December 6, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis has sent a message to the participants of the latest United Nations climate conference, which opened in Madrid last Monday, asking whether “there is the political will to allocate with honesty, responsibility and courage, more human, financial and technological resources to mitigate the negative effects of climate change, as well as to help the poorest and most vulnerable populations who suffer from them the most.”
In a purely “horizontal” context, in which he spoke neither of God and His rights over Creation nor of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Pope Francis recalled a “growing awareness on the part of the various actors of the international community of the importance and need to ‘work together in building our common home,’” as affirmed in the Paris Agreement adopted by the COP21 in December 2015.
The Conference of Parties (COP) is an international body responsible for monitoring and reviewing the implementation of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose activities rest on the Special Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC claims not only that “global warming” — or, when the weather does not cooperate, “climate change” — is an indisputable scientific fact, but that human activity is responsible for it because of the burning of “fossil energy” (such as petrol, coal, and gas), consumption of meat, deforestation, and other industries produce ever more carbon dioxide (CO2), a “greenhouse gas” that traps the sun’s heat in Earth’s atmosphere.
COP has by now reached its 25th edition and takes place this year in Madrid after having been initially scheduled in Santiago de Chile, where social unrest led the organizers to move the event to Spain, albeit under Carolina Schmidt, Chilean environment minister and president of the COP25, to whom Pope Francis addressed his message.
Pope Francis, moving clearly out of the spiritual sphere that is the Catholic Church’s domain of action, once again used the prestige of the papal function to put the Vatican’s full moral force behind the aims and objectives of the COP 25 or, to be more precise, behind the paradigm change encouraged by the United Nations through the fight against “global warming”: a change to Western styles of life, redistribution of world riches to the “poor countries” that according to the climate change theory pay the price of the “rich countries’” over-consumption, and stringent measures deemed necessary for the good of “the planet.”
Pope Francis deplored in his message that “sadly, after four years, we must admit that this awareness is still rather weak, unable to respond adequately to that strong sense of urgency for rapid action called for by the scientific data at our disposal,” once more speaking as if the conclusions of the IPCC reports are absolutely indisputable regarding both global warming and mankind’s direct responsibility for the innumerable catastrophes that climate alarmists have announced for the near future.
This attitude disregards numerous studies on the part of climate and other scientists who have not only challenged the scientific validity of climate models used by the United Nations to justify the change in human habits and way of life, but who also question the exactitude of climate measurements presented in this context and who deplore that other, well known, and far more consequential elements that play a role in Earth’s temperature are neglected — the sun, for instance, whose cyclical activity is known to have a direct impact on the climate of our planet, while the impact of human-produced CO2 remains marginal in the Earth’s atmosphere.
Pope Francis’s message to Carolina Schmidt once more gave witness to the Church’s unquestioning adoption of the U.N. agenda — despite its profoundly anti-human stance and promotion of population control to reduce the so-called effect of human activity on “global warming.” Proponents of population control such as Paul Ehrlich, Joachim Schellnhuber, and Jeffrey Sachs have been repeatedly invited to scientific events at the Vatican, while Sachs was invited to intervene at the recent Amazon Synod, where care for the “common home” took center stage.
In his message to the COP25, the pope deplored that “current commitments made by States to mitigate and adapt to climate change are far from those actually needed to achieve the goals set by the Paris Agreement. They demonstrate how far words are from concrete actions!” he wrote.
Adopting the alarmist language of the “climate-warmers,” Pope Francis spoke of the “concern about the ability of such processes to respect the timeline required by science, as well as the distribution of the costs they require,” while at the same time insisting that “numerous studies tell us that it is still possible to limit global warming.”
“To do this we need a clear, far-sighted and strong political will, set on pursuing a new course that aims at refocusing financial and economic investments toward those areas that truly safeguard the conditions of a life worthy of humanity on a ‘healthy’ planet for today and tomorrow. All this calls us to reflect conscientiously on the significance of our consumption and production models and on the processes of education and awareness to make them consistent with human dignity,” he said.
He insisted that young people understand this and added, in substance, that they will hold our generation responsible for the problems we will have refused to solve.
All of this is a far cry from the Church’s very reason for existing: to communicate the graces won by the merits of Our Lord’s Incarnation, Passion, and Resurrection for the salvation of many, to whom the gates of heaven have been reopened through His work of redemption.
In fact, such an alignment on worldly objectives is clearly political in nature, and a corruption of man’s true relationship with nature: according to Catholic doctrine, the Creation must surely be respected and used by man with love and admiration for what God has made, but man is at the summit of the material creation which exists to allow him to achieve his true end as a being both spiritual and material: eternal happiness in the “next” world, living of the very life of God.
What would the world look like if the Paris Agreement objectives and further stringent measures touted both by the COP25 and Pope Francis were truly to be implemented?
On October 31, the globalist World Economic Forum gave a glimpse into the future it is hoping for in an op-ed signed by Ida Auken, member of the Danish Parliament.
Under the title “This is what 2030 could look like if we win the war on climate change,” she wrote:
By 2030, your CO2 emissions will be greatly reduced. Meat on your dinner table will be a rare sight. Water and the air you breathe will be cleaner and nature will be in recovery. The money in your wallet will be spent on being with family and friends, not on buying goods. Saving the climate involves huge change, but it could make us much happier at the same time.
She explained how transport-sharing would become the rule, with private cars banned from cities and more and more people deciding not to own personal cars.
“For lunch you can choose from dozens of exciting meals — most of them are plant-based, so you eat more healthily and are more environmentally friendly than when lunch meant choosing between five types of burger,” she continued.
Meat is one of the main targets of “warmists,” who say cattle-breeding is one of climate change’s worst culprits. Interestingly, Pope Francis never mentions this, not even in his “green” encyclical Laudato Si’, perhaps because he comes from Argentina, where beef is the staple diet.
Ida Auken sees the world as completely connected and managed beyond human error and liberty: in the 2030 U.N. dream, “if your dishwasher is about to break down, it is no longer your problem. The service provider already knows about the problem and has sent someone to fix it. When the machine no longer works, the provider picks up the old machine and installs a new one.”
Sober living is no longer associated with the sacrifice of earthly possessions for a higher good or even for the practice of virtue: it is for the planet. The idea goes very far since even private property and family homes are at least partially rejected: Ida Auken explained that in her “CO-topia,” “people are trying out new types of living arrangements with more shared functions and spaces. This means that more people can afford to live in cities.”
She concluded her futurist reverie with these words:
Agriculture has changed dramatically, as the new plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy products have made it harder for traditional animal-based products to compete. Much of the land formerly used to produce animal feedstock has become available. As people in cities have started to value going into nature, tourism, hunting and angling now offer new types of income for people living in rural areas. Forests and nature are again spreading across the globe. People travel more in their region and by train, so air traffic has started to decline. Most airlines have switched to electrofuels, biofuels or electricity.
Or to say things more clearly: human beings will no longer have the freedom to travel as they now are able to, and the anti-CO2 arrangements will have had the effect of a profound revolution in the economy and in society as a whole — the whole point being that this revolution would not be the effect of a free choice, but imposed in the name of unverifiable future catastrophes and fear.
The same Ida Auken, in a particularly revealing piece published by weforum.org in November 2016, was already conjuring up the image of a property-less, communal world in 2030 under the title: “Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better.”
The paper made clear from the start that the true aim of the big climate scare is a new form of communism:
Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city — or should I say, ‘our city.’ I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.
It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.
She went on to say:
In our city we don’t pay any rent, because someone else is using our free space whenever we do not need it. My living room is used for business meetings when I am not there.
Once in awhile, I will choose to cook for myself. It is easy — the necessary kitchen equipment is delivered at my door within minutes. Since transport became free, we stopped having all those things stuffed into our home. Why keep a pasta-maker and a crepe cooker crammed into our cupboards? We can just order them when we need them.
But she also realized: “Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. Nowhere I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.”
Mrs. Auken is a former environment minister of Denmark, of the socialist and feminist persuasion. What does she have to do with Pope Francis’s commitment to fighting “climate change”? A lot more than you may think: She is giving a concrete image to the U.N.’s political agenda for climate-fueled socialism and making visible, under the aegis of the powerful World Economic Forum, the face of things to come.