Back in 2015, when rumors circulated that Pope Francis was writing Laudato Sí, an encyclical on the environment, I offered some unsolicited advice as to what should be in the letter: “What Should the Pope’s Ecology Encyclical Say?”
I remember writing that piece one night in a Beijing hotel room, after spending a day out in that city’s notorious air pollution. Yes, I really — not just notionally —understood why concern for the environment was (and is) important. But I also thought that the Catholic Church needed to be saying something more than CNN does, or at least not just the same thing with some pious words and a dash of holy water added. I also thought the secular environmental movement posed some dangers to Christian orthodoxy, and I believed the Pope needed to point them out.
Now that Pope Francis has said he’s writing a second part to his Laudato si’, a sequel of sorts that is reported to “cover current issues,” let me also revisit old advice and add some new suggestions.
Back in 2015, I cautioned against the quasi-religion into which environmentalism was turning. The environmental and climate movements apparently have their own anthropologies, their own views of the human person, and those visions were ultimately incompatible with the Judaeo-Christian one.
Our culture has been formed by a vision of the human person first put forward by Judaism and then shared by Christianity. It’s found on the first pages of the Bible, so I call it our “Genesis heritage.”
A central element of that “Genesis heritage” is how it understands man. The human person is not just another biological species. He is not just another life form with an oversized carbon footprint. The human person is qualitatively different from the rest of the material creation. (Spiritual creation, i.e., angels and what “eye has not seen of what God has prepared for those who love Him,” are outside this essay’s scope).
The human person is not just “part” of material creation. He stands at its zenith. As Vatican II (Gaudium et spes, 24) teaches, man is the only material creature God wanted for His/his own sake. The double pronoun signifies what I think is the double nature of the question: God wanted man for Himself, but he also created man as a person for himself, not just as a means for other creatures….
So, if the Pope is penning Laudato 2.0, my concrete suggestions are to contribute what the Church alone is uniquely qualified to contribute: her vision of the integral human person and the moral implications it entails. That means recognizing the uniqueness of the human person within material creation and opposing any ecological vision that in any way marginalizes his centrality. That also means broadening the vision of ecology from mere physical pollution standards to a wider aperture that combats the toxic moral pollution increasingly choking human persons….
From Catholic World Report
It would also mean Pope Francis LIMITING his comments to what the Church is in a position to say, what falls within her mandate.
The Church played it cool on the issue of evolution, which roiled the Protestant Churches from the late 19th century. A pontifical Biblical commission said cautiously (1914) that the gradual development of the human body over time did not clash with doctrine, as long as God was respected as Creator of all and of individual human souls. Pius XII said more in Humani Generis, refusing a final concession to modern evolutionary theory, but cautiously avoiding specifics. Francis needs to do the same on climate issues.
Marxists aren’t cautious on claims about climate issues because the whole point of climate alarmism is to take away individual liberties and siphon wealth away from the middle class. Haven’t you heard of watermelons? They’re green on the outside but red on the inside. Climate activists are Marxists on the inside.
You can certainly separate ideas for improving conditions from an ideology.
Maybe a lot of these so called climate issues are really chastisements. The world has gone too far in the way we are living these days and the things we are promoting. Look up for your redemption draws near. Pray the Rosary everyday. God is trying to get our attention. Pray, Pray, Pray.
JPII condemned liberation theology, Francis has wrongly recycled it as a good. Francis shows open disdain for America and her ideals and his thoughts are colored by this hatred. He embraces communist ideology and is attempting to bathe the Church in its evils.
Judaism did not exist yet when Genesis was written. What a ridiculous comment.
Judaism was an organic development of Israel which gave us the Mosaic Law, and it was in this context Jesus Christ was born. So Christianity owed a debt to Judaism for this Genesis perspective. And if so, why is this such a ridiculous comment? I don’t understand the point of such petty sniping .
A wonderful book to read on this very important topic is: Salvation is from the Jews by Roy Schoeman, who converted from Judaism to Catholicism. This book is an in-depth study of the role Jews and Judaism in God’s plan for salvation from Abraham to the Second Coming. It’s a must read!
Genesis was written/edited into its final form during the Babylonian Exile, which lasted from 587 BC to 538 BC. It was written by Jews who were in exile. So Judaism did exist when Genesis was written.
Sincere question: when did the religion of the Hebrews become Judaism?
Will it include any of the following words: Sin, redemption, salvation, dominion, “imago dei”, eternity, etc.,?
Yes! For all those long centuries, before the modern era and Vatican II, the Catholic Church taught us the truth, to live by. There is a huge difference between earthly, temporal things– and Divine, heavenly things, of God. When you cross yourself with Holy Water and enter a church, with the Blessed Sacrament in the Tabernacle– you are leaving the earthly, temporal world, and entering the sacred, holy world, of Christ. “Let all mortal flesh keep silence” as the beautiful Advent hymn relates. Genuflect and kneel in reverence, awe and prayer, before Our Lord. He is truly present, in the Blessed Sacrament. Mankind was made in Imago Dei, in the Divine Image of God. Our First Parents, Adam and Eve, once walked sublimely with God, in a Paradise, the Garden of Eden– but fell from grace, got evicted from Paradise, and were cast out into a painful existence, far from God, in an exile of sin, suffering, disease, disorder, earthly calamities, and death. A veritable “vale of tears.” Christ was born to redeem us of sin, suffering and death, and to offer us Salvation– and Eternal Life with Him, in Heaven. We must use our brief temporal, earthly time, as a pilgrimage, or journey, to Heaven. There is a lot of hard work and painful sacrifice necessary, in conformity with God’s Will, to hopefully gain Heaven. Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Love the beautiful visions granted by God to Christ’s Beloved Disciple, St. John, in the Book of the Apocalypse, or Revelations. The Bible has the correct story of God’s Creation, and mankind’s beginning, fall from grace into sin, redemption, and final end. It will be a wondrous thing, in the final end, the complete transformation of the earth, and of all things on earth, and the exquisitely beautiful sight of the great Saints, praising and glorifying God, in Heaven. Earthly science only observes the material world, that’s all it can do. It cannot go any further. We need our Faith to show us the whole truth of the Creation Story. God is always silently present, and is busy at work, constantly, in His Creation, slowly bringing it all to His fulfillment, unknowable and unseen by us, according to His Will.
All of those words are in Laudito Si; so they may be in its sequel as well.
For centuries, before Vatican II, the Catholic Church had the right focus on the Creation story, and man’s place in it– Adam’s Fall, Adam and Eve being kicked out of the Garden of Eden, and the new earthly struggle, now being apart from God– the new, terrible, painful earthly struggle with sin, suffering, disease, disorder, earthly calamities, and death, in this earthly “vale of tears.” And the terribly hard work, and painful sacrifices, which “fallen mankind” must endure, on our earthly, spiritual pilgrimage, or journey, to seek man’s redemption and salvation, in Christ– and hopeful, eventual union with God, in Eternal Life, in Heaven, Paradise. A total end to sin, suffering, disease, disorder, earthly calamities, and death! Love the Book of Apocalypse, or Revelation, in which St. John, the Beloved Disciple, reveals his beautiful visions from God, of our final end, and the wondrous transformations of all in God’s Creation, that will occur. The souls of the saints will have a most exquisitely beautiful and glorious reward. Our earthly, temporal existence is very brief– but Eternity is forever and ever. Best to use our brief time on earth, seeking Christ’s Salvation, and hope for Heaven.
Well, I tried writing one comment, but thought it had disappeared, after I clicked the “post comment” key. So I wrote another comment, along the same lines. And both comments ended up being printed.
If you are baptized and you have not committed mortal sin, then you have Christ’s Salvation. You will go to Heaven. You may have to go through a purgation prior to getting there.
If you have committed mortal sin, then you need to repent and receive absolution from a priest in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
There are people who believe that the changing climate is not an issue for mankind. But, it is. It doesn’t matter who is causing it or how it is happening, it is a concern, one for which we should all try to minimize. Is man alone responsible for the changing climate? it would be nuts to take that position. Is man responsible in some way for the changing climate? Maybe just a little. It is man that is putting junk into the air, using plastic products that are polluting the oceans, and hurting the land. While man is not totally responsible for climate change, it should do what it can to reduce its negative effects, small as they may be. The Bible tells us that we are the stewards of the environment, that it is our job to protect it. But can we have an influence on such a massive environmental event? I think we can. Solar power doesn’t put toxins into the air. Windmills don’t harm the environment, really. Reducing the use of products that take centuries to decompose helps a little. Recycling helps a little. Using less gas in cars helps a little. Prayer helps a lot. The environment isn’t a political issue, or at least should not be. Let’s lead “clean” lives and try a little to reduce the threat. We don’t want this summer to be the new norm do we?
I think that while we are on earth, we must be responsible stewards, and be careful, and respect God’s Creation. Whatever we do, before plans are laid and carried out– a period of prayer is necessary, to ask God to guide us to the best solutions to things, according to His Will. This is His Creation– not ours. Best that we learn to live right, with as little environmental destructions as possible– and to fix the things that mankind has carelessly and greedily contaminated or destroyed.
After reading the original L.S. from 2015, I personally got the idea that the human person is central. Really clearly, in fact. But if a follow-up encyclical needs to be written to make this more clear, I’m all for it.
This makes me wonder if the author ever read Laudito Si.
Bob one , you’re old enough to remember the global cooling hysteria from the 70’s and all the other climate prophesies that did not come to pass as well, you ignore the part China and India play in this .I agree with much of your post , but the warning comment on this past summer being the ” new norm ” another doomsday prophecy with no evidence to back it up . As far as the environment not being a political issue I agree , but rational unbiased information is not always presented , greed drives this agenda from the left , look at the current nonsense regarding gas stoves as a prime example, the push for electric vehicles in this state without the infrastructure to support it also shows the poor reasoning of environmental solutions.
Pope Francis said in an interview that conservative American Catholics are backwards and have replaced faith with ideology. He also said they need to leave room for doctrine to evolve. Pay attention, people. The writing is on the wall that the synod is going to change Catholic doctrine to bless gay sex.
My personal doomsday clock just inched another minute closer to midnight. If it reaches midnight, I will leave the church because I will conclude that the church is fake. Things are still barely okay, but it’s not looking good.
Don’t you believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament?
He won’t leave. Even if they “bless gay sex”, whatever that means.
Yes, but I’ll stop believing if the church nukes itself. That will mean my belief had been false and misplaced.
I will pray to the Good Shepherd for you, little one looking away from the field.
Berlin’s archbishop just announced that priests in his diocese will be allowed to bless the unions of same-sex couples. This is part of Germany’s implementation of the synodal way. This is what’s coming to the Vatican synod. The Church is nuking itself. You need to be ready for it, because it’s probably more likely to happen than not at this point, the way things are going. Look at the momentum. Look at the synod participants.
The battle lines are being drawn.
Berlin’s Archbishop said that he himself will not do gay blessings because the Pope said not to.
This is an example of being sly like a fox. The archbishop doesn’t have the courage to perform blessings of gay unions, but he’s told his priests that they can give such blessings with impunity.
If the archbishop really thought the pope’s “no” meant “no,” he would not encourage his priests to bless gay unions.
The archbishop just doesn’t want to get in trouble. He knows the pope won’t discipline priests who bless gay unions, so if the archbishop won’t discipline them, then nobody will.
But the archbishop could be disciplined/removed from his see by the pope if he were to bless gay unions himself.
The archbishop just doesn’t want to give up the perks of being an archbishop. He’s a fraud. A wolf in sheep’s clothing who doesn’t even have the courage to be a wolf, so he gets other wolves to do the dirty work.
I am not good enough to advise but you seem to be in a faith crisis. They can be very consuming and distressing.
Pray the Rosary, St. Michael prayer, Chaplet of Mercy.
Consecrate yourself to the Immaculate Heart.
Have you done the First Fridays?
The Synod meets October 4-29 then takes a year long period of discernment and meets again in October of 2024. They will issue a document. Then the Pope writes an apostolic exhortation (there has been a recent change where he does not have to do that but I think he will because the whole synod topic is so misunderstood. So you are looking at a year and a half away.
I am gonna pray for you. God bless you and bring you peace.
I say, “doomsday” may be experiencing a “faith crisis” because either she has not read the Pope’s exact words from the interview in context, or she has interpreted them negatively. This negativity perhaps comes from imbibing foolishly and wholeheartedly the spirit of dissent and disobedience one finds in certain blogs and vlogs out there.
I agree with the Pope’s words from his interview with the Portuguese Jesuits. There are indeed people out there in the US (no, the Pope never used the phrase “conservative American Catholics” in the interview, contrary to “doomsday’s” falsehood) who are “backward looking” (indietrismo) in faith and morals (and even doctrine). They erroneously believe that the Church’s understanding of faith and morals and doctrine cannot change. That’s false. That’s not Catholicism, people.
People, read the Pope’s own words from the interview: “You have seen that in the United States the situation is not easy: there is a very strong reactionary attitude. It is organized and shapes the way people belong, even emotionally. I would like to remind those people that indietrismo (being backward-looking) is useless and we need to understand that there is an appropriate evolution in the understanding of matters of faith and morals as long as we follow the three criteria that Vincent of Lérins already indicated in the fifth century: doctrine evolves ut annis consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate. In other words, doctrine also progresses, expands and consolidates with time and becomes firmer, but is always progressing. Change develops from the roots upward, growing in accord with these three criteria.”
The Pope is correct in this words. However, words from people like “doomsday” only seek to unnecessarily disturb the faith of Catholics.
What I find disturbing about your thesis is that the moral goalposts are always moving and we’d better get used to it, people. Yours is an exercise in the frippery of moral relativism, as in “Who am I to judge?”. Yeah, and we all know where that quote came from.
And what is disturbing about “Axiom’s” comment is the dissent and disobedience from the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. And, what “moral goalposts” is she talking about? Folks, the main Goalpost in the moral and spiritual life is God Almighty Himself, until we “rest in Him” (thank you St. Augustine whose feast is today btw, people).
For example, Pope Francis in the interview gave the example of the development in our understanding of the death penalty which is a sin. People, (particularly “Axiom” there), is God Almighty Who gives life served worthily if humanity clings to this rotting relic of the culture of death called the death penalty? NO! You should be grateful and joyful that the Church has deepened its understanding of the inviolability of all human life including that of the criminal. The development of our understanding of doctrine is not a cause for lamentation and worry, but of joy because we’re coming closer to the understanding of God.
So people the Magisterium of the Church does not err in matters of faith and morals, and is indefectible concerning these issues. To doubt God’s gift of infallibility to the Church is to doubt on the efficacy and work of the Holy Spirit in the Church. You’re veering too close to the unforgivable sin there “Axiom.” Make a u-turn. This matter ain’t frippery.
If the magisterium is silent while gay unions are blessed, that’s not committing an error, but it’s failing to correct error. Francis is not going to change church teaching on the books, but he’s already ignoring it such that people who violate it won’t face correction or discipline. It’s the same effect, though, and people like you will continue to defend blindly a magisterium that is not fulfilling its responsibilities.
A husband who doesn’t love his wife and ignores her is still technically married to her. He doesn’t beat her or abuse her; he just ignores her. Oh, but as long as he doesn’t hit her or divorce her everything’s okay. He’s not a bad husband. That’s what you’re essentially saying.
It’s not that the goalposts are changing, they are being taken down and the rules no longer apply. The church is becoming a free for all in which people believe and do and bless and pray whatever they want, even if it contradicts the Bible and Catholic teaching.
The situation in the church today is like if in America the governors of California and New York suddenly said that they wouldn’t discipline their residents for committing crimes, and the federal government was silent about their inaction. Oh wait, that’s happening too.
I hope the synod fails. I honestly hope Pope Francis doesn’t live to see the end of the synod and that his successor halts it. I think that’s the only way it gets stopped, folks.
The Vatican and the Pope have said no to blessing gay unions.
Both “Francis successor” and “ignoring” are mistaken. A person of goodwill and a faithful Catholic does not wish for failure for a pastoral effort of the Church such as the Synod. Such as not the sentiments of a good person. Plus, the Goalpost has never changed, people; it seems that “Francis successor” never learned Who the real Goalpost is: it’s God Almighty. And no other.
Folks, to prove to you how biased their comments are: I challenge the pair of them to implore Pope Francis to start disciplining, castigating, reprimanding Bishop Strickland.
In the news today: “Pope Francis has appointed his longtime friend and fellow Argentinian Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni to a Vatican position, despite Zaffaroni’s controversial record and his support for homosexuality and abortion.”
Do you see what I see? Do you hear what I hear? Do you read what I read?
Why would the pope appoint a flagrantly anti-Catholic man to a Vatican position?
The church is near to nuking itself.
Sorry, but whatever this commentator named “Zaffaroni’s” hears or sees, we’d rather not hear nor see, thank you very much. This is because being appointed to The Fray Bartolomé de las Casas Institute for Research and Promotion of Social Rights in the Vatican doesn’t mean that suddenly Justice Raúl Eugenio Zaffaroni from Argentina is a member of the Magisterium who can directly shape the Church’s teachings on faith and morals.
Holding some beliefs, such as supporting abortion and homosexual genital activity and unions, should disqualify a person from any service in the Vatican. It’s a matter of consistency and valuing your own religious doctrines seriously.
He’ll have a role in further corrupting the church’s doctrine, and that’s the point being made by people opposing this appointment.
Both “disqualify” and “appointment” are wrong. If the Pope wants dissenting voices in The Fray Bartolomé de las Casas Institute for Research and Promotion of Social Rights, that’s up to him. He formed the Institute, so he should know what kind of people he wants in it. It’s his call, not yours. It may be good in a panel of advisers to hear debate and contention. It sharpens the arguments in favor of the Church’s teachings. Oh you people of little faith.
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-08/pan-american-committee-judges-private-association-faithful.html
This is what you are creating a scandal about?
Sheesh.
Remember what Jesus said about those who create scandals.
jon, he did not form the institute.
Do research first before you dispute anyone’s comment here, ok? For example, do you see that Vatican News Story about the Institute that somebody posted on here? It’s right above your own comment. It says that the Pope “approved” the Committee of Judges, he “appointed” its members, he “approved the creation” of the Institute which comes under the Committee, plus he “appointed” the members of the Institute. Don’t be slothful. Look things up first before you dispute anyone here. People really.
jon, it says that it started in Brazil and then Argentina in 2017.
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2023/08/18/230818c.html
The first two paragraphs: I am speaking of the first; you are speaking of the second.
The Pope appointed all of its members. He created it and formed it. The links all show that.
Honestly folks, it doesn’t seem like that the writer of this article, Grondelski, has even read Pope Francis’ “Laudatio si.’” His critique of the Pope and of his Encyclial is off-the-mark.
For example, his critique that the Pope has “failed to point out the cliff’s edge, much less decry those who would build a wall fencing it off,” is a total straw-man. No where in “Laudatio si’” has the Pope encouraged young people to forgo childbearing, nor has he even mentioned “Gaia. Totally false.
In fact, if Grondelski had read the Pope’s Encyclical, he’ll find that the Pope has indeed placed a “comprehensive view” of this issue of the environment by also considering the “moral environment in which [man] lives.”
I mean, read this, people, from “Laudatio si’”: “Authentic human development has a moral character. It presumes full respect for the human person, but it must also be concerned for the world around us and ‘take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system’. Accordingly, our human ability to transform reality must proceed in line with God’s original gift of all that is” (5).
The Pope need not grossly demarcate battle lines such as “Christ vs Gaia” nor “the Genesis heritage vs. the wacky enviornmentalists.” No. He’s the universal Pastor, not a cultural warrior fighting for the American right.
Instead, the Pope has fixed the Holy Trinity as the One to Whom all creatures are tending towards. Read this from “Laudatio si’”:
“For Christians, believing in one God who is trinitarian communion suggests that the Trinity has left its mark on all creation…The divine Persons are subsistent relations, and the world, created according to the divine model, is a web of relationships. Creatures tend towards God, and in turn it is proper to every living being to tend towards other things, so that throughout the universe we can find any number of constant and secretly interwoven relationships…The human person grows more, matures more and is sanctified more to the extent that he or she enters into relationships, going out from themselves to live in communion with God, with others and with all creatures. In this way, they make their own that trinitarian dynamism which God imprinted in them when they were created. Everything is interconnected, and this invites us to develop a spirituality of that global solidarity which flows from the mystery of the Trinity” (239-240).
If only Grondelski had read that, he wouldn’t have felt the need to mention “Gaia” or to even write his sorry article.
jon, thank you.
Welcome back.
…. He never went away; just always here in disguise.
It’s telling that Francis is definitive about climate issues but wishy washy about LGBT.
You obviously do not understand him.
He is very advanced in faith, hope and charity.
I think most people don’t pay attention to him unless CNN or some other mainstream news outlet reports on him.
Some read blogs or watch podcasts which are often very inaccurate.
Some are deliberately undermining not just his thoughts and prayers but his person (like your post.)
Very few people actually keep up with his writings and addresses.
BTW, the website Where Peter Is is now as liberal as The National Catholic Reporter. If Pope Francis approves gay marriage, Where Peter Is will say, “Whelp, that’s what the pope said, so it’s gotta be from God.”
People can’t forget about clergy gay abuse. It’s the one-two whammy. High ranking clergy who acted gravely immorally and covered it up. Now high ranking clergy defecting from sound doctrine. They are related. Either the church’s clergy are suffering from widespread corruption but the faith is true, or the faith is fake and the clergy just went through the church motions as a job and enjoyed the privilege and perks with a little or a lot of gay on the side.
High ranking clergy have not defected from sound doctrine.
Is this the kind of BS people fall for these days?
Many years ago, like the ’80s which was worse than now, I remember kneeling in front of the tabernacle and telling Jesus “I don’t care if no one else believes, I believe.”
Sequel should be titled “Laudato Xi.”
I prefer “Laudato Si-quel”
Or “Lauda2 Si”
One thing I know is that if someone is inordinately invested in care for creation, I conclude that person is a liberal kook. Two care for creation encyclicals? That’s unnecessary.
I understand what Laudato si says. I also understand where the mainstream ecology movement is going, and no small part of it is built on a philosophical anthropology inimical to a Catholic understanding of the person. And, yes, one can cite a line here and there of Francis from Laudato (he loves citing himself) BUT the mainstream ecological movement is not being shaped by that vision. Rather than aggressively offering a countervision, one has the the clear impression that attention is on “common home” first, clarifications later. In other words, the general ecology train pulls the Francis ecclesiastical caboose. That, I think, is misdirected energy for the Church.
I also note that, while many people insist on marginalizing the protection of the unborn by invoking the seamy–I mean “seamless”–garment approach to “life issues,” when it comes to the pseudo-religion of ecology, suddenly “climate” and “common home” and all sorts of other euphemisms that pse everything into the secular agenda seems to trump all. That fails in practice to see that human ecology involves the moral as well as physical environment, which OUGHT to be the Church’s focus. If I heard that with the same intensity I do as a virtually indistinguishable “green agenda,” that would be an improvement.
It is very rare for the author of an article to come on here to defend themselves.
Most people won’t know because they don’t actually read the article or click the link to read the whole thing and see who wrote it.
In spite of your protestation that you understand what “Laudato si” says, your comment here betrays that you really don’t.
For instance, the points that “Rather than aggressively offering a countervision, one has the clear impression that attention is on ‘common home’ first, clarifications later” and “That fails in practice to see that human ecology involves the moral as well as physical environment, which OUGHT to be the Church’s focus,” does no proper justice to what the Pope has written.
The Holy Father has situated the Holy Trinity Itself at the center, the forefront, and the goal of creation, and by doing so has injected MORALITY as an integral part in the cause of environmentalism. You simply didn’t recognize what the Holy Father has done here in his Encyclical. Why didn’t you?
Well, simply put sir (and I speculate here of course) you wanted the Catholic Pope to speak like a culture warrior, fighting for the American right, castigating the leftist environmentalist wackos for their atheism and extremism, thereby blessing your POV.
Well, you’re not going to get that from Pope Francis. He is the universal Pastor (not a mere culture warrior) who seeks to attract people of goodwill on the left, (that is, the amenable environmentalists) and everybody else to God by writing as he does. And true Catholic that he is, the Pope then ever-so-cleverly, suddenly places God Almighty, the Most Holy Trinity, at the center of all of creation.
So, in other words, Francis is trying to get in with the cool kids by saying he likes grunge rock too even though he doesn’t know much about grunge rock. The grunge rock cool kids are happy to have Francis around; he’s useful and says some things they agree with, but Francis is not leading the cool kids, not by a longshot. Francis just wants to be cool instead of lame, and he’s found a way to get membership in the cool kids’ club by saying things that support what the cool kids support.
The Pope is supposed to do the Lord’s will not the laity’s.
John M. Grondelki, you mention a book by David Benatar which I had never heard of called Better Never to Have Been:The Harm of Coming into Existence.
It is a philosophy book not an ecology book.
I think the Pope should address this subject.
I never really thought about it but because of sin, every person is going to harm others and themselves and others will harm them. The only way to avoid that is not to exist. Life is suffering and so much of our materialism and consumerism is an attempt to avoid the banality and meaninglessness of being alive.
I don’t know if you know this but at the beginning of industrialization this was a topic that was discussed a lot.
Life is so pointless. Why do people treat others so badly?
Some people-unfortunately-enjoy harming others. Others ,when they realize they inadvertently hurt someone, cannot deal with it and destroy themselves with self-destructive behaviors.
None of this is about ecology.
I think you just want a different topic other than ecology and I think you are correct.
Forgive my presumption to advise but…
When writing about the Church, be sure to pray with the Church. Daily Mass, Liturgy of the Hours, Rosary, Bible (Lectio Divina).
Also these prayers have a partial indulgence
Lord, God Almighty, you have brought us safely to the beginning of this day. Defend us today by your mighty power, that we may not fall into any sin, but that all our words may so proceed and all our thoughts and actions be so directed, as to be always just in your sight. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Direct, we beg you, O Lord, our actions by your holy inspirations, and carry them on by your gracious assistance, that every prayer and work of ours may begin always with you, and through you be happily ended. Amen.
Cardinal Gerhard Muller, former prefect of the CDF — now called the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith– called the Synod on Synodality a “hostile takeover of the Church.” He stated that it is being used to subvert the Church’s moral teachings. If successful, he said, it would mean “the end of the Catholic Church.” Poor Cardinal Muller! Most faithful Catholics are not happy with the Synod on Synodality, with LGBT-promoter, Cardinal Jean-Claud Hollerich, as its Relator General– and many LGBT-promoting participants and speakers, such as Jesuit Fr. James Martin. Well, we will get through these troubling times, somehow, by the grace of God. The finally assembly will be in Oct. of 2024.
Are you talking about that interview with Raymond Arroyo that he did before the Instrumentum Laboris was even written?
Those quotes are in there, but you are distorting it.
He was responding to the questions posed by the interviewer, who was presenting a distorted view of the Synod.
It is very difficult for most Catholics to understand this.
Pray to the Holy Spirit.
The Catholic Church cannot end though we know from the Catechism that there will be a great trial.
No, I heard Cardinal Muller say those very words, in his heavily accented English, several times, with different interviewers. Looks like I have a few misspelled words in my comment– sorry. Anyway, Cardinal Muller has heavy responsibilities, as a huge Cardinal of the Church. I am just a tiny little layman. So, all I can do, is just say, “well, we will just have to get through this.” And that is exactly what we will do— get through it. The Synod’s final assembly will be next year, in Oct. 2024.
But do you follow Cardinals? No. You follow the Pope.
I am aware of the concerns but my honest reaction is he does not have enough faith in the Holy Spirit.
I’m with Muller. I think this could be the end of the Catholic Church. It’s not a good thing to have weighing on your mind. And don’t tell me I don’t have faith. I’ve lived a life of faith for my whole life. Things were never this bad or bleak. And God seems to do nothing.
Oh it was much worse in the 1970s through 1995.
The Catholic Church cannot end. If you have faith, then you know that.
What is the Catholic Church? The Mystical Body of Christ.
Christ rose from the dead. He cannot die again.
Maybe you are on the wrong websites.
There are many signs of Christ’s Presence but the conversion of sinners is the best one.
Remember, He prunes away the dead branches from the Vine.
You can always deepen your faith.
In a radio address back in 1969, a young German theologian named Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI, saw hard times ahead for the Catholic Church. It will “become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning,” he predicted, and the process would be painful.
Putting things like this online is really irresponsible.
All you are doing is spreading evil, fear and doubt.
Pray for forgiveness and conversion.
No. Putting the truth about irresponsible, dishonest and evil things going on in the world, and in the Church, is very, very ecessary and responsible. Do not seek false, selfish comfort in cowardly dishonesty and lies. Know the truth– fight for it, as a valiant Christian!
The Catholic Church was originally a Jewish sect. Later, it was put into a structure, as the official State religion of Rome– and an arm of the Roman government. When Rome collapsed, the Church went on. Eventually, the Orthodox churches split off from Rome. We also later had the Protestant Reformation. Then in the 20th century, we had Vatican II, with tremendous changes. Terrible, frightening, apocalyptic calamities have been predicted, by Our Blessed Mother, for the world and for our Church– but also, our Blessed Mother has predicted that we will survive it all. Christ is Eternal, He and His Truth are forever. Apocalyptic times are unpleasant– but we will get through it all.
The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary will usher in an era of peace Yes we will get through it all. Look up for your redemption draws near.
What prophecies are you referring to?
Christ didn’t once teach anything about the environment. All the so-called Catholics I know in parish ministry who are gung-ho about creation care ministry are also rabid Democrats who support gay marriage and abortion. They won’t quote a single thing from John Paul or Benedict, but they gush over Laudato Si and lecture everyone else about banning plastic and recycling and growing your own vegetables and reducing fossil fuel use.
I personally believe that people go ga-ga for environmentalism when they don’t have real Christian faith.
They probably haven’t read it either.
Green is their religion and they don’t tolerate the unconverted. The current pope is a fan of their agenda, at the expense of Christ’s Church.
Christ teaches through the Pope.
To those who downvoted this comment, Christ does teach through the Pope. If you don’t like that, then take it up with Jesus himself, who established his Church that way.
Tried to give a thumbs up but it disappeared and now it won’t work.
ga-ga for green: Environmentalism is their God.
: