The Essence of Christianity in Resolving Ecological Crises - Research Paper Example

The Essence of Christianity in Resolving Ecological Crises Christian doctrine, despite apparent oppositions, has always stood on its ground of keeping righteousness in the light of moral and spiritual values. Through this basic notion alone, one may readily claim that Christian principles ought to be in harmony with nature and such harmony may even extend to taking the responsibility of addressing ecological concerns. During biblical times, people were found to have sought means of living and derived ethnic resources from their natural environment. Accounts in the Holy Scriptures provide evidence on how men were spiritually and socially bound with God and with each other respectively in a culture where coexistence with nature or the rest of creation on Earth inevitably essential. This simultaneous connection with the environment and God, an entirely unseen supreme entity known to be the Creator and is above all creation, undoubtedly bore huge impact in the process of establishing human civilization. At the dawning of the environmental movement, optimistic attitude by people seemed sufficient in dealing with the issues of the environment so they initiated planting trees, tidying up waterways and various streams, setting up parks, and fixing highways for safety while maintaining some aesthetic value for men to utilize attraction as a means to draw mature concern for the ecosystem. Ideals and sentiments, however, have become affected by factors that are quite significant to industrial advancements and general modernization as well as consumerism which operate at the rate that may not be suppressed even if legislation by authority was imposed. Though scientific endeavor has been considered to remedy ecological problems, the latter’s condition continue to worsen instead. A collection of scientists from different nations with Nobel-acclaimed laureates necessitated a warning to humanity: “Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society – and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about.” Apparently, even with the collaboration of science, a lack of conviction for something higher than the prevailing cause and something of profound intrinsic value serves to make humanity realize that spiritual attachment has much to do with the potential to engage with the heart of protecting the Earth. It may take some amount of philosophy to reconcile the fundamental differences between a Christian religion and Ecology yet based on historical findings in the context of theology, since God has often conveyed his loving kindness to human beings by using the Earth’s resources for supplication of their needs, then men are spontaneously inclined to express gratitude or respond back via stewardship of the living planet. One leading argument which forms a basis behind the ground for a Christian act of securing the environment from irrational abuse and manmade hazards is the Judeo-Christian claim that men are entrusted dominion of the world following the original period when Adam and Eve took control of the lower form of God’s creations, animals and plants alike, in the Garden of Eden. In effect, thus, nature is relegated to a status lower than that of man so the reason Christians ought to treat nature with affectionate care involves the core concept of relegation in order that men, particularly those who value the idea of conscience, would find themselves accountable toward the welfare of nature and ecological balance. Christianity equivalently subjects as well the notion of reincarnation and animism demystifying nature to rejection in the belief that man’s ultimate destination is God’s kingdom in heaven, otherwise, in hell, but not in any part of the Earth. In the words of explication by Lynn White – “Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen. Man shares, in great measure, God’s transcendence of nature. Christianity not only established a dualism of man and nature, but also insisted that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends.” This issue, however, has typically misled men to unrighteous exploitation of nature where no thought of conservation or preservation is held in regard to compensate for the losses brought about by excessive consumption of natural resources. In which case, the spiritual importance of connecting with nature is neglected at an instant humans are merely selfishly concerned about the advantages obtained from nature which is quite a unidirectional approach or one wherein there emerges absence of willingness to keep equilibrium within the ecosystem. The more that people are disposed to view the world in a rather material perspective, as in solely imagining the innumerable possibilities of improving lives by taking from the Earth a portion that is untimely replaced, the more that they take a sense of responsibility for granted. Under circumstances in which spirituality is present through Christian faith, nevertheless, people tend to associate reverence to God with the respect developed toward other forms of life on Earth. Such proposition is given further support in the essay “Christianity and Ecology” authored by John F. Haught, a catholic scholar. According to Haught’s model, the universe is God’s primary revelation as it unfolds God’s nature and reflects this via the natural composition of the world which God himself created. Haught makes reference to the cosmos or heavenly bodies as bearing a covenant which designates fulfillment at a time in the future yet cosmos itself should not be treated a special place for souls or an exact manifestation of God’s realm for the heaven or God’s abode remains unrevealed among the living. Moreover, Haught perceives nature being a reminder of God’s promise so men must take diligent care for nature, an incarnated version of God’s lasting covenant. So, whenever mankind affects the environment in a negative way, the deed is as good as violation or breach of God’s covenant with men and qualifies as a sinful act. To this extent, one gradually acquires deeper insight into the essence of Christianity on Ecology which far outweighs scientific knowledge and application. At this stage, an enlightened individual who happens to be a Christian discerns justice for nature based not just upon the moral standards of human law which exist to distinguish between right and wrong but more so, on the value of compassion taught by faith in God. Several non-western societies have had enduring adherence to the power of nature, believing that it possesses sanctity. Dr. Hallman exemplifies: “In one African community, they have incorporated environmental stewardship into their theology and liturgy. Wantonly destroying trees, for instance, is seen as a profound sin and can even lead to excommunication. When they seek renewal in baptism, they confess not only their moral sins but also their sinning against nature.” On the other hand, in another issue raised through “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis” by the critique of Lynn White, it is argued that the Christian tradition was liable for much of unpleasant impact made by human behavior against the environment especially during the industrial revolution when trade and commerce comprised the top priority of societies undergoing competitive pressures in the economy. White posited that man’s approach to the order of nature is mysteriously linked to worldviews and religious beliefs. In modern west’s age, the Bible-reading Christian community exhibited various perspectives relating men, God, and Earth. For one, dualism is in full recognition that God is separate from nature while anthropocentrism holds that in creation, only humans are designed in God’s image and likeness, justifying yet another thought, human chauvinism, which proposes that creation exists decisively for the sole benefit of humans only. Having contradicted the first condition, White’s argument occurs as if an examination of Christian ecology needs to be carried out at depth on a personal level. Since anthropocentrism, dualism, and human chauvinism were assessed to have directed humans to be indifferent and hostile toward nature in their schematic attempt at economic and industrial progress, this likely summons the people of the church to check on their understanding of Christian principles in relation to plans of enhancing the world in different aspects. The intended growth becomes a certain threat whenever humans lose the sense of connectedness with the elemental nature, placing the idea of environmentalism in a secondary consideration once the situation of the polluted world already reaches its calamitous state. This may imply that Christians could be reduced to learn a way to empathy for nature by choice or only on occasions no other solution seems to work in the age almost everyone appears to depend much on the competence of new inventions with technology or applied science. Prior to studying the relevance of Christian theology with Ecology, one may find it appropriate to contemplate first on the intimate connection between God and creation and be able to figure in the process how God’s overwhelming love for his creation is unconditionally expressed in the beauty of nature. With reference to the Bible, a believer can opt to comprehend the sacred call to stewardship by being guided according to the wisdom of God’s work with creation and how he particularly conducts himself to be seen and understood through the living nature. Psalm 104:25, 30 provides account of God’s creatorship: “In wisdom you made them all, the earth is full of your creatures. There is the sea, vast and spacious, teeming with creatures beyond number - living things both large and small... When you send your Spirit, they are created and you renew the earth.” Same is conveyed with Colossians 1:16-17 which tells “All things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things and in Him all things hold together.” Besides demonstrating such scenario where God breathes in life to specific matters he prefers to have flesh and function for the purpose of accompanying men and satisfying their needs, correspondingly, the Bible testifies as well to the relationship God has managed to build with all his creation which, in turn, interacts with him in full measure of adoration and fondness as stated in a number of passages, one of which is by Psalm 96:10-13: “The Lord reigns... Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad, let the seas resound and all that is in it; let the fields be jubilant, and everything in them. Then all the trees of the forest will sing for joy, they will sing before the Lord for He comes, He comes to judge the earth.” There even comes a point when God delivers his teachings by way of drawing concrete examples from nature just as how Jesus derived parables by making use of images or objects of ecological worth. Works Cited Krueger, Fred. “Why Ecology is a Christian Issue: A Historical Review of the Ecological Path Not Taken.” 2012. Web. 9 Jan 2012. http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et0895/et0895s5.html. “Christianity and Ecology – The Body of Salvation.” 2012. Web. 10 Jan 2012. http://hollys7.tripod.com/religionandecology/id2.html. Cauthen, Kenneth. “Christianity and Ecology.” 1997. Web. 11 Jan 2012. http://www.bigissueground.com/atheistground/cauthen-ecology.shtml. Saunders, Stanley P. “Toward a Deep Christian Ecology.” 2007. Web. 12 Jan 2012. http://www.atthispoint.net/editor-notes/toward-a-deep-christian-ecology/173/. “Christian Ecology.” 2012. Web. 11 Jan 2012. http://www.christianecology.org/Stewardship.html. Read More