Bonaventure for Environmentalists

Last updated on: June 15, 2012 at 12:22 am by Matthew Tan

Bonaventure for Environmentalists 2012-06-15T00:22:00+10:00 Matthew Tan

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In a previous post, reference was made to the necessity for the Christian to be concerned for the environment, whilst at the same time being cautious of not buying into the anthropophobic premises of the most predominant strands of environmentalism. That post suggested that the key lay in finding a new form of anthropocentrism, a picture of the environment with humanity at its centre, which at the same time resists pitting a voraciously consumerist humanity against an innocent and vulnerable planet. To get past this tension, the notion of the stewardship of man is very often put forward by Christian greens as the solution to keeping that anthropocentrist vision of the environment. Yet, the question remains: what is the content of stewardship? Without any positive content, stewardship becomes a slippery term that can run the risk of affirming that very consumerist notion of anthropocentrism.

A possible way forward can be gleaned with a read of Illa Delio’s book Simply Bonaventure, a chapter of which looks into the Trinitarian theology of the 12th century Doctor of the Church. For Bonaventure, Delio suggests, the outpouring of the Trinity within creation leaves a mark of the Godhead within each and every creature, both animate and inanimate. There is thus a mark of the holy in every creature, but this sacralisation is done so in a way that resists the pantheism that is characteristic of much of today’s environmentalism. This is so for two reasons. First, their sacralisation comes not of themselves, but by their relationship with the Triune God. Secondly, rather than remain as they are, all creatures have within them a pull towards the Godhead that made them, to return to the source from whence they sprung forth. In so doing, each creature undergoes a process of perfection.

The twist to this comes as a result of Bonaventure’s platonic premises (which will have to be the subject of another post). Bonaventure writes that each creature undergoes this process of perfection not of their own volition, but by a process of following “models”, higher forms of creatureliness that are more advanced in the path towards the return to God. Bonaventure sees this in the accounts of creation where more and more complex lifeforms are created with each passing day. In addition, Bonaventure sees in each creature a world of potential for transformation to other lifeforms (a principle he calls hylomorphism). This notion of following models of perfection suggests a profound harmony within creation, and thus a set order and telos – namely the Triune God.

However, creation’s return to God can only be properly modeled by a creature that is a composite of material and spiritual nature, and which returns to God by its own free will rather than by instinct. For Bonaventure, only humanity can lead this return to God, and this is the reason why Bonaventure considers humanity as the center of creation. Humanity is given the charge of all of creation to lead that creation’s return into the Trinitarian economy.

Thus, in the writings of Bonaventure, humanity retains his privileged position in the order of creation. At the same time, however, that privileged position is qualified by his awareness of all creature’s destination towards the Triune God and the need for that universe’s perfection. This is an anthropocentrism thus that is rooted in the worship of God rather than the worship of man (a state of sin where humans becomes like gods, as the book of Genesis states). It is an environmentalism that is Eucharistic, for as Catherine Pickstock reminds us, the Eucharist dedicates to God not just bread and wine, but all the materials that are used in their making – wood, stone, wax, plants and flesh. This Eucharistic element is what prevents the confusion between the perfection of Creation in its Godward pilgrimage, and the subjugation of creation to satisfy humanity’s appetites.

Previous Post

June 12, 2012

The Politics of the Resurrection: A View from John Howard Yoder

Next Post

June 18, 2012 Upcoming Engagements: On the Liberal Arts, Dignity, New Media and Health Insurance

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category architecture art Augustine Belloc Benedict XVI bible blogs books bourgeois Christianity Campion College Chesterton Christianisation Church and Culture Church Fathers citizen conference conservative consumer culture cybernetics Desert Fathers discipleship distributism drinking ecclesiology economics education environment Evagrius of Pontus formation Foucault George Weigel Girard Graham Ward http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post interfaith Jacques Ellul John Chrysostom Julia Kristeva Latin liturgy mall marriage monasticism Music Narrative news philosophy polis politics pop culture postmodern city postsecular prayer prostestant quote Quotes Radical Orthodoxy resources Rome Rule of St. Benedict saint Saints secular sociology theological anthropology theology transcendance Uncategorized videos William Cavanaugh

Select a Month December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 October 2009 February 2008 December 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What foreign power destroyed Jerusalem, ending the kingdom of Judah?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Egypt Assyria Persia Babylon