LaRouche: Global Warming Hoax is an Existential issue for Christianity
In comments on the recent Vatican conference on Climate Change, Lyndon LaRouche stressed that the most important development in the pattern of opposition to the Global Warming hoax internationally is that expressed at this conference.
LaRouche emphasized that the specific epistemological argument made at the conference by Cardinal Renato Martino is crucial, in that it emphasizes a conception of man based upon the notion of the immortality of the human soul, which reflects a multi-generational commitment to previous and future generations.
LaRouche emphasized that the Baby-Boomer generation, which generally supports the Global Warming hoax, hates this concept of man.
Baby-boomers, as a generation, have no loyalty to either their parents nor to their own children. They have no sense of immortality, no clear sense of intellectual life and do not believe in universal truth.
In contrast, older generations tend to define the meaning of their lives in these terms.
The fact that the Vatican organized the conference and intervened in the specific way that it did epistemologically, LaRouche said, reflects an awareness on its part that the Global Warming hoax represents an existential issue in respect to Christianity itself.
The significance of LaRouche's comments can be seen clearly in the excerpt which follows from Cardinal Renator Martino's closing speech.
Cardinal Renato Martino, Excerpted from the Closing Statement to the April 26-27 Justicia et Pax conference on Climate Change, translation by Claudio Celini
The undisputable data has emerged, that climate changes are a fact, as atmospheric warming is a fact too. Expressing consideration and attention to these facts, the Pontifical Council Justitia et Pax expresses it's confidence and it's encouragement to the scientific community to continue it's very precious work, aiming at an adequate understanding and an illuminating clarification of the causes at the origin of such complex phenomena. It expresses as well confidence and encouragement to national and international political institutions to implement development policies, especially in poor countries, without jeopardizing the natural environment. The Social Doctrine of the Church recognizes for every man the fundamental rights to development and to a healthy environment, which are to be promoted jointly, without the promotion of the former involving the mortification of the latter.
In my reflections, I do not intend to express official positions by the Pontifical Council on the issue of our seminar. Allow me nevertheless a personal reflection that, I hope, might find your well-intentioned comprehension.
On the natural environment, the social teaching of the Church casts the light of revelation, that is the light of creation and the eschatological light of redemption. Nature is for man, and man is for God.
Even in considering those problematics connected with climate changes, one shall listen to the social Magistery of the Church: it neither supports absolutization of nature, nor it's reduction to mere instrumentality.
Instead, it considers nature as a cultural and moral stage where man plays his responsibility in front of other men, including future generations, and before God.
This means that nature is not an absolute, but a wealth posed in the responsible and prudent hands of man.
It means also that man has an undisputed superiority within creation and, in virtue of his being a person endowed with an immortal soul, cannot be equaled to other living beings, nor considered a disturbing element of the natural ecological balance.
Finally, it means that nature, as it is not everything, it also is not nothing. Man does not have an absolute right over nature, but a mandate of conservation and development in a logic of universal destination of the goods of the earth which, as it is known, is one of the fundamental principles of the Social Doctrine of the Church, a principle which must be conjugated especially with the preferential option for the poor and the development of poor countries.
In considering problematics connected to climate changes, one must acknowledge that the Social Doctrine of the Church must deal with many current forms of idolatry of nature that lose sight of man. And the opposite tendency exists as well, to resolve nature, completely and without residues, within culture.
Such ecologisms often emerge in the debate on demographic issues and on the relationship among population, environment and development.
In the occasion of the International Cairo Conference on Population and Development in 1994, where I participated as head of the delegation, the Holy See, together with many third world countries, had to confront the idea according to which population increase in the following decades would be such as to collapse natural balances on earth and prevent it's development. These theses have long been rejected and, luckily, they are on the retreat.
Meantime, however, those same ones who proposed such a vision, pushed, as a means to prevent the supposed environmental disaster, unnatural instruments, such as abortion and mass sterilization in poor countries with a high birth rate.
The Church proposes a realistic view of things. It has confidence in man and his ever new capacity to seek solutions to problems posed to him by history.
Capacities that allow him often to reject the recurring, gloomy and improbable catastrophic forecasts.
The Church, however, knows also that human actions in regard to nature must be ethically oriented. The ecological issue, therefore, must be perceived as an ethical issue. This is demanded by the Church, given that there is a constant interaction between the human person and nature.
John Paul II had happily adopted the expression "human ecology." God, he wrote, not only gave the earth to man, but gave him man himself.
Therefore, he must respect not only nature through a "natural ecology," but also the dignified moral life of man through a "human ecology."
The environmental issue is an anthropological issue. The great Pontiff stated in Centesimus Annus : "At the origin of the meaningless destruction of natural environment there is an antropological mistake, unfortunately spread in our time.
Man, who discovers his capacity for transforming and, in a certain sense, to create the world with his own work, forgets that this occurs always on the basis of the original donation of things from God.
He thinks that he can arbitrarily dispose of the earth..., and instead of performing his role of collaborator of God in the work of creation, man replaces God with himself and therefore he ends up with provoking the rebellion of nature, which he tyrannizes instead of governing it." ....