Week 1

As a ministry major, it seems that I ought to have an opinion about everything because people, throughout my future vocational life, will be looking to me for answers.  I need to have a stance on gay marriage, abortion, pop culture, social media, politics, and everything else that has an influence over the American culture because my stance should affect and reflect how the church stands.  For the most part, though, the church has made its opinion known regarding most of these issues, and I can simply agree with it instead of formulating my own opinion.

However, the earth is something that often goes unmentioned in theological debates.  After all, the church's stance on how man ought to treat the earth can be broadly summarized in four simple words: take care of it.  Why sit and meticulously sort out the specifics of such a stance when the church is too busy fighting "more important" battles of a secular society, right?  Why would the church need to outline a position on stewardship when it can simply set up a few recycling bins, plant a couple trees, and then go back to what really matters?

Well, maybe the church should start caring a little more.  Earth-threatening problems may be closer than we think.

Do know that I include myself when I say, "the church."  I never cared much about protecting the earth.  After all, I survived both Y2K and 2012, so it was only habit to think that this ecological horror story was only another hocus-pocus, end-of-the-world bit.  My thought process was as follows:

We will have to feed nine billion people by 2050?  We can do it.

Water is not only getting scarcer all the time, but it is also getting less pure?  Surely it will all be alright.

Our meat consumption will have to decrease in order to feed the world?  No, thanks.

Acid rain is destroying U.S. marine life?  Not until I see it.

Earth's temperature is climbing every year?  So we might have to wear some more sunscreen.  So what?

My positions on issues such as these were built on indifference rather than ignorance. I knew the numbers. I had seen the graphs.  I had heard that we needed to make a change.  I was just never worried.  After all, the earth has yet to fail us, so why would it start now, right?  However, my apathy was not unique; many Christians choose to ignore this eminent issue, even if they are aware of its severity, simply because they cannot solve the problems themselves.

I have only one question to such people: what is Christ-like about discarding these apparent ecological crises?  Jesus did not see five thousand hungry men and assume that someone else would find a way to provide.  He did something about it!  I understand that he had divine power and substantially less than the nine billion people we will soon have to face, but, regardless, when presented with the many issues this aging earth is experiencing, ask yourself, at the risk of sounding cliche, what would Jesus do?

Honestly, however, there is not much knowledge as to what we ought to do.  For instance, National Geographic Magazine gives a lot of research as to agriculture, diet, aquaculture, and other ecological arenas, but, for the most part, states that there are improvements to be made and merely recommends a handful of improvements.  Likewise, Steven Bouma-Prediger, in For the Beauty of the Earth, outlines several problems with the earth that are escalating, such as the increasing population, global climate change, and over-consumption of energy, to name a few, only to leave readers wondering what can be done to resolve such crises.

At this point, I understand that there is not much that the church can do to feed all the hungry people of the world, purify all of earth's water supply, regulate the levels of greenhouse gasses in the earth's atmosphere, or oversee the diet of all mankind, but it can at least make its opinion known.  As mentioned earlier, the church has made known its position on homosexuality, abortion, politics, and a number of other social issues, so clearly the church knows how to spread awareness, which may be the most influential tactic it can use to preserve the aching earth.  We ought to make the problems known until the only logical next step is to make the solutions known.  The world knows that the church has a voice.  Why not voice something that affects the way we all live?  The world knows that we can prompt change in the world.  Why not change, in essence, the world?