Southern Baptists and the Environment

As the question of global warming moved to the center of public discourse, the evangelical Christian community was visibly vocal in opposition even to the issue being raised. When they did address it, it was often seen as a ruse of the devil to keep churches from addressing "real" issues or a part of some left wing conspiracy to destroy our culture. There were some pockets of dissent as some evangelicals talked about the responsibility of stewardship of the earth but, in large degree, they were drowned out by the majority voice. The Southern Baptist Convention was among the loudest in dismissing any discussion of global warming as a moral issue for Christians to consider.

This past week, a group of over 40 prominent Southern Baptist leaders released a Declaration on the Environment and Climate Change that represents a very cautious but real change in direction. They acknowledge that in the scientific community "there is general agreement" regarding the cause, the nature, and the severity of global warming. They go on to say

Though the claims of science are neither infallible nor unanimous, they are substantial and cannot be dismissed out of hand on either scientific or theological grounds. Therefore, in the face of intense concern and guided by the biblical principle of creation stewardship, we resolve to engage this issue without any further lingering over the basic reality of the problem or our responsibility to address it. Humans must be proactive and take responsibility for our contributions to climate change—however great or small.

Again and again in the statement the writers reaffirm stances on abortion and homosexuality - the social issues that Southern Baptists have held central. The writers did not want to open themselves to criticism that they were abandoning what the SBC sees as clear issues for controversial ones. Still, they take a stand on climate change and, given the history, it is a courageous one.

I have little respect for the Southern Baptist Convention. In my opinion they have abandoned the heart of the Baptist tradition. In shutting down any room for difference of opinion, they have lost the ability to hear the voice of the Spirit and deadened any sensitivity to the movement of God in changing contexts. Having said that, this statement gives me hope that perhaps there is a possibility for movement in the SBC. In spite of the cautiousness of the statement, it still represents the possibility of seeing new problems, new contexts, and new answers. That is grace.

The Fall of the Soviet Union and Iraq

What do these two subjects have to do with one another? Let's first talk briefly about the Soviet Union. It fell not because of the strength of America but because of the weakness of its own economy which was overburdened by a military budget that bled everything else dry. Military spending is not productive spending. It doesn't provide infrastructure or goods to the public. Instead it is just a little better than throwing the money away. It is the epitome of the disposable product. So all of this wasteful spending as they tried to keep up with us in an arms race while sustaining a war in Afghanistan was more than they could afford. When their economy collapsed, as was inevitable because of the percentage of non-productive sending, the nation crumbled.

Last Thursday Joseph Stigletz, a Nobel Prize winning economist, and Robert Hormatz, vice chairman of Goldman-Sachs International, testified before the Joint Economic Committee of congress. Stigletz said that he believes the overall cost of the Iraq war will be around 3 trillion dollars with the direct cost to US taxpayers being at least $2 trillion.

Both men testified about the opportunities to make this country better that are rendered impossible because of this war. Stigletz said that for a fraction of the cost, Social Security and Medicare could have been kept easily solvent for at least 50 more years. Each day's spending could put 58,000 children in Head Start, make college affordable for 160,000 students, pay the annual salaries of 11,000 border patrol agents or 14,000 police officers. And that is one day's costs. Watch this little film from the American Friends Service Committee to see more of what could be done with just 1 day's expenditure for this war.

Stigletz also noted that 40% of the vets from the first Gulf War are eligible for disability benefits which will go on for decades. Imagine, he asked, what the numbers will be for this war which will involve 2 million troops and go on for at least the 5 years we already have under our belt? Imagine with me the social costs when the safety net for them fails as it did for the Viet Nam vets - remember how many of them ended up homeless on the streets? How many of these young men and women will end up discarded? And what will happen to their families?

And finally they testified that because of tax cuts during war and what was an already growing deficit, this war is financed almost entirely by deficit spending. Bush has worked to try to hide the costs of the war by bypassing the normal budget process and using emergency appropriations for the funds. The costs will be hanging around our necks like an albatross for decades to come.

And John McCain says we should expect to stay there another 100 year!

Let me make a prediction. If we do, we will fall just like the Soviet Union did and for essentially the same reasons. It will have nothing to do with the strength of our ideals or the beautiful vision upon which this nation was founded. It will be because of a poorly planned and completely unnecessary war that strangled our economy.

A vote for McCain will virtually insure that end. Actually, I think a vote for Hillary will too. It is only Obama who is talking about seeing security in a new way - of building coalitions and negotiating before dropping bombs.

moral issues

I've been very involved in housing as a moral/spiritual issue here in Santa Barbara. Virtually every time I speak to this end the local paper blasts me in an editorial and asks whether the environment is not also a moral issue. The question has always seemed a silly one to me. Of course, creation care is a moral/spiritual issue. Of course, Christians must be involved in caring for the earth, combating global warming, and conserving the wondrous diversity of plant and animal life on our planet. To place housing for people in opposition to caring for the creation is just silly. A holistic gospel requires that we look at... the whole enchilada.

Well, it seems that there is a group of evangelical leaders who in a letter express their believe that caring for creation and combating global warming is diverting attention from the "great moral issues of our time... notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children." In his blog, Jim Wallis asks whether these are the only great moral issues or

Is the fact that 30,000 children will die globally today, and everyday, from needless hunger and disease a great moral issue for evangelical Christians? How about the reality of 3 billion of God’s children living on less than $2 per day? And isn’t the still-widespread and needless poverty in our own country, the richest nation in the world, a moral scandal? What about pandemics like HIV/AIDS that wipe out whole generations and countries, or the sex trafficking of massive numbers of women and children? Should genocide in Darfur be a moral issue for Christians? And what about disastrous wars like Iraq? And then there is, of course, the issue that got Dobson and his allies so agitated. If the scientific consensus is right - climate change is real, is caused substantially by human activity, and could result in hundreds of thousands of deaths - then isn’t that also a great moral issue? Could global warming actually be alarming evidence of human tinkering with God’s creation?

So what are the moral issues of the day? One difference between the lists has to do with the actor... in the Dobson et al list, moral issues are only those things done by individuals - abortion, sexual activity - and not those things done by cultures, countries, or companies. For the News Press editorial staff, the only moral issues are those that impinge on the comfort of the haves. For Jesus, I fear the list is a lot bigger and less comfortable than either of those.