 |
| The Reciprocal Relationship between human and nature. http://www.uhno.se/_image/painting_symbolic/03_The_Reciprocal_Relationship_betwwen_Man_and_Nature_1978_Vastervik.jpg |
INTRODUCTION
John Allen Jr.[1]
reflected that this particular mega-trend “the greening of Christianity[2]” deserved
a close attention because of its pressing need. The ecological issue being faced
by the world is not anymore a matter of a concern to few people. In fact, it
concerns everyone and even the Church. There is a pressing need to have a
founded eco-theology that would serve the Church to be more eco-centred and be
fully aware of its effect and essence in the whole creation.
Indeed, in the recent years of 20th
century there were theologians who began to venture the importance and the
essential part of the ecology and its integral participation to human salvation
and the salvation of the whole creation. Humanity’s claim to be the peak of
creation as the most important of all has been challenged for humanity is
entirely dependent on the environment. The earth in itself is where humanity
lives and the resource of every human development. However, in the quest of
human advancement and development in all aspects of life may it be in
political, social or in religious sphere, has contributed to the degradation
and misuse of the resources of the earth. We have seen that the magnificent
inventions and innovations of technology supplied by extensive mining of
minerals, logging of tress to pave the rise of big cities and et cetera backed
a whirlpool effect to the whole world. This is very much evident in the
most-discussed “climate change” by the scientists claiming the imbalance of
chemical elements in the atmosphere that caused unusual and severe alteration
of the weather and climate. These are primarily due to human interventions.
Moreover, came the recent
theologians who tried to integrate this important aspect of humanity and to be
a concern as well of the Church. Thus, John Allen gave two considerations why
“greening of Christianity” must be promoted. First, the humanity has the
responsibility for the whole environment as part of the entire creation of God.
The negligence of the environmental issues is not just a matter of aesthetic or
moral concern, however, it is essentially an aspect with great importance to
the consequences for global stability. Secondly, there is the need to have a
clear articulation of a specific Christian theology of the environment. More so,
that the rise of secular environmentalism posts a big challenge for its
tendency towards the deification of nature and relativization of the uniqueness
of the human person.
In effect, a serious and closer
formulation of theology of environment must be realized. In a way, the
objective of this paper lies in this endeavour. It is to affirm the importance
of this aspect of theology in the Church – having a new perspective of being a
Church.
The Greening of Christianity
It
is a new consciousness in theology emphasizing the relevance and the integrity
of nature in the whole theology of creation and the mystery of salvation. In
the recent years, alarming issues with regards to environmental problems made
people to become more and more aware of the situation of the whole humanity in
relation to nature. With the pressing climate change due to exploitation of
resources and misuse of minerals led to the degradation of the environment. In
fact, this contributed also to the extreme weather events due to global warming
that have caught the attention of many. This caused problems such as air, water
and earth pollution, chemical imbalance in the atmosphere as to the high
density of C02 which causes high temperature. And also the food and water
shortages and terrains vulnerable to typhoons, landslides and other natural
disasters due to massive mining and logging. These environmental problems led
ultimately to many deaths and deprivation of rights to many people and basically
to the destruction of the environment.
Hence, in John Allen’s article[3],
the two Christian leaders namely, Bartholomew I of the Orthodox Church and
Benedict XVI of the Roman Catholic Church have joined their voices in naming
this pressing ecological crises faced by humanity today. This is indeed a
responsibility as well of the Church to protect the environment as this is integrally
part of the whole creation of God. Accordingly, Allen quoted the two leaders
addressing a common cause for the protection of the environment and
invigorating a theology of creation. The two leaders said, “In the face of the great threats to the natural
environment, we want to express our concern at the negative consequences for
humanity and for the whole of creation which can result from economic and
technological progress that does not know its limits… as religious leaders, we
consider it as one of our duties to encourage and to support all efforts made
to protect God's creation, and to bequeath to future generations a world in
which they will be able to live.”
However, it is not to be forgotten
that not so long ago, figures who considered to address this environmental
issue, like Tielhard de Chardin, by developing a theology of creation had been
apprehended and suspected by the Church authorities. Moreover, even the
Church’s documents that have been decreed throughout the years or even in the
Second Vatican Council a serious attention was not given to nature[4].
Furthermore, the documents revolved around the anthropocentric perspective. It
is a bias that puts nature to be only and mere thing that is to be dominated by
humanity and is always at the centre to only serve humans. This caused deep misconception of the role of
nature in the whole of creation. Consequently, in the later years the devastating
effects cannot be denied and overlooked anymore. This called the attention of
big institutions such as in political, economic and religious arena.
Hence, as a Church, the importance
of the environment in the whole of creation and a reinterpretation of the
biblical sources vis-à-vis the unrelenting ‘sign of the times” now stands at
the pedestal of theology.
The Greening of Christianity and
the Church as Community
One of the models of the Church as
identified by Avery Cardinal Dulles is the Church
as Community. Accordingly, the Church is not just a mere organization or an
institution where it is governed by laws and decrees. The Church is neither
just a mere expression of human relationships with one another in a
sociological sense. Nevertheless, the Church is a communion of persons
disclosed in the divine life of the incarnate Christ through the Holy Spirit.[5]
The spiritual communion of the Church makes the Church in itself the Body of
Christ and as a People of God. Hence, the Church as community expresses the personal
and interpersonal relationship of the community of believers, indeed, a
fellowship of persons with God and with each other. It is said that this model
of the church also expresses a close affinity and intimacy within the
community. Dulles, further developed this model by referring to the two
biblical terminology where the church as community can be also founded. The
image of the “Body of Christ” expressed in Romans 12 and 1 Cor. 12 as well as
in Ephesians and Colossians that its structure is vital. It is organic and
growing. In relation to this, Christ is described as the “Head of the Church”
as explicitly describe in the letter to the Colossians, where in the Church is
vitally connected and from whom life overflows and as well as the very
existence of the church. The church is further related as the “People of God”.
It is explicit also in the Old Testament where Israel is called the people of
God or the chosen people, to be more precise. Nevertheless, in 1 Peter 2:9 this
image is more significant in which the church opens its identity to the world.
Thus, the church is a communion of persons, though it is basically interior,
however, expresses external bonds of creed, worship and ecclesiastical
fellowship.[6]
This image of the church is further
discussed by Dulles that it has also disadvantages[7].
These include, first, an obscure cooperation between the spiritual and the
visible dimensions of the church. Second, there is the danger of divinizing the
church beyond its due. And third, there is a lack of clarity regarding the
church’s identity and mission and the possibility of reducing the church to a
social impulse.
Vis-à-vis the mega-trend of
“Greening Christianity,” this model of the church can be further reflected in
terms of relationship. The image of a community best expresses the personal and
interpersonal relationship of the believers. They are united through faith,
hence, founded in spiritual sense. Moreover, in terms of their relationship as
People of God or Body of Christ, this particular mega-trend expands this
relationship as a community. It is said that in this community the immediate
relationship of all believers with the Holy Spirit, who directs the church, is
emphasised[8].
Accordingly, the mutual service towards one another is at its significance. Truly,
this makes the church to be a community of brothers and sisters expressed in a
concrete way through service founded in faith, hope and love.
As
this community is called to be expanded and widened to the rest of the created
world there are also consequences it entails that must be considered and looked
upon.
The Challenges
Moreover, the church is situated in
this temporal world. Humanity does not and cannot live on earth without the non-human
creatures. In fact, the human beings are entirely dependent on these non-human
creatures yet, these creatures will continue to exist without the humans. Scientific
studies have proven this that billions of years ago there was no sign of
humanity’s existence, yet, life has begun already.[9]
However, the earth was already filled with various and unique creatures being
confirmed through stunning archaeological discoveries.
However,
my point here is actually the expression of interconnectedness and the interdependence
of everything that is on earth. Hence, what is implicit in this “greening of
Christianity” is the image of the “entire creation.” What I really mean is that
God created a vast creation and not just the human race. All other beings –
living or non-living, seen or unseen, mobile or immobile, solid or liquid or
gas are all part of God’s magnificent creation. In this image, humans are
fellow-members together with God’s other created beings.[10]
This provides a broader context of the humanity’s role and identity in this
vast creation without separating humans as demi-gods who are to dominate the
earth. Consequently, it is an affirmation that humans share with other
creatures the same earth and recognize the same Creator-God. It is, indeed, a
very rich, diverse and huge community enormously interconnected and
interdependent.
In
fact, the late Pope John Paul II had recognized also this relationship of
humanity with the created being that constitute the natural world. In his
encyclical letter Sollicitudo Rei
Socialis (1987), the Pope affirms that the resources of the natural world
could definitely help humanity’s nourishment and enrichment. However, we are
not at the position to merely use and misuse and dispose these resources at our
own will as if these are inexhaustible. Nevertheless, the Pope insists that we
humans must take into account the nature
of each creature and most importantly our mutual connection with these creatures as integral to the ordered
system that is the cosmos.[11]
It
is also a way of recognizing the sacredness of nature as part of God’s
creation. And as sacred beings, respect and care, enriching and nurturing are
due to these non-human creatures. Recognizing the sacredness of all things does
not mean divinizing the environment but even recognizing the divinity of our
Creator-God that through God’s gratuitous grace and love, we are all created. Moreover,
the mystery of incarnation and redemption of the Son, in the person of Jesus
brings the whole creation into perfection that in Jesus’ saving action through
his paschal mystery there will be a “new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21:1).” For
the eco-theologians this innovation is coined as ‘panentheism’ which asserts a
renewed emphasis of the presence of God in all reality and that all reality is
in God and so God also transcend in the world[12].
Certainly,
it is a clear confession of God’s creative action in the world. And in the
tradition of the Trinitarian theology, the role of the Spirit of God is
precisely the principle of the indwelling of God in the whole creation.[13]
Walter Kasper, a German cardinal would also put it that the Holy Spirit is the
source of novelty in creation. He acknowledges that the “Holy Spirit as the
divine love in Person is the source of creation because creation is an
overflowing of God’s love and participating in God’s being.[14]”
On the other hand, this image of the
entirety of creation posits and challenges the traditional image of the Church
as a mere bond or community of human beings. With this new image, it calls an
expansion of this community towards the other created beings on earth. Hence, it
challenges the anthropocentric tendency of this image because the
eschatological aspect of the universe is surely intended for all creatures not
just to humans alone – that is, the final destiny of the whole creation is the
communion with the Triune God.[15]
This might be quite radical for all
the pronouncements of the church and even the recent theological discussions
regarding environmental issues are all anthropocentric. However, this kind of
narrow perspective is seen by the eco-theologians as a hindrance to complete
conversion. Nevertheless, it does not also mean that an anthropocentric
perspective be totally abandoned. The need to be done is a theological
anthropology that has to be situated within a wider context of theology of
creation as a whole.[16] Indeed,
it is within an earth-centered or creation-centered approach that we humans
could arrive to a true understanding of ourselves.
And this calls for the
reinterpretation of the humanity’s role and identity in relation to the rest of
the created world. Particularly, the past biblical interpretations must be
re-interpreted not for the mere salvation of humanity alone but of the whole
creation of God. The contentions regarding the humans’ role must also be
re-interpreted as well that humans are not mere gods who are to dominate and
use the rest of the creation without limits. This kind of biblical
interpretation has surely led to the perverse understanding of humanity to the
extent of exploiting and misusing the resources of the earth. Although, we are
to affirm that throughout the history the developments humanity had made to
nurture lifestyle is tremendous and overwhelming. Nevertheless, the development
of human life in many aspects as to political, sociological and economic have
also brought tremendous and overwhelming devastating effects to the earth’s
resources. Unsurprisingly, the devastating effects to nature were and are
entirely of the same effect felt by us, humans. Consequently, there is the need
to be open as well to an eco-centric perspective in relating with nature. Yet,
what should be primary is a theocentric theology in viewing the whole of
creation.
The Community of Creation
With all these things that must be
considered in addressing this particular ecclesial and global crisis on the
environment, there is the need now to somehow alter the image of the Church
into a Community of Creation.[17]
The church, though a community of persons yet, it should be wider than this.
God did not create humans alone. Even the biblical source would attests that it
was the non-human creatures that were created first. And hence, even scientific
studies would also affirm that human life only appeared later.
Furthermore, this community of
creation entirely suggests the fundamental relationship of every creature in
the created world. Aldo Leopold, an American environmentalist also used the
term ‘land community’ and biotic community’ which indicate the vital importance
of the complex, organic interdependence of soil, water, vegetation and wildlife
wherein we humans belong also.[18]
And what is important here in this image is the interdependence of humanity and
all other creatures that the Hebrew Bible also affirms visualizing a
theocentric community of creatures.[19]
For Wendell Berry, another American
environmental activist also speaks of humanity as “creature of God, members of the holy community of creation.[20]”
This is somehow a recognition of the membership of all the created beings in
the world at the same time humanity’s fundamental relationship with the created
world. Humans and non-humans are members of the vast community of the creation
of God, “sharing the same earth, affected
by the processes of the earth, affecting the processes that affect each other,
with common interest in life and flourishing, with the common end of glorifying
God.[21]”
This
again simply means the interconnectedness of the members of the creations.
Further, each created being has a role to perform in this community of
creation. This suggests that humanity cannot be lost and the dignity will not
also be lost in this vast community. There is a great diversity of roles which
entails more on cooperation, not fierce competition, as to Darwin’s emphasis of
the ‘survival of the fittest.[22]’
In addition, as there is a greater call of cooperation with the community of
creations, it is not to deny the human exceptional intelligence, a power that
we have. However, this power should not be interpreted that humans are already
all-powerful and that every created being will be under human’s complete
dominion. Humans are far from being omnipotent. The rest of the created world
could fully exist and live on without humans as they were billions of years ago
before the appearance of human life.
That is why, we as humans must be
more aware of our capacities and abilities on how we could contribute to the
betterment of the community of creation. We are to be vigilant actually of our
tendency of having an illusory aspiration to become omnipotent. This tendency
reinforced by our anthropocentric approach to the world only duped us in
creating sophisticated technological and industrial advancement which turned
out to trigger unforeseen damage to the community. Consequently, by realising
our own giftedness as humans and recognizing our membership in the community of
creation it will enable us to cast off any illusory dream to become the most
powerful creature in the world. This will further make us realize that we as
humans have the power instead of taking care our community and treating others as
part of God’s magnificent creation. Indeed, we have the power to nurture and to
make our fellow created beings flourishing and in return we will be also and as
one, we are able to participate in God’s creative action in the world.
After all, we as humans can only
communicate verbally with our fellow human beings. It is left to us that as
particular Christian community, this kind of consciousness be reinvigorated
into our lives. Through our liturgical life, in the celebrations of the liturgy
and in the proclamation of the Word, a sincere and true longing to be in
communion with the rest of the created world should at least be manifested. And
that with hopefulness, what we have shared in our liturgical life as Christians
be transformed into practice in our daily lives, in our homes, workplaces and
neighbourhoods.
The Practical Values and Purposes
There
are significant things that will be contributed by this image of the community of creation that since this
image affirms the intrinsic unity and relationship of all creatures, this will
more promote and develop the “greening of Christianity”. Hence, the following
are the possible contributions of this image to the said mega-trend.
One of the issues of the mega-trend
is a clear and profound theology of the environment. Through this image, it
calls and leans towards a deeper theological trajectory of the theology of the
environment. We are not actually starting from zero since there is a
significant number of theologians already who are venturing into this theology.
What the church needs to do is more appreciation and affirmation of this
theology as fundamental also to our faith.
Accordingly, this will allow the
church to have a clear and solid standpoint regarding the ecological crisis
faced by the earth community. As a church, we are not to turn a blind eye in
the face of this pressing and alarming ecological crisis which entirely affect
the whole human community. Now as a church this is more of a calling in today’s
context to see and relate with the world in a wider and inclusive perspective.
Hence, a strong social teaching on ecology with a teeth has to be formulated.
For this reason, this is will bring
the church into a consciousness and into practical steps for the preservation
of the environment – after all, the whole earth community that basically
includes humans. This preservation must always be looked at also vis-à-vis the
theology of creation not just for a mere economic interest. Relating with the
environment at the perspective of economic interest will bring us again into a
human exclusivist self-interest. Hence, preservation must always be in a wider
context for the whole creation and for the generations that are to come and
thus towards also the eschatological aspect of the whole created world.
Most importantly, the church has to reclaim its
prophetic role in naming the injustices done to the environment and in the
whole of creation. The church has to stand and to pinpoint principles, human
works and interests that denied the preservation of nature and the holistic
development of the created world. The church should also be prophetic in the
face of justifying development and progress of human culture as the principle
of plundering the resources of the earth. Nevertheless, this kind of culture deprived,
abused and displaced thousands of people that resulted to hunger, poor and
unjust access to earth’s resources and deprivation of basic human rights which
ultimately results to death. Moreover, this resulted to unalterable and
unrepairable damage to the environment which also leads to the extinction of
many species and catastrophic natural disasters. But unless, the church is to
profess a community of creation that
respects and loves everything that is on earth, the massive degradation of all
aspects of life that God created out of sheer love and creative grace will be
unredeemable, then the church remains indifferent and alien to “the creation’s
groaning and agony” (Rom. 8: 22). This is surely not a sign of being a church,
a Body of Christ and a People of God. We are to be a church that sees and
recognizes the divine in this vast creation as “God saw every created being he
had made, very good (Gen. 1: 31).” And ultimately, a community that in hope
awaits the fulfilment of the cosmic Christ for “a new heaven and a new earth
(Rev. 21:1).”
[1] He
is an American journalist of Boston Globe serving as an associate editor especialzing
in news particularly about the Catholic Church.
[2]
John Allen, National Catholic Reporter,
“The Top Five 'Missing Mega-Trends' Shaping Catholicismthe Top Five 'Missing
Mega-Trends' Shaping Catholicism”, published on 26 December 2006 < http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2007/01_02/2006_12_28_AllenJr_TheTop.htm>
accessed on January 10, 2014.
[3]
John L. Allen Jr., The ‘Greening’ of the Institutional Christianity, December
15, 2006, National Catholic Reporter,
http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/greening-institutional-christianity,
(Accessed on March 10, 2014).
[4]
Sean McDonagh, The Greening of the Church,
(New York: Orbis Books,1990), 175.
[5]
Avery Dulles, SJ, The Models of the
Church, (New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1974), 45-46.
[6]
Ibid., 51.
[7] Ibid.,
55-57.
[8]
Ibid., 49.
[9]
Denis Edwards, ed., Earth Revealing –
Earth Healing: Ecology and Christian Theology, (Minnesota: The Liturgical
Press, 2001), 48.
[10]
Richard Bauckham, The Bible and Ecology:
Rediscovering the Community of Creation, (Texas: Baylor University Press,
2010), 64.
[11]
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis 34 as qouted
by Donal Dorr, Option for the Poor and
for the Earth: Catholic Social Teaching, (Philippines: Claretian
Publications, 2013), 416.
[12]
Dorr, Option for the Poor and for the
Earth: Catholic Social Teaching, 435.
[13]
Edwards, ed., Earth Revealing – Earth
Healing: Ecology and Christian Theology, 51.
[14]
Water Kasper, The God of Jesus Christ, (London:
SCM, 1983) 227 qouted by Edwards, ed., Earth
Revealing – Earth Healing: Ecology and Christian Theology, 51.
[15]
Prisco Cajes, OFM, Anitism and Perichoresis:
Towards A Filipino Christian Eco-Theology of Nature¸ (Philippines: Mersen
Graphics Center, 2002), 124.
[16]
Edwards, ed., Earth Revealing – Earth
Healing: Ecology and Christian Theology, 412.
[17]
Bauckham, The Bible and Ecology:
Rediscovering the Community of Creation, 87. And also mentioned by Dorr, Option for the Poor and for the Earth:
Catholic Social Teaching, 433.
[18]
Bauckham, The Bible and Ecology:
Rediscovering the Community of Creation, 87
[19]
Ibid., 88.
[20]
Ibid., 88.
[21]
Directly quoted from Bauckham, The Bible
and Ecology: Rediscovering the Community of Creation, 88.
[22]
Ibid., 89.
