Some changes you’ve likely noticed if you read this blog. First, the blog is now my homepage. Second some of the older entries have this weird “A” Character at random places in them. That’s because when I reloaded my blogs in here that happened to some of them. I went back through to the beginning of my Spain trip to fix some of them, but I didn’t go all the way to the beginning. I have though saved all of the comments. You’ll have to re-do any bookmarks though.
Enjoy.
I’m currently in the process of revamping my whole site. Please be patient while this happens.
Do you ever have a great idea to write a blog about, and then discover that 474 people have already written about it? Well this is what I’ve run into recently. The most recent issue was about Carbon Credits. Ever since I first heard about them I thought that it was a bit odd to buy your way out of pollution. In the last month or two I’ve been thinking about it as an indulgence. Of course my Google Blog search turned up 474 other blogs which have talked about it. Apparently there are many people who thought up the concept before I did. I found people writing on this all the way back to early January.
I will thus not bore you with a discussion of what carbon credits are. Instead please read this from American Thinker or this from ZMag. Either will give you a better view of Carbon Credits than I ever could. Instead let me discuss Martin Luther.
In 1517 Martin Luther tacked an argument made up of 95 theses to the door of a church in Wittenberg. He also sent it to one of the Archbishops. If you want to check out what they were you can find them translated here. It’s a very short read, and most interesting because it’s hard to see why he was kicked out of the Church until you get to his questions at the end.
The points of his that I found most appropriate were theses 5, 6, 21, 28, 32, 35, 42, 43, 52, and 75. Now go read it. I can wait.
The important points that I will discuss are: “The Pope cannot remit any guilt…” (6), which of course leads us to “Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;” (21) Because if the Pope can not remit guilt, then the sellers of indulgences can not pass that remission on.
“They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.” (35)
“The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain” (52)
“To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.” (75)
Now, let me rewrite the preceding quotes.
A human, being inherently separated from the nature which he (singular non-gendered plural, stay tuned for a rant on that) is destroying can not absolve another human from guilt in the destruction of nature.
It is not ethical for anyone to claim that by purchasing Carbon Credits that one is absolved from any need to personally act to lessen the environmental impact of themselves or the human race as a whole.
The belief that purchasing Carbon Credits absolves you from any wrong towards nature is false.
To think that purchasing Carbon Credits can absolve a man even if he had irreparably harmed nature is madness.
Hopefully this has led you to think about Carbon Credits, and what they signify. If you’re looking for more information, please go to this blog written by a woman named Helen Szamuely.
And remember, helping the environment, like repenting sin, has nothing to do with buying it off, and everything to do with personal action.
Enjoy.
Powered by WordPress