- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (8/12)
- Next Post »A La Carte (8/13)
Serve God, Save the Planet
- 08/12/08
- 21
Though I've gone on record as a skeptic of global warming and of the catastrophic man-made climate change that is so much in the news today, this certainly does not indicate that I care nothing for the environment. If anything, the reading I've done on the subject of global warming, while failing to convince me that CO2 emissions are wrecking the world, has reinforced in my mind the importance of caring for the planet God has given us. I have become interested in a Christian response to environmental issues and decided to read a couple of books on the subject. One that was recommended to me is Serve God, Save the Planet by J. Matthew Sleeth.
Not too long ago, Sleeth was rising through the ranks as chief of the medical staff at a prominent hospital on the East coast. He began to see more and more of his patients suffering from cancer, asthma and other chronic diseases. He began to suspect that there were environmental issues involved. Somehow the earth and those who live on it are in trouble of their own making, he concluded. Sleeth eventually quit his hospital job to focus on writing and speaking about environmental issues, seeking to do so from a distinctly Christian point-of-view. He sold his large home and moved his family into a much smaller one; he evaluated his family's lifestyle and found ways of drastically reducing their environmental impact. And then he wrote this book.
"Serve God, Save the Planet asks the following questions: How can I live a more godly, equitable, and meaningful life? How can I help people today and in the future? How can I be less materialistic? How can I live a more charitable life? What would happen if I led a slower-paced existence? What is the spiritual prescription for depression, anxiety, and anger? How can I become a better steward of nature?" It is a book meant to guide Christians as they first think through the issues and then begin to take action. He feels that Christians, with their understanding of the origins of the world and with their knowledge of its Creator, are uniquely able to lead the task of creation care.
Through the book's sixteen chapters, Sleeth deals topically with areas related to creation care. He looks at our society's fixation with "stuff," at the food we eat (and its origins) and at the homes we live in. He is occasionally overstated ("Nothing is worse for the environment than a broken family") but usually measured and deliberate. He shows how many of our society's fixations (materialism, television, entertainment) are linked together and how together they have a serious environmental impact.
The book is not without its weaknesses. One weakness is that Sleeth is better at suggesting easy solutions than working through the implications of the tough ones. For example, he states that the world's population is growing too quickly to be sustainable (and provides a clear and understandable metaphor for this). But when it comes to a solution for this issue, all he can suggest is this: "Ethically designed and distributed birth control is an essential remedy if humanity is to survive its own success." That is easy to say, but the ramifications are massive. Do we allow wealthy Westerns to continue to procreate while forcing birth control upon impoverished Africans? How do we convince so many billions of people to go along with this plan? What if one massive people group (Muslims, for example) refuse to play along? It's an easy solution to propose but one that is nearly impossible to successfully implement. A second weakness, is that Sleeth seems to have "drunk the Kool-Aid." He accepts man-made global warming as a given and blindly accepts the usual solutions. For example, he stresses the need to recycle, but does not wrestle with the fact that recycling is often as big a polluter, or even a more of a polluter, as simply throwing items in the trash. Consider, for example, that recycled paper needs to be heavily bleached to remove inks and that this bleach is fed into lakes and rivers. And consider that the material to be recycled has to be trucked to recycling centers and hauled to a factory and so on. All of these actions create, rather than prevent, pollution. Recycling is not the "golden key" he makes it out to be. Such difficult issues make no appearance in this volume.
Those complaints aside, the book is good and helpful in many ways. Sleeth offers some good thoughts on environmental issues and does so in a readable, compelling way. His anecdotes, drawn mainly from a long career in medicine, add human interest to what has the potential to be a rather dry topic. Though not a big-picture, philosophical look at the issues, Sleeth's volume is worth the read for its practical value. The book's appendices are valuable guides to reducing energy consumption and reducing waste. He gave me a lot to think about in terms of lifestyle and the waste a Western lifestyle can produce, both in time and in materials.
Having said all of this, I do intend to keep looking for a more satisfying book and one that can more fully ground creation care in the Word of God. To this end, I am turning to Pollution and the Death of Man by Francis Schaeffer. I suspect he will fill in some of the gaps missing from Serve God, Save the Planet (while doubtlessly missing out on some of the practical value of Sleeth's volume).
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (21)
It always troubles me when Christians advocate not having children. One of the consistent themes from the Bible is that children are a blessing, not a curse. Dr. Sleeth seems to be advocating an, almost pantheistic view of the world in which we must sacrifice our children to placate the “environment”. Deciding to bring children into the world requires having hope for the future, something all Christians should have. Voluntarily forgoing children is the mark of people who have no hope and not something Christians should seek to emulate.
Try this book http://www.illuminatebooks.co.uk/product/9780281058334.htm Christianity, Climate Change and Sustainable Living, or Planetwise by Dave Bookless. Thanks for the review.
Your point on recycling isn’t quite right, of course recycling creates some pollution, virtually everything does. But is the cost of that greater or less than the impact of throwing away the old paper and dealing with it’s waste (here in the UK, we don’t have lots of spare room for it all) PLUS creating a new replacement. Likely not.
An interesting article from the British Medical Journal by Prof John Guillebaud suggests rather than the developing world reducing population it should be the rich nations that do as our offspring will undoubtedly live lives more damaging to the global environment.
I hadn’t heard of this book, but I’ve promptly ordered it, thanks for the review. I was going to recommend the two books Phil just mentioned too, but I guess I’ll just second them instead.
An interesting article from the British Medical Journal by Prof John Guillebaud suggests rather than the developing world reducing population it should be the rich nations that do as our offspring will undoubtedly live lives more damaging to the global environment.
If we were to compare the local environments of Massachusetts or even Texas, with say, Yemen, I suspect most people would say that environments of Massachusetts or Texas is superior, i.e. cleaner, healthier, etc. So, the logical consequences of Professor Guillebaud’s suggestion is that we need to adopt the local environmental policies of Yemen in order to improve the global environment. Does that position make sense to anybody? A clean environment is a luxury; a luxury that only wealthy nations can afford.
Tim,
As a regulator of the food industry, I’m curious what the author had to say about the foods we eat and their origins and what impact they had on the environment and our health.
Could you provide a brief summary statement related to his view on that subject?
I appreciate the time you spend on the blog. I don’t read everything, but I check it often for thoughful material.
Dave
You might also want to look at the works of Calvin DeWitt, who has written quite a bit on Creation Care.
Tim,Are you familiar with the famous wager between Julian Simon and Paul Ehrlich? Ehrlich was the author of The Population Bomb, a sensational worldwide best seller, which forecasted worldwide Poverty and Famine resulting in 100’s of millions of deaths. Julian Simon was an economist at the University of Maryland who bet that the price of five metals would drop from 1980 to 1990. Simon resoundingly won the bet. The fact is that population doomsayers from Malthus to the present have been consistently and astonishingly wrong. Simon believed that the greatest natural resource in the world, is the human capacity for problem solving and innovation. Fewer people result in fewer minds that can figure out ways to improve the human condition, find cures for diseases, and develop technologies that make us more productive and wealthier. Which is a good segue to my second point. The single biggest predictor of reducing the birthrate is wealth creation. Countries that go from being poor to rich consistently reduce birthrates. (In fact, given my agreement with Simon, I believe that the birth rates of most western countries are too low with America being one of the exceptions). The irony is that environmentalists invariably propose solutions that would have the opposite effect of what they intend. They propose solutions that make it harder or impossible for 3rd world countries to grow their economies which reduces the incentives to have fewer children.Steve
I’m with ‘ucfengr’ on the children thing. Comments like this: “he states that the world’s population is growing too quickly to be sustainable” from the mouth of a Christian should be unsettling.
In 1798 - Thomas Mathus predicted farm production couldn’t keep up with “overpopulation” and massive starvation was predicted for the 1800’s.(Darwin, a life-long admirer of Malthus, referred to Malthus as “that great philosopher”)
In 1968 - “The Population Bomb” by Paul Ehrlich predicted massive starvation in the 1970’s due to “overpopulation”.
In 1990’s - Failed Prophet Of Doom Ehrlich was at it again predicting “overpopulation”.
2008 - Christians en mass seem to be jumping on the “overpopulation” / radial environmental bandwagon. This is astonishing to say the least.
Looks like Steve and I were thinking the same thing at the same time…
If anyone doubts that there is a correlation between wealth and birth rates, check out this graph:
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=25
Ditto ucfengr’s concerns with the limited or restricted children posture to reduce world population overall —too much conflict with biblical precepts for me personally.
Dave’s query on food is interesting; I’ve been recently made aware of locavorism and it’s a semi-sane notion.
A helpful review Tim, as I’ve been cautiously walking a middle line for a while now as I strive to work out the right, biblically balanced view towards care and stewardship of God’s creation. I tend to find fault on both sides of the equation (no the moon is not my sister but yes I’d like a few trees around for my grandchildren) and it’s been difficult arriving at a well thought out, biblically informed position —there is so much hype and gesticulation on both side of the discussion.
Dave’s query on food is interesting; I’ve been recently made aware of locavorism and it’s a semi-sane notion.
Locavorism is another one of those fads that only the wealthy can indulge in. There are very few communities in the US that could subsist wholly on locally grown food.
(no the moon is not my sister but yes I’d like a few trees around for my grandchildren)
Who supports cutting down all the trees? I mean, really. The reality is that if you like trees the best way to ensure a supply is to encourage the use of oil, coal, and nuclear for fuel as opposed to wind, solar, and bio-fuels. All three of the “renewables” require that significantly more land be cleared of trees to support our energy requirements.
I really hope you’ll share it with us if you stumble across a really sound, Biblical book on the subject. As much as I’ve read on the subject, from a variety of worldviews, I can’t help but feel there’s a reasonable voice missing in the discussion. (Maybe you should write it yourself??) ;)
Tim,
You might consider these titles:
Redeeming Creation:The Biblical Basis for Environmental Stewardshiphttp://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/toc/code=1872
Our Father’s World:Mobilizing the Church to Care for Creationhttp://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/toc/code=3484
The Care of Creation:Focusing Concern and Actionhttp://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/toc/code=1556
Great site and a good review. It was well thought out and the comments have been helpful.
I am also uncomfortable with any Christian that advocates birth control for the sake of the environment.
Lance www.homeeducateinthesunshinestate.com/blog
Another good Biblical look at the environmental movement and the idea of how we should think about the environment is Gale Heide’s book “This is My Father’s World.” A description of the first printing can be found at www.joypublishing.com/fathersworld.htm. Though the book was a bit scholarly at times, I enjoyed it’s thorough treatment of the ideas and some of the more light-hearted examples Gale used.
Who cares if global warming is a real crisis or not? We still have to face the fact we’re pigs. I would guess that most of our consumer choices are made regarding only our immediate satisfaction even though we know that those choices have negative effects on others.
An immediate example is commuting to work alone. The problems it creates are plenty: air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, need for more infrastructure, traffic congestion, wasted time, stress, complete reliance on other countries for a basic component of our economy, high gas prices, having less of a finite resource to use later, etc.
The solution is pretty simple, really, but few choose an alternative. Why? I say it’s because were pigs. Anyone who reads this and doesn’t seriously consider sharing their commute is proof enough for me. Perhaps, you can contemplate the legitimacy of global warming while you drive to work alone tomorrow.
I’d almost forgotten about my quick post here, but since it’s been engaged …
Locavorism is another one of those fads that only the wealthy can indulge in. There are very few communities in the US that could subsist wholly on locally grown food.
Not so my friend. Just this summer we’ve contributed to a shared garden effort and have offset our summer produce budget. In fairness, we happen to live in a region and climate, I suspect, that supports this kind of diversity. I honestly don’t know how well this would work in other geographic regions of the U.S. but, on a limited scale, it’s working here. And, by relative standards, we’re not rich, wealthy or, for that matter, terribly fad oriented.
Moreover, I happen to know of a family that uprooted from Long Island NY, bought a small farm in WV and live, essentially, off of the land and their local setting. And they ain’t rich by any means. I also vividly recall, as a youth, visiting friends and family on a farm in VA that lived, once again, pretty much off of the land (and local environs). No avocados or pomegranates to be found. Again, not exactly the richest folks around either.
My point being I have no idea of the wide spread sustainability of locavorism (granted), and thier may be some degree of truth to your observation, but anecdotally speaking and from my little sheltered view of the world, the proof-of-concept run has been made for me.
I’d say Locavorism is less about being poor and more about being lazy, unresourceful and non-adaptive. Nathan makes some good points about our selfish attitudes (as a culture) and willingness to place our comfort and convenience above even common sense solutions.
Who supports cutting down all the trees?
Sadly, they exist. Ever hiked a clear-cut mountain top? While not heavily noted in some Christian circles, greed is very real and alive. Perhaps the wrong question has been asked and a better one might be “who wants to get obscenely rich no matter what the cost or impact otherwise”?
The reality is that if you like trees …
Well, yes, I do like trees. But more to the point, I like breathing. No trees, no oxygen. A little process called photo-synthesis. God has a reason for their existence and I gather it’s not merely ascetic. Compare orbital pix of the Amazon throughout the decades. Telling, eh? All that said, it was more a general statement about sane, balanced preservation and care of the planet and less so a direct expression of love of trees, per se. There is a place to legitimately harvest and use the planet (trees included!) as God intended.
the best way to ensure a supply is to encourage the use of oil, coal, and nuclear for fuel as opposed to wind, solar, and bio-fuels. All three of the “renewables” require that significantly more land be cleared of trees to support our energy requirements.
You got me here —though I’ve got some suspicions it’s not quite as simplistic as posited. I’m simply too ignorant on this aspect of the subject (various energy sources, thier renewability and broader impact to the world as trade off) to have a well defined posture. You may be right.
And thanks for helping me to think though this a bit more.
Once again someone becomes an instant expert on “Man-made” global warming and write another book.He is probably going to make a ton of money. Follow the money. Sleeth is another nut like Al Gore.Yes we should be good stewards of God’s earth, but remember this is a fallen world and “EVERY THING” is dying, and Scripture tells us the world will end.And we think we can stop it, that is a silly as thinking that we can actually bring continued peace to Israel and the middle east.Yet when meteorologist who cannot predict the weather start yelling global warming every one flocks to believe them, granted there a few of those guys that realize that “global warming” ( not made) is a natural cycle. Temps here in the south have been an all time low this year.And the the sun is currently in a “cool down” phase, lower solar activity, so in the next few years we will see decreased temps overall……
My point being I have no idea of the wide spread sustainability of locavorism (granted), and thier may be some degree of truth to your observation, but anecdotally speaking and from my little sheltered view of the world, the proof-of-concept run has been made for me.
Really all you’ve proved is that it is possible for some “wealthy” families to live “off-the food-grid”, if you will. It doesn’t demonstrate that locavorism is sustainable in most large communities. Think Baltimore, Washington, DC, Boston. Do you really think those mid-sized communities could rely on local food for even a majority of their food requirements?
Sadly, they exist. Ever hiked a clear-cut mountain top?
I have, but I think what you don’t grasp is that trees are a crop, just like wheat or corn. People plant, them, grow them and then harvest them to make wood products like furniture, paper, X-mas trees, etc. That doesn’t mean that they support cutting down all the trees any more than an Iowa farmer supports cutting down all the corn.
Compare orbital pix of the Amazon throughout the decades. Telling, eh?
Of course, the reason for much of that clearing is so that Brazil can grow enough sugar to sustain their ethanol programs. The Amazon example really provides support for my point, that oil, coal, etc are more environmentally friendly than “renewable” alternatives.
“Scripture tells us the world will end. And we think we can stop it, that is a silly as thinking that we can actually bring continued peace to Israel and the middle east.”
While the above statement may be true (that the world is dying and will end), I don’t think that gives us any excuse for not taking care of the planet or valuing the natural world (and not just as a “crop”.) Christians throughout history have always fought to improve things and right wrongs precisely because we believed Christ was returning and making all things new, and because we will have to answer to him for how we cared for his creation, both human and non-human.
Tim noted that he will be turning to Francis Schaeffer’s book “Pollution and the Death of Man,” for a more balanced view. Schaeffer is one of my heroes. The fact that a Christian thinker of Schaeffer’s caliber, who was so committed to defending the scriptures and their application to all of life should be concerned with environmental issues should give us pause to think. For Schaeffer, the issue of the environment was inextricable from the issue of human dignity. Both are creations of God and are to be valued for this reason. Schaeffer argued that only a Christian view of things could provide a sustainable framework for caring about the creation. I leave you with a quote from Schaeffer’s book:
“If I love the Lover, I love what the Lover has made. Perhaps this is the reason why so many Christians feel an unreality in their Christian lives. If I don’t love what the Lover has made-in the area of man, in the area of nature-and really love it because he made it, do I really love the Lover?”
Also, here is link to a good, balanced, thought-provoking article that connects eschatology and environmental stewardship: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/july/23.35.html?start=1