The Catholic Church Is Headed for Hell in a Handbasket

According to the Telegraph, a U.K. paper, the Catholic church is still giving credence to the notion of man-made global warming by offering suggestions to reduce personal carbon footprints as a method of observing Lent. I found stories dating back to 2007 stating that congregations were viewing Al Gore’s (a.k.a. Algore, grand creator of the Internet) “An Inconvenient Truth” film full of doctored data, graphs, and all sorts of stuff that caused Britain to either ban it or distribute to the students something like 70 points of factual inaccuracies contained in it.

What They Are Proposing

“Senior bishops are calling for a cut in personal carbon use for each of the 40 days of Lent. Their list of ways to achieve this includes eating less meat, flushing the toilet less often and cutting vegetables thinner so they cook faster.

But one of their tougher challenges is to give up technology such as television, mobiles and iPods for one day. The “Carbon Fast” , organised every year by development agency Tearfund, even suggests giving up technology for a day every month of the year and giving the money to charity.”

They go on to say:

“The Church of England backs the Carbon Fast and last year the Roman Catholic Church called on followers to cut down on texting and other forms of communication in the run up to Easter.

The Bishop of Oxford, who uses a blackberry, mobile phone and emails everyday, said he will struggle this Lent.

But he insisted we all need to concentrate on more “face to face” communication.”

To top it off, they even created a suggested list of “green” activities:

Other carbon fast actions include:
:: Have a technology fast. Try a day with no TV, no iPod, no computer, and even no mobile. Why not set aside a technology fast day each month?
:: Check your flush. Do you need to always flush the loo? Get a device from your water company to save water when you flush the toilet.
:: Be a part-time veggie. Aim to eat at least two vegetarian meals every week.
:: Avoid excess idling and hard acceleration to cut back on emissions when you are driving.
:: Make do and mend rather than buying new clothes.
:: Start composing food waste and growing your own fruit and vegetables.
:: Arrange a swapping party with friends. Exchange clothes, DVDs, CDs, jewellery and bags so everyone gets something new without a trip to the shops.
:: Try skinny food. Choosing thin pasta and cutting meat and vegetables smaller will mean they’ll cook faster and use less energy.
:: Eat by candlelight. How many rooms do you light in the evenings? Turn out the lights and have a meal by candlelight.
:: Take the train where possible rather than flying.

Brace Yourself for a Rebuttal

You’ve got to be kidding me! If my church, denomination, or global entity of Christ-followers referred to as “the church” started talking to me about this mumbo jumbo, I’d be having some “face to face” talks with someone pretty high up. You see, this is the problem when you turn a belief in God into a form of governing body who can literally dictate to the masses what is and is not acceptable in their eyes (as if it matters, ye Pharisees) or in the eyes of God (which they are clearly not in tune with). Everything has already been written and can easily be referenced for further clarification in the most widely-published book in the world… it’s called the Bible, which I only ever recall seeing a Pope holding one up as a gilded trophy (probably singing “We Are the Champions” in his head whilst doing so). Not that I have a problem with a man being considered something of a supreme commander of Christianity and a mediator for man to know what God wants for our lives. Not at all. Who really wants to read the Bible anyway, right? [Oh, please, dear readers, I sincerely hope your intellect to be of the caliber to identify sarcasm.]

While there is merit to not wasting what God gave you, these ideas are either ridiculous or common-sense frugality. E-mailing rather than meeting face to face does NOT conserve energy; quite the opposite. Same for a phone call, people. One of the number one issues of these global warming wackos is the excess use of fuel, and now you’re advocating frivolous travel to talk to someone when you could have e-mailed, phoned, or texted!? Seriously!? I can see by your nodding that you are too far gone.

Agree? Disagree? Let’s hear some reasoned responses.

  • Jerry

    I like the idea of a technology free day and then sending the money you saved to a charity. But ya gotta wonder what all those paper checks for five cents, enclosed in paper envelopes, and sent via airplane and truck will do for their cause. LOL!

  • http://www.perfectlypetersen.com Jesse Petersen

    But… how are you saving money by not using technology? You’re still paying for it. Not like I can call FiOS and tell them that we won’t be answering the phone, watching TV, or using the Internet. Sha’duh, to the bishops. BTW, who needs a bishop anyway? Sounds like middle management to me, if I’ve ever heard of it (and I have).

  • http://carpefactum.typepad.com Timothy Johnson

    I like to think that people have the best interests of others and noble intentions at heart. And it is true that the Bible calls us to be good stewards of all that God has given us. However, in reading this, it is hard not to agree with you. It is very evident the Catholic church is politicizing this cause. I’m a firm believer in trying to reduce my carbon footprint. I recycle. I downsized my vehicle from an SUV to a more fuel efficient sedan. I traded out all of my light bulbs for cfs. But I didn’t do all of these things because of some liberal agenda. I did it because it saves money in fuel and energy costs and it helps my community.

    I’d say you’re spot on. Keep preaching.

    • http://www.perfectlypetersen.com Jesse Petersen

      @Timothy Johnson: Yeah buddy. I even have an issue with the newly politicized term: carbon footprint. If man was increasing CO2 levels because of burning fuel, then the laws of physics/chemistry would require that the other natural gas concentrations in the atmosphere would be affected, yet they all remain the same. Therefore, CO2 levels are not rising. Even if they were, that bonehead of a scientist probably lost the paperwork. 😉