PROPHETIC JUSTICE FOR THE POOR AND CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENTAL THEOLOGY

By Ray Maleke

(Updated 4/24/2013 footnotes; still require cross-check).

In the rhetoric that surrounds the field of environmental ethics, we often find two views vying for superiority: One is the anthropocentric perspective which puts human interest as its center of gravity, while the other perspective is biocentric, advocating respect for nature. While these two sides vehemently strive to prove their point on an ideological sphere, there are people trapped in poverty who, in their predicament, exploit their natural resources to the devastation of the environment, thereby further diminishing their own resources. In this scenario, would it be justified for the poor to use their natural resources, despite the environmental cost? Or should natural resources be protected from the poor for purposes of sustainability? How can Christian environmental ethics respond to this situation?

In this essay I contend that Christian environmental theology and the prophetic demands of justice for the poor are compatible in opening access for the poor to natural resources as well as promoting environmental sustainability. For this purpose I present a case study from Ampreng, a village in North Sulawesi, Indonesia, conducted by Elsje Pauline Manginsela¹ to underline the biblical ground for an eco-centric view, which prioritizes that all members of the ecosystem thrive in mutual relationship.

This essay consists of four sections. In the first section, I describe the situation of Ampreng village in North Sulawesi, Indonesia. In the second section, I discuss biblical environmental theology in relationship to the aforementioned two views in environmental ethics. In the third section of this essay, I then expound upon the theological aspects of justice for the poor from the Prophets, emphasizing how being just to the poor contributes to the well-being of the environment. Finally, in the fourth section, I speak about an approach wherein the poor are empowered and simultaneously the environment is preserved. 

Ampreng as the Context of Reflection²

Ampreng is located adjacent to the Soputan Mountain Protection Forest upstream of Tondano Lake watershed, in Minahasa District, North Sulawesi. Due to its location, it has a significant role in preserving the Tondano Lake watershed. More than 70 percent of the people who live in this village are farmers, and more than half have not completed elementary school. Poverty, cash demands, and the needs for more land for cultivation force them to expand into the Soputan Mountain Protection Forest. Hence the Soputan Mountain Protection Forest has experienced deterioration due to illegal logging and agricultural encroachment activity. It is critical to take action to maintain the forest function and prevent further negative impacts, while at the same time, imperative to help the villagers improve their quality of life.

Christian Theology and Environmental Ethics

Anthropocentrism in environmental ethics come from the Greek anthropos (human) and kentron (pivoting point of drawing a circle, center), together suggesting the connotation of human centeredness. As may be concluded from this terminology, the anthropocentric view encompasses the idea that the human being is the most important being in the world and that all other values are measured according to their relevance to humanity.³ This position, which is alleged to cause environmental devastation, is perceived to be “embedded in traditional Western ethical thinking” and also of ‘Christian-origin.’⁴ In response to this latter allegation, William T. Johnson in his article The Bible on Environmental Conservation: A 21st Century Prescription contends that Christians have been one of the religious groups that “have served as [a] convenient scapegoat” for social ills, including environmental problems. However, he points out that this criticism is misguided because Christian theology does not promote environmental insensitivity. In contrast, Johnson exemplifies how biblical teachings play roles, not only in making positive contributions toward environmental preservation, but also in other areas, such as literature, art, music, education, health, and science.⁵

There is a need to put into perspective what actually a biblical Christian environmental theology is. One of the most pervasive arguments suggesting that Christianity causes environmental problems is that God has commanded human beings to subdue the earth as recorded in Genesis 1: 28. This verse has been treated as if it were a free-floating passage in the Bible, which may be interpreted by the bad environmental behaviors of some Christians or perhaps their insensitive opinions to environmental concern.⁶ Neglected in this argument, however, is the previous verse which records the image of God in human beings (Gen 1:27) that binds us to take care and to tend God’s creation (cf. Gen. 2:15) which God saw as good (cf. Gen. 1:21; 25). God gave human beings the responsibility to rule (that is to exercise moral agency) towards all creations – ourselves and the environment.  God demands environmental justice because God entrusts us to take care of the creation. “The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it” (Genesis 2:15). This is the Creation Commandment.

On the other side of the anthropocentric view, Richard Routley, an Australian philosopher, argues that non-human objects have intrinsic value apart from their usefulness for humanity.⁷ Aligned with him, Paul W. Taylor argues a step further, saying that all beings have the same inherent worth: values owned regardless of external perception.⁸ His position is known as the biocentric view, wherein he espouses that to live a pro-environmental life is to have respect for it.⁹ Taylor categorically denies ‘human superiority’ over other beings, however places responsibility on humanity, as moral agents and also moral subjects, to uphold principles of good conduct as members of “Earth community of life.”

While the biocentric view may agree with the Christian environmental theology of respecting all beings (in Christianity: all creation), the concept of respecting in Christian environmental theology suggests a deep theological implication. Christian view of respecting is based on the act of God who entrusted creation to humanity. And here also notably, Christian environmental theology goes beyond “human beings, animals and plants” for “[t]he earth is the Lord’s, with all that is in it” (Psalm 24:1). The act of respecting is inherited in the act of entrusting by the Creator God, meaning that taking care of the environment as a trust of the Owner of the earth. Respecting the environment is more about respecting the One who entrusted the environment to be taken care of. All creation created and exists, and therefore they all have good-on-their-own, and beyond the appreciation of their good-quality (and the opposite), it is the respect of the Creator that requires human beings to be respectful to every form of creation, including themselves.

Using the language of biocentrists, human beings are the moral agents, and together with other beings, are moral subjects. When a situation happens that places the poor and the environment at odds, the authority plays the role of moral agency and may argue for environmental protection, overlooking the rights of the poor to gain benefit from natural resources. This is the time when the call for justice should be proclaimed based on the prophetic justice.

The voice of the prophets for the poor and its implication to the environment

The prophets assumed the task of maintaining and restoring justice in their society. The word ‘prophet’ in Hebrew is considered to have a passive characteristic, as in the Akkadian nabium > nabu(m) “one who is called.” In the semantic sphere, the nabi can be used in the same sense of “call;” hence by definition it refers to a mediator who is called to speak on behalf of God.¹⁰ As in other ANE traditions, the deity is regarded as the Judge of the whole earth (cf. Gen. 18.25).¹¹ God’s universal judgeship was based on the fact that it was God who created the world and established equity and justice (Ps 99:1-4).¹²

The Hebrew word for justice “mispat” occurs 422 times in the OT. The general meaning of this word is “justice.”¹³ Other meanings deriving from this word are “judgment,” “rights,” “vindication,” “deliverance,” “custom,” and “norm.”¹⁴  Scholar Temba L. J. Mafico asserts that “originally the substantive mispat referred to the restoration of a situation or environment which promotes equity and harmony (shalom) in a community.”¹⁵ Mafico points out that in cases where the prophets speak of justice (mispat) for the poor, they are actually pointing at the rights of the poor (cf. Jer. 5:28), and therefore “mispat does not solely refer to moral norm, but also refers to basic human rights.”¹⁶ Basic human rights have to be seen as part of the inherent worth of human beings.  In other words, it must be affirmed that human beings require these rights in order to maintain their humanity, as often times they have no other means to support themselves.

In the prophetic texts (e.g. Jeremiah, Amos) we see how the ruling parties (those who do not only exercise moral agency but also have power to make decisions affecting moral subjects) are held responsible to exercise justice to the poor, the widow, and the orphans. And, interestingly enough, exercising such justice impacts the land. If justice is upheld, (i.e. no oppression toward the widow, the orphan, the alien, or the poor), the land shall be blessed. On the contrary, when the rulers are oppressive, the land suffers (cf. Zec. 7:1-14). So a just exercise of moral agency is required from the rulers. When the poor are being cared for, justice and righteousness are upheld; the Lord blessed them with shalom, wholeness, prosperity, and peace. No shalom will ever be achieved if the land is desolated, or the environment is destroyed. In the case of Ampreng village, if the extreme of either the anthropocentric view or the radical biocentric approach would be chosen, then desolation of the land and also the people would occur. The better way is an eco-centric approach.

The Eco-centric approach

With this understanding that we are called to do justice towards the poor and at the same time bear responsibility to take care of the world which God created, is there really any possibility to improve the life of the poor and at the same time preserve nature? A solution is the eco-centric approach, which strives for all members of an ecosystem to mutually thrive. The poor, as part of the ecosystem, should be empowered to improve their lives, using environmental resources responsibly and sustainably so that these resources may be developed for their own wellbeing and for future generations.

An example of the eco-centric approach in action is the “EcoTipping Project.”  EcoTipping refers to “a tip in an eco-social system that can reverse the direction of change, a change from environment decline to health and sustainability.”¹⁷ The application of the eco-tipping project engenders a better life for the poor and promotes environmental sustainability.

The process of this Eco-Tipping project is exemplified in the case of Ampreng Village mentioned above, where Manginsela applies EcoTipping Points. She describes the chain of cause and effect that engenders poverty and environmental damage as follows:

...more degraded protection forest - > less income -> more poverty -> more illegal logging -> more agricultural encroachment -> more hunting and fodder collection -> more poverty -> more degraded protection forest…

at the same time, poverty generates less opportunity to have better education, which eventually contributes to less opportunity to get better income.

From this data, she draws a Negative Eco-Tipping Point:

By understanding the cycle of Negative Eco-Tipping of Ampreng village Manginsela is able to see the basic problem which enables her to take further step in order to stop the negative cycling, and start the positive cycling which is helping the people to have a better life and to preserve the forest by education and community empowerment for Agroforestry program.

In the case of Ampreng Village, the initiation of education and community empowerment for Agroforestry program contributes to the changing of the negative cycle that prolongs poverty and environmental destruction into a positive cycle where poverty may be lessened and the watershed may also be restored and preserved. The result is

agroforestry system -> income generation -> less poverty -> better watershed function and more source of forest production -> more income -> more opportunity to have better education -> more opportunity to get better job and income -> less poverty -> -> agroforestry system -> less environmental damage...

We can imagine other negative factor(s) that promulgates different communities into a cycle which harmful to the earth (i.e., human beings, other beings, and environment). And with that in mind, get the picture of how Eco-tipping points may change the cycles into a positive one, where all creation live in a harmonious relationship with one another in the earth that is God’s. This is eco-centric approach.

END NOTES

1 "Applying EcoTipping Points to Sustainable Development with Community Forests: Ampreng Village, Sulawesi, Indonesia" (2007), The EcoTipping Points Project: Models for Success in Time of Crisis, http://www.ecotippingpoints.org/resources/application-ampreng-village.html (1 April 2010).  

2 Manginsela, "Applying EcoTipping Points to Sustainable Development with Community Forests." 

3Andrew Brennan and Yeuk-Sze Lo, "Environmental Ethics," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = (accessed: 1 April 2010).  

4 Andrew Brennan and Yeuk-Sze Lo, "Environmental Ethics." 

5 William T. Johnson, "The Bible on Environmental Conservation: A 21st Century Prescription," Quodlibet Journal: Volume 2 Number 4, Fall 2000, http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/johnson-environment.shtml (accessed: 1 April 2010).

6 William T. Johnson, "The Bible on Environmental Conservation: A 21st Century Prescription."

7 Andrew Brennan and Yeuk-Sze Lo, "Environmental Ethics." 

8 Paul W. Taylor, Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989), 75.

9 Paul W. Taylor, Respect for Nature, 99.

10 G. Johannes Botterweck (ed.), "Nabi," Theological dictionary of the Old Testament Vol. IX (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998);  Joseph Blenkinsopp, A History of Prophecy in Israel (Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), 27.

11 Temba L. J. Mafico, "Justice." The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol 3 H – J, (ed.) David Noel Freedman, (New York: Doubleday, 1992); Bruce V. Malchow, Social Justice in the Hebrew Bible (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1996), 16.

12 Bruce V. Malchow, Social Justice in the Hebrew Bible, 16.

13 Temba L. J. Mafico, "Justice."

14 Temba L. J. Mafico, "Justice."

15 Temba L. J. Mafico, "Justice"; Bruce V. Malchow, Social Justice in the Hebrew Bible, 16.

16 Temba L. J. Mafico, "Justice."

17 Manginsela, "Applying EcoTipping Points to Sustainable Development with Community Forests" quoting Garry Marten, 2007, "About EcoTipping Points" (http://www.ecotippingpoints.org/aboutetps.html).