The President Meets the Pope
by Christopher A. Ferrara
May 25, 2017
So Pope Bergoglio has met with the President he publicly declared "not Christian" because he pledges to build a border wall. The meeting was cordial, and the First Lady and Trump's daughter Ivanka had the decency to dress modestly for the occasion, including chapel veils routinely eschewed by the Pope's more "liberated" female dignitary guests.
There was, by all reports, no discussion between the Pope and the President regarding "climate change," the quasi-religious liberal dogma masquerading as science. But Trump was not allowed to escape the apostolic palace without being badgered about the issue. In the later meeting with Cardinal Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, Trump was pressed to commit the United States to remaining a party to the Paris Accord, which would impose the absurd requirement that the US "reduce its greenhouse gas emissions" — meaning predominantly simple carbon dioxide, which we exhale with every breath and plants need for photosynthesis —"by 26-28 percent below the 2005 level in 2025, and to make 'best efforts' to reduce emissions by 28 percent."
Since when does the Catholic Church, commissioned by Christ to be the sole ark of salvation, dispense advice to politicians on the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Since Vatican II, of course, when the other-worldly Church whose divine mission is to save souls was subjected to an "opening to the world" and underwent, as even Paul VI was forced to admit, an "invasion of the Church by worldly thinking." In this case, some very faulty worldly thinking.
A few questions which apparently have not occurred to Parolin or Pope Bergoglio concerning the secular dogma they have swallowed whole: What exactly is the "ecological catastrophe" Pope Bergoglio — who has no expertise in the subject — credulously supposes must happen if "greenhouse gases" are not drastically reduced? When can this "catastrophe" be expected to occur if the Paris Accord is not followed? How exactly can the "catastrophe" be averted merely because the US reduces "greenhouse gases" to "26-28 percent below the 2005 level in 2025" while other nations are not similarly burdened? How was the 2005 baseline level of the US contribution to "greenhouse gases" determined, and how would the percentage reduction be determined? If the world can afford to wait eight more years for a 26-28 percent reduction in US greenhouse gas emissions, while other nations are not required to make such sharp reductions, where is the looming "catastrophe" Pope Bergoglio imagines to exist?
More generally, if the Vatican cannot demonstrate that without the Paris Accord the world will suffer an "ecological catastrophe," which it certainly cannot demonstrate, then what is the point of the Paris Accord, and why should the American people be shackled to its strictest requirements while the rest of the world gets off relatively easy in terms of compliance? Granted, a more efficient use of energy and non-polluting and renewable methods of producing it are certainly desirable goals, but what right does the Vatican have to demand that the United States remain committed to a piece of paper that may well impair rather than facilitate achievement of those goals, given the historic incompetence of central government bureaucracies to accomplish anything of real value?
A hundred years ago, Our Lady of Fatima said this to three seers: "You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace."
Today's Vatican, however, has a very different message: "You have seen climate change, which threatens the world with an ecological catastrophe. To save it, the Vatican wishes to establish in the world compliance with the Paris Accord." It would be laughable if it were not so immensely tragic.