progress: 160/187
This summer, a friend who is a teacher at the local Christian school asked me if I would be interested in teaching a few Bible classes to the 9-12th graders. The current book is Genesis and she gave me free reign to pick my topic, so I suggested the topic of stewardship: What does/should the keeping of God's creation look like? Being the good sport that she is, she agreed. I was quite pleased that my passionate teaching on Revelation last year hadn't turned her off.
I taught three classes on the subject and I think they went well. After the first class, I left wondering if the kids thought I was a little bit out there (I liked the challenge that presented). I wondered if they expected me to be a radical recycling Nazi, or a doomsday environmentalist blaming humans for all the world's problems. Of course, these fears were most likely borne of my own paranoia of being misunderstood and therefore ignored.
But it's true that many Christians - or strains of Christians - have seemed to view the entire topic of the environment with suspicion, as if that is the domain of "liberals" and extremists. I did have a sense that before I could jump into how to care about creation I had to make a case for why we as Christians should care about creation. At the end of the first class, my friend the teacher asked me outright, why is this the case?
That got me thinking. Where is the disconnect between God's command to rule, reign, work and take care of creation in Genesis 1-2 and the adversarial relationship with creation in which many Christians now find themselves? I wrote down a few ideas.
Why do Christians often neglect or ignore the topic of earthkeeping?
1. It is a reactionary response: nonChristians’ views are sometimes so extreme, we can make the mistake of responding with an equally extreme view in the opposite direction.
Case in point: many of the folks who support saving animals are the same folks who support abortion. Therefore, if you're opposed to abortion, you must obviously stand against saving the whales, right? (I hope this thought doesn't need further development.)
2. We tend to focus more on spiritual matters than material matters – souls before bodies, humans before animals, etc.
Here is just one more way that we allow dualistic beliefs to infiltrate our actions (or inactions): spiritual = good, material = evil. This has been a recurring problem over the centuries with missionary efforts, as the salvation of souls is emphasized to the neglect of the immediate, physical needs of the bodies in which those souls are clothed. Just because an item is a higher priority than another, we are not given permission to neglect or ignore the lesser priority matters. We are called to be multitaskers, addressing many issues at once, from the Great Commission to feeding the orphans and the widows to rooting out "all bitterness, rage and anger" in our hearts. Humans are made in the image of God, but we are called to be keepers of all creatures great and small (not to mention the rivers, mountains and trees!).
Here is just one more way that we allow dualistic beliefs to infiltrate our actions (or inactions): spiritual = good, material = evil. This has been a recurring problem over the centuries with missionary efforts, as the salvation of souls is emphasized to the neglect of the immediate, physical needs of the bodies in which those souls are clothed. Just because an item is a higher priority than another, we are not given permission to neglect or ignore the lesser priority matters. We are called to be multitaskers, addressing many issues at once, from the Great Commission to feeding the orphans and the widows to rooting out "all bitterness, rage and anger" in our hearts. Humans are made in the image of God, but we are called to be keepers of all creatures great and small (not to mention the rivers, mountains and trees!).
3. We misrepresent what it means to “subdue” the earth – we turn dominion into domination.
Christians are not immune from the human tendency to define authority in terms of power and domination. It completely distracts us from the real issue, the question of "What does God's authority look like?" Of course God is powerful and every knee will eventually bow in submission to Him, but our most powerful experience of His rule is in the "glorious, incomparable, unsearchable riches" of His grace, His lovingkindness, His loving care for our every need (both spiritual and physical). All these things are "lavished" on us through Jesus' death on a cross, the ultimate expression of power expressed in self-sacrificial service. Wow.
In his book on creation care (my primary resource for these talks and Bookmeal Book #5), Steve Bouma-Prediger writes,
The proper exercise of dominion yields shalom - the flourishing of all creation. This is a far cry from dominion as domination. And Jesus, in the Gospel accounts, defines domination in terms clearly contrary to the way it is usually understood. For Jesus, to rule is to serve. To exercise dominion is to suffer, if necessary, for the good of the other. there is no question of domination, exploitation, misuse. Humans, therefore, are called to rule, but only if ruling is understood rightly. (74)
4. We’ve never been introduced to the topic from a Christian perspective
I, for one, was not introduced to the theme of "earthkeeping" until I began my Master's Degree at Regent College (and moved to Canada from the US, I might add). Up until that point, it hadn't entered my Christian consciousness. Other themes related to creation took precedence (see #7 below).
I, for one, was not introduced to the theme of "earthkeeping" until I began my Master's Degree at Regent College (and moved to Canada from the US, I might add). Up until that point, it hadn't entered my Christian consciousness. Other themes related to creation took precedence (see #7 below).
5. Worrying about the environment (or nuclear destruction, etc) suggests a lack of faith that God will take care of us.
Holders of this view tend to forget that God uses people to accomplish His will. If we are called as God's-image-bearers to be good keepers of the earth, what happens if we fail in our calling?
Holders of this view tend to forget that God uses people to accomplish His will. If we are called as God's-image-bearers to be good keepers of the earth, what happens if we fail in our calling?
I'll spare you the details of why this is most likely a poor translation of the Greek word for "to find," but the main point is, even if it's going to be eventually destroyed, what right does that give us to neglect and abuse it now? I like Bouma-Prediger's analogy, "Is it permissible for me to plunder your house just because some time in the future it will be torn down?" (78) We all know we will die someday, yet we eat, sleep, exercise, love, and enjoy life.
7. We get caught up defending God as the Creator and forget to live that truth out in our daily lives – as godly caretakers of the earth.
This is a personal pet peeve of mine, and so I write with fear and trembling of offending some who might read this. Christians jump right into the fray of the creation/evolution debate, even dividing amongst themselves as to the specifics of that creation - literal days? gap theory? intelligent design? The passion with which they lobby governments, picket schools, and turn this topic into a political hot button, is admirable, but incomplete (some might say misplaced). The main point is that God made the world, right? He is the Creator, therefore creation is good and valuable. Passion for this truth should work itself out in a deepened worship of the Creator and a more reverent approach to creation as God's masterpiece and to our role as earthkeepers of that creation. Steve Bouma-Prediger asks, “How can we honour the Master without caring for his masterpieces?” (135) Passion for creationism that does not result in care and love for creation (as an extension of our love for our Creator) is a stillborn one, not having achieved it's proper end of life and joy and worship - of shalom.
Those are a few of the potential reasons that came to my mind. Bouma-Prediger offers a few additional ones for the Western church (pp. 80-83), including the Western church in particular's addiction to consumption and wealth, tendency toward anthropocentrism rather than theocentrism, and deification of technology as the saviour of our problems. Do you agree? Disagree? Did I miss anything?
I'd better stop there. I want to write a bit more about the Redeemer and redemption of creation, but I'll have to save it for another post.
Share
This is a personal pet peeve of mine, and so I write with fear and trembling of offending some who might read this. Christians jump right into the fray of the creation/evolution debate, even dividing amongst themselves as to the specifics of that creation - literal days? gap theory? intelligent design? The passion with which they lobby governments, picket schools, and turn this topic into a political hot button, is admirable, but incomplete (some might say misplaced). The main point is that God made the world, right? He is the Creator, therefore creation is good and valuable. Passion for this truth should work itself out in a deepened worship of the Creator and a more reverent approach to creation as God's masterpiece and to our role as earthkeepers of that creation. Steve Bouma-Prediger asks, “How can we honour the Master without caring for his masterpieces?” (135) Passion for creationism that does not result in care and love for creation (as an extension of our love for our Creator) is a stillborn one, not having achieved it's proper end of life and joy and worship - of shalom.
Those are a few of the potential reasons that came to my mind. Bouma-Prediger offers a few additional ones for the Western church (pp. 80-83), including the Western church in particular's addiction to consumption and wealth, tendency toward anthropocentrism rather than theocentrism, and deification of technology as the saviour of our problems. Do you agree? Disagree? Did I miss anything?
I'd better stop there. I want to write a bit more about the Redeemer and redemption of creation, but I'll have to save it for another post.
Share
Please forgive the obnoxious formatting in this post...blogger is being weird. Advice appreciated from all nerdy Blogger people-in-the-know. :-)
ReplyDeleteDisclaimer: I do not know blog response ettiquette. If this post is in any way inappropriate (i.e. too long etc) please let me know.
ReplyDeleteGreat blog subject and excellent presentation of Christian perspective on believers dominion over creation and the attitudes to embrace. Yours is the FIRST blog I have ever read or responded too. I applaud your blog objectives and purpose – for edification and teaching on “why Christians should care”.
What with the eco-terrorism, freaky peta, gaia worship, and property rights deniers like the Sierra Club; I am one of those that view almost all environmental groups and discussions with great suspicion. The political Left has definitely taken the issue as their own. Alas, I have no idea what can be done to neutralize the stigma and cleanse the odor of environmental activism so believers will actively be involved in wresting the issue back where it belongs.
That, to me, is the challenge, since I think Christians do care.
The reasons that came to your mind were agreeably thought provoking and touch on the truth of what’s really out there. Though I would argue, not in over-arching numbers. I don’t know of anyone that would ascribe to any of those points as a reason to let the earth ‘go to hell’ or not take personal responsibility.
I guess a lot depends on what is meant by ‘earthkeeping’. Cause I think trees can be cut down, oil should be extracted . . . but that is probably another blog topic?
Since I have not read the book, perhaps I put too fine a point on it, but I have a problem with the reasons sourced from the book. Addiction to consumption and wealth, deifying technology, et al by the Western church?
These are overwhelmingly broad brush and seem tinged with a left-leaning anti-west (read America) bias.
I will concede some of each point has a truth, but, it is not an accurate or full description of the West or the Church. It MUST be coupled with the contributions made to all mankind through innovation in all fields, engineering, research, religious freedom, missionary teams, environmental clean-up, disaster relief etc. Who does the author look to for the environmental disasters in non-western, pagan or atheistic, non-consuming, poor countries??? (And I do not ascribe to the notion that they are poor because of the West, I contend they are poor because of immoral leaders and bankrupt religions.)
Becky, thanks for the thinking exercise, it was good. And writing this “agree/disagree” was fun as well (although I do not write well :o)!
You achieved your objective with me I would say.
Hi Linda, thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts. Welcome to the world of blogging! I’m glad to hear you as a Christian do care about these things! In my writing I’ve been trying to get away from the political aspersions and name-calling of those who hold different views from us, because this only shuts down the dialogue which is so desperately needed. I have spoken strongly against some Christians’ views (most of which to some degree reflect my own experience and/or fuzzy thinking at some point in my spiritual journey), but I’ve tried to avoid focusing on the extremists in either camp. Most of my friends who care about the environment – Christians or not – don’t chain themselves to machinery or trees, or hate people who drive SUVs or eat meat.
ReplyDeleteInstead, I hope to focus on the majority of well-intentioned folks out there who are trying in good faith to do their part to care for the earth. This openness to dialogue is, I believe, the path to a meaningful, proactive and transformative approach to what it means to be earthkeepers. Whatever our views about what others are doing, the question I am more concerned with is, “What am *I* doing?” Because whatever others are doing rightly or wrongly does not absolve me from my own personal responsibility to faithfully fulfill my calling as one of God’s stewards of creation.
My questions for you are these: What do you mean by the “odor of environmental activism” and what exactly do you mean by “wresting the issue back where it belongs” – where does it belong? Put another way, what is the believer’s role in being stewards of creation – expressed in terms other than blaming the other side? It’s like being Canadian – what does it mean, aside from being “not American?” ;-)
Lastly, re: BP’s criticisms of the Western church, you might get a better sense of his reasoning by glancing at my previous post on this topic (the second to last one before this, I think). But you will probably disagree, since you believe the East is “poor because of immoral leaders and bankrupt religions,” and has nothing to do with the West. There, I’m afraid I have to disagree – I might even attempt to point out that the most vibrant revival of the church is in fact blossoming in those very same poor, corrupt, and struggling countries of the two-thirds world.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. I trust you don’t mind me throwing a few questions back at you! :-) I’ll be blogging more on this topic, which might address some of your questions more directly, so stay tuned!
Take care,
Becky