With this post I'd like to delve more into the problematic guidelines for priestly formation that were recently released; see
yesterday's post. Some good people don't see the harm in what was said in the guidelines per se about concern for the environment. As I said yesterday, I think it's necessary to look at them in the context of other proceedings from this papacy to date. Together they paint a very ominous picture.
In addition to Laudato Si, many questionable statements were issued and deeds committed by the Vatican, many with the cooperation of anti-life forces. Recall that
last month the pope addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, calling for the creation of "a regulatory system that included inviolable limits and ensure the protection of ecosystems". Will seminarians be
brainwashed taught to shill for these "regulatory systems"? Also recall how the pope waxed lyrical about the
UN summit on climate change last year. He, the Vicar of Christ, stated that the summit was "humanity's last chance to thwart climate disaster" and that the world is at "the limits of suicide". Will seminarians be forced to parrot that crap? Will they be forced to teach that "
global warming is a sin" that must be "atoned" by recycling and carpooling?
Will they be forced to promote the Catholic Climate Covenant? That was a bit of a fad a little while ago and may well make a comeback. Let's look at the Catholic Climate Covenant in light of some very troubling facts
unearthed and exposed by Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute. Sarah Spengeman, Program Director of CCC, is a member of Emily's List. That organization exists for the sole purpose of helping elect pro-abortion women to political offices. The Lepanto page shows the online evidence. Additionally, Spengeman's social sites show her to be sympathetic to women's ordination and homosexual perversity.
I bring up the matter of Sarah Spengeman for she is only one of the anti-God activists that new priests, thanks to that ill-considered "gift of the priestly vocation" thing, will be forced to promote (even if only indirectly). They will also be forced to portray "climate change" as sin, thus obfuscating the true serious nature of sin. In fact, the very acceptance of the notion of "climate change" as fact may be its own sin against honesty, for
by no means is "climate change" settled science and it is outside the competency of Church hierarchy to pronounce it settled. So it seems that our seminarians will be coerced into preaching a
progressive agenda that has nothing to do with scientific truth, let alone the salvation of souls.