Vatican archbishop: All should accept that global warming is a fact

LifeSite News ^ | July 19, 2017 | Lisa Bourne

[Mrs. Don-o]

Right you are. And there's a big difference between saying that all human activities have to do with ethics, and saying all human choices are straight up-and-don moral choices. A whole lot of them are in fact prudential choices, i.e., when various options are allowable based on various evaluations of the facts, or even various (non-sinful) preferences.

For instance: Feed the hungry: a divine command. Do it by:

• Slashing the taxation/regulation burden on small farm producers
• OR: running a church-sponsored soup kitchen,
• OR: getting philanthropies to distribute vegetable seeds and sponsor gardening classes in all poor neighborhoods,
• OR extending EBT eligibility,
• OR: restricting EBT use to essential nutrition staples only;
• OR: lowering the minimum wage, so more entry-level jobs can be created and people can earn money and feed themselves.
• OR: starting a micro-credit corporation to capitalize myriad small business start-ups in areas of high unemployment;
• OR: enacting a big tax incentive for retailers and wholesalers to donate past-sell-by inventory to Food Banks;
• OR sweeping all the homeless off the streets and put them in therapeutic residences with treatment, work assignments and meals
• OR giving every panhandler a tenner out of your own pocket,
• OR getting charity foundations to hire neighborhood-based small caterers to cater meals to the indigent elderly/disabled
• OR: handing out sandwiches out of your own front door;
• OR: a dozen, a hundred more possible AND/ORs.

All these choices are allowable; every one of them is a prudential judgment, not "a human activity and therefore under the jurisdiction of the Pope" (!!).

[Mrs. Don-o]

Historically, has the Church "criminally wrong" on science? On the contrary: with a few, vanishingly rare, heavily publicized exceptions, Churchmen have a splendid record of research,teaching and promotion of science.

As science.

Not as "doctrine."

When certain scientific or religious charlatans mobilize to turn "science" into doctrine, then you've got trouble. Which is why the Bergoglian Bureaucracy should NOT be colluding with the Global Climate Alarmism Establishment: it's neither legit religion nor good science.

[arthurus]

Bergoglio is a screwball in so many ways. I just have to keep reminding myself that there is a reason for all this. The Church cannot self-destruct. If the doctrinally faithful bishops were to hold a conclave and elect a separate Pope, that would be a false star which I must not follow. But if that conclave were to choose Benedict, then I might lose my sense of direction, not that he is so much better, which he surely is, but that it is not entirely clear at this pass whether or not he is still the Pope.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I have only recently begun to consider the possibility that B16’s abrogation was invalid.

[trebb]

Understood - my comment was more as a reminder that the Church could be deadly with claims of heresy and such for those who opposed/belied teachings "outside religion" as it has been known to consider itself to be the absolute expert on most things over a certain period - being made of mortals, it can be just as petty and obnoxious, and wrong as anyone of us but some enjoy the political type powers.

The Church would better serve mankind by sticking to the Good News of the Gospel - especially since when it comes out on how we might destroy the earth God gave us, it seems to ignore that God has already told us how things go...

[Mrs. Don-o]

Got it. Good thoughts.