Trinity Journal 19 NS (1998) 139-162
Copyright
© 1998 by Trinity Journal, cited with permission.
TRINJ 19 NS
(1998) 139-162
THE FOUR MOST
IMPORTANT
BIBLICAL PASSAGES
FOR A
CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENTALISM
MICHAEL A. BULLMORE*
RIBBLESDALE
EARTH, sweet Earth, sweet landscape, with leaves throng
And louched low grass, heaven that dost appeal
To, with no tongue to plead, no heart to
feel;
That canst but only be, but dost that
long--
Thou canst but be,
but that thou well dost; strong
Thy plea with him
who dealt, nay does now deal,
Thy lovely dale down thus and thus bids
reel
Thy river, and o'er gives all to rack or
wrong.
And what is Earth's
eye, tongue, or heart else, where
Else, but in dear
and dogged man?--Ah, the heir
To his own selfbent so bound, so tied to his turn,
To thriftless reave both our rich round world bare
And none reck of
world after, this bids wear
Earth
brows of such care, care and dear concern.
--Gerard Manley
Hopkins (1844-1889)
I. INTRODUCTION
In the upper reaches of
small town
of
evangelically based education center for promoting a Christian
environmental stewardship. The philosophy of the Au Sable Institute
reads in
part as follows:
The Board, faculty, and staff of the Au
Sable Institute confess that
God is owner of all. Humankind is not the
owner of that over
which it has
authority. Human authority is more that of trustee
than owner. The
scope of this trust is global. Since all creatures
depend on the
earth for life, health and fulfillment, stewardship is
*Michael A. Bullmore is Associate Professor of Homiletics and Practical
Theology
at
140 TRINITY JOURNAL
the responsible
use and care of creation. This is a clear and repeated
testimony of Scripture.1
It is the
purpose of this article to focus exclusively on this clear and
repeated
biblical testimony. While previous articles in this series
have
attended to scientific, political, and historical dimensions of the
environmentalism issue there has been as yet no closely focused
examination of
biblical material on the issue in this venue.2
It is not as though no biblical attention
has been paid elsewhere.
There is an
encouraging recent growth in both the amount and the
quality of
writing addressing environmentalism from a more purely
scriptural
perspective.3 Much of this material, however, has arrived
in the
form of book-length treatments or collections of essays each
dedicated to
various parts of the biblical witness. It is our belief that
it will
prove useful to Christian teachers, and especially pastors, to
have a
more compact and more easily accessed treatment of the most
essential
biblical materials. Hence our focus on the "most
significant"
passages.
In their article "Evangelicals and
Environmentalism: Past,
Present, and
Future," Grizzle, Rothrock, and Barrett share
the results
1As quoted
in W. Granberg-Michaelson, ed., Tending the
Garden: Essays on the
Gospel and the Earth
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) vii. The
present author has no
formal
connection with the Au Sable Institute.
2Some may
argue that the sequence here is backwards. In his excellent earlier
article
"Bridging the Gap: Christian Environmental Stewardship and Public
Environmental Policy" (Trinity Journal 18NS [1997]), F. Van
Dyke speaks of writings
which focus primarily on the
biblical and theological dimensions of environmental
stewardship as a
"constructive first step" (p. 142). A few pages later he adds,
"As
Christian witness in environmental stewardship has matured beyond
merely
articulating what
the Bible and Christian tradition say about the care of God's
creation, so
this maturity has taken tangible form on many fronts. These have
included the
production of writings by Christians with deliberate implications for
environmental
policy" (p. 150). Late in his article and as something of a thesis, Van
Dyke states, "Ultimately, the reason and logic of the
Christian position must be based
not on biblical data only,
but on sound and original study, supported by the Christian
community, of
the basic properties and behaviors of ecosystems, and by a clear and
first-hand
understanding of the technical application of management practices toward
the solution of
environmental problems" (p. 168). Clearly Van Dyke's concern is with
public
policy, and so I understand his reference to a "Christian position"
to be a
"position" assumed in the
process of formulating public policy and encouraging
specific
public action. Given this understanding, I agree with his thesis and applaud
its intent. But leadership
in such public thought and action is the responsibility of
relatively few
people. For Christians more broadly considered whose responsibility it
is to think and behave in
a Christian manner, the "reason and logic" of their Christian
position
(i.e., world view) must be unapologetically grounded in biblical data only
and simply find
corroboration in professional scientific study. Thus our
present effort.
3See, for
example, Granberg-Michaelson, Tending the Garden;
C. B. DeWitt, ed.,
The Environment and the Christian: What Can We Learn from the New
Testament? (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1991); F. Van Dyke, D. C. Mahan, J. K. Sheldon, and
R. H. Brand,
Redeeming Creation: The Biblical Basis for Environmental
Stewardship (
InterVarsity, 1996). Mention should also be made in this
connection of the charming
pictorial
booklet, ideal for family use, The
Teaching About the Creation (Colorado
Springs: International Bible Society, 1992).
BULLMORE:
CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENTALISM 141
of a
national survey of pastors in which the participants were asked,
"What
are the most important obstacles to further development of an
effective
philosophy of creation that involves appropriate
environmental concern and action by evangelicals?" The most cited
"obstacle" (identified by well over half the
participants) was "the
lack of
teaching and preaching on the environment, particularly the
failure to
develop a robust theology of the creation."4 This lament is
voiced
repeatedly by those committed to getting a responsible
Christian
presence felt in our society as it addresses issues of
environmental concern.5
It is therefore the intention of this
article to be something of a
primer for
pastors and teachers who have a desire to include as a
part of
their larger ministry of public instruction and
encouragement, truth concerning mankind's responsibility before
God toward
his creation (a desire we would want to encourage in all
pastors and
teachers) but who to date have not had the opportunity
adequately to
study and process the potentially overwhelming
amount of
material dedicated to the subject. In short, this article
gathers and
begins to operationalize the foundational biblical
thought
necessary for a faithful Christian proclamation regarding the
environment.
At this point it may be necessary to
address a fundamental
question. Why
is it important to preach and teach this? Shouldn't we
concentrate our
limited time on the more pressing concerns of the
gospel and
Christian life? While the "environmental issue" is one of
particularly poignant current concern about which Christians should
be able
to think and speak from within a Christian perspective, if for
no
other reason to engage in potentially productive discussion, if it is
considered
separately, as some interesting topic, it does pale in
comparison to
the importance of other Christian categories. It is only
when it
is seen as of a piece with our larger responsibility before God
that it
assumes the place of something worthy of our time and
careful
consideration. A piece of history from the environmentalism
debate will
be instructive for us here.
Soon after the emergence of
"environmentalism" as a movement,
accusations were
leveled against Christianity, blaming it for the
current
ecological crisis.6 As a Christian voice began to be raised on
the
issue of environmentalism, much time was spent refuting these
accusations. It
now appears that those accusations, at least in some
scholarly
quarters, are being retracted. However, at least some
Christian
writers were willing to own some blame. In response to the
attempt by
some Christian writers to place the blame at the feet of
4R. E.
Grizzle, P. E. Rothrock, and C. B. Barrett,
"Evangelicals and
Environmentalism: Past, Present and
Future," Trinity Journal 19NS (1998) 21-2.
5See,
for another example, Van Dyke, et al., Redeeming Creation, 148, 175-6.
6Most
notably, though by no means exclusively, by L. White Jr., "The Historical
Roots of Our Ecological Crisis," Science 155 (
obligatory
reference to this article in virtually every Christian treatment of the issue.
142 TRINITY
JOURNAL
irresponsible Christians in order to protect Christianity as a set of
ideas,
James Nash insisted,
It will not do to draw
a neat distinction between Christianity and
Christendom, between
the faith itself and perversions of it by its
practitioners.
That distinction may be formally or logically true, as I
agree, but it is
facile and unconvincing when applied to history. We
cannot
so easily distinguish between the faith and the faithful.7
Despite Nash's warning, my attempt in what
follows is to focus
on
"the faith" as set forth in the Scriptures, independent of its
practice by
Christians. By so doing I am seeking to contribute to a
more
faithful expression of true Christianity by those who call
themselves
Christian. The fact that many Christians have become
captive to a
world view that unduly elevates economic progress
makes it
absolutely necessary for Christian pastors and teachers to
address the
matter head-on-and for better or worse the issue of
environmental stewardship is integrally involved in this clash of
world
views. Thus, preaching and teaching a Christian
environmentalism can, in our day, play a significant role in
facilitating the movement of people away from lives of self-interest
and
toward an earnest devotion to a Christian way of life, and must
occupy a
place in the total teaching of Christians to pursue and
honor the
accomplishment of the purposes of God in his earth. The
mandate to
care for the earth, a mandate fundamental to man's being
and
seminal in his relationship to God, has not been abrogated.
Environmental
stewardship is therefore a matter of both Christian
obedience and
Christian piety. And, it is our confidence that a clear
and
straightforward teaching is presented in Scripture upon which
morally
responsible teaching and action can be based.8
Before we look at the biblical passages
chosen it may be helpful
to
speak a word regarding the selection process. There is an almost
inexhaustible number of passages which might be treated in
connection with
a discussion of a Christian environmentalism. The
Psalms alone
are filled with references to God as Creator and in
relationship to his creation. The Prophets contain repeated references
to the
network of issues related to justice and human greed, a major
one
being that of land use. Many biblical writers, in both Old
Testament and
New, speak with an eye toward a future in which the
transformation of creation figures largely. However, within this
abundance, a
fairly well-defined canon of Scriptures emerges which
7J. Nash, Loving
Nature: Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility (
Abingdon, 1991) 72.
8That H. P. Santmire does not share this optimism is suggested by the
title of his
book The Travail of
Nature: The Ambiguous Ecological Promise of Christian Theology
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985). See
especially pp. 8-9. I am proceeding under the
conviction that
the Bible does provide clear instruction regarding our responsibility
toward
creation from which principles instructive for thought and life can be
legitimately
inferred.
BULLMORE:
CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENTALISM 143
provides,
though in basic form, a complete theology of creation.
While other
passages will be referred to in the discussion, the four
passages
selected are sufficient to the task.
II. THE FOUR BIBLICAL PASSAGES
A. Psalm
104
One might expect an attempt to articulate
a biblical Christian
environmentalism to begin with Genesis 1 and its majesterial
statements of
the foundational truth that God is the Creator. While
that
truth deserves pride of place, we will use Psalm 104 to highlight
it. For
in this psalm we find not only the assertion of the truth that
God created
the world but also the expression of corollary truths
such that
the psalm presents a more fully developed picture of the
relationship that exists between God and creation. Thus it brings the
reader to a
more heightened awareness of the response appropriate
to the
foundational truth it declares.9 It might even be argued that if
one had
to choose but one passage to support a Christian
environmentalism it should be this psalm; and if one had to choose
but one
verse it would be Ps 104:24. "How many are your works, O
Lord! In
wisdom you made them all; the earth is full of your
creatures."
The contribution of Psalm 104 might be
summarized as follows:
1. God created the earth and all things in
it, and he
continues to
sustain the earth and all things in it by the
loving
exercise of his sovereign power.
2. The earth and all things in it belong
to God by virtue of
his creative
work, and all things find their reason for
being
fundamentally in relation to him.
3. The earth and all things in it were
created perfectly--
each creature
in itself and the entire creation in its
interrelatedness.
4.
Even after the entrance of sin into the created order this
perfection
still shines through so as to be perceivable by
man. Thus,
creation continually bears witness to the
perfections
of God and promotes in man praise toward
God.
While the foundational truth of God's
creative work operates as
an
underlying assumption throughout most of Psalm 104, there are a
few
places where the psalmist explicitly asserts it (e.g., vv. 5-6), and
9There is a
fairly obvious structural parallel between Psalm 104 and the creation
account in
Genesis 1. This parallelism supports our decision, for it argues that Psalm
104 is a self-conscious attempt to interpret and flesh out the
Genesis account. For an
analysis of
this parallel, see, for example, D. Kidner, Psalms
(
InterVarsity, 1975) 368.
144 TRINITY JOURNAL
at a
moment of culmination in the psalm he breaks out with the
passionate
declaration to God, "Thou hast made. . ." (v.
24). Clearly,
the
heavens and earth exist as a result of the exercise of God's
sovereign
creativity. The unique emphasis of this psalm, however, is
on
God's sustenance of his creation. "He makes springs pour
water. . .
. He waters the mountains. . . . He makes grass grow. . . .
The trees of the Lord are well watered" (vv. 10, 13, 14, 16). And after
providing a
representative cataloging of some animal denizens of
forest,
mountain, badlands, and sea, the psalmist summarizes,
"These all look to you to give them their food at the proper
time" (v.
27). All
creatures are completely dependent on God. When God
provides, his
creatures are satisfied (v. 28). When he "hides his face,"
they are
terrified (v. 29). When God sends his "Spirit," there is new
life (v.
30). When he takes breath away, life ceases (v. 29). Here is a
significant
extension of the Genesis account. Yes, creation exists only
because it
was called into existence by God. But it continues to exist
only
because of the continuous care of its Creator.
Second, growing out of this primary claim
of the text is the
implication of theocentricity in creation. By virtue of having been
created by
God, all creatures belong to him. They are, says our
psalmist,
"your possessions" (v. 24); "his works" (v. 31).
"The earth is
the Lord's,
and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; for
he
founded it upon the seas and established it upon the waters" (Ps
24:1-2;
emphasis added). But not only have all creatures been created
by God,
they have been created for God as well, and thus they find
their
primary reason for being with reference to him. This is a point
of no
small significance in the current discussion regarding
environmentalism.
That God finds pleasure in his creation is
a consistent testimony
of
Scripture. It is this that motivates the psalmist's desire, "May the
Lord rejoice in his works" (v. 31). But can it be said that
this pleasure
of God
in his non-human creatures is a sufficient explanation for
their
being? It is one thing to find pleasure in something that exists.
It is
another thing to say a thing exists for that reason.
There is no question that creation exists,
at least in part, for the
purpose of
nourishing mankind. "He makes. . . plants for man
to
cultivate-bringing forth food from the earth: wine that gladdens the
heart of
man, oil to make his face shine, and bread that sustains his
heart"
(vv. 14-15). But does this reference to man exhaust the non-
human
creatures' reason for being? Or, to ask it positively, does non-
human
creation find any reason for being, independent of man?
Psalm 104
suggests it does. Before we examine that suggestion,
however, it
will prove useful to consider the opposing position.
Representative of this position is Thomas Sieger Derr, who
willingly
describes himself as an "unreconstructed"
anthropocentrist.10 Derr is
positioning himself vis-a-vis the
10T. S. Derr, J. A. Nash, and R. J. Neuhaus, Environmental Ethics and Christian
Humanism (Nashville: Abingdon,
1996) 17.
BULLMORE:
CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENTALISM 145
biocentrism
which dominates much of secular environmentalism
and
which holds "nature" or "the life process" as the primary
value.
Against
this, Derr is reasserting the conviction that man is
decidedly
above
nature and that nature exists to sustain human life.11 As a
"Christian"
humanist Derr is quick to add that man is made for
God
but he
is adamant ("unrepentant" he says) in his anthropocentrism.
Man's needs
are a sufficient explanation for the existence of non-
human
creation.12
While Derr, and
others like him, are right in distancing
themselves from
the biocentrism of secular environmentalism for
explicitly
religious reasons, their mistake is in not distancing
themselves far
enough. Derr would no doubt affirm a theocentric
world
view, but within that world view, I would argue, there needs
to be a
theocentric view of non-human creation.13
Nature certainly
was made
with man in mind but man's needs are an insufficient
frame of
reference entirely to explain creation.14 Only God can
supply such
a frame of reference.
Our psalm, along with other passages (Job
38-41 in particular),
speak to
the fact that creation does not exist solely for the sake of
man. In
his speech to Job, God clearly implies that some creatures
exist
simply for his own delight.
Look at the behemoth,
which
I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength he has in his loins,
what
power in the muscles of his belly!
His tail sways
like a cedar;
The sinews of his thighs are
close-knit.
His bones are
tubes of bronze,
His limbs
like rods of iron.
He ranks first among
the works of God.
(Job 40:15-19)
While God may not be chuckling gleefully
as he provides this
description, it
is evident that he is taking great delight in a prize
11Ibid.,
23-8.
12A
virtually identical stance is taken by E. C. Beisner
in the article which
appeared
earlier in this series, "Imago Dei and the Population Debate,"
Trinity Journal
18NS (1997) 173- 97.
13Derr does
acknowledge the possibility of some value in creation beyond
human nourishment, but he is
unwilling to speculate as to exactly what that value is,
"not being privy to the mind of
God" (Environmental Ethics, 140, cf., p. 23). I will argue
that, because of the
presence of certain passages in our Bibles, it is not necessary to
speculate.
14One might
be more attracted to this position if by "man's needs" was meant
more than just food and
shelter. Certainly man has a need to have his soul uplifted,
and we know that God
created the heavens and the earth in part to achieve that very
purpose (see
Psalms 8 and 19). However, even with this expanded definition of
human need, it remains an
inadequate frame of reference satisfactorily to explain the
reason for
creation's existence.
146 TRINITY
JOURNAL
creation and
is happy to point out "how utterly and awesomely
useless (to
us) are some of the creatures he has made."15 After
extending his
point by means of a similar description of "leviathan"
(41:1-10),
God emphatically declares, "Who has a claim against me
that I
must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me" (41:11;
emphasis
added). Against Job's presumption God is graciously
offering the
reminder that he does not owe man anything.
While
somewhat less dramatically, our psalm makes a similar
point