Posted on 06/18/2015 9:07:16 AM PDT by FourtySeven
222. Christian spirituality proposes an alternative understanding of the quality of life, and encourages a prophetic and contemplative lifestyle, one capable of deep enjoyment free of the obsession with consumption. We need to take up an ancient lesson, found in different religious traditions and also in the Bible. It is the conviction that “less is more”. A constant flood of new consumer goods can baffle the heart and prevent us from cherishing each thing and each moment. To be serenely present to each reality, however small it may be, opens us to much greater horizons of understanding and personal fulfilment. Christian spirituality proposes a growth marked by moderation and the capacity to be happy with little. It is a return to that simplicity which allows us to stop and appreciate the small things, to be grateful for the opportunities which life affords us, to be spiritually detached from what we possess, and not to succumb to sadness for what we lack. This implies avoiding the dynamic of dominion and the mere accumulation of pleasures.
223. Such sobriety, when lived freely and consciously, is liberating. It is not a lesser life or one lived with less intensity. On the contrary, it is a way of living life to the full. In reality, those who enjoy more and live better each moment are those who have given up dipping here and there, always on the look-out for what they do not have. They experience what it means to appreciate each person and each thing, learning familiarity with the simplest things and how to enjoy them. So they are able to shed unsatisfied needs, reducing their obsessiveness and weariness. Even living on little, they can live a lot, above all when they cultivate other pleasures and find satisfaction in fraternal encounters, in service, in developing their gifts, in music and art, in contact with nature, in prayer. Happiness means knowing how to limit some needs which only diminish us, and being open to the many different possibilities which life can offer.
224. Sobriety and humility were not favourably regarded in the last century. And yet, when there is a general breakdown in the exercise of a certain virtue in personal and social life, it ends up causing a number of imbalances, including environmental ones. That is why it is no longer enough to speak only of the integrity of ecosystems. We have to dare to speak of the integrity of human life, of the need to promote and unify all the great values. Once we lose our humility, and become enthralled with the possibility of limitless mastery over everything, we inevitably end up harming society and the environment. It is not easy to promote this kind of healthy humility or happy sobriety when we consider ourselves autonomous, when we exclude God from our lives or replace him with our own ego, and think that our subjective feelings can define what is right and what is wrong.
225. On the other hand, no one can cultivate a sober and satisfying life without being at peace with him or herself. An adequate understanding of spirituality consists in filling out what we mean by peace, which is much more than the absence of war. Inner peace is closely related to care for ecology and for the common good because, lived out authentically, it is reflected in a balanced lifestyle together with a capacity for wonder which takes us to a deeper understanding of life. Nature is filled with words of love, but how can we listen to them amid constant noise, interminable and nerve-wracking distractions, or the cult of appearances? Many people today sense a profound imbalance which drives them to frenetic activity and makes them feel busy, in a constant hurry which in turn leads them to ride rough-shod over everything around them. This too affects how they treat the environment. An integral ecology includes taking time to recover a serene harmony with creation, reflecting on our lifestyle and our ideals, and contemplating the Creator who lives among us and surrounds us, whose presence “must not be contrived but found, uncovered”.[155]
226. We are speaking of an attitude of the heart, one which approaches life with serene attentiveness, which is capable of being fully present to someone without thinking of what comes next, which accepts each moment as a gift from God to be lived to the full. Jesus taught us this attitude when he invited us to contemplate the lilies of the field and the birds of the air, or when seeing the rich young man and knowing his restlessness, “he looked at him with love” (Mk 10:21). He was completely present to everyone and to everything, and in this way he showed us the way to overcome that unhealthy anxiety which makes us superficial, aggressive and compulsive consumers.
227. One expression of this attitude is when we stop and give thanks to God before and after meals. I ask all believers to return to this beautiful and meaningful custom. That moment of blessing, however brief, reminds us of our dependence on God for life; it strengthens our feeling of gratitude for the gifts of creation; it acknowledges those who by their labours provide us with these goods; and it reaffirms our solidarity with those in greatest need.
In many way I really don't give a flying fig what the left thinks or what the haters on here think. I am reading it as I do all letters from the Holy Father, with deliberateness, prayerfulness and open to what I am to learn from it.
Well, I care what the left thinks not because I agree with them but because I staunchly disagree and know that Leftists with power are extremely dangerous to everyone. The Pope is giving them the power of his influence, and the power of propaganda with this encyclical. It does not matter if most the of the encyclical is fine and dandy, there is enough in there to spoil everything else i.e. rotten apple in the barrel.
Not just dysfunctional, but in the case of many Latin American countries, the poverty is criminal because so many of those countries are awash in natural resources, but the long string of “people’s governments” hamstring the populace and make social mobility damned near impossible.
Clearly you have not read the entire thing. I have not yet either. When I have read the entire thing and had time to reflect on his words I will form my opinion. Just remember to judge in the way you would want to be judged.
I have asked the mod to remove because of offensive language.
No I have not read the entire thing, but I don’t see how anything else that might be in it can negate the damage of the Pope’s climate change drivel. Especially the implication that those who deny AGW are immoral. That is absolutely disasterous.
What paragraph, please?
See post 19.
Paragraph 175 in post 19 and then my comment on it in post 20.
What a disaster.It's even worse than we thought ...
Agree with you entirely. And this document (predicated upon junk science and palpable contempt for that evil boogeyman, "technocracy") contains much fodder for the left to exploit.
165. We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels – especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas – needs to be progressively replaced without delay. Until greater progress is made in developing widely accessible sources of renewable energy, it is legitimate to choose the lesser of two evils or to find short-term solutions. But the international community has still not reached adequate agreements about the responsibility for paying the costs of this energy transition. In recent decades, environmental issues have given rise to considerable public debate and have elicited a variety of committed and generous civic responses. Politics and business have been slow to react in a way commensurate with the urgency of the challenges facing our world. Although the post-industrial period may well be remembered as one of the most irresponsible in history, nonetheless there is reason to hope that humanity at the dawn of the twenty-first century will be remembered for having generously shouldered its grave responsibilities.
170. Some strategies for lowering pollutant gas emissions call for the internationalization of environmental costs, which would risk imposing on countries with fewer resources burdensome commitments to reducing emissions comparable to those of the more industrialized countries. Imposing such measures penalizes those countries most in need of development. A further injustice is perpetrated under the guise of protecting the environment. Here also, the poor end up paying the price. Furthermore, since the effects of climate change will be felt for a long time to come, even if stringent measures are taken now, some countries with scarce resources will require assistance in adapting to the effects already being produced, which affect their economies. In this context, there is a need for common and differentiated responsibilities. As the bishops of Bolivia have stated, “the countries which have benefited from a high degree of industrialization, at the cost of enormous emissions of greenhouse gases, have a greater responsibility for providing a solution to the problems they have caused”
193. In any event, if in some cases sustainable development were to involve new forms of growth, then in other cases, given the insatiable and irresponsible growth produced over many decades, we need also to think of containing growth by setting some reasonable limits and even retracing our steps before it is too late. We know how unsustainable is the behaviour of those who constantly consume and destroy, while others are not yet able to live in a way worthy of their human dignity. That is why the time has come to accept decreased growth in some parts of the world, in order to provide resources for other places to experience healthy growth. Benedict XVI has said that “technologically advanced societies must be prepared to encourage more sober lifestyles, while reducing their energy consumption and improving its efficiency”.[135]
It is jaw-dropping that a pope would publish spiritually devoid utopian drivel such as the following:
212. We must not think that these efforts are not going to change the world. They benefit society, often unbeknown to us, for they call forth a goodness which, albeit unseen, inevitably tends to spread. Furthermore, such actions can restore our sense of self-esteem; they can enable us to live more fully and to feel that life on earth is worthwhile.
113. There is also the fact that people no longer seem to believe in a happy future; they no longer have blind trust in a better tomorrow based on the present state of the world and our technical abilities. There is a growing awareness that scientific and technological progress cannot be equated with the progress of humanity and history, a growing sense that the way to a better future lies elsewhere. This is not to reject the possibilities which technology continues to offer us. But humanity has changed profoundly, and the accumulation of constant novelties exalts a superficiality which pulls us in one direction. It becomes difficult to pause and recover depth in life. If architecture reflects the spirit of an age, our megastructures and drab apartment blocks express the spirit of globalized technology, where a constant flood of new products coexists with a tedious monotony. Let us refuse to resign ourselves to this, and continue to wonder about the purpose and meaning of everything. Otherwise we would simply legitimate the present situation and need new forms of escapism to help us endure the emptiness.
------------
67...Although it is true that we Christians have at times incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures, nowadays we must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures.
Followed by paragraph 171 which is a condemnation of the Algore carbon exchange concept:
171. The strategy of buying and selling “carbon credits” can lead to a new form of speculation which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of some countries and sectors.
Don't think I'm defending him, though. The paragraphs that you DIDN'T highlight (but should have) are:
173. Enforceable international agreements are urgently needed, since local authorities are not always capable of effective intervention. Relations between states must be respectful of each other’s sovereignty, but must also lay down mutually agreed means of averting regional disasters which would eventually affect everyone. Global regulatory norms are needed to impose obligations and prevent unacceptable actions, for example, when powerful companies dump contaminated waste or offshore polluting industries in other countries.
174. Let us also mention the system of governance of the oceans. International and regional conventions do exist, but fragmentation and the lack of strict mechanisms of regulation, control and penalization end up undermining these efforts. The growing problem of marine waste and the protection of the open seas represent particular challenges. What is needed, in effect, is an agreement on systems of governance for the whole range of so-called “global commons”.
Not the case.
170. Some strategies for lowering pollutant gas emissions call for the internationalization of environmental costs, which would risk imposing on countries with fewer resources burdensome commitments to reducing emissions comparable to those of the more industrialized countries. Imposing such measures penalizes those countries most in need of development. A further injustice is perpetrated under the guise of protecting the environment. Here also, the poor end up paying the price. Furthermore, since the effects of climate change will be felt for a long time to come, even if stringent measures are taken now, some countries with scarce resources will require assistance in adapting to the effects already being produced, which affect their economies. In this context, there is a need for common and differentiated responsibilities. As the bishops of Bolivia have stated, “the countries which have benefited from a high degree of industrialization, at the cost of enormous emissions of greenhouse gases, have a greater responsibility for providing a solution to the problems they have caused”
Don't think I'm defending him, though. The paragraphs that you DIDN'T highlight (but should have) are:
See post #19.
Really?
The top 10 dysfunctional countries are (according to this source), also here in order (worst at the top), are
Not one of them is historically nor majority Catholic.
Or take another metric: The Heritage Foundation rankings of economic freedom. Here are the bottom 20 (worst at the bottom):
157 Algeria
158 Angola
159 Solomon Islands 160 Uzbekistan
161 Burma
162 Ukraine (Orthodox)
163 Bolivia(Catholic)
164 Kiribati
165 Chad
166 Central African Republic
167 Timor-Leste (Catholic)
168 Democratic Republic of Congo
169 Argentina (Catholic)
170 Republic of Congo (Protestant/Evangelical)
171 Iran
172 Turkmenistan
173 Equatorial Guinea
174 Eritrea
175 Zimbabwe (Protestant)
176 Venezuela (Catholic)
177 Cuba (Catholic, but church was officially suppressed for ~50 years)
178 North Korea
(Not that in this list several countries are not ranked because of insufficient data: Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Kosovo, Sudan, Libya, Syria. All of them are low-end, and all are Muslim.)
You’ll notice that there are five Catholic countries, and four Protestant countries, listed in this list of the 20 bottom-most countries for Economic Freedom.
There are two Catholic countries listed in the 20 TOP-most countries for Economic Freedom --- Chile and Ireland --- which, interestingly, are ranked ahead of the USA, the UK, Germany, Japan, and all of the Scandanavian countries.)
This would help us evaluate whether historically Catholic countries are the most economically dysfuctional.
I should have been more clear about my post. I was referring to comparable countries that are advanced and industrialized. Comparing Japan and Zimbabwe is like comparing a Ferrari to a wheelbarrow.
“To be serenely present to each reality...” As if there is more than one reality. I have not read the document and do not intend to. It should be ignored by everyone. “And when he hath let out his own sheep, he goeth before them: and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers.” The voice from Rome for the last 60 years or so has been the voice of strangers - and should be ignored. Catholics know what they must do to save their souls. (Sedevacantists begone - the Holy Ghost only prevents the Pope from formally defining error as revealed Truth, not from behaving like an idiot.)
51. Inequity affects not only individuals but entire countries; it compels us to consider an ethics of international relations. A true “ecological debt” exists, particularly between the global north and south, connected to commercial imbalances with effects on the environment, and the disproportionate use of natural resources by certain countries over long periods of time. The export of raw materials to satisfy markets in the industrialized north has caused harm locally, as for example in mercury pollution in gold mining or sulphur dioxide pollution in copper mining. There is a pressing need to calculate the use of environmental space throughout the world for depositing gas residues which have been accumulating for two centuries and have created a situation which currently affects all the countries of the world. The warming caused by huge consumption on the part of some rich countries has repercussions on the poorest areas of the world, especially Africa, where a rise in temperature, together with drought, has proved devastating for farming. There is also the damage caused by the export of solid waste and toxic liquids to developing countries, and by the pollution produced by companies which operate in less developed countries in ways they could never do at home, in the countries in which they raise their capital: “We note that often the businesses which operate this way are multinationals. They do here what they would never do in developed countries or the so-called first world. Generally, after ceasing their activity and withdrawing, they leave behind great human and environmental liabilities such as unemployment, abandoned towns, the depletion of natural reserves, deforestation, the impoverishment of agriculture and local stock breeding, open pits, riven hills, polluted rivers and a handful of social works which are no longer sustainable”
Comment: I do not care for the "ecological debt" verbiage. 150-200 years ago, when European countries held extensive colonies, he would have somewhat of a point, but all of these former colonies are now supposedly sovereign states. Multinational corporations do not have their own armies, so far as I know. So if the rulers of these countries in the "developing south" did not consent to having this exploitation occur, they could call a halt to it. If they didn't want their people working for near slave wages in sweatshops, it would stop. But the fact of the matter is that they are far too happy with the payoffs they're receiving to really care one way or the other.
So who should Bergoglio be holding to account? In my book, it's the rulers of these countries who allow their countries to be despoiled and their people to be exploited.
Dear Pope Francis: Shut Up and Pray!
Can't have a post Vatican II encyclical without a nod to other "religious traditions", can we?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.