Double Speak?
Offered without comment (except for the post-script!):
Vatican says Nothing Wrong with Nuclear Power
Nuclear power should be considered a useful energy source, a senior Catholic cardinal has said on Wednesday.
…“With maximum safety requirements in place for people and the environment, and with a ban in place on the hostile use of nuclear technology, why should the peaceful use of nuclear technology be barred?” Martino, the Pope’s justice minister, told Vatican Radio.
“Excluding nuclear energy because of a preconceived principle or for fears of disasters could be a mistake and in come cases could have paradoxical effects.
…Pope Benedict on Sunday marked the fiftieth anniversary of the International Atomic Energy Agency by calling for “progressive and agreed nuclear disarmament and to favour the peaceful and assured use of nuclear technology for real development” [link].
End nuclear power now, say bishops
Catholic bishops in Japan said Thursday they want an immediate end to nuclear power generation.
During a press conference at Motoderakoji Cathedral in Sendai City, they launched a document entitled End Nuclear Energy Now: Coming to terms with the tragic disaster of the Fukushima Daiichi accident.
…The bishops acknowledged that, if nuclear energy were to be abolished, Japan would be left with an energy deficit, and that the problem of CO2 would still need to be addressed. But they insisted that humans have a responsibility to protect “nature and all life, which are God’s creatures,†and to pass a safe environment on to future generations.
…Japan has “a culture, national wisdom, and tradition of living in harmony with nature,†and its Shinto and Buddhist religions are also infused with a similar mentality. And “in Christianity, we also have the mentality of noble poverty.†[link]
P.S. Should the Church even comment on this? What do you think? What is its locus standi to comment on such an issue which has no obvious link to religion?
Also read: Cases against anti-nuke Church officials
sir,
where v can post questions related to FTI or any national issues…!!
2 get answers from you
“Should the Church even comment on this?”
Before the liberal brigade starts the “They have every right to…” diatribe, this is not about their rights. They are simply not qualified to crusade for/against nuclear power. Why? The same reason they are not qualified to decide whether evolution should be taught in schools. Scientific acumen (lack thereof).
As far as I can guess these kinds of things always have something to do with funds flowing into the church. If big-oil gave a nice fat check to the church network, then it makes sense. If not, then I can only assume they are having an identity crisis.
It would help if you could list the topics (in your opinion) the Church is allowed to comment on. For that matter, what are the topics a religious establishment should comment on? Going even futher, if a religious establishment DOES NOT comment upon some topic it should comment on, would you say that it is not doing its duty?
Let us have a comparison with the other religion/s some of which often claim that the function of a religion is to provide a basis for the society ‘Dharanat Dharmaha’ .
The recent tsunami and subsequent N-Plant accidents at Fukushima, Japan has suddenly given the Church a chance to start driving the fear psychosis in the name of Jesus. What happened to those Christians who got killed during the Tsunami? Didn’t Jesus come to save them or were they “Not So Original Sinners” who were condemned to Hell. Request Hindu’s to get know the truth of Christianity. The entire Christianity thing as is being “marketed” currently using the New Testament began during the era of Constantine (325CE) who used the “Christ and his sacrifice” for his world conquest with the intention to plant the cross in every inhabited land on Earth. The Church is still continuing the same agenda, now funded by top politicians like George Bush, Hillary Clinton et. al who are all involved in the Joshua Project directly or indirectly. And let’s not forget that Sonia Maino is an Vatican plant in India. http://www.scribd.com/doc/13746840/Edvige-Antonia-Albina-Maino-Alias-Sonia-Gandhi.
See how they are trying to control the N-Plant in Korea in the name of monitoring. A bunch of guys with absolutely no knowledge in Nuclear physics, trying to cheat their world with their superstitious belief (Adam & Eve, Noah’s arc, Virgin Mary, Jesus et. al). http://www.catholicnews.sg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5879:church-wants-to-monitor-korean-nuclear-plant&catid=270:april-10-2011-vol-61-no7&Itemid=79.
With India, it is far more easy thanks to huge population still uneducated and actually living like pagans. Little wonder the Church found it easy to muster up crowd support to delay the Kudamkulam N-Plant process.
@Prakash:
I can’t figure out whom your comment was directed towards.
“It would help if you could list the topics (in your opinion) the Church is allowed to comment on.”
This suggestion is twisted.
I think the question should be refined. (I hope Shantanu reads this). As I mentioned in my response – *crusading* for a cause they cannot objectively analyze (nuclear power, evolution) is unethical. It will have undesired outcomes (more than 40% people in USA don’t believe evolution is true – they believe in the “book of genesis”). This is not about their right to have opinions.
“Going even futher, if a religious establishment DOES NOT comment upon some topic it should comment on, would you say that it is not doing its duty?”
I’m pretty sure it would be inconsequential.
…… and what is “Dharanat Dharmaha” ?
Dear All: Thanks for the comments…Hurried responses to some of the points raised:
@Shivam (#1): You can post questions related to FTI here: https://satyameva-jayate.org/2010/06/09/politics-fti/
On other issues, it is very likely that there would be a post on the topic on this blog. Pl search for the right post (using the “Search” box at the bottom of the page or use the “Categories” drop-down menu) and leave a comment there:
@bbc (#2): You are right that there are issues involved here which go beyond a purely rational (if you can ever have that) debate on nuclear power.
As I mentioned in the post, it is not clear to me what is the Church’s locus standi to comment on such an issue which has no obvious link to religion?
@Prakash (#3): Pl see the question above. What do you think? I have no intention of working on any list of topics that a Church can or cannot comment. I merely posed a question on locus-standi.
@Ganesh (#4): The reason for Church’s involvement is reported to be the fishermen who may be affected by the plant. Apparently they are all converted Christians.