Religion & Ecology: Some Post-Conference Reflections

As mentioned a few days ago, I spent all day Friday at the University of North Texas in Denton at forum on religion and ecology. I promised reflections, so here there. Not many because it was only a day long, but a few nonetheless.

First just a broad observation. No matter how much any of us (especially academy types) would like to think we have it all figured out, we always need to be engaged in dialog. And after hearing perspective from all sorts of religions from Hinduism to Christianity to Jainism, I realized how much that point needs to be driven home. We can never learn enough. And in order to avoid damaging stereotypes and caricatures we have to be engaged. There is no excuse for that.

The second thought arises from the need for the first. I observed among some of the presenters–who were wonderful and I’m sure are some of the most compassionate, open, and accepting persons–a tendency, whether conscious or not, to portray their particular religion’s response to ecological crises as superior to others. I don’t even know if it was intentional. I doubt that it was (for some at least). But it was there. And these were people who have made it their life’s work to be an open and tolerant student of the world’s religions. If anything, I think that further illustrates the need to intentional dialog and intentional listening. If all we’re interested in is triumphalism of a certain brand, how can we ever expect to unite and fight ecological crises? Or any problem for that matter?

Finally, I realized even more than before that much of Christianity’s inability to address ecological problems arises from our deep-seated misinterpretation of Genesis and our perversion of the creation narrative(s). Lynn White Jr. points this out in his article, “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis” wherein he indicts the Judeo-Christian tradition as the root of problem rather than part of the solution tracing the issue all the way back to the interpretation of Genesis 1:28 and rightly observes that “Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen.”

Historically, the western church as wrongly assumed, as our misleading translation alludes, that human beings are to “rule” the earth, to have “dominion” over it, and to “subdue” its creatures. In Genesis, Adam is given the right to name the animals, another sign of dominion and power over another. As a result, Christians have treated the world as a sort of endless resource and an endless garbage dump whose value is derived only by its utility to humans. Who care about ecology when we’re given dominion over it all? Of course this is all very misleading. A better translation would be that humans are to be “responsible” for the earth. To be good “stewards” of it. Stewardship. Now there’s a word we in the church usually only here in relation to money campaign and building funds. We would do well to remember were our divinely sanctioned stewardship lies. And it’s not to our buildings that are likely destroying the environment.

As White suggests, it’s high time we reclaim the sounder interpretation of Genesis, take responsibility for our inaction and contribution to the problem, and begin to act as stewards of the earth in which we live. After all, without the earth it would be pretty tough to survive.