Coal

Rose and Andrew on Creation Care

Oct 10, 06:51 Ethics

John Rose has some good points regarding the metaphysics of Creation Care, but when it comes to pressing for “acknowledgement” at the expense of taking action on behalf of the natural world, I think it may be wiser to let go for a while. I’m sure that it’s not Rose’s intention to place one against the other; as I wrote before, discussion and action really aren’t exclusive, and there’s no reason to stop discussing metaphysics while taking steps to ensure the good health of the world we live in.

Andrew has also been thinking about these things, and returns from a conference to report:

When asking for support from churches, they [a Christian environmental organization called A Rocha] have received responses from pastors such as “We only have one life, so we ought to live it preaching the gospel.” They even have received responses indicating that since one day there will be a new earth, it really doesn’t matter what happens to this one. It is my response that this view is both ignorant and unbiblical.

Indeed, there are so many obvious flaws with those responses it’s amazing they make it past the speaker’s lips. It is an example of how a unconsidered metaphysic can provide a (in this case weak) veil justifying actions that are really completely unrelated to the metaphysic. Although I agree with Rose, I initially thought that given the prevalence of this kind of thinking, it may be wise to present the metaphysical questions only after making it clear that, indeed, the environment is worth taking care of. But then I realized that that leaves those very Christians Andrew is speaking about with a comfortable little house in which to hide, however flimsy its walls.