You might have caught Hillary Clinton Bashing members of the GOP concerning their positions on abortion.

You can see why Hillary Clinton and the left would have this opinion after all who would support someone who keeps a woman pregnant like this:

Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of “reproductive health”.

or daring to equate the unborn to the born.

When we fail to acknowledge as part of reality the worth of a poor person, a human embryo, a person with disabilities – to offer just a few examples – it becomes difficult to hear the cry of nature itself; everything is connected.


and this

Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away”

Or these people who want to deny science

On the other hand, it is troubling that, when some ecological movements defend the integrity of the environment, rightly demanding that certain limits be imposed on scientific research, they sometimes fail to apply those same principles to human life. There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when experimentation is carried out on living human embryos.

You can’t expect democrats to be nice to republicans who say outrageous things like this.

Except the author of those quotes aren’t a Republican candidate or campaign, the author is Pope Francis, and they are not from any Republican platform or position paper they are from Laudito Si’ the Paper that Hillary loved so much.

This suggestion is evergreen:

The answer and the tactic is such a “gimmie” that I’m almost embarrassed to have to explain it. It’s really simple:

Any Candidate who is asked about Laudato Si’ should instantly say that if they are elected they would immediately finance research on Global warming by diverting funds earmarked for Planned Parenthood, Research using Human Embryos and any international family planning program that the government is funding.

Furthermore the very day the Pope speaks such a bill should be ready to submit on the floor of the house and moved forward to force Democrats in the Senate to filibuster it or if they fear to do so to force the President to either sign it or veto it.

Every time Hillary talks about defending Planned Parenthood as “extreme” she is calling Pope Francis extreme. Every time Hillary and company compare those defending life from conception to natural death to ISIS she is comparing Pope Francis and every Catholic who follows the faith to ISIS. And conservatives should call her any every Democrat out there on it.

*********************************************************************

The only way I can keep doing this full time is if my pay comes from you. My annual goal is Twenty Two grand which will give me a nominal living doing this.

But I have to take things as they are so if you like what you see here including my paid writers like Tim Imholt, Fausta Wertz, Pat Austin et/al and have a little extra you can spare.  I’d appreciate it if you would hit DaTipJar





Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire more blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

If you could kick in I’d really appreciate it.

I’ve written a lot about Laudito Si’ What it means, how it should be interpreted and for me there is only one thing more frustrating than watching people who have been wearing their Catholicism on their sleeve for years suddenly decide Matthew 16 doesn’t apply to Popes when they say things that we don’t like.

And that’s the idiocy of Republicans who have no idea how to answer the press that are trying to club them with this document.

Why does this upset me? Because the answer and the tactic is such a “gimmie” that I’m almost embarrassed to have to explain it.  It’s really simple:

Any Candidate who is asked about Laudato Si’ should say instantly say that if they are elected they would immediately finance research on Global warming by diverting funds earmarked for Planned Parenthood, Research using Human Embryos and any international family planning program that the government is funding.

Furthermore the very day the Pope speaks such a bill should be ready to submit on the floor of the house and moved forward to force Democrats in the Senate to filibuster it or if they fear to do so to force the President to either sign it or veto it.

If the left is so sure about Global Warming being the most serious danger that the world faces lets see how much they are willing to give up to prove it.  If the White House and the left declare the Pope words and imprimatur inviolable let them prove it.

How is it possible that the GOP does not see this as the easy win that it is?  Can’t anyone play this game?

***********************************************************

 

My goal for 2015 is Twenty Two grand which will give me a nominal living doing this.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. (including my writers like Fausta)  If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done.

 

Our June Premium for tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Elizabeth The Anchoress Scalia Strange Gods: Unmasking the Idols in Everyday Life

Subscribe at $50 or more in and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

All Tip Jar hits of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.

All last week people were asking/and emailing me to comment on the Pope’s new encyclical.

While a lot of Pixels have already come out concerning it, many of them before it was released, I told everyone who asked that rather than bother with what the MSM has been saying I was going to withhold judgement until the Vatican actually released the document and see for myself.

Thursday I read Laudato Si. and noted what I thought the biggest news from the document was:

Friday, Saturday and Sunday I wrote about the parts of the document that our friends in the media decided to neglect.

Now today I want to address the a basic fact of this encyclical itself, something that people are forgetting, “what is its purpose?”

an encyclical denotes a pastoral letter written by the Holy Father for the entire Church.  This document focuses on a pastoral issue concerning a matter of doctrine, morality, devotion, or discipline. 

Catholic answers has more:

They condemn some prevalent form of error, point out dangers which threaten faith or morals, exhort the faithful to constancy, or prescribe remedies for evils foreseen or already existent.

Laudato Si.  is a long and detailed document.  It is liberally sprinkled with footnotes quoting the Church, its saints, previous Popes and even his own previous pronouncements.

In other words it’s a sermon and like any sermon is about teaching people, particularly the faithful,  about how one should act.

A fair reading of this document clearly indicated what is being taught, it preaches against lifestyle of consumerism absence of social interaction (and in fact encourages such interaction on the local level) and reliance on technology and stuff leads to an empty life.

18. The continued acceleration of changes affecting humanity and the planet is coupled today with a more intensified pace of life and work which might be called “rapidification”. Although change is part of the working of complex systems, the speed with which human activity has developed contrasts with the naturally slow pace of biological evolution. Moreover, the goals of this rapid and constant change are not necessarily geared to the common good or to integral and sustainable human development. Change is something desirable, yet it becomes a source of anxiety when it causes harm to the world and to the quality of life of much of humanity.

These are basic themes that the church has been teaching for a while.  A Lesson that was important in the world 65 years ago where missionary priests were leaving Europe and America for Africa and South America and a lesson that’s important today, Missionary priests are coming to America from Africa and South America and he takes the time to quote these bishops of Africa (chapter 14)

As the bishops of Southern Africa have stated: “Everyone’s talents and involvement are needed to redress the damage caused by human abuse of God’s creation”. [22] All of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents.

Now there are people who are getting very upset about the passages concerning global warming and scientific consensus and acting on the best information that is currently known to science.  Mostly because like myself I think the science is a lot more iffy than is being presented.  They like the social teaching, particularly on abortion and life but they’re sure the left will try to use this as a club to move their agenda, and they will.

But those guys are missing the reality and the reality is this.

It takes a long time to move governments and move agreements but a very short time to move individuals.

If we’re right and the science is on our side then in the years that it takes for governments to meet, to negotiate and to even begin to move agreements the reality of the science will trump the left, after all the encyclical does say…

Honesty and truth are needed in scientific and political discussions; these should not be limited to the issue of whether or not a particular project is permitted by law.

But the lessons for individuals those can be applied today, now at once, and because they deal with eternal truths those lessons will be true no matter where the science on global warming goes.

Those eternal truths taught by this encyclical will change hearts and bring people closer to Christ by steering individuals to the right, this is what it’s all about, no matter what any individual hoped to do with this document, no matter if it’s a democrat pol looking to get a short-term advantage or a bureaucrat in Europe is hoping for graft or even if a cleric trying to ingratiate with others by attempting to manipulate a papal encyclical and the Holy Father who released it.

That’s the reality of Laudito si.  It’s a reality divorced from politics.  The church and the Pope doesn’t teach for the  benefit of a particular political party in a particular country.  It’s not all about republicans or democrats or Europeans or Africans.

It’s about souls it always has been and if people attempt to use it for evil they will find it.  I’ll give the last word to CS Lewis again

On the other hand we do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything-even to social justice. The thing to do is to get a man at first to value social justice as a thing which the Enemy demands, and then work him on to the stage at which he values Christianity because it may produce social justice. For the Enemy will not be used as a convenience. Men or nations who think they can revive the Faith in order to make a good society might just as well think they can use the stairs of Heaven as a short cut to the nearest chemist’s shop.

********************************************************************

 

My goal for 2015 is Twenty Two grand which will give me a nominal living doing this.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. (including my writers like Fausta)  If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done.

 

Our June Premium for tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Elizabeth The Anchoress Scalia Strange Gods: Unmasking the Idols in Everyday Life

Subscribe at $50 or more in and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

All Tip Jar hits of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.

I was about to head early to mass to pray and like every guy did some channel surfing as I did so and noticed on Fox news Chris Wallace interviewing Cardinal Wuerl on Laudato Si’, who noted that people have always chosen to cherry pick the teachings of the church but it’s the church’s job to teach the lot.

Then I turned to CNN and Jake Tapper was hosting a live broadcast of the Charleston Church were the horrible murders took place this week. I was just in time to hear the preacher not that it was their faith in Jesus Christ that allows them the strength to overcome these obstacles.

And it hit me that again God is Francis’ line from Laudato Si’ correct:

80. Yet God, who wishes to work with us and who counts on our cooperation, can also bring good out of the evil we have done.

For decades our friends on the left have demonized the church and christ, and yet this week tens of thousands of people who would never consider reading a church documents will, because of a group of people hoping for short term political advantage, do so. And they will read arguments about the sanctity of life, the connection of how we treat our neighbor to how we treat our environment, and they will see examples of the words of the saints, the Popes and of scripture that they have never considered before.

How many of these people given a first look at these things will find themselves evangelized by that greatest of evangelists, the holy spirit and wanting more?

How will they divorce one argument from another, how will they claim that the Popes words provide the absolutely moral necessity for a government to act, and yet refuse to act themselves to protect the unborn, human embryos and the freedom of religious expression, all thing that they as individuals can do?

Now consider Charleston, in a midst of mass slaughter the trauma of the loss of husbands, wives, mothers, sons and daughters what did the those who have suffered beyond what one can bear do?

They forgave, and moreover they forgave not after long reflection, not after years or decades of reflection but in hours.

And today just a few days later the counties attention is on a church as the celebrant preaches the healing and forgiving power of Jesus Christ telling people who they do can find that same grace and strength in their own times of trial.

How will our friends on the left succeed in divorcing this reality from the memes they have made? How will they manage to paint christians as bigots who have forgiven such evil. How do they claim injury over a cake and the moral authority to put christians out of business when those same Christians who faced the murder of their loved ones forgive those who destroyed their lives.

Does that not reveal their anti-christ cries of “injustice” as they petty narcissism that it is?

The events of this week have been a body blow to those who would destroy Christianity in general and the Church in particular furthermore despite anger by some and tragedy for others in the end the events of this week will be a watershed for those who will discover the Lord through them.

Who knew a bible study interrupted by death and a document that some hoped would pervert the life of the church could do those things?

********************************************************************

 

My goal for 2015 is Twenty Two grand which will give me a nominal living doing this.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. (including my writers like Fausta)  If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done.

 

Our June Premium for tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Elizabeth The Anchoress Scalia Strange Gods: Unmasking the Idols in Everyday Life

Subscribe at $50 or more in and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

All Tip Jar hits of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.

Continuing our look at some of the things in from Laudato Si ‘s 246 paragraphs that the media is avoiding big time.  (Part one is here and part 2 here).  As before each paragraph will begin with what the Pope was saying and end with what I think the media was thinking in the editorial room when they decided to skip that bit.  (all emphasis mine)

Francis speaks of a cultural component of the problem of the environment.

162. Our difficulty in taking up this challenge seriously has much to do with an ethical and cultural decline which has accompanied the deterioration of the environment. Men and women of our postmodern world run the risk of rampant individualism, and many problems of society are connected with today’s self-centred culture of instant gratification. We see this in the crisis of family and social ties and the difficulties of recognizing the other. Parents can be prone to impulsive and wasteful consumption, which then affects their children who find it increasingly difficult to acquire a home of their own and build a family. Furthermore, our inability to think seriously about future generations is linked to our inability to broaden the scope of our present interests and to give consideration to those who remain excluded from development. Let us not only keep the poor of the future in mind, but also today’s poor, whose life on this earth is brief and who cannot keep on waiting. Hence, “in addition to a fairer sense of intergenerational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need for a renewed sense of intragenerational solidarity”.[125]

MSM:  I don’t know these are all values we’ve been pushing and the focus on the “crisis of the family” it’s another GOP talking point.  Not to mention all that talk about future generations it invokes that whole “family values”  business.  We aren’t reporting on this to advance conservatism are we?    

Francis on “carbon Credits”

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.

MSM:  If there’s one thing we aren’t going to touch it’s an attack on carbon credits.  This is something we’ve advanced as a positive good for decades.   We can’t be talking them down.

Francis talks about the basics of decision making:

185. In any discussion about a proposed venture, a number of questions need to be asked in order to discern whether or not it will contribute to genuine integral development. What will it accomplish? Why? Where? When? How? For whom? What are the risks? What are the costs? Who will pay those costs and how? In this discernment, some questions must have higher priority. For example, we know that water is a scarce and indispensable resource and a fundamental right which conditions the exercise of other human rights. This indisputable fact overrides any other assessment of environmental impact on a region.

MSM:   Hmm this looks good but I don’t know.  A lot of times these answers aren’t really in our favor.  Do we really want the discussion to turn toward facts vs emotion?

Francis talks about bringing all viewpoints to the table:

188. There are certain environmental issues where it is not easy to achieve a broad consensus. Here I would state once more that the Church does not presume to settle scientific questions or to replace politics. But I am concerned to encourage an honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common good.

MSM:   That’s a trap to get the “deniers” to the table.  If these guys start making their case who can tell what will happen?    nest and open debate means e mm this looks good but I don’t know.  A lot of times these answers aren’t really in our favor.  Do we really want the discussion to turn toward facts vs emotion?

Francis on the economic bubbles:

189. Politics must not be subject to the economy, nor should the economy be subject to the dictates of an efficiency-driven paradigm of technocracy. Today, in view of the common good, there is urgent need for politics and economics to enter into a frank dialogue in the service of life, especially human life. Saving banks at any cost, making the public pay the price, foregoing a firm commitment to reviewing and reforming the entire system, only reaffirms the absolute power of a financial system, a power which has no future and will only give rise to new crises after a slow, costly and only apparent recovery. The financial crisis of 2007-08 provided an opportunity to develop a new economy, more attentive to ethical principles, and new ways of regulating speculative financial practices and virtual wealth. But the response to the crisis did not include rethinking the outdated criteria which continue to rule the world. Production is not always rational, and is usually tied to economic variables which assign to products a value that does not necessarily correspond to their real worth. This frequently leads to an overproduction of some commodities, with unnecessary impact on the environment and with negative results on regional economies.[133] The financial bubble also tends to be a productive bubble. The problem of the real economy is not confronted with vigour, yet it is the real economy which makes diversification and improvement in production possible, helps companies to function well, and enables small and medium businesses to develop and create employment.

MSM:   That one’s iffy too.  President Obama supported the bailouts as did a lot of our guys.  Hitting the banks is nice but it sounds a lot like something the tea party might say.  And that whole “human life” stuff is pretty republican too.  Better skip it.   

Francis on when governments are responsible:

197. What is needed is a politics which is far-sighted and capable of a new, integral and interdisciplinary approach to handling the different aspects of the crisis. Often, politics itself is responsible for the disrepute in which it is held, on account of corruption and the failure to enact sound public policies. If in a given region the state does not carry out its responsibilities, some business groups can come forward in the guise of benefactors, wield real power, and consider themselves exempt from certain rules, to the point of tolerating different forms of organized crime, human trafficking, the drug trade and violence, all of which become very difficult to eradicate. If politics shows itself incapable of breaking such a perverse logic, and remains caught up in inconsequential discussions, we will continue to avoid facing the major problems of humanity. A strategy for real change calls for rethinking processes in their entirety, for it is not enough to include a few superficial ecological considerations while failing to question the logic which underlies present-day culture. A healthy politics needs to be able to take up this challenge.

MSM:   Nah, at first glance it looks good but it’s got “Chicago” , “Baltimore” and “Oakland” written all over it.

Francis on Science & Religion:

199. It cannot be maintained that empirical science provides a complete explanation of life, the interplay of all creatures and the whole of reality. This would be to breach the limits imposed by its own methodology. If we reason only within the confines of the latter, little room would be left for aesthetic sensibility, poetry, or even reason’s ability to grasp the ultimate meaning and purpose of things.[141] I would add that “religious classics can prove meaningful in every age; they have an enduring power to open new horizons… Is it reasonable and enlightened to dismiss certain writings simply because they arose in the context of religious belief?”[142] It would be quite simplistic to think that ethical principles present themselves purely in the abstract, detached from any context. Nor does the fact that they may be couched in religious language detract from their value in public debate. The ethical principles capable of being apprehended by reason can always reappear in different guise and find expression in a variety of languages, including religious language.

MSM:   Just what we don’t need, long discussions about the value of religion discussed in the public square.   That paragraph’s outta here.

Francis On Ecological Education:

213. Ecological education can take place in a variety of settings: at school, in families, in the media, in catechesis and elsewhere. Good education plants seeds when we are young, and these continue to bear fruit throughout life. Here, though, I would stress the great importance of the family, which is “the place in which life – the gift of God – can be properly welcomed and protected against the many attacks to which it is exposed, and can develop in accordance with what constitutes authentic human growth. In the face of the so-called culture of death, the family is the heart of the culture of life”.[149] In the family we first learn how to show love and respect for life; we are taught the proper use of things, order and cleanliness, respect for the local ecosystem and care for all creatures. In the family we receive an integral education, which enables us to grow harmoniously in personal maturity. In the family we learn to ask without demanding, to say “thank you” as an expression of genuine gratitude for what we have been given, to control our aggressivity and greed, and to ask forgiveness when we have caused harm. These simple gestures of heartfelt courtesy help to create a culture of shared life and respect for our surroundings.

MSM:   Geezes there it is again “family” “culture of life” what is this a document about the environment or a Santorum for President rally? 

Francis on the environment & sin:

218. In calling to mind the figure of Saint Francis of Assisi, we come to realize that a healthy relationship with creation is one dimension of overall personal conversion, which entails the recognition of our errors, sins, faults and failures, and leads to heartfelt repentance and desire to change. The Australian bishops spoke of the importance of such conversion for achieving reconciliation with creation: “To achieve such reconciliation, we must examine our lives and acknowledge the ways in which we have harmed God’s creation through our actions and our failure to act. We need to experience a conversion, or change of heart”.[153]

MSM:   We can’t be talking about sin, all of that’ relative and besides if we start talking about sin who knows where the conversation is going to go? 

Francis on values, sobriety & the environment:

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.

MSM:   The subjective definition of right and wrong and the “great values” is exactly what we’ve been trying to combat.  We certainly can’t use this as a basis for an environmental argument.

Francis on appreciated the environment as God’s gift

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.

MSM:  Is saying grace at meal going to do our argument any good, I don’t think so.   Who wrote this a GOP operative? 

Francis on Culture:

 

229. We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it. We have had enough of immorality and the mockery of ethics, goodness, faith and honesty. It is time to acknowledge that light-hearted superficiality has done us no good. When the foundations of social life are corroded, what ensues are battles over conflicting interests, new forms of violence and brutality, and obstacles to the growth of a genuine culture of care for the environment.

MSM:  Nah it’s too close to a GOP talking point.  Ann Coulter could have said that.

 

MSM  And we’re not even going to bother with paragraphs 236 and beyond.  It’s all Eucharist, “Thus, the Eucharist is also a source of light and motivation for our concerns for the environment, directing us to be stewards of all creation.” (236)  the sabbath  On Sunday, our participation in the Eucharist has special importance. Sunday, like the Jewish Sabbath, is meant to be a day which heals our relationships with God, with ourselves, with others and with the world. (237) The Trinity:  Consequently, “when we contemplate with wonder the universe in all its grandeur and beauty, we must praise the whole Trinity”.[169] (238) God  Creatures tend towards God, and in turn it is proper to every living being to tend towards other things, so that throughout the universe we can find any number of constant and secretly interwoven relationships.[171] (239)  Mary  Just as her pierced heart mourned the death of Jesus, so now she grieves for the sufferings of the crucified poor and for the creatures of this world laid waste by human power.  (241) and Joseph He too can teach us how to show care; he can inspire us to work with generosity and tenderness in protecting this world which God has entrusted to us.  It’s all about worshiping God, we can’t risk getting perfectly good secular environmentalists reading this stuff and starting to think of this in terms of religion, and particularly not Christianity.  After all that last thing we want this document to be is a lesson in Christianity.

If you are shocked that none of these messages were mentioned by the MSM, you just aren’t paying attention.

Continuing our look at some of the things in from Laudato Si ‘s 246 paragraphs that the media is avoiding big time.  (Part one is here).  Each paragraph will begin with what the Pope was saying and end with what I think the media was thinking in the editorial room when they decided to skip that bit.  (all emphasis mine)

Francis talked about the Dignity of Humanity:

90. This is not to put all living beings on the same level nor to deprive human beings of their unique worth and the tremendous responsibility it entails. Nor does it imply a divinization of the earth which would prevent us from working on it and protecting it in its fragility. Such notions would end up creating new imbalances which would deflect us from the reality which challenges us.[68]At times we see an obsession with denying any pre-eminence to the human person; more zeal is shown in protecting other species than in defending the dignity which all human beings share in equal measure. Certainly, we should be concerned lest other living beings be treated irresponsibly. But we should be particularly indignant at the enormous inequalities in our midst, whereby we continue to tolerate some considering themselves more worthy than others. We fail to see that some are mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, while others have not the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly showing off their supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste which, if it were the case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice, we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more human than others, as if they had been born with greater rights.

MSM:  Eh we like the inequality stuff but the idea of man’s pre-eminence doesn’t really work for a lot of our readers, we’ll skip it.

Francis on Jesus and creation:

96. Jesus took up the biblical faith in God the Creator, emphasizing a fundamental truth: God is Father (cf. Mt 11:25). In talking with his disciples, Jesus would invite them to recognize the paternal relationship God has with all his creatures. With moving tenderness he would remind them that each one of them is important in God’s eyes: “Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? And not one of them is forgotten before God” (Lk 12:6). “Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them” (Mt 6:26).

MSM:  Too religious, too paternalistic.  Too absolute.  Can’t Francis talk about this without bringing in all that “Jesus” stuff?  

 

Francis on the beauty that Technology has produced:

103. Technoscience, when well directed, can produce important means of improving the quality of human life, from useful domestic appliances to great transportation systems, bridges, buildings and public spaces. It can also produce art and enable men and women immersed in the material world to “leap” into the world of beauty. Who can deny the beauty of an aircraft or a skyscraper? Valuable works of art and music now make use of new technologies. So, in the beauty intended by the one who uses new technical instruments and in the contemplation of such beauty, a quantum leap occurs, resulting in a fulfilment which is uniquely human.

MSM:  I don’t know complementing bridges and building and transportation systems is iffy enough but that business of the “beauty of an aircraft or a skyscraper” will have the Sierra Club cancel their ads en masse.

 

Pope Francis on despair:

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.

MSM:  We can’t talk about this, our entire living depends on being a platform to see stuff people don’t really need.  What would our advertisers say if we talked about stuff bringing emptiness?

Francis on the value of man:

117. Neglecting to monitor the harm done to nature and the environmental impact of our decisions is only the most striking sign of a disregard for the message contained in the structures of nature itself. When we fail to acknowledge as part of reality the worth of a poor person, a human embryo, a person with disabilities – to offer just a few examples – it becomes difficult to hear the cry of nature itself; everything is connected. Once the human being declares independence from reality and behaves with absolute dominion, the very foundations of our life begin to crumble, for “instead of carrying out his role as a cooperator with God in the work of creation, man sets himself up in place of God and thus ends up provoking a rebellion on the part of nature”.[95]

MSM:  You lost us at “embryo”.

Francis on the dignity of life:

120. Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away”.[97]

MSM:  Abortion incompatible with ecology?  That’s blasphemy!

Francis on Relativism:

123. The culture of relativism is the same disorder which drives one person to take advantage of another, to treat others as mere objects, imposing forced labour on them or enslaving them to pay their debts. The same kind of thinking leads to the sexual exploitation of children and abandonment of the elderly who no longer serve our interests. It is also the mindset of those who say: Let us allow the invisible forces of the market to regulate the economy, and consider their impact on society and nature as collateral damage. In the absence of objective truths or sound principles other than the satisfaction of our own desires and immediate needs, what limits can be placed on human trafficking, organized crime, the drug trade, commerce in blood diamonds and the fur of endangered species? Is it not the same relativistic logic which justifies buying the organs of the poor for resale or use in experimentation, or eliminating children because they are not what their parents wanted? This same “use and throw away” logic generates so much waste, because of the disordered desire to consume more than what is really necessary. We should not think that political efforts or the force of law will be sufficient to prevent actions which affect the environment because, when the culture itself is corrupt and objective truth and universally valid principles are no longer upheld, then laws can only be seen as arbitrary impositions or obstacles to be avoided.

MSM:  C’mon Francis you were doing so well with forced labor, blood diamonds and fur and you have to go and spoil the whole point by bringing up the elderly , relativism and objective truths.  Don’t you know that euthanasia is a blessing and we all know that what’s true for some isn’t for others?

Francis on the Dignity of Work:

128. We were created with a vocation to work. The goal should not be that technological progress increasingly replace human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity. Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfilment. Helping the poor financially must always be a provisional solution in the face of pressing needs. The broader objective should always be to allow them a dignified life through work. Yet the orientation of the economy has favoured a kind of technological progress in which the costs of production are reduced by laying off workers and replacing them with machines. This is yet another way in which we can end up working against ourselves. The loss of jobs also has a negative impact on the economy “through the progressive erosion of social capital: the network of relationships of trust, dependability, and respect for rules, all of which are indispensable for any form of civil coexistence”.[104] In other words, “human costs always include economic costs, and economic dysfunctions always involve human costs”.[105] To stop investing in people, in order to gain greater short-term financial gain, is bad business for society.

MSM:  Francis you did it again!  We were ready to dive into the bit about evil corporations but you have to spoil it by emphasizing work and suggesting aid for the poor should be provisional toward a goal of work.  That’s practically a GOP talking point! 

Francis on Genetic Modification and history:

133. It is difficult to make a general judgement about genetic modification (GM), whether vegetable or animal, medical or agricultural, since these vary greatly among themselves and call for specific considerations. The risks involved are not always due to the techniques used, but rather to their improper or excessive application. Genetic mutations, in fact, have often been, and continue to be, caused by nature itself. Nor are mutations caused by human intervention a modern phenomenon. The domestication of animals, the crossbreeding of species and other older and universally accepted practices can be mentioned as examples. We need but recall that scientific developments in GM cereals began with the observation of natural bacteria which spontaneously modified plant genomes. In nature, however, this process is slow and cannot be compared to the fast pace induced by contemporary technological advances, even when the latter build upon several centuries of scientific progress.

MSM:  Hey Francis enough with the history lessons.  Do you know how much time and effort we have invested in the whole Frankenfood meme?  Rejected! 

Francis on experimentation with human embryos:

136. On the other hand, it is troubling that, when some ecological movements defend the integrity of the environment, rightly demanding that certain limits be imposed on scientific research, they sometimes fail to apply those same principles to human life. There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when experimentation is carried out on living human embryos. We forget that the inalienable worth of a human being transcends his or her degree of development. In the same way, when technology disregards the great ethical principles, it ends up considering any practice whatsoever as licit. As we have seen in this chapter, a technology severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its own power.

MSM:  Embryos, Embryos Embryos, Hey Francis I thought you had a scientific background.  Don’t you know a clump of cells when you see one?   Rejected! 

Francis On Human ecology:

155. Human ecology also implies another profound reality: the relationship between human life and the moral law, which is inscribed in our nature and is necessary for the creation of a more dignified environment. Pope Benedict XVI spoke of an “ecology of man”, based on the fact that “man too has a nature that he must respect and that he cannot manipulate at will”.[120] It is enough to recognize that our body itself establishes us in a direct relationship with the environment and with other living beings. The acceptance of our bodies as God’s gift is vital for welcoming and accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home, whereas thinking that we enjoy absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation. Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology. Also, valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different. In this way we can joyfully accept the specific gifts of another man or woman, the work of God the Creator, and find mutual enrichment. It is not a healthy attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it”.[121]

MSM:  Are you kidding me, the whole Transgender Movement and to some degree the gay rights movement depends on exactly the opposite of this?  

I guess that’s enough for part 2.  Tune in Tomorrow for part 3

 

Earlier today I talked about what I thought the biggest news from Laudato Si is.  Now I’d like to look at several passages that jumped out at me while I read it.

If you just go by the MSM reports one might think this was the confirmation of all the liberal dreams of the left and the fears of the right concerning the holy father, the media has been falling over itself to complement the pope and push this encyclical.

However anyone who has read the document might notice that there are a lot of things here that our leftist media friends would rather we just skip.

So lets take a look at some of the things in its 246 paragraphs that the media  you might not have heard.  Each paragraph will begin with what the Pope was saying and end with what I think the media was thinking in the editorial room when they decided to skip it. (all emphasis mine)

Pope Francis on urbanization:

45. In some places, rural and urban alike, the privatization of certain spaces has restricted people’s access to places of particular beauty. In others, “ecological” neighbourhoods have been created which are closed to outsiders in order to ensure an artificial tranquillity. Frequently, we find beautiful and carefully manicured green spaces in so-called “safer” areas of cities, but not in the more hidden areas where the disposable of society live.

MSM:  Yeah Francis is talking about the 2nd World Urban areas he was intimately familiar with in South America but this is something that could be easily applied to the same cultural elites like us that are pushing this document.   Besides most of our cities are run by Democrats. We’ll skip it.

Pope Francis on the social decline that has come from Technology and the ignoring the wisdom of centuries:

47. Furthermore, when media and the digital world become omnipresent, their influence can stop people from learning how to live wisely, to think deeply and to love generously. In this context, the great sages of the past run the risk of going unheard amid the noise and distractions of an information overload. Efforts need to be made to help these media become sources of new cultural progress for humanity and not a threat to our deepest riches. True wisdom, as the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between persons, is not acquired by a mere accumulation of data which eventually leads to overload and confusion, a sort of mental pollution. Real relationships with others, with all the challenges they entail, now tend to be replaced by a type of internet communication which enables us to choose or eliminate relationships at whim, thus giving rise to a new type of contrived emotion which has more to do with devices and displays than with other people and with nature. Today’s media do enable us to communicate and to share our knowledge and affections. Yet at times they also shield us from direct contact with the pain, the fears and the joys of others and the complexity of their personal experiences. For this reason, we should be concerned that, alongside the exciting possibilities offered by these media, a deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with interpersonal relations, or a harmful sense of isolation, can also arise.

MSM: Social Decline?  We’re in the “enlightened age”.  We all know that all those “sages” were a bunch of racist, sexist, homophobic idiots who have something to teach us that’s worth remembering.  Why they didn’t even believe in Gay Marriage!  We can’t talk about this.

Pope Francis on those aloof to reality:

49. It needs to be said that, generally speaking, there is little in the way of clear awareness of problems which especially affect the excluded. Yet they are the majority of the planet’s population, billions of people. These days, they are mentioned in international political and economic discussions, but one often has the impression that their problems are brought up as an afterthought, a question which gets added almost out of duty or in a tangential way, if not treated merely as collateral damage. Indeed, when all is said and done, they frequently remain at the bottom of the pile. This is due partly to the fact that many professionals, opinion makers, communications media and centres of power, being located in affluent urban areas, are far removed from the poor, with little direct contact with their problems. They live and reason from the comfortable position of a high level of development and a quality of life well beyond the reach of the majority of the world’s population. This lack of physical contact and encounter, encouraged at times by the disintegration of our cities, can lead to a numbing of conscience and to tendentious analyses which neglect parts of reality. At times this attitude exists side by side with a “green” rhetoric. Today, however, we have to realize that a true ecological approach always becomes a social approach; it must integrate questions of justice in debates on the environment, so as to hear both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor.

MSM:  This kinda hits too close to home.  Just because we are here in our cities eating at the best restaurants and drinking the finest booze doesn’t mean we don’t give damn about actual people.  Better skip it in case people draw that conclusion.

Francis on cultural pressure from the Developing world

50. Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of “reproductive health”. Yet “while it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development”.[28] To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues. It is an attempt to legitimize the present model of distribution, where a minority believes that it has the right to consume in a way which can never be universalized, since the planet could not even contain the waste products of such consumption. Besides, we know that approximately a third of all food produced is discarded, and “whenever food is thrown out it is as if it were stolen from the table of the poor”.[29] Still, attention needs to be paid to imbalances in population density, on both national and global levels, since a rise in consumption would lead to complex regional situations, as a result of the interplay between problems linked to environmental pollution, transport, waste treatment, loss of resources and quality of life.

MSM: Hey “reproductive health” is the cornerstone of our belief system.  Well we certainly CAN’T critique policies pushed by democrats that require this wise agenda on cultures in return for aid and anyways it’s for their own good!

Francis on progress that’s been achieved:

58. In some countries, there are positive examples of environmental improvement: rivers, polluted for decades, have been cleaned up; native woodlands have been restored; landscapes have been beautified thanks to environmental renewal projects; beautiful buildings have been erected; advances have been made in the production of non-polluting energy and in the improvement of public transportation. These achievements do not solve global problems, but they do show that men and women are still capable of intervening positively. For all our limitations, gestures of generosity, solidarity and care cannot but well up within us, since we were made for love.

MSM: Eh I dunno I guess we could point to the environmental movement for that success but if we talk about success, it might take away from the urgency of the problem.  We’ll leave that alone.

Francis one environmental extremism:

60. Finally, we need to acknowledge that different approaches and lines of thought have emerged regarding this situation and its possible solutions. At one extreme, we find those who doggedly uphold the myth of progress and tell us that ecological problems will solve themselves simply with the application of new technology and without any need for ethical considerations or deep change. At the other extreme are those who view men and women and all their interventions as no more than a threat, jeopardizing the global ecosystem, and consequently the presence of human beings on the planet should be reduced and all forms of intervention prohibited. Viable future scenarios will have to be generated between these extremes, since there is no one path to a solution. This makes a variety of proposals possible, all capable of entering into dialogue with a view to developing comprehensive solutions.

MSM:  Nah that’s a non starter, one of Francis’ extremes are the tech guys of the left and the other is  the base of the Democrat party.  That’s gone.

Francis on renewal:

71. Although “the wickedness of man was great in the earth” (Gen 6:5) and the Lord “was sorry that he had made man on the earth” (Gen 6:6), nonetheless, through Noah, who remained innocent and just, God decided to open a path of salvation. In this way he gave humanity the chance of a new beginning. All it takes is one good person to restore hope! The biblical tradition clearly shows that this renewal entails recovering and respecting the rhythms inscribed in nature by the hand of the Creator. We see this, for example, in the law of the Sabbath. On the seventh day, God rested from all his work. He commanded Israel to set aside each seventh day as a day of rest, a Sabbath, (cf. Gen 2:2-3; Ex 16:23; 20:10). Similarly, every seven years, a sabbatical year was set aside for Israel, a complete rest for the land (cf. Lev 25:1-4), when sowing was forbidden and one reaped only what was necessary to live on and to feed one’s household (cf. Lev 25:4-6). Finally, after seven weeks of years, which is to say forty-nine years, the Jubilee was celebrated as a year of general forgiveness and “liberty throughout the land for all its inhabitants” (cf. Lev25:10). This law came about as an attempt to ensure balance and fairness in their relationships with others and with the land on which they lived and worked. At the same time, it was an acknowledgment that the gift of the earth with its fruits belongs to everyone. Those who tilled and kept the land were obliged to share its fruits, especially with the poor, with widows, orphans and foreigners in their midst: “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field to its very border, neither shall you gather the gleanings after the harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner” (Lev 19:9-10).

MSM:  I like the poor and sharing stuff but you’ve got that whole Sabbath day stuff with it.  People will immediately think Chick-Fil-A and anyways there are too many quotes from Leviticus and we all know what THAT book says about homosexuality.

Francis on the supremacy of God:

75. A spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable. That is how we end up worshipping earthly powers, or ourselves usurping the place of God, even to the point of claiming an unlimited right to trample his creation underfoot. The best way to restore men and women to their rightful place, putting an end to their claim to absolute dominion over the earth, is to speak once more of the figure of a Father who creates and who alone owns the world. Otherwise, human beings will always try to impose their own laws and interests on reality.

MSM:  Are you kidding me?  A spirituality without God is exactly the point we’ve been pushing for years, and we certainly can’t talk about absolute realities.  Rejected!

Francis on the nature as valued by God as part of his creation:

88. The bishops of Brazil have pointed out that nature as a whole not only manifests God but is also a locus of his presence. The Spirit of life dwells in every living creature and calls us to enter into relationship with him.[65] Discovering this presence leads us to cultivate the “ecological virtues”.[66] This is not to forget that there is an infinite distance between God and the things of this world, which do not possess his fullness. Otherwise, we would not be doing the creatures themselves any good either, for we would be failing to acknowledge their right and proper place. We would end up unduly demanding of them something which they, in their smallness, cannot give us.

MSM:  Uh oh a lot of our fans equate nature as a God, we can’t quote him saying nature isn’t God.

That’s over 2000 words and we have barely gone through a 1/3 of the document.  There is a lot more to come.

 

 

I’ve just finished reading the Pope’s Encyclical letter LAUDATO SI’ and I have a lot to say about it, but that will wait for later right now however I’d like to note one thing concerning this letter that in the long term will likely be the most important thing about this document.

At the start of Laudato Si’ in paragraphs 3-6 Pope Francis cites Pope St. John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope St. John Paul II & Pope Benedict XVI and their various writings on the environment as an introduction for this thesis. For anyone familiar with encyclicals this is nothing odd, Popes often draw on the writings and sermons of the church over the years to show the continuity of the sermon he is giving.

What is Unusual is that what happened starting in paragraph 7

I would mention the statements made by the beloved Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, with whom we share the hope of full ecclesial communion.

And continued on from there:

8.  Patriarch Bartholomew has spoken in particular of the need for each of us to repent of the ways we have harmed the planet, for “inasmuch as we all generate small ecological damage”, we are called to acknowledge “our contribution, smaller or greater, to the disfigurement and destruction of creation”.[14] He has repeatedly stated this firmly and persuasively, challenging us to acknowledge our sins against creation: “For human beings… to destroy the biological diversity of God’s creation; for human beings to degrade the integrity of the earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the earth of its natural forests or destroying its wetlands; for human beings to contaminate the earth’s waters, its land, its air, and its life – these are sins”.[15] For “to commit a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against God”.[16]

9. At the same time, Bartholomew has drawn attention to the ethical and spiritual roots of environmental problems, which require that we look for solutions not only in technology but in a change of humanity; otherwise we would be dealing merely with symptoms. He asks us to replace consumption with sacrifice, greed with generosity, wastefulness with a spirit of sharing, an asceticism which “entails learning to give, and not simply to give up. It is a way of loving, of moving gradually away from what I want to what God’s world needs. It is liberation from fear, greed and compulsion”.[17] As Christians, we are also called “to accept the world as a sacrament of communion, as a way of sharing with God and our neighbours on a global scale. It is our humble conviction that the divine and the human meet in the slightest detail in the seamless garment of God’s creation, in the last speck of dust of our planet”.[18]

I am a lay Catholic and do not claim any knowledge beyond what I have read or taught but to my knowledge I’ve never known of a post schism Encyclical that gives three paragraphs to an eastern orthodox patriarch.

Furthermore this is not a one way street.  At 7:26 this morning Time Magazine put out a piece written by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew: An excerpt:

Invoking the inspiring words of Scripture and the classics of Christian spirituality of East and West (particularly such saints as Basil the Great and Francis of Assisi), while at the same time evoking the precious works of Roman Catholic conferences of bishops throughout the world (especially in regions where the plunder of the earth is identified with the plight of the poor), Pope Francis proposes new paradigms and new policies in contrast to those of “determinism,” “disregard” and “domination.”

This is just a few days after the close of Halki Summit II, on Theology Ecology & the World hosted by the Patriarch

In the third year of our brother Pope Francis’s blessed ministry, we count it as a true blessing that we are able to share a common concern and a common vision for God’s creation.

This is REALLY Big I think people don’t understand just how big this is.

While the MSM is busy quoting the Pope and mentioned the Patriarch in their stories I don’t think they understand that the big story that is going to have a profound effect on the history of the world is not any statement on the environment.

It’s that a Catholic Pope is quoting an Eastern Orthodox Patriarch in an encyclical and said patriarch is complimenting him back.

200 years from now that’s what people will be talking and writing about.