Slashdot Mirror


Pope Francis To Issue Encyclical On Global Warming

HughPickens.com writes The Guardian reports that following a visit in March to Tacloban, the Philippine city devastated in 2012 by typhoon Haiyan, Pope Francis plans to publish a rare encyclical on climate change and human ecology urging all Catholics to take action on moral and scientific grounds. "A papal encyclical is rare," says Bishop Marcelo Sorondo, chancellor of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy of Sciences who revealed the pope's plans when he delivered Cafod's annual Pope Paul VI lecture. "It is among the highest levels of a pope's authority. It will be 50 to 60 pages long; it's a big deal." The encyclical will be sent to the world's 5,000 Catholic bishops and 400,000 priests, who will distribute it to parishioners. Within Catholicism in recent times, an encyclical is generally used for significant issues, and is second in importance only to the highest ranking document now issued by popes, an Apostolic Constitution. "Just as humanity confronted revolutionary change in the 19th century at the time of industrialization, today we have changed the natural environment so much," says Sorondo. "If current trends continue, the century will witness unprecedented climate change and destruction of the ecosystem with tragic consequences."

Francis's environmental radicalism is likely to attract resistance from Vatican conservatives and in rightwing church circles, particularly in the US – where Catholic climate sceptics also include John Boehner, Republican leader of the House of Representatives and Rick Santorum, the former Republican presidential candidate. "There will always be 5-10% of people who will take offence. They are very vocal and have political clout," says Dan Misleh, director of the Catholic climate covenant. "This encyclical will threaten some people and bring joy to others. The arguments are around economics and science rather than morality." Francis will also be opposed by the powerful US evangelical movement, says Calvin Beisner, spokesman for the conservative Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, which has declared the US environmental movement to be "un-biblical" and a false religion. "The pope should back off," says Beisner. "The Catholic church is correct on the ethical principles but has been misled on the science. It follows that the policies the Vatican is promoting are incorrect. Our position reflects the views of millions of evangelical Christians in the US."

24 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good for him by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This Pope is the best one we've had in MANY years! He seems genuinely concerned for the average person, and seems to apply the standards Jesus used, which is precisely what a pope should do!

    May God bless him!

    And may people who stubbornly believe it's OK to screw up the environment be sent to a very warm place, where there won't be any climate change, ever.

  2. Environmental radicalism? by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apparently listening to the world's scientists and acknowledging reality is now a "radical position".

    Pretending that all is well with the climate, and that our only problem is that our entire scientific community is delusional, OTOH -- that's the reasonable and moderate position.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  3. Re:Agreed. by belthize · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ha, haha, hahahaha.

    Well this atheist wishes you both irrelevance, though if he's going to be relevant I'd prefer his brand.

    On a side note why is it whenever I read posts like the above, when I click on them, I can be absolutely certain the poster is none other than Mr AC.

  4. The times, they are a'changin' by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an atheist, I have to say that I respect this Pope for trying to drag the church, with many kicking and screaming, into the 21st century.

    And not just the church - look what he did to help the US and Cuba. A year ago that wasn't even on the radar.

    I wonder what else he has up his sleeve.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:The times, they are a'changin' by Baussian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As an atheist, no one who cares about the Pope's opinion gives a shit about yours.

      Speak for yourself. As an atheist, I do care about any help we can get to combat the growing ignorance. I much rather have a religious community who's believes align with scientific findings than one which goes against it for whatever reason.

  5. Re:Good news! We did it! by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    -1 Downvote for quoting the Daily Mail on anything.

  6. Re:Agreed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Idiot. Pope Frank doesn't represent you. He represent GOD. You think Catholicism is a democracy?

  7. Re:Doesn't matter by GNious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do know that there's PLENTY of scientific evidence out there which ISN'T funded by big oil refuting the ridiculous notion that carbon-dioxide is pollution?

    What I particularly liked about your post is the large number of sources you included to support the above statement.

  8. Extreme climate event: Hell freezes over by Snufu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Never thought I would see the day when the head of the the Catholic church represents a beacon of scientific rationalism dragging the rest of the first world into the modern era.

    1. Re:Extreme climate event: Hell freezes over by orzetto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Never thought I would see the day when the head of the the Catholic church represents a beacon of scientific rationalism dragging the USA into the modern era.

      Corrected that for you. Except for a few lunatics, no one seriously disputes AGW outside the US.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
  9. Re:Doesn't matter by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do know that there's PLENTY of scientific evidence out there which ISN'T funded by big oil refuting the ridiculous notion that carbon-dioxide is pollution?

    First of all, "scientific evidence" doesn't show whether or not something is or is not "pollution". "Pollution" is a term of judgement.

    The science shows that increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can change the climate. There are not "PLENTY" of scientists who disagree with that.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  10. Slashdot's refusal to accept climate change... by Skarjak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...boggles the mind. I mean, this is a tech website, you'd expect people here to be on average more intelligent or at least to have a better scientific culture than the average. And yet, whenever there's an article about climate change, there's always a bunch of morons spouting completely ignorant statements defeated by 10 seconds of googling. Where do all these people come from?

    1. Re:Slashdot's refusal to accept climate change... by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I mean, this is a tech website,

      Exactly, it's a tech site, not a science site. Techies are usually logically-minded and rationalist but they're also raging dilettantes who assume that they can run any dataset they want through a shell script and make better sense of it than the so-called "experts." They are quick to yell "conspiracy!" and suspicious of anyone with advanced qualifications.

      Techies of the Internet age are also steeped in libertarian ideological and moral values and disdain any sort of consensus or political process, let alone any conversation about morality or values.

      These are people that think they can download any movie or TV show and nobody deserves to be paid for it; these are people that trade PGP keys so they can email each other about their lunch order in perfect secrecy; these are people that assume they know more than their boss because they know how to unblock port 20 on his laptop. How do you think such people will react if you tell them that driving their car is slowly destroying the planet, and a massive regulatory and social revolution is necessary to stop it?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Slashdot's refusal to accept climate change... by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A lot of the "Dr." titles that appear on anti-evolution petitions are MDs, the general phenomenon is called the Salem Hypothesis.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  11. About time by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Someone has to look out for the Christians of the world.

    Hint: Jesus was against Pharisees and Money Lenders. If you think he said for you to get rich and destroy the world, you're reading the wrong bible.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  12. Re:Doesn't matter by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what you're saying is "because lots of the power we have available now is produced by burning coal, we shouldn't try to produce power in the future by doing something else"?

    I mean, of course the wind turbines get produced by burning coal - that's so that future wind turbines will be produced by drawing electricity from a grid powered by wind turbines (and tidal power stations, and hydro plants, and solar plants, and nuclear, and ...)

  13. what's wrong with this picture by mtrachtenberg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remain mystified by how such a sane and decent person has risen so high within a large institution.

  14. Re:Agreed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have you heard of this guy Paul who wrote most of the new testament? He said: "For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."" (Galatians 5:14)

    Some of your neighbors are gay. Paul ordered you to treat *all* your neighbors with love, and so did Jesus. Pope Francis is just following orders. If the Bible is your authority on truth, you should too.

    Conservative Christians/Catholics grossly misunderstand their Biblical history. Compared to the conservative Jewish tradition of his day, Jesus was a FLAMING liberal. Eating with sinners and tax collectors! Breaking the law when it doesn't make sense! Forgiving sinners that were caught red-handed! These are part of why everyone was so pissed off at him: he was too liberal.

    Conservative Christianity has been infected by hatred, judgmentalism, self-righteous pride, and disgusting selfishness. And you, Mr AC, are a fine example of exactly this.

    You seriously need to have a heart-to-heart with your God before it is too late.

  15. Re:Allegiance to a foreign power? by plopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If a US politician advocates for Israel does this mean they are allied to a foreign power? If a US politician takes campaign contributions from a multi-national corporation does that mean they are violating the foreign immoluments clause of the US Constitution?

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  16. Re:Good for him by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You hypocrites are always making fun of religion, and calling catholics pedophiles and faggots.

    That's bullshit and you know it ...

    We would never call catholics 'faggots'.

    --
    Look where all this talking got us, baby.
  17. Does not represent a change in views of the Church by unimacs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For many years the Catholic Church has maintained that global warming is a real problem and that people should act accordingly, -as stewards of God's earth. Pope Francis has taken it a step farther but it's not a sudden change in position.

    I was raised Catholic but no longer consider myself one. I still have a fascination for the Church's history and how it functions. I also share some of its values. To those that consider it an ultra-conservative organization, that's only partially true. It often isn't, at least not in the US political sense of the word "conservative". It's also a very large organization that exists within many countries and cultures. Though there is only one set of beliefs and teachings, the emphasis placed on those different teachings varies from place to place. For example, many Catholics in the US practice birth control even though the official teaching of the Church is that it's a sin (aside from "Natural Family Planning"). Few US priests (at least in my part of the country) are going to attempt to lecture their congregations on it.

    So even though the Pope has put more teeth behind the Church's official stance on global warming, that doesn't mean that Catholic climate change skeptics are going to suddenly tow the party line. It will hopefully mean that the larger organization will make funds available to its churches to make them "greener" but I doubt it. Money tends to flow only in one direction within the Church.

  18. Radical? by jandersen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Francis's environmental radicalism is likely to attract resistance from Vatican conservatives and in rightwing church circles...

    Isn't it strange that accepting what for all practical purposes must be called the scientific consensus is described as 'radical'? And stop calling deniers 'conservative' - a conservative is somebody who, after giving the matter some thought, feels that the old ways are best - whereas the deniers are people that refuse to apply their intellect at all, if there is a risk they might have to change their minds. I have a lot of respect for conservatives; rather less for deniers.

  19. Re:Doesn't matter by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Coal is used to refine raw iron ore into iron or steel because the ore consists to a huge percentage of OXYGEN!
    So you need coal to reduce the iron ore to iron, and for that you basically can only use coal: not gas nor oil.
    However the majority of steel production is recycling of existing steel ... which is mainly done with electricity.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  20. Re:As someone brought up in a Catholic family... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We've already heard from some preposterous stuff from deep-green environmentalists (aka back to the wonderful Stone Age world of peace with Mother Earth) that AGW is a moral imperative, and sure enough, religious people are trying to join as well.

    Straw man. The Pope and the mainstream environmental movements are not arguing for that, so using it to criticise him is not a valid argument.

    I am old enough to mistrust any politician or religionist who talks about anything as a "moral imperative" because it usually implies mob justice and the crushing of civil liberties. Look at the history of the World. Look at ISIS right now whose highest priority is the moral imperative of submission to Islam. Tell me I'm wrong.

    Wow, you really like these straw men, huh. When I think of moral imperatives, I think of things like equal rights for black people and the end of slavery, equality for homosexuals, not polluting the world or hunting species into extinction, that sort of thing. ISIS isn't really representative of the Pope's views or what he means by "moral imperative", so I'm happy to say you are wrong.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC