Environmentalism is a hot topic these days. Al Gore’s recent Nobel Peace Prize for his documentary on global warming has heated up the pressure for people to “go green.” Alright, sorry about the puns! “Hot topic” was unintentional, but “heated up” was! Anyway, is it appropriate to preach on environmentalism? If so, what do preachers have to say?
Yes, preaching on environmentalism is appropriate! Beginning in Genesis 1:26-28, care for God’s creation is a legitimate biblical concern. The challenge, of course, is applying the biblical data in a way that does not confuse theology and ideology. In other words, those who share a commitment to care for the environment do not always agree on the strategies or tactics for carrying out this commitment. Carl F. Henry once offered this sage observation: “Scripture does not set forth specific lines of ecological action, which may vary with time and place. But it does adduce fixed principles that indicate that God was not content to create a chaotic wasteland but rather a habitable universe and that he expects his designated stewards to maintain it that way.”
Christians who are honest with the biblical text and the scientific data may disagree about the extent of global warming or about harvesting timber or about emissions standards for the automobile industry. This cannot be an excuse to shy away from these questions. But we must think long and hard before embracing or protesting a particular ‘green’ theory or strategy.
There are two mine fields to be aware of when preaching on our stewardship of the environment. The first is that green advocates often get red-in-the face towards Christians. A decade ago, my brother, Mark, observed: “Christianity has become the favorite whipping boy for the majority of environmentalists and environmental groups” [Mark D. Mathewson, “Imago Dei: Ecological Horror or Hope?,” Philosophia Christi 19:2 (Fall 1996), 29.]. In his article, he cites indictments made by John B. Cobb, Jr., H. Paul Santmire, David Ray Griffin, and Carol Johnston. Now let’s admit that Christians have shared in the abuse of the environment. But the problem springs not from Biblical theology, but from a neglect or distortion of Biblical theology.
A second mine field is the thread of pantheism or eastern mysticism which runs through many approaches – at least popular approaches – to environmentalism. The distinction between God and his creation gets blurred so that nature becomes an object of worship.
In Friday’s post, I’ll share some relevant passages for preaching on our stewardship of the environment. I’ll also discuss some strategies and practical ideas which emerge from these passages. By the way, can anyone recommend a sane, concise discussion of the global warming issue?
Posted by Steve Mathewson at 10:16 AM on October 16, 2007
Comments
When I preached a sermon on stewardship of our planet at the end of a series on stewardship it received mixed reviews, but all said it was the first sermon that they had heard on the subject in their lives. That made me sad.
My understanding is that the 1967 article in Science magazine, "The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis" by Lynn White laid the foundation for much of the blame-laying on the church for the ecological crisis we are in.
When I refer to the article in lectures I give to a local Christian college, no one seems to have heard of it. When I mention it in settings where folks have been educated in secular universities, people uniformly nod their heads that it is an article that they were expected to have read.
The anti-Christian prejudice is real, but we can pout about it and make the prejudice the object of our attack, or we can do good works in relation to the environment and point to them as evidence of the falsity of the comments.
Posted by: Cal Habig on October 27, 2007
CAL: Thanks for sharing your experience. Tes, White's article made the church a target. I often read excerpts from it when I preach in Genesis 1. I've had the same experience as you -- people in university settings or communities have some familiarity with it. Your last paragraph is exactly right. Thanks for sharing this clarification and challenge.
Posted by: Steve Mathewson on November 2, 2007