Sunday, March 1, 2009

How to Approach the Approaches

In class, we read “Christianity and Ecology” by John F. Haught, and he posed the question, “Precisely why should we care about the nonhuman natural world?” After reading this paper and pondering this question for myself, I’ve come to the conclusion that Haught has a pretty good grasp on the sanctity of the Earth and speaks a lot of truth. He gives us three different ways in which we can look at environmentalism and Christianity. These ways include the Apologetic, Sacramental and Eschatological approaches to create a type of “environmental theology” as Haught calls it.

In the Apologetic approach, theology examines the Bible in order to search for scriptures that prove that the bible does, in fact, give some indication that Christians should care about the cosmos and the Earth in general. As Haught says, “At its most simplistic extreme it does little more than recite the psalms and other biblical passages that proclaim creation as God’s handiwork”. From the description in the paper and our discussion in class, I understand the apologetic approach to be merely a defense of the faith. Since God gave us dominion of the Earth, that alone should be reason enough for us to care for it and help ensure its survival.

The next approach is the Sacramental approach to ecological theology. This approach views the natural world as a “symbolic disclosure of God”. Haught described this approach as one that more readily accepts scientific thought into the theological aspect of spirituality. In fact, he points out that this approach is more sympathetic to evolutionary theories and physics. From the paper’s description, I also felt like this view accepted the fact that the earth had a spirit as well. We discussed the Sacramental approach as being very creation centered, and being that the Earth was created by God, we have a duty to take care of it. In Genesis, God declares His creations to be “good”. In this context, good means sacred. Using this understanding, all that God creates is good, sacred, and deserves our respect.

The final approach is the Eschatological Approach, and it deals with the promise of future fulfillment. From the viewpoints of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we believe that the earth will ultimately be resurrected and perfected to be the final dwelling place of those who attain the Celestial kingdom. This, to me, is a good interpretation of Haught’s eschatological approach to Christian theology. What better motivations do we, as Latter-day Saints to take care of the Earth than to know that God’s promises will be fulfilled if we are faithful and endure to the end?

I really loved reading and pondering this article, because I think it is important that every person do his or her part to take care of the world. However, in order to do so, each of the three approaches needs to be implemented in the world. In class, we talked about how various religions retain strengths in the various approaches. Some religions such as Buddhism are wonderful at accepting the sacredness of the cosmos and the spirit of the earth. They support the Sacramental approach. Those of the Jewish faith tend to be excellent defenders, and therefore are sympathetic to the Apologetic. Just as all of the religions in the world retain facets and elements of truth, likewise all of them view the world in a way that, when combined with other religious views, will enable us as a planet to better care for and show proper stewardship over our final home, the Earth.

11 comments:

  1. Sorry in advance if this post seems a little redundant from class. I didn't quite understand it the first time I read it or the first time we discussed it. I did this blog more for my own comprehension and internalization of the material than anything, so if you're bored, I apologize.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that the different approaches are interesting to consider. It's a topic worth exploring, but I don't believe that any of the approaches are absolutely right, I think to really "solve" the problem presented in the article, a look at how people think, instead of how they argue would be best.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am grateful that Haught took an understanding and kind approach to developing an ethic in Christianity. The other authors hated on Christianity. Sometimes I want to kick all of the other Christians out of the definition "Christianity" or extract Latter-Day Saints from the classification of Christian. We are so much different than mainstream Christianity. Islam doesn't mesh with Christians well because of the terrible apostate atrocities throughout history that were done in the name of Christ. We could come to a global ethic if only people would put away their preconceived notions about us and search out our message of truth. Our doctrines have so much light to add to the environmental arena.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wish I had read this post before the test Monday. I think that Haught had some very good ideas. I believe that piecing all the three approaches is what needs to happen to appreciate the earth and its sacredness. I enjoyed the blog.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah, this would have been very helpful in preparing for the exam on Monday! I've thought a lot about the eschatological view proposed by Haught, and I think it is the best equiped approach to explain how a Christian ought to view the environment and the planet.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think that Haught had some good view points and a great platform from which to jump off into LDS beliefs about the environment and Christianity. This is just one more reason to believe in the restored gospel because it incorporates all of these central and vital truths.

    ReplyDelete
  7. the differences in religion are what create balance. thats the beauty of individuality. as explained in the last paragraph each religion has strong points that keep us all in check

    ReplyDelete
  8. I wish I had read this post before the test because I really didn't understand the last approach very well but now it is starting to clear up and make a little more sense.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Great review. I read this the day after the test, and I was kicking myself. Oh well. I wish that we could read an LDS response to Haught's paper. It was interesting to read the papers on LDS environmental ethics and to see how they fit into the different approaches.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I did read this post before the test to help clarify some of the arguments, thanks! this is a very through review. It is very interesting to compare these arguments with the LDS arguments were were assigned a little later.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think you have a great grasp on the subject, and you summarized the approaches very well. I also feel that I have benefited from reading this article by seeing it from the various perspectives provided by the approaches he mentioned. Great blog! You rock!

    ReplyDelete