I was having a conversation at my church with a couple of friends on a topic that I had never really taken seriously. It is a topic that I feel politics drive our theological stance more than the other way around. It is the topic of environmentalism, particularly global warming. In our conversation I heard three distinct points that all had theological ramifications that, I think, none of us ultimately would be willing to accept.
First of all, you had an older man who is a conservative politically and theologically. He clearly stated that global warming is a hoax, and if it at all was true, man is by no means causing it. “Cows harm the environment much more than humans!” he would say. I sat there wondering more and more what this line of thought leads to and I found the end was scary to me. If global warming is true (I don’t know either way honestly), his view still does not excuse humanity. If we are just one drop in the huge ocean, we are still part of the ocean and we are still responsible for what we have done.
The second man was younger, and conservative just like the first man, but he is open-minded. He is a searcher. “One volcano erupting is way worse for the environment than anything we do. Nature is already harming itself.” I completely agree with that. Tornadoes just ravaged my whole area last week. Nature is not kind to itself (or God is not kind to nature). But still, does that excuse how we treat nature? Let me put it another way, does that excuse how we treat creation?
In the last corner of this triangle, I was sitting there doing my normal thing: playing devil’s advocate (not my greatest quality, ha). I would say I am a moderate politically and conservative theologically. In the conversation I kept bringing back the point I made above: but are we not responsible with how we treat creation? “We are told to subdue and have dominion!” I heard back. “We are also commanded to cultivate and keep it, which means to take care of it,” I said right back. We were at a standstill.
Joseph Soloveitchik, in his book The Lonely Man of Faith, talks about the two Adams: the one commanded to subdue in Genesis chapter one and the one commanded to cultivate in chapter two. The first Adam is the man of technological advancement and the second one the man of faith. He claims both are commanded of God – we are called to be creative with the world as well as to just enjoy and sustain the world given to us. He argues that God wants us to live in this tension of practicality and sanctity.
And there we were yesterday, fighting the tension. Practically we have built our entire western lifestyle on fossil fuels. It works quite well! However, unlike my older friend suggested, the global warming idea is not about attacking the American lifestyle – let us not be so caught up in it that we can’t conceive our opposition as being equally sincere as ourselves. The people trying to stop global warming are really trying to save whales, ecosystems, and climates. They are trying to cultivate and keep this earth; why are so many conservative Christians so angry about this? Even if they are wrong, are they not trying to do something that we are all commanded to do? Or are we really just mad that they beat us to the punch and that secular science is acting more Biblically than us?
Regardless of all of this, let’s step back for a second. I mean honestly step back. Are we allowing our political affiliations to dictate our theology? In the past year I have had to ask myself this question constantly. I have gotten a lot more politically minded since I have asked this question. We get so irritated when we are forced to privatize our religion with no prayer in schools, our stance on abortion, and our stance on homosexuality. But all of a sudden when it comes to more liberal issues politically, we want our religion privatized. Whenever I talk to a conservative about governmental stance on the poor or the environment I get one of two statements: “The poor is the responsibility of the church not the government,” or “Jesus was never political so we shouldn’t be either.” Both true, but if your religion shouldn’t be privatized would it not somewhat dictate you stance on these issues as well?
Listen, I don’t drive a Prius, grow my own food, or only buy organic stuff. I’m just a Christian who thinks that maybe my theology should guide my politics and not the other way around.
Image credits: cartoonstock.com, tower.com



That last sentence NAILS IT! As Christians our theology “should” guide our politics & not the other way around. Sadly, many are too busy “doing” to TAKE time to Stop & Think about which is the “cart” & which is the “horse”~which one is “leading” versus which one is “following”. Thank you SO much for making me think!
Philip, I enjoy your posts tremendously. I’ve been considering aspects of denying self vs. serving others ever since that post, and I’ve been chewing away at this one since it was posted.
This is such an interesting topic, and I think you deal with it honestly and respectfully in this post.
Good post. Your last statement should be proclaimed loud and clear for many need to hear it.
I would like to take issue with the assertion that “Jesus was not political.” That depends on your definition of “political.”
In his day and culture, the church was terribly political and he got right in their faces about it. He didn’t run for office, but he did make his opinions about the ruling officials clear.
If we really believe what we say we do, our theology should permeate our lives. That includes the way we think, the way we act, what we support and what we stand against. Governmental politics is just one platform through which we can do that.
Maybe it would be more accurate for people with this view to say, “Jesus did not have political agenda”? I agree, he talked about political things, but was only concerned with how it lined into or effected your religious life.
Great article Philip! You might be driving a Prius after Hawaii
I really appreciate your willingness to explore this environmentalism/politics topic, especially as a Christian man from the South! Living in Hawaii has made me much more aware of the environment and how humans positively and negatively impact nature. But I’m always amazed at how polarizing this topic can be for many of my Memphis Christian friends (& I’m sure others, I’m just more familiar with Memphians).
Philip, thanks for this article.
I think it is interesting how our fallenness often blinds us from hearing opponents who have a good idea. Like how both Dems and Repubs often miss each other, whether politicians or voters, because they don’t want to concede an inch to their opponent. That is the opposite of love.
Add to that an additional resistance or even attacking a good idea, like creation care, and many just look foolish.
On the issue of creation care, along with your point, I want to be mindful that we don’t let our positive politics also frame the discussion. That we call it the “environment” is political. Wendell Berry, years ago before the politicization of Gore and others, warned us about calling nature an “environment” is to separate us from nature, as if we’re a foreign object in a terrarium. It is nature, and we are part of it as nature. If our theology really drove these matters, for all of us, we’d be mindful to work hard to frame the debate more accurately, even above the political discourse.
But when we are not mindful, we must be confronted first with the politics, the power-plays, and the political baggage. Oh that we would take Scripture more seriously as a large Body helping each other pay attention before it comes to that. Then we can front-run the discourse and tend to our Father’s World.
Would be a great topic for a Soulation retreat gathering.
This would be a great topic that I think would make people think more honestly about Scripture and even the first few chapters of the Bible.
You are right, as well about Berry’s thoughts. You have to be careful not to find ourselves on either extreme here.
A very relevant topic. I would like to see you write more on this in the future, if you have it in you.:0