is easy to see: Where do they claim the energy for electric cars comes from?
It is no coincidence that the bishops (including Bergoglio) who pal around with abortionists the most are also calling the loudest for measures that will kill billions of people with deadly heat and cold, and with outright starvation. Not to mention the murderous spike protein “vaccines.”
Can I deduct my increased lighting and heating costs from the next Annual Catholic Appeal?
I already did years ago when this San Diego bishop told Catholics to reject President Trump.
I’m a priest and a theologian, and I don’t understand where these Bishop’s believe they have derived competence as economists or environmental scientists or whom elected them to policy-making offices in the administration of secular authority.
Babies are being murdered in California, marriage is being perverted, pornography is being filmed and distributed, the homeless are being made into political pawns – all within the great state of California. Souls are tumbling into hell, and they talk about carbon taxes?
Pray for them, God will require an explanation from them on their Day of Wrath.
“Green plants grow faster with more CO2. Robust agricultural research shows that more CO2 will help feed a hungry planet. We can all agree that more food security helps us at home and abroad. Land plants given more CO2 also become more drought-resistant because higher CO2 levels allow them to use water more efficiently. More abundant and stronger plants from increased CO2 are already seen around the world. Satellite images show significant greening of the planet in recent decades, especially near deserts where drought resistance is critical. This remarkable global greening is the result of an increase of CO2 over the last two hundred years. Still higher CO2 levels will bring still more benefits to plant growth.
Evil idiocy. We would benefit from more carbon dioxide. The current level, 400 PPM, has vegetation gasping for CO2. 2500 PPM is the optimum level for vegetation–i.e., food, trees (lumber)–and animal life. Shellfish are constantly sequestering CO2 to make their calcium carbonate shells. Without the Industrial Revolution, life on Earth would already be perishing.
Arthur, the major study in this field was conducted at Stanford over a period of several years. A portion of the study results states: But results from the third year of the experiment revealed a more complex scenario. While treatments involving increased temperature, nitrogen deposition or precipitation — alone or in combination — promoted plant growth, the addition of elevated CO2 consistently dampened those increases.
“The three-factor combination of increased temperature, precipitation and nitrogen deposition produced the largest stimulation [an 84 percent increase], but adding CO2 reduced this to 40 percent,” Shaw and her colleagues wrote.
Fr. James V. Schall: ‘ Does “Climate Change” Cause Hunger?
I bring this issue up because of a headline in L’Osservatore Romano’s English edition that said: “War and Climate Change Are Causes of Hunger” (October 20, 2017). These words were contained in an address that Pope Francis gave in Rome to the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)of the United Nations. Presumably, these two were not thought to be the only causes of hunger, but their emphasis seemed curious. Somehow, I had always associated hunger issues with farming. crisismagazine.com/2017/climate-change-cause-hunger
It looks like Francis is using the Al Gore method: Blame everything on global warming — then let science sort it all out a decade later.
The more time McElroy spends on hoaxes the less time spent in diocese. Silver lining, eh?
Climate Change policies will bring about the greatest poverty and misery the world has ever known. They want to end farming. They want to move people into already crowded cities and control all their actions, even family size. They want to limit travel. The ultimate goal is to get rid of people without them feeling guilty about it. The poverty and hunger they are unleashing upon humanity will be catastrophic. And bishops like these will bear responsibility for supporting this. These bishops claim to care about the poor. Yet by their actions they will be creating untold poverty and hunger. Shame on them! This is a worldwide experiment that will be disastrous. Read the news and you see where this is going and what these planners have in store for us. Look at what they are doing to the economy by giving money away. Inflation is going out of control. People don’t want to work. This is all a recipe for disaster. And it is deliberately planned out by these globalist who claim to care about the poor all the while they enrich themselves and make more poverty, not less. If these bishops cared about the poor they would encourage business and jobs, not handouts, and government controls on all aspects of life. They charlatans acting like humanitarians.
The 20th century was a study in Market vs Command Economy. McElroy sits upon the ash heap of history.
How about teaching the Holy Roman Catholic Faith for a change???? These prelates are frauds and not even Catholic, they don’t even hide the fact anymore. They are Left wing Democrats plain and simple.
Bishops not even Catholic? It’s the schismatics who aren’t Catholic.
The earth has been gradually warming for about 10,000 years. What do you think caused it before the last hundred years of Oil, gas and coal use? All this climate stuff is BS but it’s a great way to incite fear and control. How many times do we have to be told, ‘be not afraid’.