What Is Her.meneutics?

The Christianity Today women's blog provides news and analysis from the perspective of evangelical women. We cover news stories and books related to international justice and evangelism, pregnancy and sexual ethics, marriage, parenting, and celibacy, pop culture, health and body image, raising girls, and women in the church and parachurch.

Her.meneutics is edited by associate editor Katelyn Beaty and online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey.

Free Newsletters

books we're reading



« Christmas Cooking with Nigella (or Jesus) | Main | Gimme that Christian Side Hug »

December 11, 2009

'Love Thy Neighbor' Shows Up at Copenhagen

Many Christians who support climate-change protocols have the least of these in mind.

Lisa Graham McMinn

The Copenhagen Climate Conference (COP15) began December 7 and will continue through next week. World leaders are gathering to negotiate carbon emission protocols that will replace the 1997 Kyoto agreement, which expires in 2012. Robust proposals are coming from African countries, along with Tuvalu and other low-lying island nations, which have already felt the negative impact of climate change. Tuvalu is leading the charge for the Alliance of Small Island States, who want binding proposals to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5C. Their argument is that, as non-industrialized countries they have not burned fossil fuels nor contributed to global climate change, yet are among the most vulnerable to the consequences of rising sea levels.

4033105310_f6e0c4e0b6.jpg

Christians are not united on the best response to climate change; neither are nations (see this BBC report on where countries stand on Copenhagen). Some are skeptical about the science (especially, perhaps, in light of British and American researchers' hacked e-mails on how to manipulate data to show human-caused climate change), as well as about the United Nations as a governing body capable of overseeing global policy on climate change.

But one organization, 350.org — founded by Bill McKibben, an environmentalist and Christian who has written for CT and Books & Culture — is standing in support of the most vulnerable countries, calling for protocols in line with current scientific consensus. They want to see a fair, ambitious, and binding deal that includes helping developing countries develop while also bringing CO2 emissions down to 350 parts per million, the level determined safe by the scientific community. 350.org has helped mobilize over 5,200 actions in 181 countries that gathered in cities, churches, schools, parks, and businesses and collectively raised support in an effort to get the world’s leaders to commit to robust climate change policies.

Christians who support efforts by groups like 350.org speak of Christ’s mandate to love our neighbors as ourselves, and to protect their well-being and capacity to flourish. Such love may require that we change lifestyle habits, pay more for energy, and support efforts to assist the development of green energy both here and in industrializing nations.

Maybe we can’t stop climate change. But a large number of geologists, biologists, and climatologists think we still can (see this study from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Called to be a steward of creation, I’d rather err on the side of action, and stand in support of those already feeling the effects of climate change. One thing I know for sure: God loves life, and as God’s representative one of my responsibilities is to help guard the flourishing of life.

That may mean I have to give up some autonomy and submit my will and self-interest to a larger community who depends on the same atmosphere as I do. More may be asked of me than I am comfortable giving. But I want to be willing to trust democracy, and a global community looking out for the well being of this planet's inhabitants. I have a better chance of extending God’s love to others if I am also vested in protecting their well-being, and the well-being of my great-grandchildren, and theirs.

Church vigils are being held this weekend as faith communities sound their support for the Copenhagen talks and pray for leaders gathered there. Regardless of our perspective, we could all pray that leaders will be wise in their deliberations, listen well, and count the cost of inaction as carefully as they count the cost of action.

Share |

Posted by Katelyn Beaty on December 11, 2009 9:46 AM

Comments

I like this article. As one who lives in an industrialized nation and much above sea level, I have thought that climate change was just a political issue. But, when you put in the perspective of helping "the least" I see it differently. If we, as humans are changing the climate, and something can be done about it, then we should.

I don't want to be responsible for one more person starving or losing their property from flooding. I am in favor of concervation in all areas. If we have to decrease our scale of living, then I am willing. But if this is just all political then I don't want to be a part of it.

When will we know for sure?

Posted By: Steve Ker | December 11, 2009 3:37 PM

Climategate has completely put everything the eco-imperialists and eco-nazis have been advocating in doubt. Science becomes pseudo-science when it goes to bed with advocacy. The scientific method has been prostituted for the cause of green businesses and left-wing political gain, very little of it has origins in altruism or true scientific inquiry.

Posted By: Rajan | December 12, 2009 10:04 PM

I like the questions your raise, Steve. For me, the question is this: has a scientific issue been distorted so that we wrongly think of it as a political issue, or has a political issue been distorted so that we wrongly think of it as a scientific issue. My inclination is to trust the 97% of scientists who agree on this, which means political rhetoric ought to have very little to do with this issue. We need to be a community of caring Christians, Republicans and Democrats, willing to make sacrifices for the good of our neighbors.

Posted By: Mark | December 13, 2009 11:46 PM

Copenhagen meet has turned up more like a political issue than an environmental issue. The developing nations should at no cost provide grounds to the developed nations to demolish the Kyoto Protocol.

Posted By: baie d'Açai | December 18, 2009 12:59 AM

The Copenhagen meet has turned out to be a political issue rather than being an environment issue.

Posted By: baie d'Açai | December 18, 2009 1:03 AM

"...if this is just all political then I don't want to be a part of it. When will we know for sure?" Well put Katelyn Beaty! That is EXACTLY the issue. Another 'feel-good' project is NOT what we need. America is a VERY giving nation. Our Judeo-Christian heritage makes that a part of our make-up. But for another nation or organization to demand we change, simply because they 'think' we are the problem is lunacy. As one man recently said, there are good people on BOTH sides of this issue. And, much debate that is not conclusive. To start off in one direction, only to find it is simply a cooked-up hoax that man could not control will cost not only our reputation, but jobs and many people's livelihood. I'm not sure I'm ready to take that risk. In all honesty, I don't trust the United Nations to be honest. Period! Steady, thoughtful growth in the direction of alternative sources of energy is the safest and best answer.

Posted By: BruceSr | December 22, 2009 12:19 AM

Copenhagen was political, it was our world leaders ----political world leaders. World leaders create policies that effect transportation, production of energy, international trade, and factories. Policies effect the environment, to separate the two is not logical in the world we live in today. To desire no part in politics is understandable, environmentalists have a tainted reputation in general, but to strive for a more sustainable earth, and therefore the well-being of this planet's inhabitants (as Lisa said), a deeper understanding of the social issues is essential. The environment is changing, governments and political leaders create policies around the production of energy, and we turn our lights on and off. It is all connected. Action is essential to change. To say that politics and the environment should be separate, may or may not be true. But to strive for action and change, politics must be considered. Steady and thoughtful growth would be ideal, but some things cannot wait. Action is required. We have a choice in how we live our life, we have a voice in politics, therefore we have a voice in climate change.

Posted By: Kelsi Kimura | January 8, 2010 3:47 PM

Post a comment:





Verification (needed to reduce spam):

tags

February 2012
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29