I was a neo-platonist, part the second

For all of those who read that posting all those months ago--whenI began to realize the implications that philosophical priorities have impacted the way we live, the way we interact with the world, and the way we view God--here is the second installment.

In my earlier post, gentle reader, I wrote about how I once believed that the material things of this world were of virtually no consequence, being utterly corrupted by the fall. But as time has worn on I began to feel more and more uncomfortable with that understanding of nature.

I've been fascinated by the whole campaign concerning liveEarth, which being absent from the States I've been able to keep up on thanks to MSN. Today I found this article by Phillip Harper which is titled "What Would Jesus Drive?" Beyond the title, which brings up memories of the Christian-Ghetto marketing nightmare that was (and still is), the article is compelling. It does not attempt to give a simplistic answer to the issues of where evangelical Christians stand in regards to care for the environment. Like nothing I've ever read before it acknowledges that there are some very complex issues to be dealt with.

There are some (who are very influential, might I add) who say that Christians should not be concerned about the environment--they say it will divide our attention from the great moral crises of our time. This, I believe, is the impact of that neo-platonic influence I was talking about--"why worry with the material world?? We have souls to think about!" I find it to be short-sighted and one-dimensional in perspective. They seem to think that the world can be changed if they lobby enough on one or two issues. They are throwing all their resources at one symptom of a greater problem--which includes the misuse of the world God has given us in both its material, moral, and spiritual implications.

The first reason I like this article is the fact that Harper gives credence to the aspect of my faith that causes me to care about the environment: stewardship. This world is a precious, precious thing and we are to care for it, and as the article says, "nurture" it. One of the unfortunate byproducts of almost all technology has been to manipulate nature, not to craft nature. I just wrote a paper on Chaucer's Franklin's Tale in which the Franklin juxtaposes the beauty of a garden--nature crafted, shaped, and designed by man; and a magician attempting to manipulate the world by science and illusion for some other purpose. I'm not saying we should only be making flower gardens with technology, but only that our technology should be responsible and pursued with the perspective of the whole in mind.

Another aspect in relation to man's use of environmental resources which the article touches on is the belief that God has given mankind the responsibility of dominion over the world. We are his stewards, the ones he has given charge to as he looks over it. So therefore it is our responsibility to find ways to tame this wild yet beautiful world. We can go back again to the gardens of England and find their beauty being a mixture of art and nature--man's touch upon that which God has made. Things like electricity (which really, I must say is pretty addicting--who wants to live without that??) would never have been possible without people learning how to harness that which provides us with so many other helpful things.

But perhaps my favorite aspect of this piece is that it refuses to ignore the human element in regards to the environment: it does not forget the poor. I feel a little uninformed about the policies that have been discussed for global reform and the implications they might have, but Harper raises some really good points about the immediate moral implications this has upon the world's poorest peoples. They barely have resources as it is--is it right for us to strip away what little they do have when the newer technologies, while better, are not available to them? Should we ask them to wait another 100 years to receive electricity and running water when resources which are based on fossil fuels are available today?

Like I said, I'm not terribly informed when it comes to all of those details, but like some have said when studying Jesus' words: what I don't understand shouldn't scare me as much as what I do understand. And what I do understand, both in what Jesus says and in what the problems are in the world is this: there are people who are dying, physically and spiritually. Our wealth in the world and in is completely disproportionately distributed. I'm not saying I know how to fix it, I'm not sure if anyone does. The complications, details, and repercussions are immense. But it's just nice to know that someone else sees them. The creation and the poor cannot be forgotten. That's what I can understand. And there's enough responsibility to scare me to death as it is.