For the 3rd day Before Christmas, religion gave to me...
Pope criticizes environmentalism, and compares it to neopagan pantheism
According to Ratzinger, "a correct conception of the relation between man and environment does not take us to make nature absolute or consider it more important than the person."
Where does this come from? Of course it would be an extreme measure to consider nature more important than the people, but, when has that happened? Oh, wait, yeah, the Copenhagen Climate Conference! People are talking about how important is the environment, which may affect some big interests from big corporations, and maybe, maybe, that has something to do with the Ratzinger's words.
But there's more:
"Thus a way is opened to a new pantheism with neopagan characteristics, which make man's salvation a by-product of nature, understood in a purely naturalist sense."
And what is wrong with that? What is wrong with making people conscious that nature is being predated, which will ultimately affect us? What does that have to do with Neopagan pantheism? Does the relation between neopaganism and nature's importance make it right to criticize the ideal of protecting our planet?
Sometimes I would like to slap Ratzinger in the head. Sometimes that work with an old TV.