I have taken the better part of the day to read Pope Francis’s encyclical regarding the care of the planet. Environmentalists and government officials pushing for progress with the talks on climate change that take place in Paris during December, are elated with the wording the Pope has employed. The UK Guardian wasted no time publishing language from the unofficial draft leaked to the press yesterday which they quote (in part): ‘humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it… Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases… given off above all because of human activity.’
The encyclical itself utilizes a weird synthesis of science and mysticism that is remarkably similar to how the environmentalist movement articulates its philosophy and policy positions at times. Not only does it reference studies from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the encyclical says the Earth ‘is protesting for the wrong that we are doing to her, because of the irresponsible use and abuse of the goods that God has placed on her. We have grown up thinking that we were her owners and dominators, authorised to loot her. The violence that exists in the human heart, wounded by sin, is also manifest in the symptoms of illness that we see in the Earth, the water, the air and in living things.’
While such a blend of science and mysticism is not only consistent with the views of the environmentalist movement itself, the encyclical also continues to highlight the Roman Catholic Church’s abortion fetish. Francis essentially linked concern with the environment with the existence of a developing fetus or what the church calls innocent human life. Can’t say the church isn’t consistent. Not only do they join with environmentalists in exterminating human life by destroying industrialization but the Church ramps up its wish to force women to be breeding cows by being a means to an end to procreation.
Evangelical and other conservative Christian denomination also stand in solidarity with their Catholic bretheren but in a different way. Despite their recent rejection of environmentalism, at one point evangelical Christians bought into green philosophy. A good example of this is a 2005 New York Times article reports on an evangelical Christian organization’s statement on the environment:
In October the association paved the way for broad-based advocacy on the environment when it adopted “For the Health of the Nation: An Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility,” a platform that included a plank on “creation care” that many evangelical leaders say was unprecedented.
“Because clean air, pure water and adequate resources are crucial to public health and civic order,” the statement said, “government has an obligation to protect its citizens from the effects of environmental degradation.”
Despite the green movement’s enthusiasm for this screed, the Catholic Church still does not support the green movement’s embracing family planning programs and abortion rights along with their liberal views on homosexuality. In theory, the Church does not support environmentalists viewing humans as a cancer to be eradicated from the planet. But greens are happy to talk up the Pope’s encyclical since it is another means to their ends to browbeat rank and file Catholics into submission. With Francis’ declaration, the Catholic church’s view of the Earth and the environmentalists reverence for Gaia are one in the same.
In reality, environmentalists seek to sacrifice mankind on the altar of their neo-pagan mother goddess of nature, Gaia, while religion calls for mankind to be sacrificed to the greater glory of God or the church. With Francis’ enunciation, religion and environmentalism now stand in vile solidarity in their quest to revert civilization to another Dark Ages by enslaving human beings to their collective will. Both philosophies are not only anti-human, they are anti-life.