Was the Pope justified in criticizing climate change activists?

[stewartcs]

...Either way, religion also dicates that we were created by God but Catholics believe in evolution.

How can you believe in evolution and also believe God created you?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

How can you believe in evolution and also believe God created you?

If you believe that everything exists because of God then that would have to include evolution.

Unless one is bound by a rigorously literal interpretation of the Bible, there is no logical mandate to exclude science from one's belief system. Very few classically mainstream religions take the bible on completely literal terms. In fact this is part of the reason for the rise in the evangelical and other more extreme religions - they make everything very simple and provide all of our answers.

 

[Moonbear]

Article #7 is pretty much verbatim what they printed in the article.

Um, it only seems consistent with the first sentence and not with these parts:

The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.

I don't see anything in the official Vatican paper about scaremongering, man-made emissions or melting ice caps. Nor do I see it mentioning anything about "dogma of the environmentalist movement." Maybe I missed it.

He really just seems to be endorsing the same thing that a lot of people here endorse...we should be good stewards of the planet we live on, and that means not jumping to hasty conclusions or acting outside of what good science tells us is the best course of action. He seems to basically be saying to let the scientists do their job, and be patient in letting them do so thoroughly, so we have the best information possible before making decisions that might make things worse rather than better.

Stewardship of the Earth is a Catholic issue, and that's the authority from which he speaks on the subject.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Stewardship of the Earth is a Catholic issue, and that's the authority from which he speaks on the subject.

True. He doesn't claim to talk to God, but it is his job to determine the official church view of world events and other issues.

 

[siddharth]

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.

Right of course but deliciously ironic.

 

[chemisttree]

True. He doesn't claim to talk to God, but it is his job to determine the official church view of world events and other issues.

I believe that he has claimed to have spoken to God. In the words of Pope Benedict XVI

"Ars celebrandi": here too I would say that there are different dimensions. The first dimension is that the "celebration" is prayer and a conversation with God: God with us and us with God. Thus, the first requirement for a good celebration is that the priest truly enter this colloquy.

In proclaiming the Word, he feels himself in conversation with God. He is a listener to the Word and a preacher of the Word, in the sense that he makes himself an instrument of the Lord and seeks to understand this Word of God which he must then transmit to the people. He is in a conversation with God because the texts of holy Mass are not theatrical scripts or anything like them, but prayers, thanks to which, together with the assembly, I speak to God.

...Thus, to be well in tune, it is very important to understand this structure that developed over time and to enter with our "mens" into the "vox" of the Church. To the extent that we have interiorized this structure, comprehended this structure, assimilated the words of the liturgy, we can enter into this inner consonance and thus not only speak to God as individuals, but enter into the "we" of the Church, which is praying. And we thus transform our "I" in this way, by entering into the "we" of the Church, enriching and enlarging this "I," praying with the Church, with the words of the Church, truly being in conversation with God.

Furthermore, he claims to go beyond a simple one on one discussion but to communicate on behalf of the entire 'we' of the church, something a bit more than the parishioner alone can do.

http://www.miraclerosarymission.org/liturgy.html

 

[gravenewworld]

Since the good book is the word of God, anything we say that contradicts that is just plain wrong... and he isn't afraid to tell us so.

Actually Catholics don't take the Bible literally at all. That would be other Christian denominations. I went to a Catholic grade school, high school, and college. Learned about evolution at every single level.

And like Ivan said Revelations according to Catholic theology is nothing more than a book filled with symbolism and was written during the time of Roman persecution. Catholics don't take that book literally at all or believe that it contains any prophecies. There will be Catholics out there who will disagree with what I just said, but they are not up to date on Church teaching.

 

[Evo]

Actually Catholics don't take the Bible literally at all. That would be other Christian denominations. I went to a Catholic grade school, high school, and college. Learned about evolution at every single level.

And like Ivan said Revelations according to Catholic theology is nothing more than a book filled with symbolism and was written during the time of Roman persecution. Catholics don't take that book literally at all or believe that it contains any prophecies. There will be Catholics out there who will disagree with what I just said, but they are not up to date on Church teaching.

True, Catholics don't use the bible, they use the Roman Catholic Missal. I don't ever remember reading from the bible in all of my years at catechism or mass.

 

[wolram]

Pope inoceti and his 6 hundred year reign will answer most questions.

 

[Pelt]

I think the pope has the right to expressed his opinion on global warming just like any politician or political pundit.

He apparently has the right not to express any opinion on climate change, a right he seems to have exercised.

 

[gravenewworld]

True, Catholics don't use the bible, they use the Roman Catholic Missal. I don't ever remember reading from the bible in all of my years at catechism or mass.

?


During the Liturgy in a Catholic mass 3 readings are read from Bible.

Usually in a typical mass the priest will conduct the mass from the Missal and during the Liturgy someone from the audience will come up to the podium and read a segment from the Bible.

 

[Evo]

?


During the Liturgy in a Catholic mass 3 readings are read from Bible.

Usually in a typical mass the priest will conduct the mass from the Missal and during the Liturgy someone from the audience will come up to the podium and read a segment from the Bible.

Not in our church.

Mostly Father Nelson would read from the Missal, then crack jokes, oh, and we'd sing a lot, but that was back when it was all in Latin.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Mostly Father Nelson would read from the Missal, then crack jokes, oh, and we'd sing a lot, but that was back when it was all in Latin.

Do you remember any of these Latin jokes?

 

[Evo]

Do you remember any of these Latin jokes?

The jokes were in English.

He was excommunicted when I was 11 for being married and having 10 children, seriously. That's when I quit the church, I told my mother I refused to attend anymore and she understood. Father Nelson was a wonderful man and the best priest I'd ever met and for the church to have such ridiculous rules was the last straw.

 

[mgb_phys]

He was excommunicted when I was 11 for being married and having 10 children

A priest of having sex with a consenting adult female - deviant!

 

[drankin]

A priest of having sex with a consenting adult female - deviant!

That's strictly a Catholic doctrine and not a biblical decree. This is one of the reason Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church of the time.

 

[Evo]

That's strictly a Catholic doctrine and not a biblical decree. This is one of the reason Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church of the time.

I thought he mainly broke off due to his anger over the Catholic church selling "redemption" to restock the coffers that the corrupt Medici Pope bankrupted on his lavish lifestyle.

 

[gravenewworld]

Do you remember any of these Latin jokes?

ubi o ubi est meam sub ubi?


modo fac id


those are some I remember from high school. man just saying those makes me miss how beautiful Latin is.

 

[drankin]

I thought he mainly broke off due to his anger over the Catholic church selling "redemption" to restock the coffers that the corrupt Medici Pope bankrupted on his lavish lifestyle.

Nope. That was just one of the many reasons. The big one was that the Catholic church at the time wouldn't let commoners read "God's Word" for themselves. They weren't "worthy" which shows the arrogance of the Church at the time. By doing this the Catholic church interpreted the "Word" as was beneficial to the Church and the devout commoners had to take it at as "The Gospel". Had they been able to read the "Word" for themselves they would have realized that you cannot buy "redemption" and Church would not have been able ring money out of the commoners. Luther went against the grain risking his own life and in a sense rescued sincere people from the Churches deception.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

ubi o ubi est meam sub ubi?

:rofl:

modo fac id

:rofl::rofl:

 

[gravenewworld]

:rofl:

:rofl::rofl:

There other way of saying "Just do it!" is "Id tantum fac!"

 

[mheslep]

That's strictly a Catholic doctrine and not a biblical decree. This is one of the reason Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church of the time.

I thought he mainly broke off due to his anger over the Catholic church selling "redemption" to restock the coffers that the corrupt Medici Pope bankrupted on his lavish lifestyle.

You are both right. More generally, the reformation was theologically about getting back to the precepts of 1st-2nd century Christianity and dumping on the ash heap most any baggage produced later. That would include both redemption payoffs and celibacy for the clergy.

 

[Art]

He was excommunicted when I was 11 for being married and having 10 children, seriously. That's when I quit the church, I told my mother I refused to attend anymore and she understood. Father Nelson was a wonderful man and the best priest I'd ever met and for the church to have such ridiculous rules was the last straw.

Celibacy has been in and out of fashion many times in the RC church with 7 popes being married themselves and 11 being the sons of clerics with a further 6 known to have had illegitimate offspring.

The attitude to celibacy was fairly lax in recent times with the church turning a blind eye to the priests who had sexual relationships until John Paul 11 who tightened things up considerably and banned dispensations although married Protestant pastors who converted were still accepted for ordination.

 

[denverdoc]

IIRC, help me out historians of science, the catholic church did not take kindly to scientific commentary re their worldview. As a result Galileo suffered in purgatory needlessly for 400 years, until enuf evidence accrued for the church to change its mind. So as a Catholic, I hear this guy suggesting, let's see, jury is still out. If that's not enuf of a red flag, then I'm reading this wrong. And yes, it does sound like US PR--which after the denunciation from the Papal throne re Iraq, must have George dubya, himself privvy with inside info, including the main man himself, feeling all warm and tingly.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

denverdoc,
If you pray on it I'm sure that you will feel differently.

Welcome back.

 

[Pelt]

That's strictly a Catholic doctrine and not a biblical decree. This is one of the reason Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church of the time.

Martin Luther's attack on clerical celibacy stemmed from a broader attack on Christian monasticism in general and particularly in the failing asceticism in the prevailing orders of the time. After all, celibacy seemed kind of silly when churchmen were widely perceived as living like lords, eating well, drinking well, and in more than a few cases not abiding by their vows.

Setting that aside, the Biblical argument for asceticism doesn't differ greatly from that of other traditions. Abstinence from any number of natural but voluntary pursuits is viewed as a discipline rather than righteousness set against the wickedness of indulgence. Sex is natural, healthy and morally acceptable, but so is discipline; the ability to do without in pursuit of worthier objectives remains a valued if not exclusive form of purity. Similar arguments are put forward by teetotalers, vegans, warfighters, martial artists, athletes, etc.

 

[Moridin]

Unfortunately, Luther carried on with another old doctrine, expressed in the book On The Jews and Their Lies. Oh well.

 

[drankin]

Yep, Luther had a racist side. I haven't studied that side of him yet.

 

[binzing]

This just in! The church has been backwards for as long as it has been "in business". Galileo and Copernicus would tell you that!

 

[Pelt]

Yep, Luther had a racist side. I haven't studied that side of him yet.

Well hot diggity. A racist in the 16th century? Who would've thunk it?

 

[Pelt]

This just in! The church has been backwards for as long as it has been "in business". Galileo and Copernicus would tell you that!

Copernicus had been dead for seventy-three years before On the Revolutions made it into the Index, and Galileo's problems could be chalked up to an academic bureaucracy that looks unsurprisingly like university admin and faculty today.

 

[Moridin]

Well hot diggity. A racist in the 16th century? Who would've thunk it?

It is important to remember that this originated directly from religious doctrine and almost a millennium of prior Jewish persecution.

Copernicus had been dead for seventy-three years before On the Revolutions made it into the Index, and Galileo's problems could be chalked up to an academic bureaucracy that looks unsurprisingly like university admin and faculty today.

Where is anyone threatened with torture or house arrest? Given, the Galileo affair was not as bad as it is sometimes made to look, but it was a clear sign of religious institution suppressing and overtaking open scientific inquiry based on religious dogma. After all, the bible teaches that the Earth is flat and still under a solid firmament of stars and the like. The Church did not vindicate him until 400 years later. Let's not forget the treatment of Kepler and Newton with them being non-trinitarians / arians and not mentioning god in Principia (Newton's Hypothesis non fingo).

 

[Pelt]

It is important to remember that this originated directly from religious doctrine and almost a millennium of prior Jewish persecution.

It's also important to recall the far more primitive context of the 16th century.

Where is anyone threatened with torture or house arrest?

I'll readily admit life was tougher before the Modern Age.

Given, the Galileo affair was not as bad as it is sometimes made to look, but it was a clear sign of religious institution suppressing and overtaking open scientific inquiry based on religious dogma.

Not simply based on religious dogma, but secular philosophy as well. The Church didn't start the inquest against Galileo, his peers did. At the time, the Church sat at the top of an academic authority that settled disputes amongst faculty in various fields and institutions. At the time, it made sense, many of the best educated men in Europe were clerics and the best academic institutions in were clerically run. You might consider them the equivalent of a National Academy of Sciences or a Board of Regents with authority and swords at their disposal. The Index itself was subject to review and disputed within the secular and clerical bureacracies. It's not a perfect system organizationally, especially when combined with the force of law, but it's not terribly dissimilar from the defanged structure of the modern academy. And for good reason; even today we understand the necessity of having some bureaucracy to weed out good scholarship from bad; exacting retribution against those who abuse their credentials in order to deter kookery and fraud.

After all, the bible teaches that the Earth is flat and still under a solid firmament of stars and the like.

A better way to put it is that one interpretation of Scripture confirms this old natural philosophy. It was discarded long ago by serious institutions, Catholic or otherwise, and at roughly the same time. The dispute is over the Church's delay in issuing an apology and correction over its error in handling the Galileo affair, and that is an argument over process rather than knowledge.

The Church did not vindicate him until 400 years later.

That's like complaining about a newspaper that doesn't issue a correction over an incorrect story despite it treating the facts in a more enlightened fashion in future reporting. Few if any institutions, academic or otherwise, feel obligated to issue clear mea culpa over process simply because of an occasional wrong result.

Let's not forget the treatment of Kepler and Newton with them being non-trinitarians / arians and not mentioning god in Principia (Newton's Hypothesis non fingo).

We can tie this into the Galileo affair, which unsurprisingly occurred in the same segment of history. The Church has felt no need to apologize for a lack of enlightened procedure in an era where enlightenment was generally lacking. Otherwise, we'd be asking for ancient universities to apologize for failure to adhere today's scholastic standards in their early history. It's easier and surprisingly more honest just to forgive yourself of youthful indiscretion.

 

[Moridin]

It's also important to recall the far more primitive context of the 16th century.

Which was mainly the result of...?

A better way to put it is that one interpretation of Scripture confirms this old natural philosophy. It was discarded long ago by serious institutions, Catholic or otherwise, and at roughly the same time. The dispute is over the Church's delay in issuing an apology and correction over its error in handling the Galileo affair, and that is an argument over process rather than knowledge.

You seem to be misunderstanding me - the scriptural authority was used against Galileo at the time of his life. This part was not about the Church's delay.

That's like complaining about a newspaper that doesn't issue a correction over an incorrect story despite it treating the facts in a more enlightened fashion in future reporting. Few if any institutions, academic or otherwise, feel obligated to issue clear mea culpa over process simply because of an occasional wrong result.

The place of the Earth in the Universe and the suppression of science is hardly comparable for some incorrect story in a paper.

And for good reason; even today we understand the necessity of having some bureaucracy to weed out good scholarship from bad; exacting retribution against those who abuse their credentials in order to deter kookery and fraud.

Unfortunately, that process is done with knowledge backing the stance; not simply the authority of a religious institution or ex cathedra.

We can tie this into the Galileo affair, which unsurprisingly occurred in the same segment of history. The Church has felt no need to apologize for a lack of enlightened procedure in an era where enlightenment was generally lacking.

I fail to see how that is an excuse for the behavior at the time. Notice that the Galileo "excuse" was not just an information "whoops, sorry" statement. According to Catholic Doctrine Galileo spent those 400 years in purgatory.

 

[Pelt]

Which was mainly the result of...?

Not knowing any better?

You seem to be misunderstanding me - the scriptural authority was used against Galileo at the time of his life. This part was not about the Church's delay.

Excuse me? You were just complaining that it took 400 years for the Church to issue a correction? How is it not about the delay?

The place of the Earth in the Universe and the suppression of science is hardly comparable for some incorrect story in a paper.

Suppression of science? Come on. Nobody seriously tosses that accusation around simply because folks aren't funding their fields of interest to their expectations today. Now translate that management of academic resources to the 17th century. For a body that was supposedly into the "suppression of science," the Catholic Church managed to produce a pretty foundational field of natural philosophers.

Unfortunately, that process is done with knowledge backing the stance; not simply the authority of a religious institution or ex cathedra.

That process is done with the authority of an academic institution, with a somewhat more democratic process than clerical arbitration. We're just trading adjectives here.

I fail to see how that is an excuse for the behavior at the time. Notice that the Galileo "excuse" was not just an information "whoops, sorry" statement. According to Catholic Doctrine Galileo spent those 400 years in purgatory.

I'm pretty sure the purgatory bit is made up, but let's say the Church did condemn him to purgatory. If you buy into purgatory, then you also buy into the Church belief that souls that go there desire to pay their penance. So who are we to get in the way of Galileo's desired atonement?