Christian Stewardship and Environmental Ethics
To some, Christian environmentalism sounds like an oxymoron. This may be true for several reasons. Christians are reluctant to take on a tree-hugging, nature-worshiping persona. Christians are also puzzled by the inconsistency of environmentalists who protest the killing of baby seals, but remain silent concerning the killing of unborn humans.
But another reason most likely stems from a famous essay in 1967 entitled, “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” by Lynn White, Jr. In this essay, in a Gestapo-like fashion, White blames Christianity for the world’s environmental problems. He writes, “Christianity…not only established a dualism of man and nature but also insisted that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends. 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.” White believes that the real loss was Christianity’s replacement of pagan animism, a belief that every object in nature possesses a spirit. To White, if we would return to animism we would avoid cutting down trees, damming up rivers, and boring holes into the side of mountains.
White’s essay became one of the most influential articles of its time and sparked a host of other essays in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Fred Van Dyke writes, “Part of its success was that it told secular academics what they wanted to hear, that religious traditions in general, and Christianity in particular, were contemptible mythologies, justifiably despised.” White’s indictment of Christianity was the prevailing belief for many years, but his accusation woke Christians from their ecological slumber. Many Christian theologians and scientists began to respond to this accusation by showing that White and others had completely mischaracterized Christianity and the Bible. Over time, many academicians dismissed White’s conclusion, but the sentiment remained in popular culture for some time. Today that sentiment is changing.
Ironically, environmentalists are now beginning to see the Judeo-Christian idea of stewardship as the last great hope in environmental ethics. Environmental philosopher Max Oelschlaeger writes, “For most of my adult life, I believed, as many environmentalists do, that religion was the primary cause of the ecologic crisis. I also assumed that various experts had solutions to the environmental malaise. I was a true believer….I lost that faith by bits and pieces…by discovering the roots of my prejudice against religion. That bias grew out of my reading Lynn White’s famous essay blaming Judeo-Christianity for the environmental crisis.” Oelschlaeger goes on to say, “The church may be, in fact, our last best chance. My conjecture is this: there are no solutions for the systemic causes of ecocrisis, at least in democratic societies, apart from religious narrative.”
In his popular conservation biology text, environmental ethicist J. Baird Callicott writes, “The Judeo-Christian Stewardship Environmental Ethics is especially elegant and powerful. It also exquisitely matches the requirements of conservation biology. The Judeo-Christian Stewardship Environmental Ethics confers objective value on nature in the clearest and most unambiguous of ways: by divine decree.”
Next week we’ll take a closer look at these divine decrees from Scripture.
a pdf version of this entry is available here Labels: environmentalism, stewardship
A New Religion
A new religious system centered on the earth is emerging worldwide. Its distinctive message is the impending doom of global warming. This new religion has many familiar elements: high priests (scientist that speak infallibly), doomsday prophets (Al Gore and many from Hollywood), a laity (people who merely believe what the priests and the prophets say without critical evaluation), and heretics (scientists that are skeptical of an impending doomsday). This new religion has defined sin as CO2 emissions, rather than a moral offense against a Holy God. Fortunately for the “sinner,” an indulgence can be bought in the form of a carbon offset, which allows one to continue to drive an SUV, fly in private jets, and live in large mansions without condemnation.
This new religion lacks the skills of logic and critical thinking, and a science based on evaluating all the evidence, not just what supports one’s theory. For instance, since the 1850’s the earth has experience a warming trend, followed by a cooling trend, followed by the current warming trend. The cooling trend was so pronounced that scientists in the 1970’s were predicting a new ice age. In 1975, Newsweek ran an article using indisputable “scientific evidence” that a new ice age had begun.
Many global warming gurus cite NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies director James Hansen, when he stated that nine of the ten warmest years have occurred since 1995. When NASA ran an internal audit of it statistical information it discovered that four of the top ten hottest years were actually from in 1930’s. Previously cited “warm” years—2000, 2002, 2003, and 2004 were actually cooler than some of the years directly preceding the 1900’s.
Evidence of climate fluctuation throughout earth’s history is not hard to find. The Hudson and Thames rivers froze in what has come to be known as the “little ice age” of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the medieval period, Vikings established settlements in Greenland and Newfoundland until the little ice age froze them out. A few years ago, a body of a 4,700-year-old traveler was found frozen in a mountain glacier in Switzerland, indicating the mountain pass had been open at one time for human travel.
In recent years, NASA’s instruments have calculated that Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, and Titan (a moon of Neptune) are all warming, which have nothing to do with burning fossil fuels. Many scientists are now pointing to the sun’s cycle as the culprit in warming and cooling of the planets.
Last year the “Evangelical Climate Initiative” was published with the names of 86 evangelical Christian leaders, including Rick Warren, who has decided to back major initiatives to stop global warming. While I’m an evangelical, and I do believe there are theological reasons for being environmentally conscious, I’m not quite ready to drink the Kool Aid with my other evangelical friends. Next week we’ll look at what I believe to be a more balanced response to environmentalism.
a pdf version of this entry is available here Labels: environmentalism
Racial Segregation: Sin in the Church, pt. 4
[In concluding this series, I’ve invited my good friend James Smith, a member of Trinity, a prospective Elder, and an African-American, to share a few thoughts concerning the issue of racial segregation in the church. Judging from the wide range of responses to this series, there is still much work ahead.]
Every church I’ve attended since becoming a Christian has been predominantly white. When searching for a church, sound doctrine, not racial makeup, has been at the top of the list. Recently, I was challenged in my thinking about racial segregation after I invited a white couple to our church and then followed up the invitation with assurances that the church was predominately white. Why did I feel I had to make that comment?
Unfortunately, this mentality is rampant in our churches today. Every area of society has been enriched by racial integration, from the arts, sports, and entertainment, to politics and academia. Yet the church remains largely segregated. What was the initial cause of this segregation? Why do 21st century Christians from different races continue to worship separately? Are there valid excuses for continuing this behavior?
Slavery was the foundation for segregation in the 18th and 19th centuries. As black slaves were converted to Christianity, slave owners allowed them to worship only among themselves. The abolition of slavery did not change this practice. After the civil rights laws were enacted, the church had the opportunity to promote integration from the pulpit, but chose to continue to worship separately. However, secular organizations such as Major League Baseball, the National Football League, and the National Basketball Association, along with the entertainment industry, saw the value of integration and slowly began to make changes.
Today, churches are still largely segregated, fearful of losing their own cultural identities. But coming together will produce a rich, diverse, and unified community, with Christ at the center rather than a particular group or culture. We see this in the book of Acts where a diverse group of people from many nations come together committed to a common goal. This is how the 21st Century church should look.
Many concerns arise with the talk of integrating racially different congregations. Which building? Which pastor? Which staff members? Which worship style? These issues must be addressed, but should not prevent progress. As church leaders, it will be difficult to stand before God, see a remnant from every nation, tongue and tribe, and explain why we chose to remain segregated.
For anyone thinking about crossing the racial/cultural barriers and coming together to work side by side and worship the God of heaven, my suggestion is to take the advice from the Nike commercials and “Just Do It.” God is bigger than any excuse or concern we could have for remaining segregated.
a pdf version of this entry is available here Labels: racism, segregation
Racial Segregation: Sin in the Church, pt. 3
When James, the half-brother of Jesus, wanted to illustrate the dangers of showing partiality, he wrote an example in the context of a worship service. James writes, “My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory” (2:1). A few verses later he writes, “If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors” (James 2:8-9). Showing partiality toward another race (racial prejudice) transgresses the law of love, therefore it is sin. In light of our racially segregated churches, one does not have to wonder too much what James would have to say about this issue. As Christians, we don’t love like we should; we continue to be divided by race, rather than united by love.
The early church was racially diverse. There were Jews (Hebraic and Hellenistic) and Gentiles (from the Middle East to Europe), and even though there were cultural strains (Acts 6:1, 15:1), the apostles never advocated segregating the church based on race. If they had, they would have set up Jewish churches and Gentile churches. But in the New Testament we find Jews and Gentiles worshiping together.
The apostle Paul taught that all believers in Christ become part of one body and one household. Paul writes, “so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Romans 12:5). In Ephesians 2:19 Paul writes, “So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God.” Just so we understand that God’s kingdom transcends all cultural barriers, Paul writes, “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith…There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26, 28). If all believers in Christ are a part of one body, and members of God’s household which transcends all ethnic, social and gender barriers, then why do we worship separately as if this were not true? In Revelation (5:9, 7:9) we find every tribe, language, people, and nation before the throne of God. If that’s what heaven will be like, shouldn’t our churches represent that unity in diversity now?
As long as we cling to our own cultures and ways of worship (music style, order of service, preaching style) there’ll be no progress in the desegregation of the church. If one ethnic group demands that another ethnic group gives up everything and assimilates fully into their own culture, there’ll be no advancements. When two ethnic groups join together, what should be produced is a tertium quid--a third distinct culture (a blending of styles and practices). The unifying factors should be a commitment to God’s kingdom above our own cultures, Christ-centered and exalting lyrics, and Christ-centered biblical preaching (Phil. 2:9-11). With that, God would be glorified.
a pdf version of this entry is available here
Racial Segregation: Sin in the Church, pt. 2
God loves diversity; no two things are created exactly alike. Before sin entered the world, He called his creation “good,” and when He created humanity in His own image He called it “very good.” It was God’s plan from the beginning to create, from one couple, all the ethnic groups of the world. Paul affirmed this in Acts 17:26 when he said to the Athenian philosophers, “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place…”
When God became a man in the person of Jesus, he became a Palestinian Jew. He was a direct descendant of Abraham, who was from the region of what is now Iraq. Contrary to the picture of a blue-eyed, blond-haired Jesus that hangs on the wall of many of our churches, Jesus most likely had dark eyes and dark skin. However, we quickly discover in the Gospels that Jesus was not just interested in saving his own race (thankfully, since most of us would not qualify). In the Gospel of John (3:16), Jesus reveals the reason for his coming to earth: “For God so loved the world [all nations], that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” After his death and resurrection, and directly before his ascension, he gave the church its marching orders: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations [ethnic groups], baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit…” (Matt. 28:19). God’s kingdom will consist of a remnant of all the nations of the world.
The Apostle Peter, in spite of his own racial biases, learned this lesson well. In Acts God showed Peter in a vision that no race should be considered “unclean.” As he entered the house of a gentile, Peter said, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean” (Acts 10:28). Peter then said, “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality…”(Acts 10:34). The Apostle Paul concurred when he wrote, “For God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:11).
The theme of the Gospel is that God’s kingdom transcends all racial, social, and economic barriers and that God loves all nations exactly the same. Because of this, God assures us that heaven will consist of individuals from “every tribe, language, people, and nation” (Rev. 5:9). But if the church is to represent the kingdom of God on earth, and Jesus taught us to pray, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” why do Christians still show partiality? Why are churches still divided racially? Christians have failed to fully understand the heart of God. We have missed the opportunity to be a witness to the truth that God’s kingdom transcends all cultural barriers, making all nations one in Christ.
Next week we’ll take up the question of cultural differences.
a pdf version of this entry is available here Labels: racism, segregation
