Catalyzed by a tweet from Paul Baloche (here, or if its gone from twittersphere, archived here) Paul Baloche is a Christian I esteem; I play his music, I sing his songs, I've seen him play live, I read what he writes, I even use his resources with our church worship team. So seeing him tweet in support of the Keystone XL pipeline made me pause to think. Now this is not a post about Paul taking this position - I don't know him personally and I don't know his reasoning. But I do know that he has significant Christian influence, and also that the Keystone XL issue is a very nuanced and complicated issue. What would Jesus say, I wonder? It makes me wonder if Christians are looking at this (and many other) issues too 1-dimensionally – for Christians have a tendency to reducing complicated situations to single criteria - "single issue voting". The pipeline is complicated and polarised, made doubly so by the extensive media lobby activities, and further compounded by serving the tar sand mining industry. Its too complicated an issue for one blog post, but there is a bigger Christian picture that underlies each persons choice to lobby for or against. (For the record, I am firmly against, but perhaps not for the reasons you might imagine). First, lets recognize that tar sand exploitation will likely continue with or without the Keystone XL pipeline, but that's not the point. The real question is whether as Christians we should or should not be encouraging a particular path of action. Here are some quick thoughts of the inter-related issues for the Christian. a) The most obvious issue is our responsibility for stewardship of the earth (e.g. see these lists of relevant bible verses here or here). There are actually two issues here. The first is that exploiting the tar oil sands is one of the most energy intensive and environmentally destructive (both the in situ production and pipeline impacts) approaches to obtaining fossil fuel. The question is thus "What Christian reasons do I have to justify encouraging this energy pathway over other available options". If my Christian purpose is captured by the two great commandments, then is this decision the best way forward for living with the heart of Jesus for the suffering of the world (and not just for the best interests of the USA or Canada)? Secondly, its a no-brainer that the western world is addicted to consumption. Is supporting Keystone XL and tar sands exploitation is akin to buying a pill for the pain of our global addiction to consumption and feed the desires of materiel comfort and security? Aside from any spiritual issues (see (c) below) this life style of material excess is fuelled by our over-exploitation of God's creation to get a daily fix of fossil energy. Consider the global environmental consequences of palm oil production, tropical deforestation, and fossil fuel extraction. In furthering our consumptive lives we also hold up an aspirational goal of materialism for the poverty-stricken global majority. Can I, as a Christian, in good conscience encourage such developments where the prime purpose is to fuel my addiction? On these two perspectives alone I would have trouble defending to Jesus my encouragement of Keystone XL and tar sand development. b) We are called as Christians to serve those who suffer; the poor, the weak, the ill. Now, one argument put forward for Keystone XL and the tar sands is that it reduces the need to purchase oil from middle eastern (terrorist, as some would say) nations, and from poor third world nations. In this we would build independence from external factors (implicitly meaning that we can then reduce the risks to our western lifestyle of comfort). I would argue that this is simply an argument to build buffers against that which makes me uncomfortable. As a Christian, consider the consequences of undermining the revenue stream of many third world nations, leading to further increased debt and exacerbating the near impossible escape from poverty. Of course there is corruption and abuse of power in these nations, of course it's not all nice. But is disengaging a Christian answer? What suffering do we enhance by doing so. Would a Christian not instead step into the place of suffering and engage for change? No tar sand oil, no Keystone XL: then I become forced to engage with the trouble spots of the world. c) The parable of the rich young ruler man is always one that troubles me. For what is it that Jesus might ask me to sell in order to follow him? Keystone XL and tar sand exploitation are all about strengthening the foundations of production and consumption, and in the process building my basis of power. Unfortunately this power is not benevolent, instead this power feeds and is in turn manipulated by the very machine it builds. Imagine if western nations halved their consumption and released the freed human and physical resources to help the poor. Of course this will not happen – secular human nature dominates. But that is no excuse for the Christian to not swim against the flow of easy yet globally damaging solutions. If the rich young ruler had been able to see a bigger picture, instead of having his vision filled by a desire to protect his comfort zone, would Jesus have stayed with him a little longer? d) Climate change – is as controversial a topic as one may find in the USA and Canada. Yet the rhetoric is foolishly polarised; the evidence is overwhelming. I've written on this before (e.g. here, here, or here), so suffice to say that its real, its multi-generational, and that the impacts are most felt by those already poor and suffering. So how, as a Christian, can I even begin to support an action that further feeds the CO2 production factory that the (western) world has built for themselves, and which developing nations are striving to emulate. Can I say to Jesus “we decided for Keystone XL and tar sand exploitation, and by the way I'm sorry for how this made life worse for my children, grand children, and all those poor people exposed in poverty". And so, what can I conclude? The western world, and Christians especially, need to engage in some serious reflection. Each action I choose to take, each decision I support, each outcome I lobby for, is often multi-dimensional and complex. I need to decide if it is helping or hurting those God asks me to love. For myself, the Keystone XL pipeline and tar sand exploitation ultimately hurts. But each of us needs to objectively research the issues (understanding the enveloping bias of the lobbyists that seek to sway us), and to reason before God whether we are serving his purpose in all we say and support.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Why?
Probably the best therapy is to express yourself. Why do you think psychiatrists make you lie on the couch and talk, while all they do is murmur "hmmm", "uhuh", or "go on"? Archives
May 2017
|