Protection of Creation - Joint Statement

Discussion in 'Theology and Doctrine' started by Botolph, Sep 11, 2021.

  1. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    2,529
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The Ecumenical Patriarch, the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury have issued a joint statement addressing the Environment Concerns and Issues raised by Climate Change and our response to it.

    The statement is attached and concludes:

    This is the first time that the three of us feel compelled to address together the urgency of environmental sustainability, its impact on persistent poverty, and the importance of global cooperation. Together, on behalf of our communities, we appeal to the heart and mind of every Christian, every believer and every person of good will. We pray for our leaders who will gather in Glasgow to decide the future of our planet and its people.

    Again, we recall Scripture: 'choose life, so that you and your children may live' (Dt 30:19). Choosing life means making sacrifices and exercising self-restraint.

    All of us - whoever and wherever we are - can play a part in changing our collective response to the unprecedented threat of climate change and environmental degradation.

    Caring for God's creation is a spiritual commission requiring a response of commitment. This is a critical moment. Our children's future and the future of our common home depend on it.​

    I would be interested to know what others in the forum think of this joint statement. I for one would receive it well, and feel that it is grounded in the tradition of faith and theology.
     

    Attached Files:

    Invictus likes this.
  2. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    I see nothing objectionable in there but a lot of good and Godly wisdom in it.
     
    Botolph and ZachT like this.
  3. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    I have concerns and misgivings about the emphasis being placed on temporal benefit rather than on lasting, spiritual, eternal benefit. Since when is it the goal of Christ's Body on earth to create a more utopian society? What happened to the Great Commission? The role of these three leaders should be to rally the Church to meet the spiritual needs of the lost, not to rally us to 'save the planet.'

    I'll pick out a few tidbits from the statement and comment on them.

    Accordingly, as leaders of our Churches, we call on everyone, whatever their
    belief or worldview, to endeavour to listen to the cry of the earth...​

    When did it become acceptable for the Church to personify the earth, to refer to the planet as if it could cry out in pain, anguish, or some other emotion? This is a concept embraced by Gaia and other false religious groups.

    We are cautioned against
    adopting short term and seemingly inexpensive options of building on sand,
    instead of building on rock for our common home to withstand storms (Mt 7.24-27).​

    This simile was never intended by Jesus to mean a physical place, but these leaders take the spiritual concept of making Christ the Rock our foundation and they turn it on its head, as if Jesus meant it in literal terms. But that is a minor quibble.

    The current climate crisis speaks volumes about who we are and how we
    view and treat God's creation. We stand before a harsh justice: biodiversity loss,
    environmental degradation and climate change are the inevitable consequences of
    our actions, since we have greedily consumed more of the earth's resources than the
    planet can endure.​

    While I fully agree that pollution and other factors cause losses in biodiversity and degradation of the environment, I wholeheartedly reject the claim that climate change should be included as an 'inevitable consequence of our actions.' Some of you disagree, but I believe that a systematic skewing of data, incorrect assumptions, and purposeful silencing of dissenters lie at the bottom of the "global warming" falsehood.

    Today, we are paying the price. The extreme weather and natural disasters of
    recent months reveal afresh to us with great force and at great human cost that
    climate change is not only a future challenge, but an immediate and urgent matter
    of survival. Widespread floods, fires and droughts threaten entire continents. Sea
    levels rise, forcing whole communities to relocate; cyclones devastate entire regions,
    ruining lives and livelihoods. Water has become scarce and food supplies insecure,
    causing conflict and displacement for millions of people.​

    Yes, absolutely we have issues on this planet with water usage and with land management. In the US we have problems with the government's agricultural policies as well. And much of the fire damage in the western US could probably have been avoided with better forestry management policy & practices. That's where the accuracy ends, pretty much, because man does not have influence over extreme weather, natural disasters (there's a reason they are "natural" disasters... they're not caused by man!), floods, or droughts. These things have been happening since long before the industrial age and they will continue for as long as this earth exists, for it is a fallen world and under a curse. Climate change is not the "urgent matter of survival" this document claims it to be, nor should it be the proper emphasis of the Church.

    This path requires an ever closer
    collaboration among all churches in their commitment to care for creation.​

    Did you get that? The churches can't get together to win the lost. Not for any money can they do that! :rolleyes: But now they say they need to collaborate "to care for creation." What happened to caring for the lost, for the strayed sheep? What happened to eternal life? It is shoved aside in favor of preserving mother earth and creating a more equitable society in the 'here and now.' I have come to expect Francis to emphasize the push for "a good life" on this old ball of dust, but I never thought I'd see two other top religious boneheads join him in his misplaced fervor.

    These three leaders are using the side issues of poverty, mishaps, natural disasters, and some other things as 'cover' for the real issue being addressed in this document. That primary issue is the "climate change" (a/k/a "global warming") agenda that is being utilized on a global level to justify a dangerous increase in authoritarianism. Notice what the document says:

    As world leaders prepare to
    meet in November at Glasgow to deliberate on the future of our planet, we pray for
    them and consider what the choices we must all make.​

    This joint statement is meant to prepare the minds of the laity for whatever unpleasantness that comes out of such meetings and decisions of "world leaders" and to emphasize "the imperative of cooperation," and at the same time it is designed to signal to those world leaders the preparedness of the EOC, RCC, and Anglican C0mmunion to 'back their play.' This document, my friends, is the "imprimatur" (the seal of approval) of these three bodies upon the global hegemonic rule that is rising before our very eyes.

    Cue the Antichrist: enter 'stage left'! :sick:

    I really would hope that Aussies might pick up on this huge rise in authoritarianism. After all, it's in Australia where we see children being taken from their parents' homes by authorities simply because the parents haven't been vaxxed. And it's in Australia that citizens are being told they must download a phone app, take a photo of themselves at home (with GPS embedded, I'm sure), and send it to the authorities to prove that they are still at home like good little boys and girls! :p Don't you see the common theme between the Covid push and the Climate push? They are two sides of the same coin. It's as plain as day! :doh:

    The rise of authoritarian rule and despotism is the real crisis.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2021
  4. ZachT

    ZachT Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    498
    Likes Received:
    476
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Thank-you for sharing this, I also received it well. God is present not just in man, but in all of creation. Showing creation the appropriate amount of respect, and caring for it is the right thing to do.
     
    Invictus and Botolph like this.
  5. ZachT

    ZachT Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    498
    Likes Received:
    476
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Neither of these things are true. I had no idea what you were talking about, and had to google both of these things to even know what they were referencing.

    On the claim children are being taken from their homes I found a bunch of British and American anti-vaxxers saying this was happening in Australia as a way to mislead their followers (complete with a video and other "evidence" of a parent saying their kids were taken because of COVID), and the Victorian police tweeting at those foreign anti-vaxxers that it's not true and the separation in the video has nothing to do with COVID. From the police: "Victoria Police can confirm this is inaccurate. This vision was in no way related to Covid/vaccinations or testing. For the privacy of those involved, we will not be providing any further details.". It is not policy in Australia to remove kids from their unvaccinated parents - only 32% of our population is fully vaccinated. That's a lot of kids the state would have to abduct. The government "taking" children has a very politically sensitive history in Australia, because it's something our government actually did, with endorsement by certain churches - we call it the "Stolen Generation", and it is the kind of authoritarianism we are very conscious of.

    On the phone app - that's entirely optional, no one is being "told" they must download an app and send the government snapshots of your face. Australia has a quarantine border. If you come into the country, we put you into a hotel for 2 weeks to quarantine. Some people have complained this is unnecessarily expensive, and slows down the number of allowed arrivals, because some citizens have homes in their arrival city that they could quarantine in instead. One state has implemented a system where you can opt-in to quarantining at home instead of in a hotel. The condition is you need to download an app that confirms you are staying home at random intervals. I'm sure the app does track your GPS location, I don't see what the invasion of privacy is there - you're under a state enforced quarantine, the government already knows exactly where you are. If phone apps make you comfortable you're welcome to remain in hotel quarantine without a phone app. Surely your problem must be against quarantines, not opt-in phone apps.
     
    Invictus, Annie Grace and Botolph like this.
  6. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    2,529
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    bogus claim

    bogus claim

    Or perhaps we have come to the view that unfettered capitalism and unbridled individualism hold not the keys of the kingdom, and neither do they show us the path of redemption.
     
    Invictus, Annie Grace and ZachT like this.
  7. Annie Grace

    Annie Grace Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    242
    Likes Received:
    276
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican (Australia)
    Thanks to fellow Aussies for debunking those stupid claims. I am proud to live in a country that has had a pretty good response to the pandemic and is continuing to try to do well for its citizens. I think over-reaching claims of authoritarianism and loss of freedoms is just fear-mongering. I support any cooperation between religions that has its goal to serve human beings and help the planet that sustains us all.
     
    Invictus likes this.
  8. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    When Stalin was the leader of the USSR, his commitment to his own idiosyncratic ideology, specifically the belief that there was an active, international capitalist cabal conspiring against socialism, led him to not only “see” connections between events that simply weren’t there, but to even hypothesize non-events in order explain his own faulty understanding of what had occurred. Not only could something like a simple production shortage at a factory be “sabotage”, but it’s source in his mind had to be outside - or at least originally from outside - the Soviet Union. The human cost of these false beliefs, emanating as they were from the central levers of State power, was staggering.

    People today, whether on the Left or the Right, who peddle conspiracy theories are playing with fire. It’s seemingly innocuous and easily dismissed until some idiot who actually believes that nonsense gets elected to high office, as we Americans have learned all too painfully over the last 5 years. Even without that, there’s a real human cost to these false beliefs. How many people die each year of lung-related illnesses because extremist right-wing politicians refuse to take air pollution in major cities seriously and think efforts to address it are some kind of “authoritarian” conspiracy? (And, of course, the real authoritarians are the ones actively preventing progress on that and on other issues.) As J.S. Mill wrote in On Liberty, “beliefs that are not true cannot really be useful”, and conspiracy theories, which can lead to real, measurable harm when actually acted upon, even by purely individual initiative, need to be deprived of oxygen in the public sphere, especially on Forums like this, which are (one would hope) aiming to adhere to a higher standard.
     
    Annie Grace likes this.
  9. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    In reading this I did not see a push for some grand "green new deal" but a call to just be good stewards. Plant a couple trees, don't liter, don't be wasteful, and other things like that. I am not sure how it is controversial.
     
    Annie Grace likes this.
  10. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    Okay, I could be wrong on these. Just read a recent blog post regarding the phone app, could have been falsely exaggerating. And the video clip I saw (perhaps a month ago?) of police taking a child away, allegedly in Australia and allegedly for not being vaxxed, could have been misused by someone to misrepresent things.

    My wife is under the impression that there's at least one state in Australia that is very restrictive. Yes? No?
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2021
  11. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    Consider the emphasis and primary thrust of this joint statement, and try to not be distracted by the side issues they threw in to add 'flavor' and 'palatability.'

    This is the first time that the three of us feel compelled to address together the
    urgency of environmental sustainability
    , its impact on persistent poverty, and the
    importance of global cooperation
    . Together, on behalf of our communities, we appeal
    to the heart and mind of every Christian, every believer and every person of good will.
    We pray for our leaders who will gather in Glasgow to decide the future of our planet
    and its people.
    Again, we recall Scripture: 'choose life, so that you and your children may
    live' (Dt 30:19). Choosing life means making sacrifices and exercising self-restraint.
    All of us - whoever and wherever we are - can play a part in changing our
    collective response to the unprecedented threat of climate change and environmental
    degradation.​

    It's all there; one just needs to 'read between the lines' a little bit to see the global agenda.

    Question: how does a new, stronger concentration on "global cooperation" to head off "climate change" help bring people into right relationships with God and build His everlasting Kingdom?
     
  12. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    God gave us control over creation. I am not sure how asking us to do a better job of taking care of God's creation is an anti Biblical stance? In fact I see it as a Biblical thing to do just as I try to take care of my body for the same reason
     
    Annie Grace and Rexlion like this.
  13. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    “Read between the lines” = imaginary connections. This is unfalsifiable, conspiratorial thinking. It’s a religion unto itself. Why deal with the actual issue at hand when it’s far easier for one to just make allegations of an insidious plot? (And there’s the rub: these characters don’t believe there’s actually a problem here that needs solving. It’s believing what one can’t see to the extent of disbelieving what one does see.)
     
    Annie Grace likes this.
  14. ZachT

    ZachT Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    498
    Likes Received:
    476
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Yes. My state (Queensland) is very restrictive - although I suppose what defines 'very' is subjective. Certainly more restrictive than the rest of the country, and Australia is more restrictive than the average country overall anyway. But right now I have very few restrictions because we have no COVID community transmission cases. Compulsory indoor mask usage ended on Friday, we have fully packed sports stadiums, the border is open again, people can have large several-hundred large gatherings indoors. Five cases just came across the border from down south, so we'll probably go into another half-statewide lockdown, compulsory masks, cancelled weddings, etc. if they trace a community transmission, but the evidence is bearing out that our approach is clearly working.

    We had a pretty serious outbreak in a school in the suburb where I live, just as bad or worse than the initial outbreak events in Victoria and New South Wales. New South Wales gets worse every day, and has around ~1000-1500 new cases every day. Victoria's outbreak is also growing and has ~400 new cases every day. Yesterday, Queensland had 0. The difference was when it happened here the government took away perhaps more freedoms than most would consider justified, and the other states had more proportional responses. Now New South Welshmen and Victorians still have restrictions, even though their outbreaks started months ago, and we're already back to business as usual. I have more liberty today then the states down south have, because my state was perhaps "overly restrictive" (if we want to use that word).

    [EDIT: The point being that it's not authoritarianism for authoritarianisms sake. The purpose of being so restrictive is so the restrictions can be lifted earlier, with less illness and loss of life]
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2021
    Annie Grace and Rexlion like this.
  15. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    I understand your point. It is Biblical, in a strictly technical sense, but there's more to it than that. Remember, Satan quoted the Bible to Jesus, but that did not make what he was saying a correct statement in context with God's will.

    What is the Gospel? It's Jesus Christ crucified, died, and risen from the dead for our redemption and forgiveness from sin. In gratitude to God, we honor him with our bodies and minds and with our willing obedience. Now, is it part of the Gospel to compel others to believe in Him? No. Nor is it part of the Gospel to use the government to compel everyone to stop emitting carbon dioxide, to make everyone sacrifice to "save" the environment.

    Do we find these concepts promoted by Jesus or the Apostles? We don't. Did the early church ever talk about pollution of water and land? No. Did God tell Israel that the environment was a priority? No, despite the fact that tiny Israel was home to about a half million inhabitants (plus their livestock) in Jesus day, and Jerusalem contained perhaps as many as 70,000 people. It was not one of the priorities God emphasized to His people back then, nor is it a part of the Gospel or of the Church's commission. It was never a part of the Church's message for the past 1900 years (give or take some). What do we say when a new teaching arises and tries to attach itself to the Gospel message of the Church? We call it an innovation, a teaching that does not belong in the Church, perhaps even a false gospel. I suspect @Stalwart would have something to say along these lines.

    The joint statement mentions "climate change" or "climate crisis" four times, and "environmental" is used five times; this is the overriding theme of the document (although it also mentions the "poor" four times, it is done as a means of generating sympathy and agreement, and helping the poor is tangential to the document's main thrust). "Climate change" is the newer, broader, more acceptable term for "global warming," because everyone can see that the world's climate does change over time (it's undeniable and has been happening for millenia), whereas global warming is very much disputed (despite efforts to silence those who question the narrative). More broadly, climate change is a matter pertaining to science, and is not a subject of faith. Religion should not engage in endorsing or rubber-stamping questions of science, especially scientific issues that are disputable. When religion does get involved in endorsing scientific theories, it is essentially turning climate science into a new, secular gospel; under this new gospel, the commission is to 'work together to reduce carbon emissions and save the planet' in supplant of our Great Commission to tell people how to be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ. When climate science intrudes into the Church, it becomes a new, secular gospel that distracts and detracts from the one true Gospel.

    We should also keep our focus on the fact that this earth is under a curse. Earth and all things living upon it are subject to entropy, which means everything is regressing from a state of relatively high order to a state of greater and greater disorder. We are not called as Christians to 'save the planet' for all of humanity's future, because (1) earth and natural humanity are both beyond redemption, and (2) God will soon destroy it and create a new earth (Rev. 21) for the resurrected believers to inhabit in their resurrected, eternal bodies.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2021
  16. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    There is much in this that echoes Pope John Paul II’s first Encyclical, Redemptor Hominis (esp. sec. 8).
    https://www.vatican.va/content/john.../hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html

    There are also echoes of Pope Francis’ Laudato si.
    https://www.vatican.va/content/fran...-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

    Ecology is ultimately an extension of the concern for life, and human life especially. By linking climate change with poverty, the hierarchs are highlighting that the essence of the Gospel is to act in Jesus’ place to all who are in need (of him), especially the poor and the hungry. One is reminded in particular of the story of Joseph in Egypt, and all that he thought was necessary to save his people from famine, in a previous era of climatic shift. If Joseph is at all a type of Christ, it is surely contrary to the Gospel to allow eschatological fanaticism to negate basic moral duties to our neighbor as well as to God, to take care of the earth, or, as it is said in Judaism, to “redeem the world”.

    All in all, it’s a fine document. One hopes it is well received.
     
    ZachT and Botolph like this.
  17. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    2,529
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I have long preferred the term Ecology to Environment. The reason I prefer to term is that it seems to embody the principle of relationship more clearly. It is something we are part of, not something utterly remote, external, and to be observed. My mother of an abject collector of many things, truly beautiful things, exquisite art, notable collectables, rare, precious, the finest and the best. She would love to show then to people, and talk about them, the story behind them, how they came into her possession, etc. There was a really odd picture of a fish, sort of oddly primitive in primary colours, and it had been there a long time, so it always seemed familiar, though not really of the standard of her collection generally. One day I asked her about it, and I discovered the story, and I learned that I had painted it as a child, and given it to her. I realised that she had treasured the gift, because of the relationship.

    God has given us to one blue dot sailing through the universe as our home. If we treasure our relationship with God, then we will surely treasure the gift of this one blue dot as part of our expression of that relationship. John tells us that God so loved the world.

    Once upon a time there were three men in a boat, and they had a choice, either they could get on, or get off. Humanity is in that position. If were carry on the path we have been on for the last couple of hundred years we will sink the boat. The last 100 years has seen a fourfold increase in population and a tenfold increase in carbon emissions. And we have been gifted with sufficient intellect as to understand that we are the cause of much of it. Any home owner knows you have to look after it, cleaning, tidying, removing leaves from the gutters, gardening, painting and maintenance.


    On the subject of Aps in Australia. Most of us have two.
    1. The first one is the one funded by the Federal Government called CovidSafe. It runs in the background, and it does track movements and proximity to other phones running the same ap. This data is stored in a databank on the phone for 21 days, or perhaps a little longer. Should it transpire that you are Covid Positive, the Health Department will ask you to set the sequence that uploads that data to the health website to facilitate contact tracing.
    2. The second is the QRCode system Aps by the various states. Mine is Service NSW, and under this system when you enter a shop or business or Church, you are required to check in and check out using the ap. This data is uploaded to the relevant state health authorities websites live, and then they identify that a covid positive person was at a venue, they are able to identify who else was there an so contain the outbreak.
    In terms of the vaccine roll out it is progressing, We were very slow on the mark in Australia, with our PM declaring that it was not a race, and in reality many other countries were in much greater need or urgent vaccine roll outs. As it transpired we do now have a couple of outbreaks and we are struggling on the one hand with containment and on the other hand with a vaccine rollout. Currently NSW is 78% 1st dose, and 46% 2nd dose, and we look to be on track to be at 80 fully vaccinated by sometime in November.

    Those in home quarantine are contacted by heal officials every couple of days to ensure welfare and compliance. Unfortunately it transpires that some in quarantine feel the need to share. Let me assure you as a nation which entered to modern era as a mob of criminals, good little girls and boys is not apt. The freedom of the gospel was first preached in the land accompanied by men in chains.

     
    Annie Grace and Invictus like this.
  18. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,723
    Likes Received:
    2,563
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    :handshake:
     
    Rexlion likes this.
  19. ZachT

    ZachT Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    498
    Likes Received:
    476
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I would say caring for our common home, the home that our neighbours live in, a home that represents God's presence and will in all things outside of Scripture (as Augustine put it), and that helps us better understand God if we take some time out of our busy lives to actually observe it (as Aquinas observed), is fostering the right relationship with God.

    Do you want to be shown, you senseless person, that faith without works is barren?
    ~ James 2.20

    I don't see this joint statement as distracting the faithful to do anything that would distance themselves from God. It's our duty, as Christians, to care for the planet until Christ returns with the new Heaven and new Earth - not to accelerate its destruction because "eh, God will give us a new one anyway". Especially because there's no guarantee the passages about the destruction of the Earth are literal, and that this new Earth is actually a "new Earth", and not just the same planet but full of righteousness.
     
    Invictus and Botolph like this.
  20. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    2,529
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Genesis 1:24-31
    And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind.’ And it was so. God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good.

    Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.’
    So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

    God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.’ God said, ‘See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.’ And it was so. God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.​

    Genesis 2:15
    The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it.

    Numbers 35:33-34
    You shall not pollute the land in which you live; for blood pollutes the land, and no expiation can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it. You shall not defile the land in which you live, in which I also dwell; for I the Lord dwell among the Israelites.

    Jeremiah 2:7
    I brought you into a plentiful land to eat its fruits and its good things.
    But when you entered you defiled my land, and made my heritage an abomination.
    With all due deference and respect, I put it to you that our responsibility and care of the earth, and things one might call ecological concerns, is deeply embedded in scripture, and not a modern error, nor heresy, now an innovation, nor something that does not belong in the Church.

    The nature of the dominion entrusted to humankind is surely not a licence to rape pillage and plunder creation, but rather a stewardship to tend and to till and to care for. Our relationship with the environment is truly relational, and the creation cares and nurtures us just as surely as we should tend and nurture it for generations yet unborn.
     
    ZachT, Shane R and Invictus like this.