Laudato Si

[Papist]

Doubt the media will point out the following points in the encyclical.

1) Creation has a Creator, and is more than just “nature-plus-evolution”
2) Human ecology means recognizing and valuing the difference between masculinity and femininity
3) Jesus sanctifies human work
4) Look up from your phones and encounter each other
5) Save the baby humans
6) Helping the poor requires more than just handout
7) Overpopulation is not the problem
8) True ecology requires true anthropology and respect for human dignity
9) Real change requires a change in culture, not just politics
10) The Church does not presume to settle scientific questions, and we need an honest and open debate
11) Stop with the cynicism, secularism and immorality

 

https://stream.org/11-things-probably-wont-hear-pope-francis-encyclical/

[Yaatee]

Non-Catholics have not said that they agree with everything in the encyclical.  But they, and especially those despised environmentalists, have applauded the emphasis in the encyclical on  conservation of the planet and the people within. There will be a disagreement about the science; the encyclical does not pretend to be the last word in this regard. No one opposes work, certainly not the citizens of the USA, who work harder than anyone in the first world.  Environmentalists also support peace and the respect for peoples from all cultures, as through these some attempt can be made to preserve the world.  Certainly all this can be achieved only through a change in our culture and basic values, in which mindless consumerism, acquisition and display are perceived for what they are, destructive to us, our civilizations and the planet.

An article in today's Wall Street Journal describes catastrophic floods and even gas fires burning people alive in Ghana caused by innumerable plastic bags clogging water and gas pipes.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/ghanas-growth-spurs-uncontrollable-trash-1434928945

And skyrocketing animal extinctions  may, indeed, end up threatening our own survival.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/skyrocketing-extinctions-put-humans-at-risk/?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Of course many, if not most, people, including many scientists believe in a Creator.  Others, used to scientific proofs, will say, "I don't know", a position which I regard as justifiable.  Of course there is a difference between the sexes; more information regarding this is being discovered every day, as the genome is unraveled.

I think that non-Catholics and "environmentallists"applaud the emphasis of this encyclical.  There has been a lot of opposition by quite a few Christians to whether even climate change even existed, let alone whether human activity accelerated it.  I hope that this encyclical will help to legitimize these views, which are essential to our survival.

[Catlick]

Many on the Right think that the Pope should stick to his core business and only preach on private morality, liturgy, etc. The Pope should speak up (and has spoken up) against such injustices as unfair wages and environmental destruction.

On the other hand environmental destruction is #59 on my list of things that currently keep souls from reaching Heaven. A LOT MORE evil is done by the horrible liturgical abuse, the blatant heresy among the bishops, the huge addictions to pornography. 

[Papist]

Non-Catholics have not said that they agree with everything in the encyclical.  But they, and especially those despised environmentalists, have applauded the emphasis in the encyclical on  conservation of the planet and the people within. There will be a disagreement about the science; the encyclical does not pretend to be the last word in this regard. No one opposes work, certainly not the citizens of the USA, who work harder than anyone in the first world.  Environmentalists also support peace and the respect for peoples from all cultures, as through these some attempt can be made to preserve the world.  Certainly all this can be achieved only through a change in our culture and basic values, in which mindless consumerism, acquisition and display are perceived for what they are, destructive to us, our civilizations and the planet.

An article in today's Wall Street Journal describes catastrophic floods and even gas fires burning people alive in Ghana caused by innumerable plastic bags clogging water and gas pipes.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/ghanas-growth-spurs-uncontrollable-trash-1434928945

And skyrocketing animal extinctions  may, indeed, end up threatening our own survival.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/skyrocketing-extinctions-put-humans-at-risk/?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Of course many, if not most, people, including many scientists believe in a Creator.  Others, used to scientific proofs, will say, "I don't know", a position which I regard as justifiable.  Of course there is a difference between the sexes; more information regarding this is being discovered every day, as the genome is unraveled.

I think that non-Catholics and "environmentallists"applaud the emphasis of this encyclical.  There has been a lot of opposition by quite a few Christians to whether even climate change even existed, let alone whether human activity accelerated it.  I hope that this encyclical will help to legitimize these views, which are essential to our survival.

​We are called to be good stewards of God's creation. The Pope is the head until the King returns.  A steward is someone who handles affairs for someone else. In ancient kingdoms, stewards ran the country in the absence of the king. Upon the king's return, the steward gave a full accounting for his actions. Even when the king was present, the steward often handled the daily affairs of the kingdom. However, a steward did not own the kingdom. And, the king determined when and how long a steward would serve him.  The concept of stewardship dates from the beginning of time, when God entrusted the earth to Adam and Eve and their offspring (Gen. 1:26-28). All men are stewards of the earth's resources (cf. Catechism, no. 2402). In a new way, all Christians are stewards of the earth and of the spiritual graces given through Christ's death and Resurrection. We have received not only the earth, but also many spiritual riches to be used to advance the kingdom of God (Lk. 19:11-27). Our Lord expects that we will use all for His glory and the salvation of souls.  

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth" (Gen. 1:26-28). This passage from Sacred Scripture provides the essential foundation for understanding what Christian stewardship means. Imagine a world of no violence, no sin, and complete tranquility among all people. That's what Adam and Eve had before the Fall. This was the setting within which God spoke the words above.

While some may consider the term "dominion" in this passage to be the only direct reference to "stewardship," the entire passage reveals that the stewardship expected of Adam and Eve and all of us has three essential characteristics. It is collective; it respects the purpose for which things exist; and it respects the dignity of each person. 

The "emphasis" of this encyclical is stewardship of God's creation, which goes much beyond saving the spotted owl and choosing paper or plastic. How many of these environmentalists that support peace and the respect for peoples from all cultures support abortion and/or euthanasia?  We all can't cherry pick what we like and/or agree with and dismiss the rest. How much peace can we have when our global culture accepts (and celebrates) behaviors that are contrary to natural law and God's will.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Papist

[Yaatee]

Here are what some nuns think about the encyclical.

http://globalsistersreport.org/environment/green-new-world-27181

Interesting that the title "Laudato Si" has become known around the world so fast.  Reminds me of "Pacem in Terris".

 

 

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth" (Gen. 1:26-28). This passage from Sacred Scripture provides the essential foundation for understanding what Christian stewardship means. Imagine a world of no violence, no sin, and complete tranquility among all people. That's what Adam and Eve had before the Fall. This was the setting within which God spoke the words above."

While some may consider the term "dominion" in this passage to be the only direct reference to "stewardship," the entire passage reveals that the stewardship expected of Adam and Eve and all of us has three essential characteristics. It is collective; it respects the purpose for which things exist; and it respects the dignity of each person.

"The "emphasis" of this encyclical is stewardship of God's creation, which goes much beyond saving the spotted owl and choosing paper or plastic. How many of these environmentalists that support peace and the respect for peoples from all cultures support abortion and/or euthanasia?  We all can't cherry pick what we like and/or agree with and dismiss the rest. How much peace can we have when our global culture accepts (and celebrates) behaviors that are contrary to natural law and God's will."

 

Well, humans have failed in being responsible stewards of the planet, that is for sure.  This is why it surprises me that many (usually right-wing) Christians, so concerned with stewardship, which usually translates as money, have denied climate change and who is responsible.  Poor God, entrusting the earth to Adam and Eve and their offspring.

And the dignity of each species, or at least some recognition that each species occupies a niche in an exceedingly complex structure. We destroy these creatures at our peril.

But we do cherry pick. That's the point.  Much of this encyclical reached millions (?billions) that otherwise disagree with the pope.  Millions, I would say, most people disagree with the catechism about the meaning of "natural law", and many, (most?) people don't believe in a Catholic God.  Still, the encyclical reached them.  

The emphasis on "environmentalism" and climate change  was truly recognized as being the center of the encyclical, since our very survival depends on it.

​

Edited June 23, 2015 by Yaatee

[Seven77]

There are so many non-Catholics who have read, are reading, or will read this encyclical. I think that among other things, it will capture a wider audience for listening to the message of the Gospel without their even knowing it.  The Pope knows exactly what he's doing.  Just an observation.

[Dr_Asik]

The novelty here is to make environmental conservation a grave and properly Christian moral duty - because our negligence ultimately causes famine, disease and misery, especially among the smallest and poorest in our world. And what you have not done for these poor people, you have not done for me, said Jesus. So it's well about time Christians from even American right-wing allegiances start caring about these issues as they do other grave issues they typically do care about, like abortion and family issues.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Dr_Asik

[dUSt]

I love everything about this encyclical. I've actually seen more criticism of it from the "liberal" leaning Catholic circles than the "conservative" leaning circles.