ON HUMAN VALUE, CHILDREN, AND POLAR BEARS    

“We care for creation because we love the God to whom it belongs and because we long to see God’s glory enhanced through creation and God’s pleasure in creation served through our loving care.”

                                      

                                                                Christopher Wright 

     I want to do two things in things in this post.  First, more or less in the spirit of "throwback Thursday," I want to link again to a post I did in November of 2013, On Image And Value.  That post considers some of the same issues raised in last week's post from a different angle.  Last week's post considered the significance of the incarnation for animals, arguing that because the incarnation was an event of cosmic significance, humans cannot use the fact that God was incarnate as a human to set ourselves apart from or above the rest of creation.  Likewise, in On Image and Value, I consider the traditional idea that humans have inherent value, as distinct from the rest of creation, because humans alone are made in the image of God.  I argue instead that human value and  the value of all of creation comes from the fact that we loved by God.  Our creation in God's image does not set us part in terms of value, but imposes on us responsibilities.  If we can be said to have greater value, it is only because we are called upon to fulfill those important responsibilities to care for creation and in particular the animals.  These two concepts are closely related, and I think it is worth considering them together.


      Second, and on a related note, I want to comment on an article I saw today, somewhat surprisingly, in the environmental law trade press.  The article provides yet another example of Christians talking about creation care and seeing only part of the picture, and thereby missing a critical element of God's call to us.  Today's Energy and Environment News ClimateWire included an article about religious groups seeking to raise the issue of climate change from various Christian perspectives to the Congress and to congregrations.  The article discusses a number of different groups and views.  One of the groups discussed was the Evangelical Environment Network, which makes presentations to conservative churches about the biblical mandate of environmental stewardship and the need to address climate change.  According to the article, Mitch Hescox, the president of the organization, attributes the skepticism about climate change among some conservative Christians to "the fact that evangelicals are typically conservative and Republican, and that climate change has long been framed as a partisan issue."  He counters, however, that, "'It's not about Al Gore, it's about Jesus,' Hescox said he tells groups. 'And it's not about polar bears. It's about our children.'"  (Here is a link to the article, although it is a subscription only publication.) 

     Why, I wonder, can it not be about both polar bears and children?  And what is wrong with it being about polar bears?  The article quotes Hescox as saying that "[t]here is a biblical responsibility for caring for God's creation," but the dichotomy he presents between polar bears and children, one worth taking action to protect and other not, suggests that he does not consider polar bears to be part of that creation.  It suggests that the real reason to protect creation is to benefit humans and implies the rest of creation - including polar bears and other animals - is of value only to the extent it is useful to humans.  Of course, we can't assume that a few quotes in one article adequately represent Hescox's views or the views of the Evangelical Environment Network.  It is nevertheless a disappointing statement and one that echoes all too clearly the history of a church unwilling to see the inherent value of our fellow creatures and desiring instead to set humans above and apart from the rest of creation.   As the two posts discussed above make clear, this statement expresses a vision of God's incarnation, of God's grace, and of our call to live into the image of God that is too small. 

Photo credit: Steve Amstrup, US Fish & Wildlife Service