Respect for Life: The Motivation for Ecological Concern

In the Encyclical Centesimus annus, along with the discussions of the ecological question, Pope John Paul II points out to “the urgent need for a ‘human ecology’.” This concept is meant to recall that “not only has God given the earth to man, who must use it with respect for the original good purpose for which, it was given to him, but man too is God’s gift to man. He must there fore respect the natural and moral structure with which he has been endowed.” (Centesimus annus, 38).

If man loses his sense of life and the security of moral standards, we may not be able to take effective changes to safeguard both the concerns of nature and those of the society. Here, we should remember that “the church obviously”, as Pope John Paul II says, “has no ‘technical solutions’ to offer. Her contribution is at the level of Gospel witness and is expressed in proposing the spiritual values that give meaning to life and guidance for practical decisions.[1] These spiritual values shall inspire us, from which we should make a change of attitude. This attitude must include reverence for life, which recognizes both intrinsic and inalienable dignity of the human and the intrinsic value of nature.

Today, every one sees ecological issues as a moral challenge and emphasizes the moral responsibility to save the nature from the present destruction. In his January 1, 1990, World Day of Peace message, “The ecological crisis: A common Responsibility”, Pope John Paul II encouraged “a new ecological awareness”. The overriding theme of the Pope’s was that “the ecological crisis is a reality and that it is a moral problem.”

[2]

Again in the document ‘Ecclesia in Asia’, Pope John Paul II indicated that it is out of our reverence to the creatures of God, that we have to protect the eco-system. Man should handle the earthly resources not as a cruel exploiter, but as an intelligent being and a responsible fulfiller.”[3] Our moral obligation is clear. We have moral obligation to the future generation and also we have the obligation to respect life and allow others to live or create an atmosphere for them to lead their life.

In our moral consideration, man is seen as a subject in corporeality. He is related to material world and to its resources. For all these we depend on common good (society). If individual does not contribute to common good, we will not have anything tti receive. We have the obligation to contribute to common good. Our social responsibility is to try to achieve a livable humanity for all. But this does not mean that we can ruthlessly exploit nature. If we do so, we will be always at the midst of the threat of ecological crisis. And we will hand over to next generation a destructed nature. So we have hold on our moral obligation to respect and to promote. In fact, Francis, through out his life, was convinced of this moral obligation to respect and promote. Though he was not aware of the ecological disaster in his time, in his attitude, there was an implication of moral social responsibility; even to consider the future generation. He had only a positive outlook on created things, they were not to be abused or subdued.

Our social moral responsibility demands also to repair the damages done to the ecosystem. So we need an ecological ethics to repair the eco-system.

[1] L’Osservatore Romano, Vaticn, Nov.22, 2000, p.3.
[2] A.LAPORTE-VEST, Caring for the earth, p.11.
[3] Cf., JOHN PAUL II, Ecclesia in Asia, p.41.

By Jesmond Joseph

What is the climate system?

It may seem hard to believe that people can actually change the Earth’s climate. But scientists think that the things people do that send greenhouse gases into the air are making our planet warmer.

Atmosphere
The atmosphere covers the Earth. It is a thin layer of mixed gases which make up the air we breathe. This thin layer also helps the Earth from becoming too hot or too cold, much like clothing does for us. Weather systems, which develop in the lower atmosphere, are driven by heat from the sun, the rotation of the Earth, and variations in the Earth's surface.

Oceans
Oceans cover about 70 percent of Earth's surface. Their large mass and thermal properties, enable them to store vast quantities of heat. Oceans buffer and regulate temperature – energy absorbed or lost by the oceans results in a smaller surface temperature change than would occur over land. The atmosphere and ocean constantly exchange energy and matter. For example, water evaporates from the oceans into the atmosphere. This moisture then falls back to the Earth as precipitation – rain, snow, sleet, and even the morning dew on the grass.

Land

Land covers 27 percent of Earth's surface, and land topography influences weather patterns. For example, the weather in areas covered by mountains can be completely different than the weather in areas where the land is mostly flat.

Ice

Ice is the world's largest supply of freshwater. It covers the remaining 3 percent of Earth's surface including most of Antarctica and Greenland. Because ice is highly reflective and because of its insulating properties, ice plays an important role in regulating climate.

Biosphere

The biosphere is that part of Earth's atmosphere, land, oceans that supports any living plant, animal, or organism. It is the place where plants and animals, including humans, live. Large quantities of carbon dioxide are exchanged between the land-based biosphere and the atmosphere as plants take in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen, and animals inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.

(http://epa.gov/climatechange/kids/climatesys.html)

One Green Year: What You Can Do Today

You could decide to lose weight—again—or this year you could resolve to lighten the load you leave on the planet. To help, we’ve outlined a series of small changes that add up to big results and divvied them up by time frame—tasks you can complete today, in the next week, during the next month and over the course of the next year. Breaking your efforts into smaller, more manageable tasks isn’t a cop-out: By following this plan, each small step adds up to changes that will benefit the health of the planet—and, yes, even your own health—immediately and in years to come.

Food
Instead of having lunch delivered to your office, walk to a nearby restaurant and save take-out containers by dining in. Or bring your own container to the restaurant and have it filled there. At the very least, bring a set of your own silverware and a bottle of your favorite condiment to the office so you can skip the plastic utensils and the little packets of salt, pepper, ketchup and soy sauce.

Transportation
Start making a note of each car trip you take. “Changing your car habits is one of the most dramatic ways to reduce your environmental impact,” says Jodi Helmer, author of The Green Year: 365 Small Things You Can Do to Make a Big Difference ($14.95, Alpha, 2008). Getting a clear picture of exactly how car-dependent you are can help in finding ways to cut back.

Energy
Get a baseline of your current carbon footprint using the reliable online calculators at either safeclimate.net or lowimpactliving.com. Set a goal of how much you’d like to reduce your impact over the coming year—10 percent is a good start. To up the ante, get a likeminded friend or group of friends to make a competition out of it: Send out an email today inviting them to join your year-long challenge.

Everyday Purchases
Buy a calendar and a notebook made out of recycled paper so you can track your consumption throughout the year. In the coming months, you’ll be noting each of the following on your calendar:
the highest and lowest temperatures at which you set your thermostat each day
the number of kilowatthours of electricity your household uses each month (it’s listed on your bill)
the quantity of fuel you buy for home heating each month, whether it’s natural gas or oil
how many gallons you buy at each trip to the gas station
In the notebook, create tally pages for car trips, trips made by public transportation, and self-powered (walking and biking) trips. Another page can be for waste, especially if you’re going to compare your progress with friends and neighbors. Divide this page into “recycled” and “not recycled” columns, and tally the things you dispose of and the things you recycle—plastic bags, drink containers, etc.— week by week.

(By Kate Hanley)

Flying vs Driving: Which is Better for the Environment?

The simple answer is that driving in a relatively fuel-efficient car (25-30 miles per gallon) usually generates fewer greenhouse-gas emissions than flying. In assessing the global warming impact of a trip from Philadelphia to Boston (about 300 miles), the environmental news website Grist.org calculates that driving would generate about 104 kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2)—a leading greenhouse gas—per typical medium-sized car, regardless of the number of passengers, while flying on a commercial jet would produce some 184 kilograms of CO2 per passenger.

Flying vs Driving: Carpooling Generates Fewest Greenhouse Gases Per Passenger What this also means, of course, is that while even driving alone would be slightly better from the standpoint of greenhouse-gas emissions, carpooling really makes environmental sense. Four people sharing a car would collectively be responsible for emitting only 104 kilograms of CO2, while the same four people taking up four seats on a plane would generate some 736 kilograms of carbon dioxide.

Flying vs Driving: Cross-Country Calculations Show Stark Contrasts Journalist Pablo Päster of Salon.com extends the comparison further, to a cross-country trip, and comes to similar conclusions. (Differences in the math are attributable to the use of slightly varying assumptions regarding fuel usage and source equations.) Flying from San Francisco to Boston, for example, would generate some 1,300 kilograms of greenhouse gases per passenger each way, while driving would account for only 930 kilograms per vehicle. So, again, sharing the drive with one or more people would lower each individual’s carbon footprint from the experience accordingly.

Flying vs Driving: Air Travel Most Economical for Long Distances But just because driving might be greener than flying doesn’t mean it always makes the most sense. With current high gas prices, it would cost far more in fuel to drive clear across the United States in a car than to fly nonstop coast-to-coast. And that’s not even factoring in the time spent on restaurants and hotels along the way. Those interested in figuring out driving fuel costs can consult AAA’s nifty online Fuel Cost Calculator, where you can enter your starting city and destination as well as the year, make and model of your car to get an accurate estimate of what it will cost to “fill ‘er up” between points A and B.

Flying vs Driving: Carbon Offsets Can Balance Travel-Related Emissions Once you’ve made your decision whether to drive or fly, consider purchasing carbon offsets to balance out the emissions you are generating with cash for renewable energy development. TerraPass, among others, makes it easy to calculate your carbon footprint based on how much you drive and fly (as well as home energy consumption), and then will sell you offsets accordingly. (Monies generated through carbon offsets fund alternative energy and other projects, such as wind farms, that will ultimately take a bite out of or eliminate greenhouse-gas emissions).

Flying vs Driving: Public Transportation Beats Both Car and Air Travel Of course, an individual’s emissions from riding a bus (the ultimate carpool) or a train (many of which rely solely on electric power generated by their own motion) would be significantly lower. Paster adds that a cross-country train trip would generate about half the greenhouse-gas emissions of driving a car. The only way to travel greener might be to bicycle or walk—but the trip is long enough as it is.

( taken from environment.about.com by Larry West)

Vision of Creation in the Canticle of Creatures

The Canticle of Creatures reveals Francis’ “experience of the fundamental unity and coherence of reality.”[1] In his approach to the universe, Francis never felt himself as an “isolated subject facing objects in the world”.[2] Seeing himself as one love-centre in the universal brotherhood; Francis composed the Canticle of Creatures which provided the complex relationship he saw among God, human kind and other creatures. Keeping this general notions in mind, let us turn to the text of the Canticle:

Most high, almighty, and good Lord,
Yours is the praise, the glory, honour, blessing all.
To you, Most High, alone of right they do belong.
And no mortal man is fit to mention you.
Be praised, my Lord, of all your creature world,
And first of all Sir Brother Sun, who begins the day,
And light you give to us through him,
And beautiful is he, a gleam, with mighty splendor:
Of you, Most High, he gives us indication.
Be praised, my Lord, through Sisters Moon and Stars:
In the heavens you have formed them,
Bright and fair and precious.
Be praised, my Lord, through Brother Wind,
Through Air, and cloudy, clear, and every kind of weather,
By whom you give your creatures sustenance.
Be praised, my Lord, through, Sister Water,
For greatly useful, lowly, precious, chaste is she.
Be praised, my Lord, through Brother Fire,
Through whom you brighten up the night,
And fair is he, and gay, and vigorous, and strong.
Be praised, O Lord, through our Sister Mother Earth,
For she sustains and guides our life,
And yields us diverse fruits, with tinted flowers and grass.
Praise and bless my Lord, and thank him too,
And serve him all, in great humility.”[3]
One should see the Canticle as a very rare medieval document, in that its main purpose is to inspire people and teach them how to think of creation, how to deal with creation with gratitude, appreciation and respect.

Interdependence in the Canticle
Francis recognized the autonomous existence of creatures and their values. In the Canticle, as Francis assumed, “there was a complex, a multifaceted relationship implying much interdependence among creation, humanity and God.”[4] Creation and humanity having a certain autonomous character, depend each other. This is made more concrete in the case of Brother Sun. As Roger D. Sorell puts it, “the sun functions according to divine plan, burning the day. The sun relies on God for its origin and continuing function, people rely on the sun to do its duty.”[5] The concept of utility and interdependence returns with Mother (and Sister) Earth. But Francis primarily thanks in terms of usefulness, in the sense of its productiveness. Even here his consideration is that people should thank earth for the sustenance, for the bountiful crops she produces, in the amount she determines, and in the seasons she allots.

At times Francis also wishes human beings to be in some ways subordinate to specific creatures. Francis and his brothers depended on the fire at night. In this vision, there is no place for the question whether people should summit to creatures, even when they threaten properly, health or sanitation. According to Francis, “a person should obey creatures’ wishes so that they can do what hey like with him, as far as God allows them.”[6] One should have trust in God, who governs, all creatures for their benefit. The Canticle is not composed out of the sadness at man’s misuse of creatures at the time of its composition. One can find the greatest expression of Francis’ sense of intimacy with, dependence on and appreciation for the things in creation.

[1] Eric Doyle, St. Francis and the Song of Brotherhood, p.39.
[2] Ibid.
[3] . Translation of James Meyer OFM, The Words of Saint Francis, PP> 238-240.
[4] D. Sorrell, St. Francis of Assisi and Nature, Tradition and Innovation in Western Christian Attitudes Toward the Environment, p.130
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., p.132.