“African bishops stated that climate change makes manifest ‘a tragic and striking example of structural sin’.”
Holy Father Francis, Laudate Deum (October 4, 2023)
“And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”
John 8: 23-24
There is no such thing as “structural sin” because “structures” do not have immortal souls. “Structural” is an old word for what up-to-date people now call “institutional,” as in “institutional racism.” The adjective “structural” denotes a practice that is so deeply imbedded in a society’s way of life that, although pervasive, it is invisible to all but an enlightened few.
A society might be cursed with a “structural evil,” which is to say a deeply imbedded practice that routinely churns out undeserved harm, but evil is not identical to sin. Even moral evil is not identical to sin because “sin” denotes the richly deserved harm a sinner does to himself. That richly deserved harm is a one-way ticket to damnation and Hell.
Are the African bishops Francis quotes suggesting that we all will be damned to Hell for the “structural sin” of climate change? Or are they just whoring theological jargon in the hope that doing so will win them a “place at the table” where postmodern jibber-jabber is exchanged?
Scripture suggests that Jesus will remove sin from the world in his Second Coming. In his First Coming he attended, instead, to the more urgent business that scripture calls “remission of sin,” a phrase that implies something like cancellation of a debt or removal of a fatal morbidity. As the passage from John says, Jesus said he came so that men would not die “in their sins,” not so that men would not die from the sins of other men.
Men who die “in their sins” die with undischarged debts to Satan. Like a pitiless creditor, Satan repossesses their souls—their souls being at this post-mortem moment all they have to give. You may imagine Satan presenting a sinner with a bill for the feast that sinner ordered from the diabolic menu of iniquity. Ordered and relished, I should add. Confidently reaching for his wallet, the sinner discovers to his chagrin that he is now naked, un-pocketed, un-walleted, and unable to settle the bill.
And as an insolvent debtor once passed into slavery, so an insolvent sinner passes into the house of his pitiless creditor, ever afterwards a bondservant, a chattel, and a slave.
Unless, of course, he has a Redeemer.
This is all elementary, Sunday-school understanding. Crude, vulgar, unspiritual, some may say. Indeed, they may be like the chief priests of old “sore displeased” that I mention it. To which I respond, like Christ himself, “have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings . . .” (Matthew 21: 15-16).
There is no such thing as “structural sin” because “structures” do not have immortal souls and are, therefore, merely tools and instruments of Satan. Abstractions like Capitalism, Consumerism—even Climate Change Denialism—will never be asked to settle their bill with Satan, will never reach for their wallet, find they have none, and then blackly despair. For even African bishops to speak of structures sinning is frankly a sin.*
*) Incidentally, the word “sin” appears only once in Laudate Deum, the word “sinner” not at all.
The Orthosphere 
Agree that it is calculated nonsense to talk of structural sin.
But, if evil is regarded as that which is aligned against God, then these bishops serve church institutions that are (overall, and in their most significant respects) Satanically-aligned.
So, the real situation is one of the servants of structural evil, making untruthful accusations, of an incoherent concept of “structural sin”
Compounding which is that CO2/ “carbon” warmism and the “climate emergency” is itself a Total Lie; constructed in service to the Satanic agenda of global totalitarianism – with its evil goal of omni-surveillance and total mind-control.
A very nasty brew altogether!
An astute post.
One thing that I am very much enjoying about the last few years is that the unfaltering attacks on the Church by those within the Church has led to an increased awareness on what Christ’s message actually is due to its defenders rising to the charge when prompted.
All part of a divine plan, I would say.
“Or are they just whoring theological jargon…” Wow, was that apt. That’s exactly what so many of our bishops have become — the world’s live-in whores.
The religious language around global warming/climate change was tiresome decades ago and hasn’t improved.
What really annoys the hell out of me is that most of the population mouths the global warming pieties without believing them really at all. I base this on the mailers I get from the power company periodically, offering what amounts to indulgences for like $10 a month. If I really did believe in CC/GW at a transcendental or even just existential level, I think that marks a bare minimum of what I could do. But the subscription levels to it are apparently really really low. So low that they don’t advertise them (if even 10% voluntarily paid, they’d shout it from the rooftops).
From this I conclude that basically nobody really believes, at least not at the transcendental or existential level. Accordingly I wish they’d shut the hell up. Or at least modify their language to preferential rather than existential or transcendental.
All religions require voluntary sacrifices from its believers: they want you to renounce things. So religion and selfishness are opposites from each other.
Progressivism is the perfect religion: you don’t have to do anything, only believe in the dogma (this is derived from Sola Fide). This is called being aware, being ” on the right side of history”, being “the solution not the problem”, being part of the awakened, etc.
You write a tweet with a hashtag, you put a LGBTI or Ukraine flag in your Facebook profile and that’s it. You don’t need to do anything, invest any money, engage in any task. You are selfish and virtuous at the same time. The square circle. This is why this religion attracts the biggest scumbags. Then they go on and go on telling the world how virtuous they are. In part, it is virtue signaling. In part, it is to convince their own conscience.
The ones who have to pay are the deplorables and so on, but this is fair because they are deplorables and oppress everybody else. As a Spanish writer said: “the party has one advantage over the Gospel: it forces others to do penance.”
In many ages because of their education, the clergy, especially those in high authority, have gradually come to identify with academia, or other elites. I am saddened but not shocked to see this happening with some of the African bishops.
I wrote my review on Laudate Deum here:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/199284899-laudate-deum-exhortaci-n-apost-lica-sobre-la-crisis-clim-tica?from_search=true#CommunityReviews
That being said, structural sin is not a term invented by Pope Francis. It was denounced by Saint John Paul II.
It may be of surprise to some, but there are Catholic Moral Documents prior to Pope Francis’ pontificate. It may be beneficial for some to read them.
In particular, the Catechism of the Church, number 2477:
http://scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2477.htm