Some theses for Workshop 3 on Monday, July 15, ICCJ

1. The thesis of Lynn White (1967), who accused the `Judeo-Christian tradition' of being guilty for the ecological crisis, has caused a fierce debate amongst scholars. First: `The Judeo-Christian tradition' does not exist. Second: The accusation has led both to guilt feelings and to polemical apologetics. For a response not much exegesis on Genesis 1: 26,28 has been done. The context of our modern time and modern problems has been decisive for the outcome of most ex-egesis on Gen. 1:28 en 2:15 and could be better called `eisegesis'.

2. The Hebrew verb `radah' (`to have dominion') in Gen.1:28 shows the ambivalent attitude of people in biblical times toward nature. This text is used in the ecological debate out of the original context. The desert and the wild animals were big threats for biblical (wo)men, while the behaviour of modern people means a tremendous threat to nature and also to wild animals. It is scientific nonsense to quote Gen.1:28 as the cause for the exploitation and manipulation of nature.

3. Many elements in the biblical and post-biblical traditions of Judaism and Christianity are relevant to support the present ecological awareness. It can, however, not be denied that the Bible is anthropocentric.

4. The thesis of A.Th.van Leeuwen (Christianity in World History, 1964) that the desacralization of nature in the Bible has paved the way for the growth of technology and science and has led to the liberation of mankind, is at least very onesided. Of course, technology has contributed to the liberation of human beings in the struggle against illnesses, hunger and poverty, but has also caused new slavery and terrible catastrophes (Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Chernobyl).

5. The perception of the interdependence of natural things arises not from   religion, but from careful scientific research. The Bible supports, however, this rediscovery of interdependence. Nature is in the Bible not a neutral and independent object, but is very much alive and has a soul. Nature is not divine but could be called sacred. There should grow a covenantal solidarity between human beings, animals and nature, an anticipation of the eschatological vision of Isaiah 11, 6-10.

6. The earth-religiosity and nature-romanticism of many New Age-groups is pagan and can not be the biblical response to the ecological crisis. Human beings have to take responsibility for the preservation of the earth.

7. If we know, with St.Paul (Romans 8,22) that "all of creation is groaning with pain, like the pain of childbirth", we are called as children of God to become active and creative co-workers of God in the liberation struggle for His creation.

8. St.Francis of Assisi is often called the patron saint of    eco-activists. We must not forget that he was a child of the   Middle Ages, for example in the ascetism against his body. His `Hymn of the Sun' can be very inspiring for the search for a new solidarity between all the creatures of God.

9.Religious feelings of `awe and amazement' (A.J.Heschel) toward God and His creation should lead to an active ecological awareness.

10. Christians should develop a `sjabbat theology'. (See Jürgen Moltmann, Gott in der Schöpfung, Ökologische Schöpfungslehre, 1985, S.281-299).

Simon Schoon