The GeoChristian

In my previous post, I referred to Lynn White’s 1967 essay “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis.” Here is an extended quote from the end of the article regarding Francis of Assisi:

Possibly we should ponder the greatest radical in Christian history since Christ: Saint Francis of Assisi. The prime miracle of Saint Francis is the fact that he did not end at the stake, as many of his left-wing followers did. He was so clearly heretical that a general of the Franciscan Order, Saint Bonaventura, a great and perceptive Christian, tried to suppress the early accounts of Franciscanism. The key to an understanding of Francis is his belief in the virtue of humility — not merely for the individual but for man as a species. Francis tried to depose man from his monarchy over creation and set up a democracy of all God’s creatures. With him the ant is no longer simply a homily for the lazy, flames a sign of the thrust of the soul toward union with God; now they are Brother Ant and Sister Fire, praising the Creator in their own ways as Brother Man does in his.

Later commentators have said that Francis preached to the birds as a rebuke to men who would not listen. The records do not read so: he urged the little birds to praise God, and in spiritual ecstasy they flapped their wings and chirped rejoicing. Legends of saints, especially the Irish saints, had long told of their dealings with animals but always, I believe, to show their human dominance over creatures. With Francis it is different. The land around Gubbio in the Apennines was being ravaged by a fierce wolf. Saint Francis, says the legend, talked to the wolf and persuaded him of the error of his ways. The wolf repented, died in the odor of sanctity, and was buried in consecrated ground.

What Sir Steven Ruciman calls “the Franciscan doctrine of the animal soul” was quickly stamped out. Quite possibly it was in part inspired, consciously or unconsciously, by the belief in reincarnation held by the Cathar heretics who at that time teemed in Italy and southern France, and who presumably had got it originally from India. It is significant that at just the same moment, about 1200, traces of metempsychosis are found also in western Judaism, in the Provencal Cabbala. But Francis held neither to transmigration of souls nor to pantheism. His view of nature and of man rested on a unique sort of pan-psychism of all thing animate and inanimate, designed for the glorification of their transcendent Creator, who, in the ultimate gesture of cosmic humility, assumed flesh, lay helpless in a manger, and hung dying on a scaffold.

I am not suggesting that many contemporary Americans who are concerned about our ecologic crisis will be either able or willing to counsel with wolves or exhort birds. However, the present increasing disruption of the global environment is the product of a dynamic technology and science which were originating in the Western medieval world against which Saint Francis was rebelling in so original a way. Their growth cannot be understood historically apart from distinctive attitude toward nature which are deeply grounded in Christian dogma. The fact that most people do not think of these attitudes as Christian is irrelevant. No new set of basic values has been accepted in our society to displace those of Christianity. Hence we shall continue to have a worsening ecologic crisis until we reject the Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man.

The greatest spiritual revolutionary in Western history, Saint Francis, proposed what he thought was an alternative Christian view of nature and man’s relation to it: he tried to substitute the idea of the equality of all creatures, including man, for the idea of man’s limitless rule of creation. He failed. Both our present science and our present technology are so tinctured with orthodox Christian arrogance toward nature that no solution for our ecologic crisis can be expected from them alone. Since the roots of our trouble are so largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not. We must rethink and refeel our nature and destiny. The profoundly religious, but heretical, sense of the primitive Franciscans for the spiritual autonomy of all parts of nature may point a direction. I propose Francis as a patron saint for ecologists.

I certainly don’t agree with everything either Francis or White says—I don’t agree that there is a “Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man”—but it is all worth thinking about.

Grace and Peace

“The ecological crisis is the fault of Christianity.”

I’m continuing to read For the Beauty of the Earth, by Stephen Bouma-Prediger.

The fourth complaint against Christianity given by environmentalists is that because the Christian worldview is largely responsible for the rise of science and technology, Christianity is to blame for the ecological crisis that is upon us. This idea was promoted by a widely reprinted essay by historian Lynn White entitled “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Here is White’s summary:

We would seem to be heading toward conclusions unpalatable to many Christians. Since both science and technology are blessed words in our contemporary vocabulary, some may be happy at the notions, first, that, viewed historically, modern science is an extrapolation of (Christian) natural theology and, second, that modern technology is at least partly to be explained as an Occidental, voluntarist realization of the Christian dogma of man’s transcendence of , and rightful mastery over, nature. But, as we now recognize, somewhat over a century ago science and technology—hitherto quite separate activities—joined to give mankind powers which, to judge by many of the ecologic effects, are out of control. If so, Christianity bears a huge burden of guilt.

White’s thesis is accepted without question by most environmentalists, but Bouma-Prediger points out the weaknesses of the argument:

• While Christianity had a role in the rise of science and technology, it was not the sole factor
• “Ecological crises are not peculiar to Christian-influenced cultures. Non-Christian cultures have also caused severe or irreparable harm to their ecosystems.” — quoted from James Nash.
• In general, environmentalists accept White’s critique of Christianity but ignore the section where White points out that there has always been a stream of thought in Christianity that affirms the value of the Earth. White proposes St. Francis of Assisi as the patron saint for ecologists.

So, perhaps Christianity isn’t singlehandedly to blame for the ecological crisis. We may need, however, to admit that we have been partially to blame, either by our sins of commission, or our sins of omission. Bouma-Prediger goes on to suggest some causes of our environmental predicament.

• The church is partly to blame.
  • “The church is captive to modern Western culture.” This includes being conformed to the world in the areas of consumption and wealth.
  • “The church has accepted the anthropocentrism of modernity.”
  • “We in Western culture have made technology into a god.”
  • “The church has forgotten creation.
• Materialism:
  • “Success, therefore, is defined in terms of material possessions and economic productivity.”
  • The natural world has no intrinsic value or value irrespective of its usefulness to humans; rather, “a thing has value only when and if it serves some direct human use or can be exchanged for something else that has value.” (Adam Smith)
  • “The natural world is scenery, not habitat. Individual freedom is paramount. Self-interest is natural. Wealth is the greatest good. Nature has no value in itself.

In summary, the ecological crisis is not due to Christianity. There are many factors that have contributed to our current world of pollution, biodiversity loss, and resource degradation. Christianity has, at times, been part of the problem, but there have been other factors as well. When Christianity has been part of the problem rather than part of the solution, it is because Christians have been conformed to the world rather transformed by the Scriptures.

The rest of the book is focused on developing a Biblical perspective on the environment.

Grace and Peace

A book on the environment by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (and Terry Maple): A Contract With the Earth. I haven’t read it yet (unlikely to be in bookstores in Bucharest any time soon) but it looks like a good read. Here is the beginning of chapter one, which is on Amazon’s site:

Whether we like it or not, humanity has assumed responsibility for the welfare of the earth and all the noble creatures that share it. The scale of human civilization, the volume of our economic activity, and the power of science and technology have made us shapers of much of the earth. The power to shape leads inevitably to a responsibility to wield this power wisely and carefully. America, as the world’s sole superpower, is obligated to provide environmental leadership at a time when so many world leaders are wringing their hands at the sheer enormity of the task.

Americans know that shaping a healthy environment is the one challenge that eclipses all others. Without a green and productive Earth, clean air to breathe, and healthy streams, rivers, lakes, and oceans, life as we know it cannot survive. But where is America’s environmental playbook? And who has vetted the principles that will form the foundation of our strategy and the metrics by which success or failure can be measured? Who has the proper balance of courage and expertise to lead? A Contract with the Earth offers a new approach to the challenges of the twenty-first century, encouraging our citizens to accept the responsibility of global environmental leadership and to overcome our nation’s troubled history of vacillation and withdrawal when the opportunity to lead beckons. We offer this preamble to A Contract with the Earth as a platform to frame our commitment to renew the living earth.

That the book was written by Newt Gingrich will commend the book to most conservatives. That the preface was written by the eminent biologist E.O. Wilson might convince many liberal environmentalists that Gingrich offers something worth listening to.

Grace and Peace

My previous post was about Chuck Colson’s “Breakpoint” radio broadcast for today: Just Do It: Good Stewardship and Global Warming. In this broadcast, he refers to a disagreements among Texas Baptists regarding the construction of coal-fired power plants in their state. A pastor was quoted as saying:

The pastor, in turn, assures [an opponent of the power plants] that God is sovereign over his creation, and no amount of coal-burning will alter by a millisecond his divine plan for the world.

It is true that God is sovereign, but that doesn’t make his argument sound. Let’s make some similar arguments:

• God is sovereign over my finances, and no amount of credit card spending will alter by a millisecond his divine plan for my retirement.
• God is sovereign over my garden, and no amount of Roundup spraying will alter by a millisecond his divine plan for my harvest.
• God is sovereign over my grades, and no amount of procrastination on my part will alter by a millisecond his divine plan for my report card.

God is sovereign. He calls us to be good stewards. We may not completely understand how these two statements work together, but that doesn’t negate either one. There may be good arguments for building the power plants (as a short-term solution to energy demand), but this pastor’s argument wasn’t one of them.

Grace and Peace

Today’s “Breakpoint” radio commentary by Chuck Colson is Just Do It: Good Stewardship and Global Warming. Colson is looking for common ground among Evangelicals:

We evangelicals are so busy disagreeing with each other that we have lost sight of what can agree on:” good stewardship of the earth.

Amen. Even in areas where there is disagreement, such as global warming, we should be able to agree on some basic issues and move on from there. These basic issues include the Biblical truths that the Earth is the Lord’s, not ours; that life does not consist in the abundance of one’s possessions, that we are accountable as stewards for how we use resources given to us, and that we are to love our neighbors.

Grace and Peace

There is a growing awareness among Evangelicals of the importance of environmental issues. There are good Biblical arguments for the importance of taking care of the creation as part of loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength; and loving our neighbor as ourselves. Increasingly, this is true among politically conservative Evangelicals; it is no longer just our more politically liberal brothers and sisters in Christ who see that being good stewards of the environment is part of the call to discipleship.

Marvin Olasky has an article on World Magazine’s web site called “Compassionate Environmentalism.” Here are some quotes:

While older evangelicals tend to emphasize the problems of gay marriage, many younger evangelicals concentrate more on poverty-fighting and environmental issues – and that’s fine. But what happens when evangelicals understand that helping the poor and aggressively fighting global warming are at loggerheads?
I first became aware of the divide between concern for the poor and radical environmentalism in Austin a decade ago. The city went all out to protect a species of cave spiders but scrimped on police protection in poorer sections – and one result was that a deaf woman died in a gang shooting near my home. Sure, in theory we can protect both cave spiders and humans, but in reality needs and wants compete for a limited pool of money.

“Creation care” is important. God calls us to be stewards and gardeners, caring for oxen in the ditch and relishing lilies. But the Bible also teaches that human beings, created in God’s image, are the most valuable resource on earth.

My hope and prayer is that those who see the importance of environmental issues will be able to rise above “left vs. right” to find solutions to environmental problems that are good for the Earth, good for the poor, and good for the economy.

However, some conservatives just don’t get it. Here is a comment added by a reader of Olasky’s post:

When I walk out my front-door, the only environmental problems I see are crab-grass. Pass the herbicide please.

The Bulldoze-the-Everglades-and-Kill-the-Whales side of conservatism is no more Biblical than the Worship-the-Earth-Goddess-and-Hug-a-Tree side of the environmentalist movement.

Grace and Peace