Pollution

Pope Benedict has a few times now compared environmental pollution to spiritual corruption in society. This is one example but there have been others. Commenting over at Mark Shea's blog it seems like this analogy can be carried quite far. What is interesting is that those on the left and the right argue opposite sides of these parallel issues. The left thinks moral corruption is something the right uses as a fear mongering issue. Christians have predicted dire consequences if this or that moral line is crossed. We have crossed them again and again and no disaster has befallen us. The right thinks environmental pollution is something the left uses as a fear mongering issue. Scientists have predicted dire consequences if this or that level of pollution is crossed. We have crossed them again and again and no disaster has befallen us.

Then both sides make an illogical leap. The left concludes that the moral climate of society can continue to degrade without limit and without consequence. The right concludes that pollution can continue to increase without limit and without consequence. Even if you accept the consequences thus far have been relatively minor it does not follow that a big consequence could not be right around the corner. If you smoke for 20 years and don't get cancer does that prove smoking will never give you cancer? Not at all. Even if somebody wrongly predicted you would get cancer does that means they are just a fool that can safely be ignored? No, they still might know something that you should listen to.

Beyond that, neither the left nor the right will concede that nothing serious has already gone wrong. What has happened is we have gotten used to pollution in our air and water and we have gotten used to spiritual pollution in our society. Now that does not make those things healthy. The truth is we don't know how much our spiritual and physical health is effected by the pollution we hardly even notice anymore. If we did know we might see that we have made some huge mistakes in the past. Politicians don't want to focus on old issues so they rarely bring up these mistakes. It does not mean the evidence is not all around us.

So why does the right use such lousy arguments when it comes to pollution and why does the left use such lousy arguments when it comes to morality? It comes down to sin. The sin of the right is greed. Environmentalists call for government regulation of business. That costs money. If there is one thing the right cares about more than God it is money.

The sin of the left is harder. It might be lust. Many of the issues involved are directly related to sex. But there is something deeper as well. There is an intellectual pride that refuses to accept a link between people's private lives and the health of society. Divorce, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, etc. Those things can be common and yet we can still have progress. In fact, we can call the fact that these things are common progress.

Now there is one way these issues are not parallel. That is in how serious they are. Spiritual pollution is worse than physical pollution. Not that there is any reason we should have to choose one or the other. Still if we did Jesus said, "“I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him" (Lk12:4-5).