Tod Brilliant, A Christian Hater? What?
I don’t hate Christians. Some of my best friends are Christians.
Ahem.
I’ve received a few emails questioning my post covering Pete Stark’s announcement of his non-theism as well as the follow-up where I suggest that some Christians condone rape. It seems that some readers have taken offense at my tone, as to them I am degrading the Christian faith and, hence, all Christians. Maybe I buried it too deep in the ‘rape’ post, so let me once again point anyone who is confused about my stance to THIS ESSAY, entitled “Christian Environmentalism” by Dr. Ray Bohlin. In it, Bohlin quite clearly puts across a viewpoint that, I believe, represents that of any Christian who truly follows the word of God. When I castigate those ‘Christians’ who rape and pillage the Earth, it should be clear that I’m putting these people in the same class as the Popes and ‘Christian’ leaders who organized the Crusades way back in the day. That is, in the class of those who profess a faith but live like the damned.
From Bohlin’s essay:
Nature has value in and of itself because God created it. Nature’s value is intrinsic; it will not change because the fact of its creation will not change. The rock, the tree, and the cat deserve our respect because God made them to be as they are. . . In its proper sense, man’s rule and dominion over the earth is that of a steward or a caretaker, not a reckless exploiter. Man is not sovereign over the lower orders of creation. Ownership is in the hands of the Lord.
Now, if only the U.S. President, and those like him, would start acting a bit more Christian, I believe our world would be in far, far better shape. The problem is not so much with Christianity, which is fundamentally a loving and nurturing faith (Yes, I said ‘fundamentally’ but don’t confuse that with those poor, errant fundamentalists) that has, at its core, the Ten Commandments, which neatly mirror much of the Buddhist 8-Fold Path. The problem is with modern Christian leaders who continue to allow their faith to serve to empower the aims of men (no, not “humans” - men). If these leaders would, at the very least, preach adherence to the Golden Rule, that would be something.
There is also confusion among some Bible scholars over whether man has “dominion” over all things or is “steward” of all things. The two words have quite different meanings. The “dominion” interpretation has proved erroneous (I won’t link to the debate as I doubt my regular readers are still following along as most aren’t aware of my degree in Religious Studies and if they were would likely brand me as suspect, at best) but has done great damage. More from Bohlin:
While God intended us to live in harmony with nature, we have more often than not been at odds with nature. This reality tells us that man has not fulfilled his mandate. The source of our ecological crisis lies in man’s fallen nature and the abuse of his dominion. Man is a rebel who has set himself at the center of the universe. Man has exploited created things as though they were nothing in themselves and as though he has an autonomous right to do so. Man’s abuse of his dominion becomes clear when we look at the value we place on time and money. Our often uncontrolled greed and haste have led to the deterioration of the environment.
And that, dear friends, is so damned right on that every single eco-warrior on the planet should cement those words to memory. Why? Because they explain so very clearly how Christianity has veered off course. And, if we are to fix this mess, we need every last Christian to get back on the Good Ship, back on the right Path. We are all stewards, my friends and while the job of Steward is far less sexy sounding than that of Dominator (note/image: PSA Airlines had some super-sexy stewardesses a few decades back), the dividends are a lot greater.
The real problem is that the eco-sphere doesn’t know how to talk to Christians. We dismiss them as irrelevant when we so badly need them to join the fold. Imagine the progress we could make if we had a few Ray Bohlins with whom to strategize.
Tags: environment, Ruminations
Dominion or steward, does it matter? Both are words that seem to infer (imply?) that they are seperate from the earth; somehow above it.
Nice point. I think the primary difference is that dominion infers that all on the earth are here to be primarily subservient–mere fodder–while steward implies a type of ‘beneficent handling’ that would forestall many destructive activities.
And therefore they’ve taken on the primary roll of owner, not player.
God created and gave it to people, but if you look at the old religions (now mythologies), the relationship people had was with gods who were actually part of earth (gods of fire, water, etc). This required people to make peace with earth in order to work out their issue with the gods (because gods and earth are the same). (not all mythologies, but most)
When El finally just became god, the relationship was broken with nature and we only needed to take (see just about every single book in Tanakh) things/places/people to please him.
Heck, we even put ourselves in caskets to ensure that even in death we won’t become part of the earth. That’s just one last final f-u to the earth.
Well put, Kirk. The old religions were much more an extension of basic human survival circuitry, at a time when the survival of the unit meant everything. Modern religions, especially Christianity’s most recent incarnations, act as support systems for the individuals (kings, popes, landowners) to consolidate power - hence the separation you speak of.