(Ir)religiosity

There has been a recent surge in publication of various “special-interest” bibles.  For the comic book and graphic novel geeks there is the Manga Bible, for the hipsters the Bible Illuminated, and for the Methodists the Wesley Bible. Don’t fit into one of those groups?  No problem. There’s always the all-purpose People’s Bible

It just not cool anymore to have plain Jane NRSV or NIV.

The Green Bible is another of these new, hip bibles.  I have mixed feelings about it.  Now, to be sure, all of these new bibles can be useful.  Each of them takes seriously the need to speak in contemporary language with contemporary images and metaphors.  The Green Bible goes a step further, understanding the need, if we are to be faithful bearers of the good news, of taking seriously contemporary problems and providing alternatives.  Many Christian, especially younger ones, are tired of the old ways of “doing” church and “living” theology.  They wonder if their bible has anything serious to say about contemporary issues and if their God cares about what is happening in the world.  And these new bibles communicate that much more effectively than King Jimmy.

According to its website, “The Green Bible will equip and encourage people to see God’s vision for creation and help them engage in the work of healing and sustaining it.”  Which is wonderful; that is indeed part of our task — to understand and take seriously God’s dream for the entire world, the entire cosmos even, and participate in the actualization of that dream in our own peculiar way and in our own particular contexts.  That is good.  That is important  I get that. Read the rest of this entry »

To create good participants in the current system:

Schools should be focusing on [the capacity to communicate effectively or to cooperatively solve problems], as well as ethical reasoning. Wall Street’s meltdown, linked to shady lending practices, reveals the moral bankruptcy of huge segments of the market. Yet political leaders now urge our children to quietly fill-in bubble tests, seeking only to become productive cogs in a broken wheel.

I’ve been thinking about pedagogy this past week and the downfalls of various methods of teaching and testing.  It reminds me of a Paulo Freire quote I ran across a while back.  I cannot for the life of me remember where it came from.

Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.

That is inspiring however it is at the same time discouraging to see institutions and educators who continue to foster the present system(s).

Here are some of my brief Earth Day reflections. I plan to liveblog the Pennsylvania primary later on tonight. Until then here you go. Oh, and I guess I’ll throw in a bonus: a sermon I gave last Sunday on Earth Day and climate change. It’s kinda long. And I don’t normally use a manuscript, so I or may not have actually said what is written. Bear with me.

Today is April 22. Today is Earth Day.

Today is the day we celebrate and appreciate our environment. We raise awareness about ecological sustainability and perhaps participate in eco-activism and acts of eco-justice.

As a Christian I reflect on my divine responsibility and my divine mandate to care for God’s good creation, not because there is an impending problem (though that fact is undoubtedly compelling!), but because God saw that creation was very good before human beings were even on the scene. And as beings created in the image of God we are given the wonderful responsibility of ensuring that creation remains good. That is our divine responsibility. That is our divine mandate. That is our original stewardship.

If anything I sincerely hope that we will all examine our lifestyles and our actions today, and everyday, realizing that they do indeed matter and they have deep implications not only for our collective future, but for our belief in and about God. We live what we believe. Are we participating as co-creators with God as creator, or are we participating as co-destroyers with God as destroyer? Our actions have already answered that question. Indeed, they have been answering the question for some time.

Further, I hope that we gain a new understanding of what it means to “Go Green,” realizing that we don’t have to go out any buy a new trendy t-shirt made of organic material to show that we care. The answer to solving the climate crisis and living more ecologically sustainable lifestyles lies not in consuming more, but in consuming lives and become better, more responsible stewards of what we already have. Until we are liberated from the arrogant assumption that we can simply buy ourselves out of our problems we cannot even being to addresses the real problem. The real problem is our hyper-consumptive nature that drives our politics, economics, religion, and so on. We must humbly face that demon, and remove that plank from our eye, before we can even begin to address other issues.

I’ve been on a little ecology kick lately partially due to the fact that Earth Day is coming up and I’ll be preaching the Sunday prior to it. So, I’m kicking around some ideas and I ran across this, the newly released findings of the Vulcan Project:

And of course, the record of arctic ice melting 1979-2007:

Global warming has become quite the hot button issue these days. For that reason I don’t even like to use that phrase anymore. I prefer to use global climate change. It’s much less divisive than the alternative and its much more accurate. While the temperature is rising worldwide, resulting in our planet suffering from the equivalent of a moderate-to-high fever, the effects are much more widespread. More natural disasters. More flooding. More drought. I could go on. This is not just ‘warming.’ This is global climate change.

But that’s not really what this post is about. I know plenty of people who couldn’t care less what I called it. Regardless of overwhelming consensus in the scientific community, they simply deny its existence. It simply isn’t real. It’s a hoax. A dirty trick and an elaborate scheme fabricated by the liberal left and the Hollywood elites to raise taxes and make Al Gore rich. Seriously. I know some people like that. After all I do live in Oklahoma and Jim Inhofe is my senator.

First of all, to say such a thing is ignorant at best. The consensus of scientists and climatologists is that global climate change is happening and it is growing worse because of human action (or inaction). Peer-reviewed literature concurs. Let me say that again peer-reviewed literature concurs. Not some crazy wack-job writing up an article, peer-viewed work from within the community. So, denying it is kinda silly. I can deny gravity all I want to, but that doesn’t make its effects on me any less damaging were I to jump out the window.

But some people still deny the science. And personally, that’s fine with me. We need some skeptics to keep us questioning and fact-checking. In that case, what does it matter? Suppose the science is wrong. Suppose the whole thing is a hoax. Shouldn’t we still be environmentally friendly in our actions? Isn’t caring for the environment a good idea itself? Regardless of whether we’re in the middle of crisis, shouldn’t we care about the world in which we live? Isn’t reducing your carbon emission a good idea regardless of whether it’s a pressing issue? Shouldn’t we take care of something even when it’s in good condition and not wait until it’s in bad shape? I don’t wait until my dog is starving to feed her. That’s asinine. No, I feed her everyday because she needs to be fed. Not because she’s starving to death and I want a quick fix. I feed her because I care for her well-being. What’s so wrong about taking care of the environment in itself?

I find it quite interesting that some of the staunchest critics of the science behind global climate change are also benefiting from and getting elected by the oil and gas industry. It is interesting that some people who claim the whole thing is false are the same people who drive Hummers and other SUVs. It is interesting that some people who decry the “alarmists” are the same people who have always refused to recycle and conserve energy because it took to much time and effort.

You want to know what I really think? I think that some people use the whole “global warming is a hoax” story as a cover so they can continue to treat the world as an endless resource and an endless garbage dump. They are the same people who are completely enamored in the dripping hyper-consumerism that is so rampant in our culture. They don’t want to put forth the effort, the time, or the money to “Reduse, Reuse, or Recycle” because they don’t really care either way. They are lazy and don’t want to be pushed out of their sphere of comfort. After all, that would be too inconvenient and too demanding.

I don’t have a people with those that refute global climate change as much as I have a problem with those that refuse to care for the earth because it might cramp their style.

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.

I’m at another ecology conference, this time in Denton at the university of North Texas (PDF file of the schedule here). I don’t know if there will be wifi at the venue tomorrow. If so, I’ll try and liveblog some of the talks. If not, I’ll post some reflections later on.

Well, I made it. I’m back and quite exhausted. Being hit by the one two punch of being at a conference and going through daylight savings the same weekend drains you. But it was well worth it. On a whole the conference was great. I’ll mention a few highlights and then some criticism.

First, I was most impressed by the action taken by the staff throughout the conference to not only talk about sustainability, but to practice it as well. Too many times I’ve been to conference we’ve talked about sustainability over a nice styrofoam cup of coffee or strategized about alleviating poverty and world hunger over a 3 course, catered meal.

Second, aside from the information and knowledge gained from the plenaries and workshops, this trip was worth it just for the conversation and fellowship that was had among friends and colleagues. It’s kind of weird, I hung out with people I see almost everyday, but don’t speak to all that much. It took a conference for us to take off our “school hats” and engage in genuine friendship. That being said, I have the best friends and colleagues a guy could ask for; it’s not everyday you run across authentically concerned and compassionate folks who refuse to leave things the way they are. Amazing.

Now for the criticism. Or maybe it is just an observation of the typical happenings at these types of events. I don’t mind people sharing personal success stories about how they implemented a certain strategy that resulted in transformation. I think that’s great and further proves my belief that everything is and must be contextual and local. What I do have a problem with is the manner in which those stories are presented. More often than not these local, contextual stories are shoved on the listeners in a prescriptive manner that assumes a certain strategy or idea that worked in one context or locality can be generalized as some sort of silver bullet that will work for everyone. That is simply untrue. What works for me may note work for you and vice versa. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about sustainability or poverty. And in that respect and I don’t want to isolate this particular event. I’ve been to many conferences like this and it always happens. This one was better than most. All I’m saying is there is a way to share personal, local success stories in way that is not prescriptive and at times condescending. Contextuality needs to be shared, it is in enriching, but a larger conversation must jettison from that or else we’re just patting ourselves on the back.

Ok, enough said about that. Like I said, this was one of the better conference I’ve been to. I didn’t talk much about content here, but by and large it was good and spot on in most respects. I’m always holding my hope and my cynicism in tension. This weekend I was able to re-grip that tension with a sense of realism and without feeling like I’m out there being crazy all by myself, which I do most times.

~bh ><>

I’m in Fayetteville, Arkansas for the “Caring for Creation” conference. I’m pretty excited. Unfortunately, web presence for this event is pretty minimal. You can see more information here (it should be the first event listed) including links to PDF files of the workshops and plenary speakers, etc.

I don’t know what the internet situation will be like over there, hopefully they will have wifi. If they do, I will be live-blogging here throughout the weekend providing you with live updates on the workshop and the plenaries. If they don’t have internet access I’ll be live updating my twitter, via my cell phone, which you can see at my twitter site, at my facebook, or in the left-hand sidebar down there somewhere.

Obviously that won’t be as ideal or as comprehensive as an actual liveblog, but I’ll do what I can. All updates will be in central standard time. Don’t forget to spring forward this weekend! Reflections on the entire weekend will follow on Monday.

REAL-TIME UPDATES:

3:57 pm: Got here several hours ago. Had lunch and did some hiking. Now I’m waiting for dinner. May see if I can catch some z’s. The good news is there is wifi, at least in my room. Not sure about the rest of the campus. So I’ll be updating here and hopefully throughout the sessions. If not here then via twitter. The bad news is tonight’s plenary speaker, Dr. J. Matthew Sleeth, had to cancel because of weather and flight delays. So, I’m not sure what’s going to go down tonight. More to come.

9:05 pm: So, there is no internet in the conference area. Kind of frustrating. Updates won’t really be “real” time. The first plenary was pretty good, a nice intro. to the weekend. So far I’m very impressed, most conferences I go to talk about sustainability and then use styrofoam cups and have expensive food catered, but here they gave us mugs to use for the entire week. I’ve never been to a conference that actually puts their message into action.

11:31 pm: The best part about these events are the conversations that take place and the relationships that are built/nurtured. That alone is better than any plenary speaker.

Day 2:

10:19 am: Just finished my first workshop on determining your eco-footprint. Wow. Mine was lower that the national average (which I guess doesn’t say a whole lot), but not as low as I’d like it to be. The overarching issue here is consumption. Global climate change is the symptom of that deeper problem. Next plenary at 10:30 by the my professor.

2:47 pm: The plenary session this morning was great. Dr. Davies talked about systemic solutions for sustainability and the Oikos movement. My second workshop was about political advocacy and was good, although I still remain a little cynical about the influence of advocates being usurped by the lobbyists. It seems like our government is turning into a system by the lobbyists for the lobbyists.

4:07 pm: Second afternoon workshop, “Reduce-Reuse-Recycle,” was pretty mediocre. It was exclusively about recycling and basically amounted to the facilitator telling her success story and assuming we should all do the same thing. Great if you want to hear an inspirational story, but not very practical. Got some free time now, until dinner. Think I may try and catch a nap.

12:17 am: Again, conversation trumps all. I’m grateful for that. The third plenary was perhaps the best thus far given by John Hill of Board of Church and Society of the UMC on global climate change. It’s hard not to be depressed when faced with the facts and projections, but I am hope nonetheless. And inspired. It’s late and we spring forward tonight, I’m out.

Day 3: 

10:07 am: Worship was great. Anytime you incorporate readings from Zen Buddhism and Albert Einstein into the service it automatically goes up a few notches in my book.  Not that I’ll likely be able to take it home, but it was really good nonetheless.

~bh ><>