A Christian Theologi-cal Responses to the

Ecological Crisis An overview of the overview of the theological re-sponses to Lynn White’s claim on the Christianity.

Compendious summarization.

very shortly summarized by

CHOI WOOCHUL Stefano

Stephen Bede Scharper – Author of the Art.

• Ph. D. • Assistant professor of the

Study of Religion at St. Michael’s college

• Publications.- Redeeming the Time: A Political Theology of the Environment. - The Green Bible(with Hi-lary Cunningham)

• Many articles on the eco-logical issues. He is lecturing at St. Jerome’s

university on the ecological is-sues on Nov. 2007.

The beginning of the debate

• Lynn White asserted that, in his article, Christianity was one of the main factors those which effected seriously on the ecological crisis to which now we are facing.

• This assert gave an occasion for many Theologians to dis-cuss whether Christianity is really a historical root of our ecological Crisis or not.

• After the Article by Lynn White Jr., there were three kind of approaches to it.

• (In this presentation, the specific attestation of Lynn White Jr. will be skipped for it is what we already learned.)

• I would like to skip also specific instances which were included to introduce the scholar’s thesis because it is impossible to scrutinize all of them in this class hours.

Introduction to the Approaches

Apologetic approachCritique of Lynn White Jr. Defender of Christianity

Constructive approachAcceptor of Critique. Self-criticizing theologians.

Listening approach

Indirectly responding theologians.

Apologetic approach

• Apologetic Approach criticized on the hypothesis of Lynn White.

• They tried to defend Judeo-Christian Tradition from the theoretical claim by Lynn White and his followers.

• The embolismic scholars of this approach like below:• (1) Robin Attfield• (2) Thomas Sieger Derr• (3) H. Paul Santmire

Apologetic approach Robin At-tfield

• He sifts through biblical, patristic, medieval evidence.• showing the centrality of stewardship and cooperation

with nature in the Christian theological tradition.• Hebrew Scriptures do not suggest that all the created

world exists solely to serve humanity. It includes restric-tions on the use of forests and animals. Hebrew concept of dominion involves accountability and responsibility, not mere exploitation.

• The Christian attitudes were much more varied than White attests. (Calvin expressed a notion of stewardship)

• Real cause of our crisis is Western’ society’s sacred be-lief in the inevitability of progress.

Apologetic approach Thomas Sieger Derr

• The genesis of Western technology and science is multi-ple, complex, and obscure. Thus it is a false simplifica-tion to isolate one particular religious strand when a myr-iad of nonreligious elements also were factors. He won-ders how White explains ecological disaster in non-Christian parts.

• He indicates that there is impressive evidence of an early and enduring Christian concern for environmental preservation.

• The “orthodox” Christian stance toward nature is re-spectful stewardship of an earth which belongs only to God.

• Instead of minimalism, he takes a position of responsible antrhopocentrism.

Apologetic approach H. Paul Santmire

• His goal is to understand the “travail” of nature in West-ern Christian thought.

• After the White’ critique, there are many voices. What these voices lack is historical framework, an careful ex-ploration of the theology of nature in the “biblical-classi-cal Christian tradition”

• Western theological tradition is not ecologically bank-rupt, nor is it lined with pearls of ecological riches. It is marked by two overarching motifs: spiritual – ecological

• He articulates 3 major metaphors: ascent, fecundity, mi-gration to good land to categorize the biblical tradition. He says that this 3 metaphors are co-existent in the Bible. It shows the possibility of a fresh ecological read-ing or biblical faith, he believes.

Constructive approach

• Constructive Approach adopts a self-critical perspective in dealing with the accusations leveled at the Judeo-Christian tradition by Lynn White Jr.

• They rarely concern the exact of the assessment by White but rather the ecological crisis and also try to find new Christian way to solve the matters.

• (1) Douglas John Hall• (2) Jürgen Motlmann• (3) Walter Bruegemann

Constructive approach Douglas John Hall.

• He starts with the claim that something is fundamentally wrong with our civilization. It has to do with “the dis-torted relationship between human and nonhuman na-ture”.

• He examined the “image of God” in the tradition of Jerusalem. He contends that in the history of Christian-ity, the symbol was only rationally taken even though it has more wider meaning.

• In this symbol, the relational aspect should be focused. (being with-God, being with-humankind, being-with na-ture. They are in a single relationship) The essence of human is to be in relationship of love. : Biblical ontology

Constructive approach Jürgen Moltmann

• His work is primarily pneumatological. He explicitly iden-tifies “God in creation” as the Holy Spirit, and his initial point is “the indwelling divine Spirit of creation.” The Spirit is the “holistic” principle of creativity and coopera-tion in creation.

• He applies his messianic orientation to an ecological doctrine of creation.

• The role of human is to respond to the ecological crisis as responsible agents of history, attuned to the Holy Spirit’s presence in creation and guided and girded by God’s hope-yielding eschatological promise.

Constructive approach Walter Bruegemann

• He focuses on a crisis that has more to do with human feelings of rootlessness and anomie than with ecological destruction.

• His principal project is to provide a novel ‘prism’ through which the Bible can be scrutinized, that prism being the narrative-of-the-land motif in the Bible.

• Land is perhaps the core theme of biblical faith. • Promise of entry into the land – story of land manage-

ment and exile – the renewed story of promise commenc-ing in exile and resulting in a kingdom.

• This story-telling approach rather can be instructive to the eco-theologians. It can be a ancient understandable model to be adopted in modern society.

Listening approach

• This approach does not directly deal with the charges laid by Lynn White and others.

• Their concern is listen to “nature” itself. • Not by debate but in radical openness to the earth’s sys-

tem, we can fashion a truly workable and non-harmful response to the human world.

• Human role is responsive and attentive to nature.• John Carmody (a former Jesuit)• Albert Fritsch (a current Jesuit)• Thomas Berry (a Passionist priest.)

- Berry is not main concern in this presentation.

Listening approach John Carmody

• Part 1 – listening parts. He outlined the facts and figures on the environmental crisis. His background is Eastern religious thought for it is more attentive to nature and is able to assist Western Christians’ attempt to fashion a responsible theology of nature.

• Part 2 – a new Christian naturalism. - anthoropocentrism seems to be the main-steream of the Christian tradition.

• God has given nature many title to reverence.• Need for the human agent to listen to nature.• The focus seems to be on responding to the ecological

challenge.

Listening approach Albert Fritsch

• Jesuit engineer and theologian. Minister of Appalachia.• He is influenced by Teilhard de Chardin.

(within a liturgical context he explores the notion of cosmic evolu-tion by Chardin.)

• Earth as teacher. • One’s own bioregion as a source of theological reflec-

tion.• Critique of consumerism. • Listening to nature is acquired skill• Unlike Berry, his analysis was built into option for the

poor. There is a clear nexus between oppression of the poor and of the earth. It is from same companies.

• Humans enrich themselves when benefiting other earth members.

My conclusion:Necessity of partnership

• All of us whoever live in the Earth are facing to the Eco-logical crisis.

• Even the heavenly church is perfect but in the earth it is able to make mistakes for it is within the imperfect hu-man.

• We can know that the original author of bibles and theo-logical workers did not want to harm the Earth.

• However it does not mean that it had been not misguided and misinterpreted by descendants of them.

• So, we must renovate our attitude toward nature so that it will be properly In God’s plan to the Earth, our land.

• This should be in the inter-disciplinary, inter-religious, inter-race, and inter-national work, I think.

Thank You for listening

with patience.