The following comes from a July 7 Catholic San Francisco article by Christina Gray:
Here’s a sampling of reaction to Pope Francis’ encyclical “Laudito Si’,” by archdiocesan parishioners, men and women religious, church workers and Catholic leaders who finished reading the 180-page, 40,000-word document.
“The Sisters of the Presentation are especially delighted with Pope Francis’ encyclical on climate change. He has affirmed one of our congregational justice goals – to do all in our power to fight the conditions that lead to global climate change. His integral approach to the moral and justice issues that are related to, or flow from climate change – poverty, hunger, migration of peoples, always disproportionally affecting the poor – is an approach that calls all of us to action for justice; justice for the Earth and for all its peoples.
Presentation Sister Rosemary McKean, San Francisco
“I’m pleased that Pope Francis talked about concern for the protection of nature being incompatible with the justification of abortion, research using human embryos, and population control. But I think he missed an opportunity to elaborate on examples explaining why resorting to contraception and abortion to slow population growth is shortsighted. Not only does this disrespect God’s greatest creation – mankind – but in practice, population control has been used as a weapon against the poor, which has not met with acceptable environmental or humanitarian results.
Vicki Evans, Respect Life Coordinator, Archdiocese of San Francisco
“It was kind of a pleasant surprise that it was so holistic and so well organized and really focused on how we change our view of what human life and human happiness and fulfilment is.”
Jesuit Father Joseph Fessio, founder of Ignatius Press, San Francisco
“I am very glad to read that Pope Francis repudiated any form of population control as a means of addressing today’s environmental concerns. ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it,’ God’s first commandment to humans in the Bible, is as relevant today as it was ‘In the beginning.’”
Rob Graffio, vice chancellor, Archdiocese of San Francisco
“The Mercy Sisters see the encyclical as a reinforcement of their longtime efforts and their advocacy for a policy which strongly supports the environment. We believe climate change is one of the great moral issues of our time and for us a compelling and urgent call to respond … In our ministries throughout the United States, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Philippines, we see vividly the links between climate change and environmental degradation and the plight of immigrants, women and children, and those victimized by violence and racism.”
The Institute of the Sisters of Mercy, Burlingame
“This pontificate is marked by a very pastoral approach to human problems. I was surprised that his pastoral approach comes out so strongly. I was expecting more political-economic gobbledygook or Vatican boilerplate and I was really struck, and moved even, by the profound understanding he has of the human condition and how he sees our ecological problems of symptomatic of a larger problem.”
Vivian Dudro, editor, Ignatius Press, San Francisco
The Sisters of Mercy (of the Americas), Nuns on the Bus, LCWR, and NETWORK all supported Obamacare – which makes taxpayers pay for: Abortion, Contraception, and soon Euthanasia.
These are heretical groups. They only care about the temporal, not Saving Souls for eternity.
Mildly critical? The Pope’s support for a one world government with law making, policing and enforcement, and taxing is awful.
Paragraph in “LAUDATO SI’
# 175, “…… it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose sanctions.
…… to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, …..”
LAUDATIO SI cont. –
# 177 “….. One authoritative source of oversight and coordination is the law, which lays down rules for admissible conduct in the light of the common good.
The limits which a healthy, mature and sovereign society must impose are those related to foresight and security, regulatory norms, timely enforcement, …..”
Ladito Si is the most flawed document to be released under the signature of the Pope in the 2000 year history of the church. He has aligned himself with the enemies of Christ; those secular humanists who support abortion, conrtaception, population control and a world government agency which would be staffed by elites who hate the Catholic Church and everthing it stands for. GOD controls climate. “Who then is this that even the wind an the sea obey Him”? What hubris to think that man can, in any way, control cimate change. If
anyone wants to something about it, get on your knees. The answer lies in holiness, something the sad document and the pope who signed it failed to recognize.
You obviously did not read it.
The document is condemning of abortion, contraception, population control. It is about living a holy life. It is about living a life in harmony with God and His Creation.
So many people are getting bogged down in the climate change section. What the Pope is asking for is simplicity and holiness.
The Pope’s appointed employees at the Vatican widely advertised the Climate Change theme in the press prior to the encyclical being released.
The truly “Catholic” portions in the encyclical are few and far between.
When a Pope mixes truth with fiction, truth gets DILUTED and ignored.
“Mixing truth with fiction” — well said!!
When a Pope violates Doctrine of the Faith – it is news.
CCC: ” 2442 It is NOT the role of the Pastors of the Church to intervene directly in the political structuring and organization of social life.
This task is part of the vocation of the lay faithful, acting on their own initiative with their fellow citizens.
Social action can assume various concrete forms. It should always have the common good in view and be in conformity with the message of the Gospel and the teaching of the Church.
It is the role of the laity to animate temporal realities with Christian commitment, by which they show that they are witnesses and agents of peace and justice.”
I am well aware of the lip service the document pays to abortion and such, and then joins forces with its advocates.
Too bad Pope Francis did not point out and denounce the overwhelming negative and long lasting disastrous environmental impact of Communist regimes on Mother Earth these last 60 plus years. It appears, in fact, just the opposite– that Pope Francis sees global market economies and modern technology as agents most responsible for pollution and degradation of nature and impoverishing the vulnerable.
While I would like to be an enthusiast of the Encyclical, try as I may, after reading and rereading it, I am mostly underwhelmed and disappointed.
For all the good intended, I see and hear numerous ‘convenient interpretations’ from those who would promote every kind of immoral action related to population control due to the climate…
Because you are looking at it with the eyes of the world. Pray to the Holy Spirit and your Guardian Angel for help to understand the spiritual depths of it.
A one world government is not spiritual. This was never taught by Christ.
Not taught by Pope Francis either.
You are right. The encyclical Laudito Si is gobbledygook, and because of all the fiction, it is ignorable.
Why is it that only Catholic layman are pointing out the nonsense coming from this Pope? Fraternal correction from his brother bishops is non existant.
It is only a few lay people.
Some people just don’t get it.
With all respect due Pope Francis re Ladauto Si a few notable quotes:
Rev. Robert A. Sirico, president Acton Institute: “The document is a theological statement that places environmental concerns within the context of Christian life. . . But much of the discussion in this encyclical and many of its underlying assumptions are imprudent. There is a decided bias against free markets . . . The solution here—one which did not get enough elaboration in the encyclical—is a path for economic progress. Wealth creation can diminish poverty, and poverty and despoliation often go hand in hand.”
Steven Mosher, demographer, specialist population control programs:
“I am amazed at how many unsubstantiated claims and groundless assertions it…
Yes, Fr. Sirico, but it is clear from Laudato Silly that PF does not believe wealth-creation is good. I think he admires Pol Pot.
With due respect due Pope Francis and his overall message in Laudato Si, there constructive statements regarding aspects of the encyclical.Some notable quotes:
Rev. Robert A. Sirico, president of the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty: “The document is a theological statement that places environmental concerns within the context of Christian life. . . But much of the discussion in this encyclical and many of its underlying assumptions are imprudent. There is a decided bias against free markets . . .”The solution here—one which did not get enough elaboration in the encyclical—is a path for economic progress. Wealth creation can diminish poverty, and poverty and despoliation often go hand in hand.”
(Continuing from above post)
Steven Mosher, PhD, demographer,specialist population control programs:
“I am amazed at how many unsubstantiated claims and groundless assertions it contains. Many of its claims are so over-the-top that they can even be falsified by citing UN documents, which themselves tend to magnify environmental and other global problems as a fundraising ploy.” . . . “Suffice it to note that a dismal tone of environmental “apocalypse now” pervades the entire document . . .” Mosher has concerns about the role of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences expert advisor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber.
(see next post)
( last continuation from above)
Dr. Wei-Hock Soon, astro-physicist & geoscientist and non-Catholic:
“In the about 2% of the encyclical that focuses on climate (4 out of the total of 246 items), many half-truths are presented. Half-truths are the enemy of science and they must be eradicated. I fear that this encyclical is driven not by science, but by social motivations and political yearnings.”
Because the Pope will fire those he disagrees with and he will send them to wherever they can not be effective.
We desperately need our Pope to focus, write, and speak on the Immoral ACTIVITY of this world – the Intrinsic Evils – without making the MAIN theme his personal political opinions which have no bearing on Faith and Morals.
His job is not temporal politics, but to Save Souls.
Laudatio Si is a disaster, and can be found on the Vatican web site. Please read it. It is a disaster in itself.
Jesus never mixed secular politics with religion.
“True World Political Authority”? Stinks of Communism to me.
Also Stinks of a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.
With the exception of Vicki Evan’s statement I think the reviews from CSF are liberal gobblygook. The comments that follow are much more pertinent — including direct quotes from the CCC on popes not getting into socio-political-economic details. One commenter succinctly stated that “mixing truth with fiction dilutes the truth”. Further, those who defend any contradictions to the papal support of global warming try to appease by stating the pope’s support for pro-life issues. Duh! He’s the Catholic Pope–would we expect him to say otherwise?!
Great article, joe bryner (“African Bishops Beware..”, Remnant News). UN climate change adviser to P Francis, Jeffrey Sachs, has advocated the UN “reproductive health” plan, which is actually forced abortion and sterilization. How the sovereign pontiff could associate himself with such a merchant of death is incomprehensible.
Another view: “The Pope’s climate letter urges ‘Dialogue with Everyone,’ so why did Vatican single out and harass us?”
“Tom Harris relates the frustration and humiliation that his group of scientists and other experts experienced after travelling to Rome to try to provide at least some balance, which Pope Francis had publicly indicated that he wanted, to the currrent only one-sided, very pessimist position of the Vatican on climate change.”
The Pope only wants dialogue with those he agrees with.
He dismisses and attacks everyone else.
PF’S right-hand man and fellow countryman, Bp. Marcelo Sirondo-Sanchez, chancellor of the Pont. Academy SS, ordered the exclusion of every political and scientific authority he/they didn’t agree with, from contributing to Laudato Heil: Bp. Sorondo-Sanchez emphasized repeatedly how closely he had kept PF informed on the encyclical for the months of its creation. It is disingenuous entirely to maintain PF wasnt dismissive and anti-dialogic, as Chris P. asserts. Maybe some facts can be asserted instead of the self-gratifying Lawrence O’Donnell ejaculations (“Lie!”).
Meanwhile, fortunately the “Pope-Francis Effect” is working wonders for the Vatican finances. Not.
Card. Pell, a worthy man entrusted with a feckless task, reported today that Vatican has a deficit of 25 million Euros. Last year 23 million.
Good thing all those lefties are contributing, huh!
Collected a heap of articles and links on the document. Scroll towards the bottom. Have taken the controversy over the document seriously. Am beginning to loose heart. Pray for encouragement – and courage to stay put.
God will always, always back His Pope!
My question is, which Pope is that? John XXII? Hippolytus?
No Anonymous – Not in sin, and not in error.
Great collection of information, Steve Golay, and really you have a library of info indicting the fakeness of the Climate Change Doomists and their play for world power. Thank you.
The current Natl Geographic has an extensive set of interviews on P. Francis which should dispel concepts, as :his friends scoff at the idea that he is guileless”: “They describe him as a ‘chess player’, one whose every day is perfectly organized’, in which ‘ each and every step has been thought out.'”
PF’s initial attack on traditional Catholic belief (their “obsession with abortion, gay marriage, and contraception”, America interview, 9/19/13) actually now appears to be part of a well-thought-out plan to unite with UN policies, abandoning the historic Vatican opposition to UN reproductive health and family planning policies, so that influential UN advisors Ban Ki-Moon and Jeffrey Sachs could be brought on board in…
..that influential UN advisors Ban Ki-Moon and Jeffrey Sachs could be brought on board in orchestrated unity with PF on his mistaken climate encyclical. It is the skilled movements of an experienced operator. See:
I have cited before a devastating article involving Stefano Gennarini (First Things, 6/25/15) directly challenging Bp. Sorondo-Sanchez’ formulation of the climate encyclical, especially the sickening cooperation of PASS (Pont.Acad. Soc. Sciences) with Ban Ki-Moon and Jeffrey Sachs. It is compelling reading, and Bp. Sorondo-Sanchez’ responses ring completely hollow:
Catholics better wake up to what is happening now in what once was “their church”.
In the appalling “interview” (First Things, 6/25/15), Bp. Sorondo-Sanchez defends the UN’s position on “reproductive health” and “reproductive rights”, disingenuously asserting that the UN does not claim that “the UN does not adopt abortion as a basic right.”
He hair-splits the UN’s clever shadow terminology (“reproductive health/rights”) which we are very familiar with from Planned Parenthood, and claims otherwise. It is completely unbelievable that a chancellor of a Vatican pontifical academy would spend so much time defending an atheist secular institution which has openly advocated for abortion (Ban Ki-Moon openly ordered forced abortions in UN-controlled African countries in 2014 without a peep from the Vatican…
Gennarini: “This (UN policies on repro. health) means investing billions of dollars to convince poor rural women in Africa to use contraception, and “voluntarily” sterilizing millions of indigent women in India under sometimes lethally unsanitary conditions. Just to make sure countries take the bait, Sachs also says that “rapid fertility reduction” leads to a “demographic dividend,” even though countries in South America and the Middle East… have yet to see any dividend materialize, and are now quickly running into a demographic deficit.”
Bp. Sorondo-Sanchez’ unbelievably weak response to Gennarini’s assertion:
” The Magisterium of the Church, to which the two Pontifical Academies adhere, is very clear on these policies. These topics did not form a part of the discussions of the Academies at our meeting. ”
So, the voice of the unborn and their mothers in sub-Saharan Africa and sub-continental Asia, will not have a voice in the very Academy dedicated to their social welfare. That voice, thank you, Bp. MSS, chose silence.
He had a political alliance to maintain.