Re: Resource conservation and Christ's return

I am happy to see this topic raised on the ASA list because I think it is a
critical one. I want to share with you a column which I wrote in the Berea
College student newspaper, "The Pinnacle," following a convocation address
given in September, 1999, by Sr. Elaine Prevallet, SL, on caring for God's
creation. Sr. Elaine had given three chapel homilies during this same week,
the "Accent on Christian Faith" week sponsored by Campus Ministry. Students
have to turn in a card indicating their attendance at convo, and may write
comments on the cards, which are then published on the campus email bulletin
board. My column was written to respond to the criticism of students who
took the position many of you have also critiqued in your notes here.

SHOULD WE LOVE THE TREES?

submitted by Robert Schneider

      I don't know how many of you have read the convocation comments on Sr.
Elaine Prevallet's Accent on Christian Faith address on Thursday, Oct. 1
(see the Convocations bb.), but I would like to comment on what I think she
sought to accomplish in her talk and to what degree members of the audience
who commented on it understood or misunderstood what she had to say.

      A few comments expressed a deep appreciation for what Sr. Elaine was
doing. These students recognized that she was presenting a Christian
understanding of God's relationship to creation, and what that implies our
relationship to God's creation should be. Her approach was to ask a series
of questions that were designed to prompt us to think about and, more
importantly, IMAGINE how we might relate to God's created universe and
especially our part of it, the earth, in ways different from what we may be
doing presently.

      In response, one commentor, a Christian, wrote: "Sister Elaine hit the
subject which needs to be addressed squarely on the head. Without earth we
have no home, so let us protect & nurture our planet. Praise God!" Another
Christian student wrote: "If Christians cared about earth only half as much
as God does...can you imagine what would happen?" Other students expressed
appreciation for her thoughtful questions and "valid points." Another wrote,
"She does an excellent job of depicting our responsibility and oneness with
the earth." Another, a male student, said, "Thanks for bringing a woman to
speak.... her perspectives on unity, interrelatedness and respect for not
only ourselves but the universe as well were grounded and inspiring." I
suspect that these students' sentiments may be echoed by others who did not
write anything.

      But there were a larger number of negatively critical comments, and I
would like to make some observations about these, for I think that many of
those who were negative toward her misunderstood what she was saying about
our responsibility toward the earth. First, several people said that they
thought her message was "not Christian" and characterized much of what she
said as "new age." These statements say two things to me. One is that so
many Christians come to Berea College with knowledge only of their own
Christian perspective and ignorance of others, that when they hear a
Christian perspective other than their own, they judge it as "not
Christian". This seems to be especially true of any message presented by a
Christian speaker that asks us to care for God's creation or protect the
environment. There has been a trend in some Christian circles to politicize
their theologies and theologize their politics; the two have become fused
and confused. Many students come to Berea with these politicized views but
also with little understanding of creation theologies, and when they hear
such talk they dismiss those Christians who speak this way as "new-agers" or
"tree huggers" or "animal rights people" and in the process deafen
themselves to the biblical dimension of the speaker's message. It is clear
that this happened in the case of Sr. Elaine.

      A second aspect of this is that these persons' thinking is dominated,
I think it is fair to say, by a theology that understands salvation in a
much narrower sense than the Bible teaches us. It goes something like this:
"Jesus came to save souls; only human beings have souls, he didn't come to
save the trees or animals. The world will end soon, so we don't have to
concern ourselves with the earth. Heaven is our home, not earth. God will
take care of everything." I believe that I have accurately summarized the
theology that appears in many written convocation comments. I would add that
several persons faulted her for what she didn't say. They seem to have
expected her to talk like their preachers at home do: to speak of Jesus and
how we must accept him as our personal Savior. It seems clear many think
this is only what Christianity is about and when they don't hear these words
spoken they don't think the talk is about Christianity.

      But I have to say that this viewpoint misses some very important
biblical truths that Sr. Elaine understands, and spoke of partly in her
convocation address and even more so in the homilies she gave in chapel that
week. The sacred writers of the Bible, as she noted in various of her talks,
speak eloquently of God's love for and delight in God's own creation (Gen.
1; Ps. 104; Job 38-41); of the voices that all created beings utter in
praise of God their creator (Ps. 145, 148); of the responsibility of human
beings to be good stewards of this earth (Gen. 2). These writers also speak
the message that God loves the whole of creation (John 3:17) and intends the
salvation of all of it; that the whole of creation is groaning as in
childbirth, awaiting its salvation (Rom. 8:18-23). The writers speak
eloquently the message that Christ is the one through whom God creates and
in whom all of creation holds together (John 1:1-3, Col. 1:15-17, Heb.
1:2-3).

      Also, we human beings, the Bible teaches, are made in the image of God
(Gen. 1:26-27). And if God is Love (I John 4:9), and God loves all the rest
of God's creation as unconditionally as God loves God's human creation, then
do we not fulfill that divine image in ourselves when we strive to love
God's creation as God does? As Sr. Elaine emphasized, when you love, and
enter into an intimate relationship with whatever or whomever you love, you
will treat them as ones to cherish, nourish, and protect, and not to use or
violate or abuse. This is good, sound biblical teaching, and Sr. Elaine was
asking us to imagine what it would be like if we were to take that teaching
seriously, and really love and thus care for the earth that God honored us
with by making us a part of. For, in loving and caring for the earth we come
to recognize and appreciate in turn the precious gifts the other creatures
of God's earth bestow upon us, and respond with gratitude to God and to
other creatures and the earth for these gifts.

      One commentor faulted Sr. Elaine for not explaining how we can
communicate with other creatures when our intellects are so far apart and
they are incapable of human speech. Now the Psalmist and other biblical
writers who called upon all of the elements of creation to praise God (e.g.,
Ps. 148; Song of the Three Hebrew Men) understood that while their speech
was not human speech, in fact all of the elements of creation do speak. Sr.
Elaine was asking us to listen. And in fact, you will not be able to "hear"
what a tree, a clump of flowers, a mountain vista, or a galaxy of stars has
to say to you unless you are truly attentive toward them in a loving and
open way. Try it, you who are skeptical! If you really pay attention, these
various elements of creation will indeed speak to you! But as in any true
communication, you have to communicate on their terms, as I have to with my
dog Joshua; you have to be open to intimacy in order to really hear what
they have to say to you about themselves, about creation, about God. You
have to care about them as God does, and as God wants you to.

      We do not know when the end of the ages will come, any more than Jesus
in his humanity did (Mark 13:32-33 = Matt. 24:36). Numerous predictions
during the past 2,000 years have turned out to be wrong, and in fact the
Bible and Jesus himself discourages us from making them. But even if the
power by which the Holy Spirit holds this world in being were to be
withdrawn next month, would our own responsibility toward God's creation be
lessened in any degree thereby? When we are brought before the Throne of
Judgment, will we not be judged also by how we have treated that part of
God's creation we were made stewards of? Does any Christian think that the
God who loves all of creation unconditionally expects anything less of us
than to care for it, and that the Christ who holds all of creation together
in himself (Col. 1:15-17) will not hold us accountable for how we have
treated the creation he loves and came to save? Let those who insist we
should worry about our own souls and forget the trees think of how they will
answer God's questions. And then let them think about what they can do to be
faithful stewards and live up to God's expectations.

----- Original Message -----
From: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
To: "Roger Olson" <rogero@saintjoe.edu>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: Resource conservation and Christ's return

> Roger Olson wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > I don't know whether this topic has been discussed before on this forum,
> > but I'd like to see what the experts have to say about it. My good
> > friend and colleague is a herpetologist who is especially interested in
> > the preservation of wetland ecosystems. The "frog forum" to which he
> > belongs had the following excerpt posted (see following message). The
> > basic question for me is how we as believers and scientists reconcile
> > the doctrine of the imminent corporeal return of Christ with the idea of
> > environmental conservation for the long term?
> >
> > I know the "stewardship of creation" concept is most often given as the
> > justification for conservation behaviors, but many of the more
> > fundamentalist Christian groups dismiss such behavior as ridiculous if
> > the physical Earth will only be around a few more decades. It seems to
> > me that this is closely related to the YEC/OE question, and can be as
> > nasty a condundrum as explaining Original Sin or the origin of the
> > God-conscious soul.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your participation. I hope this is an appropriate
> > topic for our forum. If this has been discussed in depth before, please
> > refer to the appropriate archives..................................
>
> I see no "conundrum" here. When asked what he would do if the world would
end
> tomorrow, Luther said "I would plant a cherry tree today." C.S. Lewis'
answer in "The
> World's Last Night" was similar: When Christ returns we should be found
at our posts,
> doing our jobs, not standing on a hilltop waiting to blow trumpets.
>
> Furthemore, how imminent _is_ Christ's return? Even if it's to happen 10
years
> from now (& we have no assurance that it will), we should do our jobs of
caring for
> creation during that 10 years - or 10 minutes for that matter.
>
> & the misguided attitude of the fundamentalists you refer to isn't just of
> theological interest. Because of the influence of some Christians of this
type in & on
> the present administration it's having a disastrous impact on
environmental policy.
> See, e.g., Glenn Scherer, "Religious Wrong" in _E Magazine_, May/June
2003, p.35. The
> article is a little shrill but shouldn't be discounted on that account.
>
> Shalom,
> George
>
>
> George L. Murphy
> gmurphy@raex.com
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>
>
Received on Wed Dec 17 00:22:44 2003