POPE CALLS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

By Miriam Raftery

June 23, 2015 (Vatican City)—Pope Francis has issued a rare encyclical urging a global “revolution” to address climate change.  An encyclical is one of the church’s most authoritative teaching documents traditionally addressed to the 1 billion Catholics worldwide. But this time, the Pope says his message is aimed at “every person living on this planet” to save our “common home.”

The Pope warned that “Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with iron or disdain.”  He criticized modern society’s addiction to fossil fuels, technology worship and consumerism – trends he views as “reckless” actions that have pushed our planet to the breaking point.

A former teacher, the Pope issued persuasive arguments calling for drastic changes to embrace sustainability, including specific actions such as recycling, improving public transit and protecting our environment.  He asked, “What kind of world do we want to leave to those who come after us, to children who are now growing up?”

The 184-page document draws on the works of dozens of scientists, theologians, scholars from a wide range of fields and previous Popes. 

To the faithful, Pope Francis issued this reminder: “We are not God. The Earth was here before us and has been given to us.” 

A Pew Research poll just released found that 7 in 10 Catholics believe the planet is getting warming and almost half believe man’s actions are responsible and that climate change is a serious problem.  That faith splits down party lines however, with 80% of Catholic Democrat and only half of Catholic Republicans agreeing that global warming is occurring.

The Pope’s call for action drew mostly praise from world leaders outside of the U.S., including the current and past Secretary-Generals of the United Nations. Former Secretary General Kofi Annan said he applauds the Pope for his “strong moral and ethical leadership,” concluding that more such leadership is needed. But he asked, “Will we see it at the climate summit in Paris?”

Here in the U.S., the Pope’s action has drawn strong reactions among Presidential candidates and other politicians. 

Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a Catholic who declared his candidacy for the presidency last week, stated dismissively, “I don’t get economic policies from my bishops or my cardinals or my Pope.  I think religion ought to be about making us better as people and less about things that end up getting in the political realm.”

Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, another Republican Presidential candidate, suggested that the church would be “better off leaving science to the scientists and focusing on what we’re really good at, which is theology and morality.”  Santorum apparently was unaware that Pope Francis actually holds a degree in chemistry from a school in Buenos Aires.

On the heels of the Pope’s call for action on Climate Change, the Lancet, one of the world’s most respected medical journals, issued a report by the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change, which concludes that climate change poses a severe threat to public health worldwide. 

Democratic presidential campaign frontrunner  Hillary Clinton, former First Lady and Secretary of State, sent a tweet  stating she believes that the Pope is is right, adding, “Climate change is a moral crisis that disproportionately harms the neediest among us. We need leadership, not denial.”

California Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat and Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee in the U.S. Senate, issued a press release which states, “The Lancet report reaffirms once again that we must take steps that will allow us to protect the health of our children and families worldwide. Climate change deniers in Congress need to stop ignoring the serious repercussions of unmitigated climate change, such as extreme heat and weather events, and work with us to reduce dangerous pollution and address this serious threat to public health.”

 


Error message

Support community news in the public interest! As nonprofit news, we rely on donations from the public to fund our reporting -- not special interests. Please donate to sustain East County Magazine's local reporting and/or wildfire alerts at https://www.eastcountymedia.org/donate to help us keep people safe and informed across our region.

Comments

95% of scientific community.....

please prove this percentage 95%, just like the hockey stick graph of co2 increase it is pulled out of thin air.... no pun intended

Stay out of politics pope

Last thing we need is another socialist pope to tell us about global warming, or should I have said... Global cooling, then global warming, then climate change. Thanks got it. I am old enough to remember when we were heading for the next ice age and if you only gave more of your hard earned money to the government they could fix it. They didn't. Now it was off to global warming, oh and the government needs MORE money. Well then the whole conspiracy was blown wide open when the 2 leading "scientists" who were supplying ALL of the other scientists the data was found to be a LIE. Yup the cooked the books, doctored the evidence, made stuff up that was not true in order to give credence to the lie. Now enter "Climate Change" and gosh darn the government needs some more money. Oh and don't use gasoline, coal, nuclear, or any other fossil fuels to supply it. We need the middle and lower class to be hit the hardest by outrageous heating and livings costs. Climate change or in most states it is called "weather" has been happening for years. The earth heats, the earth cools, it goes through cycles without caring about what man does to it. Meanwhile every other country is out there producing, getting wealthier while we force sink our economy.

The Pope gets the Fox News treatment

"Another socialist pope"? Interesting. No one would describe the ultra conservative Pope Benedict as socialist. So, maybe his predecessor? Pope John Paul II was a revelation to the world, but after he was shot and his health declined, he grew increasingly conservative and had Benedict as his "enforcer" to ensure that progressive voices of change were silenced and the edicts from Rome were left unchallenged. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict together headed the church for half a century. So, when exactly were the "socialist" popes holding sway? I don't remember hearing complaints from the amradio, right wing crowd when these conservative Popes were upholding 'traditional' definitions of marriage and other social causes they supported. Next... The "leading" scientists caught skewing data were not the source for ALL (your emphasis) scientists in formulating conclusions on climate change. The idea that a worldwide cabal of scientists, most acting independently in their research, were collaborating to cook the books? Not remotely possible, or true. The desire to debunk the overwhelming evidence in support of climate change in this manner reminds me of the anti-HIV and anti-vaccine crowd in their tactics. Anti-HIV folks hunted tirelessly for the person showing symptoms of AIDS without testing positive for HIV, to try to undermine the hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS. They found one. ONE case. And from there, extrapolated mightily and called the entire idea of infection from the HIV source "false." A cursory introduction to epidemiology would have shown them their error, that is, one or two exceptions does not refute the 98-99% of people who develop AIDS in response to exposure to HIV. Likewise, finding two scientists who fudged their data seeking grants? Does not wipe out the preponderance of evidence. In anyone's but the uneducated mind, that is. And if 95% of your world scientific community expresses a concern about a subject, based on collaborative and independent investigations into temperature changes on the planet, wouldn't you want to understand the issue, rather than repeat amradio talking points? I would encourage you to read a book or two, perhaps even a long article, summarizing for your edification, the evidence and conclusions up to now. The government is not asking for "your money." They are asking industry to be responsible, and look for alternative energy sources, which makes sense. Meanwhile, the comment that we are somehow not "producing" as other countries are, in terms of energy production and usage, is at odds with the facts (yet again). Fracking is earnestly pursued here in the U.S., more than in other countries who are more cautious about the 'water' contamination that occurs as a waste product, with fears of it entering water tables meant for drinking by the public, so it seems disingenuous to suggest energy production of fossil fuels has somehow entered a curtailment here that is plunging us into despair and economic catastrophe. In fact, the opposite is the case...we are the leaders in fracking, and finding oil from the shale fields once thought inaccessible. Frustration with government, and with the changes that occur in the world, haunt and bedevil all of us as we age. But to make the mistakes in analysis seen here, and the refusal to consider evidence? Well, that seems to be a case of 'contempt prior to investigation.' Some consider this a working definition of ignorance. And we didn't survive on this planet (I'm assuming you, like me, are in the retirement years, or near it) this long, to simply put our heads in the sand and scream.