Can there be a Catholic environmental movement?
Cardinal Peter Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, was recently quoted as saying "In Catholic thought, 'nature' is neither sacred nor divine, neither to be feared or to be revered and left untouched. Rather, it is a gift offered by the Creator to the human community to be entrusted to the intelligence and moral responsibility of men and women. . . .It is hazardous - and ultimately absurd, indeed sinful - to employ biotechnology without the guidance of deeply responsible ethics. . . .Research must be done with ethics and a clear long-term vision that respects human dignity and strives for the common good." (Catholic News Service, October 23, 2013)
Christian thought speaks of mankind being made in the image of the Creator. Is it not reasonable to view all of nature as being made in the image of the Creator? I will postulate that we have more in common with the natural world than that which we do not hold in common. Wes Jackson writes: "The human race was born out of nature and it is out of nature that the human race and all life is sustained every second of every minute of every hour." (Altars of Unhewn Stone, Wes Jackson, 1987) Our ethics and our long-term vision must then respect the dignity of all of nature and strive for the common good of the entire community of nature. Humankind alone is not sufficient measure to guide one's actions. It is appropriate to revere nature and to leave, at least some areas, untouched motivated by either reverence or fear--as evidence of the natural beauty and the pristine quality of the gift or fearful of the negative consequences of our actions or our potential for misuse.
There can be a Catholic environmental movement, but it will need an updated Catholic thought.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Sunday, October 13, 2013
I have just returned from today's church service where the celebrant injected a request a cappella into the Prayers of the Faithful asking that "our nation be protected from our enemies." This particular celebrant has added this request on more than one occasion, so I will not excuse the wording by attributing it to composing on-the-fly. I would like to suggest an alternative format for future Prayers of the Faithful. Let us beseech the Lord of All "that we as a nation be reconciled with those whom we identify as enemy and who identify us as enemy."
Here are two links to articles that I found on-line this morning. The first was read before heading out the door to church; the second was read afterwards over a third or fourth cup of coffee warmed up in the microwave. Needles to say that these reads moved me more than today's church service--moved in a way that is appropriate on a Sunday morning.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/aug/24/secondworldwar.broadcasting
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/world/europe/behind-flurry-of-killing-potency-of-hate.html?hp&_r=0
The articles speak to the complexity of human nature and the ways in which we organize and think about ourselves. Is it too much to ask that our religious ministers challenge the best that can be found in our nature and not concede to an uneasy peace of mutually assured destruction, which is a false security and a non-peace? Praying for protection from one's enemies is nothing more than asking for success in an arms race or victory on today's battlefield. We are fools to ask for so little; it is a crime against our humanity and the humanity of all to settle for so little.
Here are two links to articles that I found on-line this morning. The first was read before heading out the door to church; the second was read afterwards over a third or fourth cup of coffee warmed up in the microwave. Needles to say that these reads moved me more than today's church service--moved in a way that is appropriate on a Sunday morning.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/aug/24/secondworldwar.broadcasting
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/world/europe/behind-flurry-of-killing-potency-of-hate.html?hp&_r=0
The articles speak to the complexity of human nature and the ways in which we organize and think about ourselves. Is it too much to ask that our religious ministers challenge the best that can be found in our nature and not concede to an uneasy peace of mutually assured destruction, which is a false security and a non-peace? Praying for protection from one's enemies is nothing more than asking for success in an arms race or victory on today's battlefield. We are fools to ask for so little; it is a crime against our humanity and the humanity of all to settle for so little.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Unintended Consequences, But Not Unforeseen
There is a move afoot to develop an open-pit iron ore mine in northern Wisconsin and Michigan's upper peninsula within an ancient mountain range--the Penokee Mountains.
The discussion of the proposed mine has focused exclusively on the potential environmental impacts, State mining laws, and the economic impact on local communities. I would like to raise two questions: (1)how will a mine in the Penokees impact on what remains of the iron ore/taconite industry on Minnesota's Iron Range? And (2)how will Australia's expanding iron ore production impact a Penokee mine?
The opening of Minnesota's Iron Range contributed significantly to the decline and loss of Michigan's and Wisconsin's iron ore industry 100 years ago. The older deep shaft mines could not compete with the new open-pit mines. Will not a Penokee mine with the latest technology from the ground up prove to be just too competitive for what remains of iron ore production on Minnesota's Range? One consequence may be increased pressure to increase non-ferrous metal production on the Range as the successor to iron ore production, which will increase the risk of environmental degradation from the technologies used to mine sulfide ore bodies.
Australia is in the midst of significantly increasing its exports of iron ore, with a number of mines currently coming on-line and scheduled for full production within the next two years. This is in the context of a glutted global iron ore market. Australia would appear to be in a position to more than compete with the U.S. mining industry in supplying the Asian markets. Coupling a competitive disadvantage with an oversupply does not bode well for a new mine in the Penokee Mountains, much less an existing mine on Minnesota's Iron Range. (For background, try this link: http://www.prairiebizmag.com/event/article/id/15745/)
Who will lose if the proposed Penokee mine is less economically viable than estimated? Will it not be the local communities and the State of Wisconsin at large? Once in production, taxes, fees, and other payments to local units of government are all predicated on a profitable operation. The less profitable the venture, the less income that will accrue to those impacted by the mine and those bearing the financial responsibility to ameliorate those impacts. The projected windfall will dry up just as the tornado leaves destruction in its wake. The mine operators' cut shows up on the expense side of the ledger; stockholders and units of government will share in the profits (after expenses), if and when there are any. Expenses are paid first and are carried forward year after year minimizing or eliminating profits.
What assurances are there that the proposed mine can be successful both in its own right and without destroying our neighbors and our neighbors' communities, which lie to the west?
There is a move afoot to develop an open-pit iron ore mine in northern Wisconsin and Michigan's upper peninsula within an ancient mountain range--the Penokee Mountains.
The discussion of the proposed mine has focused exclusively on the potential environmental impacts, State mining laws, and the economic impact on local communities. I would like to raise two questions: (1)how will a mine in the Penokees impact on what remains of the iron ore/taconite industry on Minnesota's Iron Range? And (2)how will Australia's expanding iron ore production impact a Penokee mine?
The opening of Minnesota's Iron Range contributed significantly to the decline and loss of Michigan's and Wisconsin's iron ore industry 100 years ago. The older deep shaft mines could not compete with the new open-pit mines. Will not a Penokee mine with the latest technology from the ground up prove to be just too competitive for what remains of iron ore production on Minnesota's Range? One consequence may be increased pressure to increase non-ferrous metal production on the Range as the successor to iron ore production, which will increase the risk of environmental degradation from the technologies used to mine sulfide ore bodies.
Australia is in the midst of significantly increasing its exports of iron ore, with a number of mines currently coming on-line and scheduled for full production within the next two years. This is in the context of a glutted global iron ore market. Australia would appear to be in a position to more than compete with the U.S. mining industry in supplying the Asian markets. Coupling a competitive disadvantage with an oversupply does not bode well for a new mine in the Penokee Mountains, much less an existing mine on Minnesota's Iron Range. (For background, try this link: http://www.prairiebizmag.com/event/article/id/15745/)
Who will lose if the proposed Penokee mine is less economically viable than estimated? Will it not be the local communities and the State of Wisconsin at large? Once in production, taxes, fees, and other payments to local units of government are all predicated on a profitable operation. The less profitable the venture, the less income that will accrue to those impacted by the mine and those bearing the financial responsibility to ameliorate those impacts. The projected windfall will dry up just as the tornado leaves destruction in its wake. The mine operators' cut shows up on the expense side of the ledger; stockholders and units of government will share in the profits (after expenses), if and when there are any. Expenses are paid first and are carried forward year after year minimizing or eliminating profits.
What assurances are there that the proposed mine can be successful both in its own right and without destroying our neighbors and our neighbors' communities, which lie to the west?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)