Pope to Call for Action on Global Warming

It’s always wise to take anything the left-wing media say with a few grains of salt, but even more so when it comes to discussions of the current pope.

Ever since Francis ascended to the Throne of St. Peter, the media have tried to turn him into some sort of Marxist superhero. Some stories have been heavily spun to try to create a pope who supports everything from mass wealth confiscation to homosexual “marriage.”

But there’s a curse that comes with being the most instantly informed generation in history. Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes “truth.” Eventually, fact and fiction can no longer be separated.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: College Expels Disabled Boy Over Sex Assault Despite Girl Admitting SHE Molested HIM!

So it is with common people, so it is with popes.

The Guardian, Slate, BillMoyers.com and other leftward outlets are trumpeting a supposed papal encyclical soon to be released that would exhort Catholics and other Christians to take action to fight global warming on moral grounds.

A check with the online papal encyclical reference turns up no such encyclical yet being issued or any information that one is coming, so the media could very well be making it up.

According to the Guardian, which seems to be the originator of the story, in 2015, the pope will issue the encyclical, address the United Nations and call a summit of leaders from the world’s major religions.

Allegedly, all of this is part of a strategy by Francis to get the world’s nations to reach a global warming agreement during a summit meeting in Paris to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The Guardian attributes this information to Bishop Marcelo Sorondo, chancellor of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

His bishops have gotten Francis in trouble before, such as when a purported message changing the church’s stance on homosexuality was leaked to global media, but turned out to be an unapproved document that the Vatican then had to denounce.

So whether this global warming encyclical will actually appear in the form that has been reported is anybody’s guess at the moment.

I would not be completely surprised if it did, though it would deeply disappointing.

For the pope to issue such a document would do far more than give support to bad science at a time when concern over the warmists’ wild claims is finally fading in the public mind. An encyclical embracing the pseudoscience of global warming would represent a deep abandonment of faith in God.

After the Flood, the Bible tells us, God placed the rainbow in the sky as a sign of his promise not to destroy the Earth again until the events in Revelation, at which time he will give his faithful a new Earth to dwell on.

The heart of the global warming message has always been one of fear that we are somehow going to destroy the planet, or at least its ability to sustain life. (Notably, environmentalist often seem more concerned about animal and plant life, as many prominent activists have expressed their desire to see a vast reduction in the human population.)

The warming message continues to say that only a powerful, probably worldwide, government can possibly save us from catastrophe by putting more of the same ignorant, pompous but powerful boobs who caused the purported problems in the first place (no, it really wasn’t your fault, or your SUV’s fault) in charge of “fixing” it.

The schemes for “fixing” global warming are usually notable for their total ineffectiveness at nudging climate one way or the other and their ability to siphon money out of your pocket. The ones that actually could affect global climate — aka “geoengineering” — are all spectacularly, obviously bad ideas that would just as likely plunge the world into a new ice age as accomplish anything desirable.

Global warming, for which the only “evidence” is the inaccurate predictions of flawed computer models, is ultimately a discussion about controlling the weather, something that has never been in the power of man, though it hasn’t stopped us from trying.

You may as well stand out in the cornfield, arms upraised to halt the advance of a tornado. Or shoot your flaming arrows into the air during an eclipse to reignite the sun.

There are so many problems with the theory of global warming that entire volumes could be and have been written about them. The idiot savants who write for the left-wing media bitterly cling to their belief that the world is being destroyed by industry, and they call us nonbelievers “deniers,” the Western version of “infidel.”

But it’s us deniers who are the only ones using our brains when it comes to the issue of global warming. To borrow from “The Sound of Music,” how exactly do you catch the wind and tie it down? That’s basically what global warmists claim they can do. And not only can do, but must do, because only they know what the exact, top secret, perfect temperature of the Earth should be.

The creatures fancy themselves smarter and more powerful than the Creator.

If Pope Francis were to openly embrace such foolishness, it would at its heart be a call to abandon not only the church’s long history of supporting science, but to abandon all faith. And I predict it would fracture the church.

Rather than embracing the message of global warming, Francis needs to teach the world to re-embrace faith in God.

Previous If I Were President
Next Newsweek's Bible-Bashing Article Says Criticizing the Government is a Sin


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.