soil-conservation-people-religion-and-land.pdf - South West NRM

The writer's mn simplistic view recognises three *
relationships:
The writer suggests that if the (lestrnction of nature is any
indication, Christian countries are guilty of gross neglect
of this third relationship. While much has been written by
theologians in defence of the Church's concentration on the
first relationship, if a nation's culture is centred on its
religious beliefs (albeit unconsciously for many), then the
Church has a central role to play in propounding and
explaining ~an/Earth relationships.
It is difficult to avoid the impression that the Church is
avoiding conservation issues and has put them in the
ecclessiastical "too hard basket". Take Montefiore (1978) as
an example: he says quite categorically, "The first priority
of the church is God. The world has urgent pressing needs,
but the church is not primarily in the welfare business - it
is about God." While one cannot argue with his priorities,
the impression is given of an escapism, at least from the
social realities of our time. Closer to home, several
branches of the Christian Church in Australia, while making
doctrinal statements on social issues in general, are silent
on land and stewardship, unlike their American counterparts.
An example might be a Church with mainly rural members,
deeply rooted in the rural tradition of perseverance,
independence and "battling cockies" as the congregation
stereotype. Its leaders are often men of the land whose
background is one of hardship, economic survival and a battle
against the elements. They are in daily contact with their
people who are caught in an economic bind which often
relegates the very idea of stewardship to the category of a
luxury they can ill afford. These leaders understand why
conservationists are often seen as a threat to financial
survival rather than champions of Christian Land Stwardship.
Hi storic perspective
Few environmental writers have caused more of a stir in the
Christian Church than Lynn White (see p. 16). White is
strongly supported by eminent writers such as Toynbee (1974),
Derr (1973) and Nash (1973). Equally reputable scholars like
Southwick ( 1972) , Olsen-T jensvold ( 1978) , Elsdon ( 198 1 ) , B arr
(1974), Imsland (1971), Farigy (1972), Richardson (1972),
Reidel (1971) and Ruether (1978) dispute a number of White's
basic tenets. Yaple (1982) has given a useful analysis of
the proponents on both sides of the "Christian arrogance''
argument. White's original paper "The Historical Roots of
our Ecologic Crisis" considers Christianity as one of the
important factors which moulded technological man's attitudes
to the world around him. Many Christians would disagree with
White's "uncaringw interpretation of the Christian view of