CONSERVATIVES MUST CONSERVE CREATION AND FIND 'ENERGY' THROUGH HIS HOLY SPIRIT
The great mystic Maria Esperanza spoke once about cryptic ways she saw future humanity getting its energy -- natural ways.
There is not the sense that what we are currently doing is very natural (which is to say: renewable, and in a way that does not violate the Creation).
Perhaps it can be expressed in this manner: when it comes to energy, we should be looking not below, to what is dark, but above, to the light.
There is a great debate right now about oil and it all seems fruitless to the extent that instead of reconfiguring the fundamental way we draw energy, there are only debates on how we can eke out more oil (or coal).
It is not the place, here, for a debate about whether fossil fuels are causing the swerve in climate (we believe that, to a large extent, global warming is a supernatural sign, more than a product of men). Notice the word "swerve": when God sends signs, they are often extremes, as we see climate extremes (and remember, it could just as quickly turn cold, which would also be a sign).
But it does seem that our economy is running on borrowed time as it functions not with foresight but short-term fixes that may be out of accord with God's Plan.
With the Holy Spirit, said Esperanza, humans could find the inspiration for vastly more natural means of working with nature (as opposed to exhausting it) in meeting our needs.
And solar energy -- looking up, instead of down -- is certainly one avenue that has not been approached with nearly the respect it deserves for a simple reason: it is not as economical as short-term solutions (like oil and nuclear). At least right now, it is not as "cheap."
Is this the only way we will judge what is right? Is our "god" indeed mammon? Or might we one day get to a spiritual point where we look for what God intended (instead of trying to re-create Him).
Right now, peer around you. What do you see?
Do you see the nature that God created, for the main part -- the world He formed -- or the creations of men? Do we believe it was in His design to have toxic outfalls into pristine rivers, or belching smokestacks against an azure sky?
What are the fruits of oil? Tensions in the Middle East. Synthetic food additives. Pesticides that do not degrade. There are the chemicals, and now genetically-modified foods that have replaced or seek to replace what God made to nourish us.
Pharmaceuticals? Yes. We need those.
But can we not derive them also more naturally?
Maria Esperanza had some incredible visions. On March 18, 1981, she received an alleged message including the words -- speaking of leaps in technology -- that:
"This will come about with the sun and with the drive of magnetic forces of earthly energies: volcanic forces, wind, water, certain kinds of seaweed because phosphorus will be better assimilated. In short, no element will be wasted, everything will be used."
"Men cannot think, cannot imagine for a moment, the great struggle among nations that will take place, brother against brother," she prophesied.
After that cleansing, however -- if mankind reverts back to the Lord, and lives in a simpler, more harmonious way, as He did, in concert with nature -- will come what she described as devices more revolutionary than computers.
She foresaw that as tapping into a "stellar curvature" -- whatever that could mean. She described such inventions as coming from "secret forces" hidden in rhythms of nature and what she called the "sacred canticles."
We pay attention because in that same message Maria Esperanza -- not perfect, as no prophet is, but interesting -- foresaw the internet.
"Electronic computers will [cause] the utmost revolution people could imagine," she relayed in a message on that March day more than a quarter of a century ago.
Wild stuff. But might not the answer to the energy crisis be in prayer? Might not the Holy Spirit better direct us? Might not there be avenues -- in fact many avenues -- that would provide our necessities without destroying what is around us?
In the current "cafeteria" style of faith, we forget that the Vatican has frequently expressed acute concern for nature and has also warned -- strongly, and repeatedly -- that extreme capitalism can be as evil as socialism (saying that without God both work toward dehumanization).
This is not us proclaiming such. This was John Paul II. It is also Pope Benedict.
In the U.S., they use the term "conservative" synonymously with those who are "pro-life."
And indeed, the greatest current evil and pro-life issue is abortion.
No candidate who promotes such (especially the fantastically evil practice of partial-both abortion) has a right to public office.
Ditto for those who promote human embryonic harvesting for stem cells, or other forms of genetic manipulation, which undermine the Lord.
But should not a conservative conserve? And should not pro-lifers expand their cause? Is one who is against abortion also one who might look at the synthetic chemicals that kill the unborn (as well as adults)?
It is a question of the hour.
Let us work with the Lord.
And let us fight the devil who -- as Marija Pavlovic-Lunetti, of Medjugorje, once said -- "seeks to destroy nature itself."