On Earth Day, Pope Francis calls all ‘to see the world through the eyes of God the Creator’

National Catholic Reporter ^ | April 22, 2016 | Brian Rowe

[ebb tide]

See the world through the eyes of the Creator, Pope Francis said at the end of his general audience in St. Peter's Square on Wednesday, marking Earth Day.

“I exhort everyone to see the world through the eyes of God the Creator: the earth is an environment to be safeguarded, a garden to be cultivated,” he said.

“The relationship of mankind with nature must not be conducted with greed, manipulation and exploitation, but it must conserve the divine harmony that exists between creatures and Creation within the logic of respect and care, so it can be put to the service of our brothers, also of future generations,” the pope said.

In his universal prayer intention for April, Francis prayed “That people may learn to respect creation and care for it as a gift of God.” On Tuesday, he said on Twitter:

In addition, the Global Catholic Climate Movement has designated April as Care4Creation Month and has produced resources and prayers that communities can use in observing it.

Since its beginning in the U.S. in 1970, Earth Day has grown into the largest worldwide civic observance, according to the Earth Day Network, which estimated more than 1 billion people participate in activities each April 22.

Earth Day was the brainchild of U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, who sought a way to place environmental protection on the national agenda at a time when pollution was compounding. The Democratic senator enlisted college students to organize and coordinate the day. More than 20 million Americans attended Earth Day festivities on April 22, 1970, aligning a broad spectrum of cohorts: Democrats and Republicans, urban and rural communities, labor and business leaders.

The energy that surfaced that day has been credited with spurring the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (1970) and the passage of signature environmental legislation, such as the Clean Air Act (1970), the Clean Water Act (1972) and the Endangered Species Act (1973) -- all initiatives enacted under President Richard Nixon.

Earth Day has since expanded to 192 countries, according to the Earth Day Network.

[Brian Roewe is an NCR staff writer. Follow him on Twitter: @BrianRoewe.]

Editor's note: Want more stories from Eco Catholic? We can send you an email alert once a week with the latest. Just go to this page and follow directions: Email alert sign-up.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Clearly Pope Francis had to speak out strongly against "homosexual unions" because he was responding to the Synods,which addressed this topic. He also denounced other anti-life practices, for instance when he strongly supported adoption in opposition to abortion:

179 "Adopting a child is an act of love, offering the gift of a family to someone who has none. It is important to insist that legislation help facilitate the adoption process, above all in the case of unwanted children, in order to prevent their abortion or abandonment. Those who accept the challenge of adopting and accepting someone unconditionally and gratuitously become channels of God's love. For he says, "Even if your mother forgets you, I will not forget you" (Is 49:15).

He didn't focus on "mass murderers" as this was not addressed by the Synods on the Family.

[ebb tide]

The purpose of the Synod was supposedly the Sacrament of Marriage and families, not homosexual unions, not adulterous unions or any other “irregular unions”.

But the Catholic Church teaching on the former has long been understood. Pope Francis convened both SinNods so Kasper, Marx could poke their noses under the tent.

[metmom]

The thing with Bible Prophecy is that you only really know, for sure, after the event has happened.

That's about the most accurate thing I've heard about Bible prophecy.

What's going to happen is going to happen and it's going to fit GOD'S timeline, not ours.

[BlatherNaut]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/10/02/meet-yayo-grassi-the-gay-man-who-is-friends-with-pope-francis/

[ebb tide]

“Hence it is can [sic] no longer simply be said that all those in any ‘irregular’ situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.”

“Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs.”

Francis is as guilty as Pontius Pilate was washing his hands.

[ebb tide]

July 10, 2015: He blesses a gay couple. Pope Francis wrote in response to a letter from Francesca Pardi, author of the children’s book Why do you have two moms?. Pardi summarized the letter on her Facebook page, saying the pope “hopes for an always more fruitful activity at the service of young generations and sharing authentic human and Christian values.” The pope ended the letter with his “apostle’s blessing” for Pardi and her partner, Maria Silvia Fiengo.

Do you think that’s an “act of love”?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Pope Francis addressed homosexual unions in order to repudiate them. This is not a legitimate reason to criticize Pope Francis.

To put it even plainer: there are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Pope Francis, but that is not one of them.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I do not approve of this "each country, each region" approach to finding good pastoral approaches to those living in sin.

I don't see how this can be reconciled with the Gospel, with the Catechism, with Canon Law or with the unity of Christ's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[ebb tide]

He did not repudiate homosexual unions, he merely stated they were not equivalent to the Sacrament of Marriage.

[Mrs. Don-o]

When Pope Francis blessed Apostolic Pentecostal Church member Kim David --- the KY county clerk who refused to issue "gay marriage" licenses --- and thanked her for her courage and told her to stay strong, all the no-good-niks swarmed out and said he really had no clear idea who she was, or what she had done. He was supposedly steered into it and told "Here, bless this lady" by Liberty Counsel and that crafty Cardinal Vigano!

So when Francis blessed this other lady and her "partner" it would be consistent to take the same line: blessing is just his automatic default setting: he didn't really know what they were up to.

It's particularly fishy when Francesca Pardi chooses to "summararize" or "paraphrase" the Pope's letter on her Facebook page; when, if the letter were an explicit endorsement, she would have proudly posted the whole letter as an image, or quoted the whole thing verbatim.

I don't know how Pope Francis got into this very unwise practice of indiscriminate blessing. Blessings are only for the pure. What can he be thinking of? It's like blessing is his all-purpose response!!

Luke 6:28
"Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you."

[Mrs. Don-o]

He said homosexual unions are not even remotely analogous to marriage. Not even remotely. That's a repudiation.

[Senator_Blutarski]

That has little to do with the politics of the city administration. It has more to do with the overfertilization of the most useless crop in the world: lawns.

I disagree.

Much of the pollution from Minneapolis/St Paul is from interconnected rain water and sewage systems. During big rains the sewage plants are overwhelmed by rain water in sewage pipes. They end up dumping raw sewage into the Mississippi.

I would also add that the water in the river near the Downtown St Paul Airport has been known to catch on fire, although it has been a while since that has happened.

[Bryanw92]

>>Much of the pollution from Minneapolis/St Paul is from interconnected rain water and sewage systems. During big rains the sewage plants are overwhelmed by rain water in sewage pipes. They end up dumping raw sewage into the Mississippi.

Republican rainwater does not intrude into sanitary sewers? ;-)

>>I would also add that the water in the river near the Downtown St Paul Airport has been known to catch on fire, although it has been a while since that has happened.

I remember that sort of thing happening up until the mid-80s. When did it last happen there?

[piusv]

He did not repudiate homosexual unions, he merely stated they were not equivalent to the Sacrament of Marriage.

Exactly.

[ebb tide]

No, as Pope, he has never repudiated homosexual or adulterous unions. He has encouraged them, whether through phone calls, emails, interviews, public greetings or his recent heretical exhortation.

“Some forms of union radically contradict this ideal, while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.” AL 292.

“In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living ‘as brothers and sisters’ which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy [i.e., sexual intercourse] are lacking ‘it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers’ ( Gaudium et spes, 51).” AL fn. 329

The Synod Fathers stated that the Church does not disregard the constructive elements in those situations which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage.AL 314

Gradualness in Pastoral Care

The Fathers also considered the specific situation of a merely civil marriage or, with due distinction, even simple cohabitation, noting that “when such unions attain a particular stability, legally recognized, are characterized by deep affection and responsibility for their offspring, and demonstrate an ability to overcome trials, they can provide occasions for pastoral care with a view to the eventual celebration of the sacrament of marriage”.AL 315

Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. AL 339

Since when did mortal sin could no longer be stated as such? Since the new pope came into town?

[piusv]

Bravo. Let’s not forget his approval of civil unions in Argentina.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/04/ncr-report-from-argentina-bergoglio-did.html

[Mrs. Don-o]

I believe the real fault and danger in these statements is not overt heresy (of the kind carefully defined in Canon Law), but a kind of insidious equivocation.

That does not get Pope Francis off the hook. Ambiguity can be more dangerous that formal, technical heresy, inasmuch as it slips past a person's immune system and then quietly infects the mind and heart before the person realizes it.

For instance:

"“Some forms of union radically contradict this ideal, while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.” AL 292.

That *could* mean, "homosexual union radically contradicts this ideal, while a marriage with "the impediment of disparity of cult" (i.e. to a non-Catholic) realizes it in at least a partial and analogous way."

It *could* mean that, and that would be a solid, orthodox interpretation -- but we don't really know what Pope Francis was thinking of, and it's amazing that in a 60,000 word document, he wouldn't even define his key terms!!

Another example:

"Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." AL 339

That *could* mean, "Even though there exists the objective, grave matter of serious sin here, we cannot say that all these people are living in a state of mortal sin, since the elements of sufficient knowledge and free consent of the will may not be present."

It *could* mean that, but it's too vague to say exactly what Pope Francis has in mind here. For instance, people might have entered into an objectively invalid second marriage, on the advice of a bad priest who told them it would be OK! They are doing something gravely and objectively morally wrong, but mortal sin cannot be imputed to them subjectively, because they did not realize this trusted priest was totally in the wrong!

Therein lies the danger: the erosion of good doctrine and practice, due to these slovenly (?) or are they hand-crafted (?) equivocations.

Showing that ... well, tagline.

[ebb tide]

The Pope’s interview on the plane ride back from Lesbos makes his heretical intents in Amoris Laetitia quite clear:

>>(Frank Rocca, Wall Street Journal) If you permit me, I’d like to ask you another question about an event of recent days, which was your apostolic exhortation. As you well know, there has been much discussion about on one of the many, I know that we’ve focused on this a lot…there has been much discussion after the publication. Some sustain that nothing has changed with respect to the discipline that regulates access to the sacraments for the divorced and remarried, that the Law, the pastoral praxis and obviously the doctrine remain the same. Others sustain that much has changed and that there are new openings and possibilities. For a Catholic who wants to know: are there new, concrete possibilities that didn’t exist before the publication of the exhortation or not?<<

>>Pope Francis: I can say yes, period. <<

[ebb tide]

That *could* mean, "homosexual union radically contradicts this ideal, while a marriage with "the impediment of disparity of cult" (i.e. to a non-Catholic) realizes it in at least a partial and analogous way."

Are you not married to a non-Catholic? Do you consider your union to be"irregular" and only a partial and analagous comparison to Marriage?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Like thousands of mixed Catholic-non-Catholc couples, we sought and got the necessary canonical permission. Without this, it would be considered an irregular union because of disparity of cult.