Skip to main content

So I asked the Vatican about global warming... Special Report Comments

Recently, I wrote an article for Catholic Online about global warming. The comments from so many readers, obviously intelligent, gave me pause and I took it upon myself to conduct further research, specifically into the Church's teachings on the subject. I pledged in advance to accept what I would discover, no matter what my personal opinions were, after all, I am Catholic and I have faith in my Church. Surprisingly, I soon found the Church has ... Continue Reading

31 - 35 of 35 Comments

  1. abey
    1 year ago

    Care should be taken when we speak of Environment & Global warming, to not end up worshiping the created instead of the Creator, which often is the case, like Gaia worship, to only lose whatever man already has.

  2. Russell Cook
    1 year ago

    Mr Connolly,

    I appreciate that you've looked into what you call the "climate change denial" side of the issue with respect to accusation that skeptic climate scientists have accepted money. However, I respectfully ask that you take into consideration three separate points in order to be sure you've settled into the correct position.

    First, if cannot be demonstrated that skeptic climate scientists "deny" climate change, is that label then suspiciously incorrect. From my viewpoint, I see that skeptic climate scientists offer highly detailed assessments (e.g. the NIPCC Reports http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2011/2011report.html ) citing thousands of peer-reviewed science journal-published papers, which say the IPCC has not conclusively made its case that human-induced greenhouse gases are the main driver of global warming.

    Second, you say "the Church agrees with the scientific consensus". When a major news outlet such as the PBS NewsHour demonstrates that it does not actually believe consensus opinion validates science theory, as I described in my article last year, "PBS NewsHour: Against scientific consensus before they were for it" ( http://junkscience.com/2012/09/28/pbs-newshour-against-scientific-consensus-before-they-were-for-it/ ) and genuine scientists can describe in detail how consensus does not validate science phenomena, what is your response. Is it plausible that the non-scientist authorities in the Catholic Church are not in a position to offer advice on what value consensus has in scientific matters?

    Third, and most important, is your belief about 'money paid to not objectively study the issue'. Precisely what proof do you have at your disposal that skeptic climate scientists were paid to provide lies to the public about the issue. That is what this basically boils down to, and it is actually the weakest, most unsupported part of it. If you or anybody else cannot provide proof of money exchanged for false fabricated science papers, reports, assessments or viewpoints, does it not follow that those making accusations that you rely on are worthy of hard scrutiny as to why they fail on that matter?

    On that last note, I wrote an article in 2010 about this dilemma. Please see "The Case of the Curious Climate Covenant" http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/the_case_of_the_curious_climat.html

    As I said at the end of my piece there, "So which is the bigger sin? Failing to stop a so-called global warming crisis which has increasing credibility problems with its underlying science assessments, or breaking the 9th Commandment in order to be sure [skeptic] scientists' criticisms aren't taken seriously?" I'd say if you discover it is the latter, then you have a gigantic problem on your hands.

  3. Tara Brelinsky
    1 year ago

    I just finished listening to a CD distributed by Human Life International (http://www.hli.org/store/cd-the-population-control-agend.html) which offered very different science. Brian Clowes, PhD explains how the global warmists claims are part of the much bigger picture, the Population Control Agenda. He states that drilling in the polar ice caps proves that the planet has experienced this type of warming before and that it is due to volcanic activity.

    There is no doubt that man could be a better steward of the earth, but it is rather interesting the myriad of pollutants that are ignored by the environmentalists. For example, women are suffering from infertility and cycle problems at a rate not seen previously. Both common sense and science show that their bodies are affected by the water systems (now polluted with estrogen from hormonal contraceptives) and by estrogens added to the food supply. Of course, the global warming agenda is about having less pesky people ruining the earth so they ignore that fact.

    Additionally, Jesus Christ offered no direct teaching on this matter so it is not a matter which I am required to accept as a Catholic. The Catholic Church has made no clear statement against the use of vaccines made with aborted fetuses, but I know that is a violation of faith.

    I appreciate your attempt to offer back-up for your position, but as this is not a matter of faith it is not guaranteed to be without error. And there is ample proof on the opposing side and it too comes from good, faithful, well-educated Catholics.

    Please, listen to the CD and understand the agenda behind the science and than you may come to another conclusion or at least ask yourself what is the proper way to deal with this topic so as not to be aiding and abetting the anti-life agenda.

  4. Jeremy
    1 year ago

    This is one of the most ressing moral issue of our time and I hope and pray the Catholic Church gets involved in speaking out with force. Thank you so m uch for bringing this topic up here.

  5. Chris
    1 year ago

    I always believed it was a myth because of my families "conservative" views, but then when I looked at the facts and discerned that matter with my faith and reason, it made complete sense that our planet has been polluted due to a massive global population and industrialization. Whether you like the politics behind it or not, action needs to take place. It is so disrespectful to keep on with our wasteful resources and technology to do what Liberals call "go-green". A hundred years from now, living conditions will be complete different if as a human population don't do something about it. Can't think of a better way for the Church to get involved; being responsible to our created planet by our God.


Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment


Newsletter Sign Up

Daily Readings

Reading 1, Isaiah 52:13--53:12
Look, my servant will prosper, will grow great, will rise to ... Read More

Psalm, Psalms 31:2, 6, 12-13, 15-16, 17, 25
turn your ear to me, make haste. Be for me a rock-fastness, a ... Read More

Gospel, John 18:1--19:42
After he had said all this, Jesus left with his disciples and ... Read More

Reading 2, Hebrews 4:14-16; 5:7-9
Since in Jesus, the Son of God, we have the supreme high priest ... Read More

Saint of the Day

April 18 Saint of the Day

St. Apollonius the Apologist
April 18: Martyr whose Apologia, or defense of the faith, is considered ... Read More