Vatican Hosts Conference With Pantheistic Theme

The planet is not alive

By William M Briggs Published on August 11, 2017

So the Vatican, under the auspices of its Pontifical Academy of Science, directed by Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, is hosting another global warming soirée. The first was not a rousing success, seeing as it failed to stop the planet’s climate from changing.

But then, the planet’s climate has never, can never, and will never cease changing. No power on earth can ever stop climate change.

So don’t put too much hope in the new conference, “Health of People, Health of Planet and Our Responsibility: Climate Change, Air Pollution and Health.”

The title should shock you. Why? Because the planet cannot have “health.” It cannot therefore have a lack of health. Only living organisms can have health or suffer its deprivation. The planet is not a living organism. It’s not an organism of any kind.

Our planet is a beautiful sight from orbit. It’s our home and we should treat it as a gift of God. But, strictly speaking, it’s a rock in space equipped with a coat of air, soil, and water in which some things live. We call this coating “nature” or “the environment,” of which we are not separate, but rather an intimate, part. The air and water is not itself alive. Scientists used to know this.

Return of the Pantheists

Yet it’s not surprising Archbishop Sorondo should choose an unscientific conference title, which implies the false (and surely heretical) view that the earth is an organism. Why? Because one of his speakers is the pantheist Hans Schellnhuber, whom we have met before.

Perhaps overawed at being made a Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire for his services in frightening the population with exaggerated threats of doom, he now goes by “John.”

Our John believes the planet is alive, after a fashion. Being “alive”, he says the planet can suffer “syndromes”.

Can you guess what causes these “syndromes”?


The way to cure the earth’s sickness is thus obvious, at least to John. Eliminate the source of infection. About that goal, more in a moment.

Tipping Points and UFOs

Our Johnny will speak on “Climate Change Extremes, Tipping Points and Health Risks.” A “tipping point” is a date before which if we do not “do something” we will be forever doomed (to suffer a changing climate). Many, many of these tipping points have come and gone, and surely we can expect many more.

Yet not unlike the cult that keeps advancing the date at which the UFO invasion force will arrive, the effectiveness of tipping points as warnings is starting to wane. Johnny might better serve science if he could instead speak on why he always looks like he’s been sucking on an unripe persimmon.

Mad scientists like Schellnhuber want fewer people. Mad economists, like Jeffrey Sachs,do too. Sachs advocates either killing people before they can escape the womb, or preventing their birth.

He’s awfully serious about limiting the number of people — besides himself, that is. I would give a crisp, brand new twenty dollar bill to hear the august and celebrated Sachs at this conference stand up like a man and say, “I wish my mom would have aborted me.”

After all, his non-existence would have helped “fight” climate change. Right? Curious it’s always the other guy abortionists want killed, never themselves.

Another fan of killing human lives in the womb is Partha Dasgupta, who’ll speak on “How Do Our Actions Undermine Nature?”

Like the other talks, this seems to imply that nature is something wholly separate from mankind, which is false. We’re part of nature, too. And what counts most in nature, or what should count most, is the livelihood of mankind, and not “nature” itself.

Unhealthy Obsession

The other focus of the conference is human health. The health of those people activists let be born, that is. The Vatican’s materials for the meeting highlight a quote by Margaret Chan, Secretary General of the World Health Organization, who said, “Climate change is the biggest global health threat of the 21st century.”

Now everybody knows the common causes of illness in people. Just as everybody knows that one of these common causes is not “climate change.” Worrying that “climate change” will cause ill health is like a man fretting he will be run over by a glacier.

We can presume Chan is not an idiot, since it would be next to impossible for an idiot to rise to her level. But her statement that “climate change” is the “biggest global health threat” is idiotic.

That means she was either lying about the health “threat” of climate change or that she meant her statement as a kind of joke. It’s just too bad Archbishop Sorondo took the joke seriously.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • A. Castellitto

    Excellent article…. Sound reasoning and logic and very well written. Please keep exposing this topic and the churches part in this…. This was very informative

  • Trilemma

    The health of the planet refers to its ability to sustain life. If the planet is healthy, life flourishes. If the planet is not healthy, life suffers. As the oceans become more polluted the planet becomes less healthy.

    Severe storms are a health threat since they have been known to kill people. If climate change results in greater frequency and intensity of severe storms then that makes climate change a health threat.

    • Alice Cheshire

      Then people are constantly under a health threat every waking minute and the whole claim becomes nonsensical. There have been storms all along, sometimes more, sometimes less. The proper response is to build better housing and so forth to deal with the storms, not imagine we are gods who control the weather/climate. Trying to stop climate change as the answer is like using a yacht to cross a pond. You can use a canoe or possibly wade. You don’t need the giant, inappropriate solution.

    • patrick healy

      If by “climate change” you mean catastrophic man made global warming, there is none.
      As our good host pointed out the climate always has, and always will change.
      There has been no increase in storms, floods, hot or cold weather which is abnormal.
      There has and is widespread manipulation and falsification of weather data to create models which are incapable of hindcasting our climate, let alone forecasting the future more than a week ahead.

      I certainly agree with you on the issue of pollution of land and sea.
      That is a crime before God and man.

      The biggest crime is the lack of affordable energy in third world countries to fight disease and malnutrition.
      This is being denied to them by the Global Warming Catastrophists who offer them wind mills and solar panels,to replace burning sticks and animal dung.
      These so called scientists meeting in Rome have only only solution to this problem – enforced population limits upon which foreign aid is allocated. This includes Catholic charities and secular ones. The UK Overseas Aid is directly funding abortions and sterilisations in Asia and Africa. It would be naive to believe Britain is alone in this practise.
      As Catholics we have a duty to refute heresy and the worship of pagan gods like Gaia.

  • John Doane

    Christians often seem intimidated by “science,” falsely so called. The debate is usually cast as science vs. religion, whereas it really is pantheism vs. Biblical Christianity. We need to reframe the debate.

    • Mensa Member

      “Science” is falsely so called?! I don’t get that at all

      I agree that science vs. religion is a false dichotomy but how is it really pantheism vs. Christianity? For starters, those are both religion (or at least spirituality). Neither use the scientific method.

  • Mensa Member

    >> the false (and surely heretical) view that the earth is an organism

    I can’t imagine who seeing the earth as an organism is heresy. There is nothing wrong with something being organism.

    Besides, I suspect he wasn’t using “organism” in the biological sense but in the “complex interdependent whole” sense.

    • Not so. Look at the links to the original pieces by our Johnny. He does not use the term as a ‘complex interdependent whole’, but as a life-form, perhaps a sort of giant computer. That view would be heretical, because it would ascribe intellect and will, i.e. rationality, to a rock. And if the earth is as the angels and men, then it is in need of salvation. Et cetera.

  • ArthurMcGowan

    Since Bergoglio took over, the Vatican is an endless Conga line of pro-aborts, depopulators, socialists, climate hoaxers, gay couples, trannies, and actual abortionists.

    A few weeks ago, Bergoglio-Spadaro-Figueroa told us the pro-life movement in the U.S. is a part of “an ecumenism of evil.”

    The mask has been off for a long time. One important task for faithful Catholics is to wake up the snoozing.

    • Alice Cheshire

      What is to be done at that point? Can a pope be removed? (I’m not Catholic, so I don’t know how that works.)

  • Shlomo Vinishsky

    This all becomes logical once you bring about one omitted detail: this is all about limiting the Christian population and it alone.

  • A. Castellitto

    like politics this is not a war of science but a piece of the spiritual-ideological campaign and propaganda to reject and discredit God…. They will do it from the inside out if they have to…..

A Christian ‘Opposite’ Strategy for Making a Difference
Tom Gilson
More from The Stream
Connect with Us