Climate Change… continued?
By | Feb 12, 2009
Archbishop David Moxon has called upon the Anglican church to take moral leadership in climate change issues. In his presentation he quotes from ‘A Moral Climate’ by Michael Northcott saying, “the strongest moral case for mitigating global warming is that it is already life threatening to those who are least able to defend themselves, and have no responsibility for its causation.” Archbishop Moxon also spells out a biblical mandate of creation and stewardship, and draws from Jeremiah connecting ecological collapse, injustice, and neglect of the moral order, with neglect of true worship (Jer.5:22-28).
None of this is particularly new. It is a good reminder; but the science is, if not unanimous, of sufficient weight to make inaction an intolerable risk. Even a hope that more efficient practice will be sufficient to allow us to continue business as usual has been unmasked by the Jevons effect. “It is wholly a confusion of ideas to suppose that the economical use of fuel is equivalent to a diminished consumption. The very contrary is the truth.” Wise words from William Jevons in 1866. If we increase our fuel efficiency we will simply drive further – or buy another house. [Taken from Hermen Daly in an excerllent article titled Climate Policy: from “know how” to “do now”]
Furthermore, the theology has been affirmed from all camps. We are aware of Gods love for the weak, marginalized and powerless; we have risen up in the past against the powers that threaten the most vulnerable; we have a theology of sacrifice; a God of identification and suffering; and we take communion weekly affirming our participation in one body with believers from the poorest and most vulnerable corners of creation. We have, it would appear, the spiritual resources needed to take the role of moral leadership called for by our Archbishop.
Set against this however… we are comfortable; and we are busy, too busy to do things differently. Oh yes, and we are important. You can tell because of how busy we are.
Which will win out I wonder. Will we forsake our cars for the sake of those who will never own one? Will we turn down our showers for the sake of those who are drowning in the flood waters of a changing climate? Forsaking consumerism will we risk plunging our economy further into recession for the sake of those whose prosperity has never reached the level of our recession? Or will we attend more gatherings, fly to more conferences, drink more cups of tea and await the resolution of a discussion surrounding how many parts per million the atmosphere can stand, and weather a tipping point is 10 years away or 20?
It is time to act, to recapture a theology of ‘enough.’ I suggest in the next few weeks as we ponder the call of our Archbishop we speak to the oldest person we know about their childhood, and ask ourselves the simple and honest question ‘what are our non-negotiables, what are we not prepared to forgo?’ Then we can decide weather we have a wayward Archbishop, or weather we will follow his call.
Users
“Would to God that all the Lord's people were Prophets.” Num. 11:29
Join in and add to the JUSTwiki today. Stories, reflection, news, comment. Be heard. Be just.
Hikoi of Hope: Walking On – Introduction
Submit a comment