More climate hypocrisy: Anglican church declares war on climate change

What exactly are they doing to combat climate change? Unless I missed it, they don’t bother saying. ** “The actions that we take in the next five years are crucial to stop us from reaching the tipping point.”** What actions? “We maintain a vigorous and effective commitment to undertake bold action to reverse climate change.” Well how about clueing us in on what your bold action might look like? By bold action do you mean simply more talking and complaining? Since you will not define bold action, then may I offer some actual bold action?

  1. Immediately convert every church to 100 percent solar power. Do it now. Don’t fiddle fart around. Get it done.
  2. Insist that every member of your church do the same with their private homes. If they cannot afford it, insist that wealthy members help them with the expense,
  3. Replace every one of your vehicles with high mileage, hybrid or electric vehicles and insist that all of your members do the same.
  4. immediately upgrade all of your lighting to high efficiency L.E.D. lighting.
  5. Recognize the fact that that population growth and increased carbon output are inseparable. Ask you members to stop procreating.

These would be “bold actions.” I have a suspicion that their idea of bold action is demand that others do all the work while the church does absolutely nothing themselves. That is typically how these things work out.

26 views and no disagreements? Wow. For a liberal forum, that ain’t bad. Everybody knows that their bold action will equal no action. They confuse political involvement for actual action.

We’ll see. I’m prediction all talk and no action. And as we know, my predictions are always right. :smirk:

Definitely not an ever more illiberal progressive here, but…

Recognizing that these days “Anglican” can be all over the place from actual Christians to things like looney Left-wingers playing church (it was joke worthy material back when Yes, Minister was being made) …

  1. solar has environmental costs people don’t normally take into account and is not optimal for what it can do in many places.

  2. ibid … also it’s still expensive for what it does … it uses energy to make money to buy stuff after all…

  3. meh

Aside … one of the best things about muscle cars these days is revving your engine while sitting next to a hybrid or EV … hopefully you’ll produce a puff of smoke they can inhale.

  1. LEDs are nice, but it’s best to add them in rotation as normal attrition claims bulbs already bought, preferring places where they will be commonly used first and places only infrequently lit last. You can always shuffle incandescents away from high use areas as they expire in low use. That said: a bulb that is turned on and off a lot cycles through life faster and an expensive bulb may never make sense for these. Finally, “Immediate” carries a financial cost that may not be rational. After all, once again, at a minimum it takes energy to make the money to buy the bulbs.

While we’re at it government itself consumes vast resources and produces little of value … government: the single greatest polluter and despoiler of the planet.

  1. so okay … why it is those who may think that children are a blessing from the Lord who should bear this burden? Shouldn’t those who have no concern for any right to life take that on themselves and the kids they don’t have as a result? Again, Anglicans are apparently all over the place.

There’s nothing to ‘‘discuss’’. Both sides repeat the same stuff they’ve said the last dozen times climate change has been discussed. No one changes their mind. Eventually the thread wanders off into some tangent topic and dies.


So what advice would you give them? They said that they are taking some undefined bold action.
I am predicting that their so-called bold action will amount to little more than more complaining and finger pointing.

Do you think that they have any real action plan for themselves?

Why not just share the Breirtbart article you read?

We all know why.

I’m not seeing any hypocrisy pointed out in your OP. The Anglican church believes we need to be better stewards of the earth God gave us. I don’t see what’s so hypocritical or controversial about that.

Thanks for that. I copied and double pasted. Accidently deleted both instead of one. Thanks for the link. You make one mistake. I did not call anybody a hypocrite. I simply predicted that they will not engage in any “bold action” what so ever. They will demand others engage in bold action. As for themselves, they will probably make no such improvements. I could be wrong, and I hope I am. But I don’t think so.


Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven enforces the borders.

Ummm…did you read the title of the thread you just started?

Let me help you:

" More climate hypocrisy: Anglican church declares war on climate change"

I didn’t say you called anyone a hypocrite personally. Read the words I typed, not the words you imagined were typed in their place.

Here is what I said:

Your thread title states hypocrisy has happened, yet your OP doesn’t mention any. You SPECULATE about hypocrisy you think will happen, but that means you’re just sort of making it up and guessing.

Not a very good thread, IMO.

Good advice.
Sorry, I was not clear. Let me be more specific. What bold climate action should the church take? What should they be doing to reduce their carbon footprint? As I said. I predict that they will take no action that involves any improvement or expense on their part. They will not reduce their emmisions what so ever. I hope I’m wrong.

Because “climate change” threads on this forum always end with the same repetitive/circular arguments between the same 4-5 people.

1 Like

Well we have you now. So the numbers just went up. Do you think that the church will actually take some action? Or will they simply complain and demand action from others?

I think they’ll probably take some action. The problem with your OP and other disingenuous climate change messages from the right is that your list of actions is unreasonable. “Ask you members to stop procreating.” Really? You can believe in climate change and take action against it and still drive your car to work and have children.

There is nothing the Anglican Church can do other than make words.

The article referenced in this thread points that out. The Anglican Church can observe results from conditions that people are attributing to climate change (and they do), and they can call for changes. But even if each and every Anglican (and Episcopalian) were to go 100% tree-hugger, the effect on global climate change would be non-measurable.

Ditto the same efforts from Pope Francis and the Catholic Church.

I understand what Altair is saying. An individual religion can’t wage war on global climate change – other than a war of words.

If we’re going to change global pollution (of all sorts), the world has to get China to change. Neither the Anglican nor Catholic church has any sway over China.

Maybe. But the other five ideas are brilliant. Yes? If not. lets hear yours. Fair enough?

And when did I ever claim to believe in climate change?

The Earth isn’t warming?

The numbers are constantly being manipulated to match the agenda. The horror stories never amount to anything. Aren’t the polar bears supposed to be all dead by now? The arctic ice free? Maybe it is warming. And maybe in twenty years we will entering another ice age. Who knows?

This is good news. Many churches are starting to realize that taking care of the Earth God made for us is part of our charge.

1 Like

Nobody knew climate was so complicated.

Yeah… between the people who can adapt and accept change and the people who have rigid minds intolerant of change.