It seems like churches should be the first to adopt new “Green Energy” technologies and become early adopters of the ecology movements across the United States. Yet, because of the platform nature of the global warming debate, many aren’t even thinking about it… especially conservative Southern churches where politics fill pulpits Sunday after Sunday.
I’m not going to make a theological case for going green; these kinds of arguments have been made in countless other places, and I believe quite sufficiently. I’m not even going to bother with trying to make the case for global warming because as a skeptic by nature, I wouldn’t know enough to even convince myself about the topic.
But I do think churches should be ecologically centered and make the switch to Green Energy. Here’s my three P’s as to why, and they shouldn’t matter as to which side of the political fence you built your facility.
Potential. No matter how any of us might feel about the data surrounding the climate change issues, a few things we can be certain of… change is happening, and it is real. If there was even the slightest potential that human dependence on fossil fuels was driving some of that change, churches should lead the way as champions of prevention. I understand the multi-faceted objections that are often raised, ranging anywhere from, “That’s a liberal issue” to the perplexing and ill-conceived “Jesus is coming back to fix it all anyway” mentality. What doesn’t compute is doing nothing at all. Churches often make claims to “prophetic visioning” of culture and its many ills. If there was even the potential that our actions were leading to climate instability, why would we fail to find the intestinal fortitude to take a prophetic stance for green energy?
If there’s even a possibility that our habits are impacting future generations, then the church must stand on the side of those with vision. It doesn’t have to be a knee-jerk reaction, and it certainly doesn’t have to be coupled with political grand standing. It doesn’t have to assume identification with any agendas or platforms. Instead, it should be about seeing clearly the potential of human beings to make things better. That’s what churches are supposed to be about, right?
Forget the debate about whether global warming is real or made up. It’s a deflection of a deeper issue, which is the responsibility we all share to be forward thinkers and doers in a global community. So if there was even a remote “chance” of making a positive difference, why would anyone toss it out?
Protection. I’m not talking about protection of the planet (that would fall under the P of potential). Until the science is complete (and it is getting more and more clear with each passing year), we just can’t know with certainty if our actions are protecting the planet or not. Whether or not we’re making a difference there, we can at least rest knowing for certain that we aren’t making anything worse. As I stated above, the potential ought to be enough to get us moving.
By using the word protection here, I’m instead talking about what many have described as the largest transfer of wealth history has ever recorded. Billions of dollars are virtually signed over to foreign companies every year. American asset protection is one great reason for churches to go green. The more money we can save on energy, even at the local church level, the more assets we have to share with the world in areas of greatest need – such as eliminating disease, mental illness, drug abuse, and poverty.
Protection also comes by way of our democratic values. Many of the recipients of the billions of dollars we send overseas do not have the better interests of freedom in mind. They often represent cruel dictatorships, seldom distribute the money in ways that benefit their impoverished or fund better educations systems. And in some cases, the money we send them can be directly tied to activities that are not only unsympathetic to democratic values, but actually at war with them.
Churches must adopt energy policies that protect the innocent, enhance freedom, and support the under-privileged. We can’t do that while sending billions of dollars per year to be utilized outside the boundaries of our laws and values.
Perception. The last P is an important one, and that is perception. There can be little doubt that the world perceives Christians as being self-centered, judgmental, divisive, and ecologically apathetic. Heck, I’m a Christian and I see so many of us this way myself. It’s extremely damaging to our faith to be constantly known for what we are against, but seldom if ever known what we are for. We come across as combative, ideological zealots, and we fail to embody the kindness and compassion of Jesus when we draw lines in the sand on the issue of ecology.
Perception isn’t everything, and I certainly wouldn’t advocate that it is the responsibility of the church to please everyone – in fact I might argue quite the opposite. But when it comes to being a positive force for change in this world, I see no reason why we should not be on the forefront of such causes. I see an opportunity to reach outside of the political agendas and find common ground. I see churches earning the right to be heard, because we’ve been faithful with the environment we share with others.
And let’s face it folks, if Christians aren’t willing to take a shared approach to the air we all breathe, why in heaven or earth would anyone care what we have to say about a giving God? Churches may not want this negative perception attached to them, but when they fail to be ecologically focused, that’s exactly what happens.
Potential for change, protection of assets, and perceptions of generosity – that’s what is really at stake whether or not you believe in global warming. Churches should make the switch. Go Green today!
No comments:
Post a Comment