- William Briggs offers commentary at Crisis Magazine. It's well worth a read.
- This report was penned before the meeting on Tuesday. Yes, before! Does that have a familiar ring to it? Think back about 5-6 months! Yes! The uber-heretical interim report of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family was likewise written beforehand, with only limited input.
- One of the select few who had input into this pig-slop of a report was none other than Jeffrey Sachs; see the post from two days ago.
- The whole thing reads like a "doom and gloom if we don't bow before the idol of global warming" tome. I'm surprised Al Gore didn't have a hand in writing this nonsense!
I'll now pull a quote from page 8 of the report (page 9 of the pdf) so you can understand just how inimical this thing is. It isn't just harmless nonsense; it's really quite dangerous. To wit:
"Over the 10,000 years that humans have depended on agriculture, it has been spread over a third
of the earth’s land surface, doubtless causing the extinction of at least hundreds of thousands and
perhaps millions of species of organisms in the process. During the last two centuries, however,
our numbers have grown at an unprecedented rate from one billion to more than seven billion
people, with expectations for ever-increasing consumption rising even faster than the populations
themselves. Although we are an inseparable part of the living world, entirely dependent on it for
every aspect of our lives, we are destroying it with blinding speed through habitat destruction,
global climate change, moving invasive species (including pests and parasites) rapidly throughout
the world, and harvesting many kinds of wild plants and animals unsustainably. Considering the
fact that we have found and named only a small proportion of the species of organisms that occur
on earth, we will never even be directly aware of most of those that we drive and have driven to
extinction. Our activities constitute a direct rejection of the Biblical injunction to care for the
world by good stewardship: they not only deny benefits that we enjoy now to future generations
but also seriously threaten global sustainability. The destruction of so many of what are, as far as
we know, our only living companions in the universe, is clearly, as Harvard Professor E.O. Wilson
has put it, the sin for which our descendants will be least likely to forgive us, as it is completely
irreversible. To save as much of the sustainable fabric of the world as possible, we need to take
many steps, among them reaching a level and sustainable population; just consumption rates
throughout the world..."
Did you catch that? They (probably Sachs) were quite sly in insinuating the concept of population control in there. That's the whole satanic idea! And yes, I do intend that adjective to be taken literally! Think of it! Just who/what do they think is qualified to decide what constitutes a "level and sustainable population"? A one-world government? How do they intend to achieve this arbitrary level? Contraception and abortion, of course! And what, pray tell, will they do with those unruly types who will not swallow the progressive schtick? Just where is this leading us? If you haven't already, please go to my post two days ago and review the Voris clip; we need to have our eyes wide open.
On the bottom of that page and going onto the next page, we see an outright endorsement of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals. The Voice of the Family yesterday issued a statement detailing why these SDG's - and this statement by the PAS - are a direct threat to unborn children. This is no surprise coming from the UN (also known as Useless Nincompoops) but now we have thrust in our faces the horrible spectacle of the Vatican striking hands with the UN in this murderous venture.
As we await, with understandable concern, the pope's statement on the environment, we must recall that he can pronounce infallibly only on matters of faith and morals - and even then under the most specific of circumstances. If there are errors therein, we are not only free to respectfully object to them but we are duty-bound to so so.
Did you catch that? They (probably Sachs) were quite sly in insinuating the concept of population control in there. That's the whole satanic idea! And yes, I do intend that adjective to be taken literally! Think of it! Just who/what do they think is qualified to decide what constitutes a "level and sustainable population"? A one-world government? How do they intend to achieve this arbitrary level? Contraception and abortion, of course! And what, pray tell, will they do with those unruly types who will not swallow the progressive schtick? Just where is this leading us? If you haven't already, please go to my post two days ago and review the Voris clip; we need to have our eyes wide open.
On the bottom of that page and going onto the next page, we see an outright endorsement of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals. The Voice of the Family yesterday issued a statement detailing why these SDG's - and this statement by the PAS - are a direct threat to unborn children. This is no surprise coming from the UN (also known as Useless Nincompoops) but now we have thrust in our faces the horrible spectacle of the Vatican striking hands with the UN in this murderous venture.
As we await, with understandable concern, the pope's statement on the environment, we must recall that he can pronounce infallibly only on matters of faith and morals - and even then under the most specific of circumstances. If there are errors therein, we are not only free to respectfully object to them but we are duty-bound to so so.
