When, in his January 1 speech, Pope Benedict XVI urged “all persons of goodwill to protect Creation”, he chose his words carefully.

Everybody talks about “the environment”. But if you speak about it as “Creation”, you bring a new factor — God, the Creator — into consideration.

Yes, the Pope believes in conservation, but only by methods compatible with God’s will.

It is contrary to God’s will, for example, to use abortion, contraception and sterilisation in trying to curb world population and thereby, supposedly, prevent land degradation, mass starvation etc.

* * *

The Pope also said that “the world has enough food for all its inhabitants, provided selfishness does not lead some to hoard the goods which are intended for all.”

He is supported in this by none other than UN Food and Agriculture Organisation Director-General, Dr. Jacques Diouf, who said last October that food security is possible right now with no necessity for reduction of population — what is lacking being the political will.

“On the earth,” Dr Diouf insisted, “There is a sufficient number of financial means, effective technologies, natural and human resources to eliminate hunger in the world once and for all.”

* * *

The Pope says the causes of the world’s injustices and crises are “of the moral order”, and he is calling for “a great program of education” to promote a change of thinking and “new lifestyles”.

To succeed in this, he says, the “secularist mentality”, that seeks to exclude religious ideas from efforts to reshape the world, must be eliminated.

 “Sadly, in certain countries, mainly in the West,” he said, “One increasingly encounters in political and cultural circles, as well in the media, scarce respect and at times hostility, if not scorn, directed towards religion, and towards Christianity in particular.”

So far, only one nation in Europe is already “carbon neutral”.

Give up? Yes, it is the Vatican.

Not only are there are solar panels on the Vatican’s Audience Hall roof, the Vatican now owns a 37-acre tract of land on the Tisza River east of Budapest, Hungary — once ancient forest, until recently denuded — now renamed the Vatican Climate Forest.

This restored vegetation absorbs as much carbon dioxide as the Vatican produces each year by driving cars, heating, lighting etc.

* * *

The Pope encourages other nations and states to likewise put some effort into real conservation.

Three weeks ago in his World Peace Day speech, he urged “all persons of goodwill to protect creation”.

Note his use of the word “creation”.

The Pope believes in conservation, not because it’s a vote-catcher — he doesn’t need votes — he believes in it because he believes in the God who creates all living things.

He also says that “commitment for the environment should be situated within the larger framework . . . .”

What larger framework?

* * *

He spells it out: “If we wish to build true peace, how can we separate the protection of the environment from the protection of human life, including the life of the unborn?”

In other words, you cannot claim to love God’s creation while, at the same time, condoning the destruction of God’s most wonderful creation — little baby humans – little babies that other heads of state gladly exterminate by legalised abortion in their desperation to secure feminist and greenie-brigade support to keep them in power.

What about world over-population?

No such thing, says the Pope.

 More about that tomorrow.

Today the much-trumpeted Copenhagen Conference on Climate change begins.

This blog has already (10/11/2009) warned readers to be skeptical, not only about the science of alleged climate change, but also about the motives behind this Conference, which seems to be less about climate and more about something else.

* * *

A couple of weeks ago, over 1000 emails exchanged by climate scientists in recent years, were “leaked”.

Climate scientists, far from being distinguished, learned, dispassionate seekers-after-truth as we might have hoped, are revealed as resorting to evidence-bending, scientific journal-boycotting and colleague-threatening. Their credibility has been blown out of the water. The scientific “consensus” seems to be built on a foundation of dirty tricks and intimidation.

So we ordinary mortals still don’t know the facts about climate trends. Those who should know are doing all possible to ensure that we never get enough facts to enable us to weigh up the pros and cons.

The average human being, world-wide, is sick of it.

* * *

Where is the Church in all this?

Pope Benedict has issued a fairly low-key statement asking scientific leaders for “an attitude of respect and responsibility for creation”.

Meanwhile he’s devoting his energies to an astonishing degree to another formal discussion – that between the Vatican’s official theologians and the world’s biggest surviving group of traditional Catholics, the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth.

The Pope has ordered these groups to keep meeting every fortnight for as long as it takes to get the festering sore of the semi-Catholic conclusions of the 1960s Second Vatican Council sorted out, once and for all.

* * *

Benedict XVI is lukewarm on warming, but red-hot on re-establishing the supernatural foundations of Catholic religion.

Insofar as “climate change” is a quasi-religious substitute for putting God first, it is a mere distraction and somebody like the Pope should be saying so.

Let us pray for our Pope that God will strengthen him to get the Church back on track.

If we pray for the Copenhagen Conference, let’s ask God that it will be over soon and everybody go home and start treating the world as God’s world, and other people as God’s children.

Without being outright “deniers”, most Australians remain climate-change “skeptics” — unconvinced about the scientific relevance of human-generated carbon to the Earth’s future climate and inhabitability.

But Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, really intends to impose an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). This calls for real opposition.

With an ETS, Australia would face a future of jobs-losing, prices rising, small businesses closing and inequality increasing.

Opposition leader, Mr Turnbull, has effectively become a clone of Mr Rudd on this matter. So he has to go.

Who can replace him? We need somebody prepared to act for what he considers right, regardless of party politics.

Is Tony Abbott the man we are looking for?

* * *

Let’s hope so. There is nobody else around who looks anything like it.

Mr Abbott says his leadership challenge isn’t personal — he will withdraw it if Turnbull changes his stance on ETS – but that seems unlikely.

Mr Abbott is well educated and intelligent. He has a serious understanding of history. He sees history from a Catholic viewpoint.

He has a compassionate understanding of secularised Aussie battlers despairing at the prospect of lives dominated by media-fed materialism and computer-modelling-generated guesswork. Our suicide rates show how late in the day it is in this regard. Mr Abbott understands this.

* * *

Meanwhile, Mr Rudd reassures the ABC that religious views are “not relevant to the (political) equation”.

It isn’t easy for somebody like Mr Abbott to escape being dismissed as a Catholic fanatic.

He understands how Mother Mary MacKillop felt when she wrote, “Australia is in every sense a dangerous place for Catholics.”

Blessed Mary was talking about trying to be Catholic educator in her day in a hostile environment.

In our day, Mr Abbott is finding, and will continue to find, Australia a dangerous place to be a Catholic politician.

We should pray for our poor, God-forsaking, nation—especially for our political leaders.

They say this so-called Copenhagen “Convention on Climate Change” is not primarily about climate.

They say it’s about weakening western nations by forcing signatories to take orders from unelected “technical panels” regarding their economic, environmental and energy policies — also handing over $60-plus billion of “reparation debt”, plus ongoing levies forever, to governments of developing nations.

“Developing” nations which include China and India — despite their space rockets and nuclear weapons.

The Copenhagen “treaty” has already been written in draft form, dated 15 September 2009 – much like the 1960s Second Vatican Council, where the world’s bishops gathered to discuss the Church’s future, only to be confronted with un-Catholic documents (drafted by “experts”) which had somehow become the Council’s agenda.

* * *

What could one do to stop this Copenhagen apology-fest transferring astronomical sorry-moneys to a bunch of mostly corrupt governments?

Check the internet. People suggest “write to your government senator” etc.

But why ask governments to promote justice? Unfortunately we have the governments we deserve. They won’t do it.

* * *

If you feel like writing to somebody, write to your bishop.

The world’s one organisation based on a non-greed philosophy is the Catholic Church. Yes, there are things wrong with the Church, but that is not the point. The point is that only God can save us.

 “It is good to trust in the Lord, rather than to trust in princes,” says the Bible — not presidents, not senators, not prime ministers.

Don’t ask your bishop to dabble in climate-change politics. Ask him to revive the doctrine that the Church is the one way to God and that all must turn to the Catholic Sacraments — for starters, going to confession, shall we say twice per month — and aiming at perfection in our lives. Why not? Didn’t Our Lord say, “Be you therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect”?

Then we might start treating the environment as something belonging to God — to be respected for supernatural reasons.

This 21^st century has so far been a backward century, arguably even more so than the 20^th. We must return to a spiritually-based culture — more spiritual than ever before.

Why are our politicians and media so keen that we should believe in “greenhouse gases”, “carbon footprints”, “climate change” etc?

Is somebody making lots of money out of our state of panic?

Emissions trading? Carbon credits? Are they not just ways of steering money away from the battlers into the hands of the rich?

How is it that climate-change fundamentalists want the high moral ground, mocking the un-convinced majority, and labelling us “skeptics” as if it was a form of leprosy?

Yes, we are now permitted to stop panicking about the “millennium bug”.   But we’re still expected to believe that “swine flu” is different from all previous flu’s. Must we still worry about the “financial downturn“, or is it over now?

It’s all a bit hard to keep up with.

Sometime soon, there will be another worldwide panic about something or other, and we’ll all feel the pressure again to stay worried.

* * *

Mary MacKillop’s mother was a great worrier.

 In her day there were no pensions. She had seven children. Her husband seemed unable to keep a regular job. Her only income was daughter Mary’s work – at times as a shop assistant, other times as a governess. 

But Mary had ideas of going off and becoming a nun – which made Mrs MacKillop worry more.

Mary encouraged her mother to have faith. In one letter she wrote, “We must and will pray, we will resign ourselves to do God’s will . . . Don’t dread the future. I feel you won’t have cause. If my God calls me, unworthy as I am, to serve him in a special manner, he will look over and save from too much care, the mother I have so much cause to love.”

* * *

Jesus Christ taught his disciples, “Take no anxious thought for tomorrow, what you shall eat and what you shall drink . . .”

The thing we SHOULD worry about is whether the way we live is pleasing to God.