Christianity and Environmentalism

Last updated on: October 22, 2021 at 4:50 pm by Guest Contributor

Christianity and Environmentalism 2021-10-22T16:50:21+00:00 Guest Contributor

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.

By Thomas M. Doran

What are Christians to make of the big environmental questions in 2021: climate change, deforestation and habitat loss, water quality and water shortages, the extinction of species, fossil fuels?

In Laudato si (Item 14), Pope Francis states, “I urgently appeal, then, for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our planet. We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all. The worldwide ecological movement has already made considerable progress and led to the establishment of numerous organizations committed to raising awareness of these challenges. Regrettably, many efforts to seek concrete solutions to the environmental crisis have proved ineffective, not only because of powerful opposition but also because of a more general lack of interest. Obstructionist attitudes, even on the part of believers, can range from denial of the problem to indifference, nonchalant resignation or blind confidence in technical solutions. We require a new and universal solidarity…All of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents.”

Conclusions about the status of the environment and climate—threats, degradation, progress, rely on science, on measurable evidence, and the more independent evidence the more reliable the conclusions. Ironically, many of those who label opponents “science deniers” do not themselves understand the science. Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. writes about Steven Koonin, a theoretical physicist who was chief scientist of President Obama’s Energy Department and taught at Caltech for nearly three decades (“How a Physicist Became a Climate Truth Teller,” Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. interview with Steven Koonin, Wall Street Journal, April 2021). According to Jenkins, Mr. Koonin’s new book “argues not against current climate science but that what the media and politicians and activists say about climate science has drifted so far out of touch with the actual science as to be absurdly, demonstrably false.”

On many occasions, scientists—experts—have reached a consensus on something that was subsequently demonstrated to be incomplete or false. Nobel prize-winning physicist, Brian Josephson, adopted the motto of the Royal Society, which he paraphrased as “Take nobody’s word for it.” (Andrew May’s profile of Brian Josephson, “30-Second Quantum Theory: The 50 Most Thought-Provoking Quantum Concepts”, Metro Books, 2017). Psychologist, neuroscientist, and biologist, John Staddon, puts it this way: “Science is strengthened not by praise but by criticism…Checking the truth of something should come well before getting agitated about it.” (“Science Needs Criticism, Not Cheerleading,” J. Peter Zane’s interview with John Staddon, Wall Street Journal, February 2021). Many impactful scientific advancements were made by people who challenged the prevailing scientific consensus, including Louis Pasteur, Marie Curie, Albert Einstein, and Werner Heisenberg. One of the most important things a scientist can learn is when to say, “I don’t know.”

In “The Scarcity Fallacy: The World’s Resources Aren’t Running Out” (Wall Street Journal, April 2014), zoologist/science writer Matt Ridley identifies instances when ecologists predicted the world’s resources would run out, though technological innovation has since broken through those limits again and again, including predictions of worldwide famine that haven’t occurred because of the extensive agricultural innovations (Green Revolution) of Norman Borlaug and others. Against the evidence of history, many believe that if we can’t solve a problem today, then it will still be a problem next year and forever. Dire predictions and forecasts are often based on this misconception. This is not to say we should have “blind confidence in technical solutions,” as Pope Francis warns, but we should not commit the opposite error of assuming little or no innovation in the future.

On the evidence, America’s environment is cleaner than it’s been for over 100 years. In the 19th century and into the 1920s, waterborne diseases (pathogens) annually sickened thousands in American cities. Today, waterborne pathogens have been practically eradicated in the United States, to such an extent that most Americans take safe drinking water for granted.

Because we now measure pollutants in dramatically smaller amounts than a generation ago, many think we are releasing more pollutants. On the contrary, the quality of treated wastewater discharged to rivers and lakes has been steadily improving. Some wastewater treatment plants now produce water of higher quality than their receiving streams. As to air quality, combustion processes are more efficient, with fewer polluting products of combustion and better air pollution abatement technology.

Concerning habitats, a 2010 Detroit News article authored by Jim Lynch reported: “After decades of struggling to overcome the Detroit River’s polluted past, a variety of fish and bird species have re-established themselves in the watershed. The budding osprey population is joined by increasing numbers of walleye, lake sturgeon and whitefish as well as bird species like the bald eagle and peregrine falcon.” A Detroit Zoo plaque reads: “After a 150-plus year absence, in 2008, beavers were once again spotted living in the Detroit River.”

The Christian tradition insists that technological advancement should not be an end in itself but ought to be a means for uplifting humankind and furthering the stewardship of the natural world. Nonetheless, technological innovation means we can make drinking water from sewage if the psychological barrier could be surmounted (just one citation among many—“As ‘Yuck Factor’ Subsides, Treated Wastewater Flows from Taps,” Felicity Barringer, New York Times, 2012), and we could mitigate the western states’ droughts and wildfires if a zero-environmental-risk mindset could be surmounted by treating ocean water and conveying the water inland for additional treatment to meet varying needs—drinking water, wildfire fighting, irrigation. Today, de-salting technologies require less energy and are less costly to build than a generation ago.

Where have these environmental improvements most often occurred? In countries with participative governments, where human rights (including religious freedom) are enshrined in law, where most people have basic needs met and exceeded, and with innovating free markets—not in command and control or oppressive countries.

For a vocal and visible element in the environmental movement, we live in a universe of quarks and energy devoid of God, where truth is self-defined or culturally defined, and environmentalism is a moral lodestone where facts, data, and evidence are of secondary concern. For those who embrace this ideology, man should have no more legal or ethical standing (and maybe less) than any other living organism; in short, a materialistic interpretation of the relationship between man and the planet.

In contrast, the Hebrew Book of Genesis (Chapter 1) relates that after each “day” of creation “God saw how good it was”, and after the sixth day when human beings were created, “God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good.”

Certainly, there are environmental issues of concern today, even in a cleaner America and other cleaner countries: invasive species, oil and chemical spills, failing and leaking infrastructure, ecological backsliding, and the human impact on Earth’s climate, but considering our track record in the past century, these threats are solvable or improvable. The science surrounding the environment and climate is so dense that it’s easy to be misled about whether we’re moving forward or backward. We should attempt to separate legitimate science from ideological noise and organizational self-interest—not an easy task these days. While the Christian Bible (Genesis, Chapter 1) tells us the human race was granted dominion over the Earth, we are also required to be good and faithful stewards of this world and its resources because all creation belongs to the Lord (Psalm 148).

Previous Post

May 20, 2021

How Religious Freedom Benefits the Black Church

Next Post

October 29, 2021 The Real (Spiritual) Problem with the Texas Abortion Ban

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advent Author Interviews Battle Over the Body and Blood of Christ Bearing Beauty Book Reviews Christian Education christian spirituallity christianity Christmas Church Church Leadership Contemplation Creation Care Death and Dying Death Penalty Disruptive Change Disruptors Series Easter Education Evolution and Faith Future of Progressive Christianity Gun Violence Health & Wellness Holy Week Interfaith Israel-Palestine Leading Differently Lent LGBTQ Living with Cancer Meditations on the Cross Mental Illness millennials Mimetic Mondays Monday Meditations Movie Reviews New Monasticism Pando Populus Parenting Patheos 10+1 Q&A Series PC(USA) Politics Pop Culture Practical Theology Series Prayer progressive christian Race Relations Reformation religion Religion and Politics Religion in America Rethink Church Social Justice Spirituality Spirituality of the Body Stump a Scholar Technology and Faith Thanksgiving Theodicy Trust Me Church Uncategorized Why I'm Still Christian Youth Ministry

Select a Month December 2025 April 2025 January 2025 September 2023 September 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 November 2021 October 2021 May 2021 February 2021 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 June 2020 May 2020 March 2020 June 2019 March 2019 January 2019 June 2018 May 2018 April 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 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What happened when the Philistines captured the Ark of the Covenant?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The Jordan parted The sun stood still Fire rained from heaven Dagon's idol fell