antagonistic attitude towards nature. In the theo-centric perspective of Christianity, human life is of great value over non-human beings. In this essay, I will try to find out some of the reasons as to why White and other critics have objected to Christianity as the cause of ecological crisis. In fact, White’s thesis certainly sets off a great deal of discussion. Most of the interpreters agree with White’s thesis, while some others disagree with him. The Judeo-Christian religions put an extreme emphasis on the right of humanity over nature. Many critics term it as a form of despotism. On the other hand, some critics believe that Christianity upholds that natural creatures have got value, and that human beings should take the responsibility to steward the natural world. This view is clearly stated both in the Old Testament and The New Testament. This approach of Christianity regarding environment is known as stewardship.
Lynn White and other critics claim that Christianity is the only reason to destroy the effectiveness of the relationship between humanity and nature.
Actually, this dualistic approach to philosophy is the cause of ecological crisis.
Dualism, as a philosophical paradigm, is practiced in many religions, especially in Christianity. In a famous verse of Genesis 1:26 and 1:28, we find explicitly the idea of dualism, upon which western science is set. It influences western science in such a way that we also find another dualism here —dualism of humanity and nature. These verses also influence the thoughts of western people’s behaviorism.
By the western mind, nature is consistently treated as God’s creation, and, it is also a mode for human consumption. So, the implication of this attitude towards nature is very much human-centered. In other words, it is anthropocentric.
Lynn White385 focuses upon those verses, which present the western religious approach to nature. He holds that the western Christianity finds the world as solely existing for humanity’s benefits, and that it inherits an exploitative attitude towards natural world, which is the key to the present and the forthcoming ecological crises. And, he states declares that “Christianity bears a huge burden of guilt”5. White's article has got the merit of being thought-provocative. He has got a great concern for the future of the world. Moreover, the
385 White, 1967, p.1205.
importance he ascribes to western Christianity in promoting modern science and technological advancement along with its ruthless destruction of natural environment. Once we thought that humanity and nature are two components of environment. Instead of that, Christianity teaches the western people that human beings are master of nature, and that nature is their sub-servant. Such a despotic tendency towards nature has emerged under the practices of Judeo-Christianity.
While supporting this central tenet of his article, he refers to the following verses from the Bible: (i) “… God had created Adam and, as an afterthought, Eve to keep man from being lonely. Man named all the animals, thus establishing his dominance over them.” (ii) “God planned all of this explicitly for man’s benefit and rule: no item in the physical creation had any purpose save to serve man’s purposes.”, (iii) “Christianity, in absolute, [is] contrast to ancient paganism and Asian’s religions.”, (iv) “not only established a dualism of man and nature but also insisted that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends”, and (iv) “Especially in its Western form, Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen.”386 From these verses, White shows that Christianity is a despotic concept if its ecological concerns are taken into account. White exposit that (i) Christianity permits human beings to dominate over nature, and (ii) it also maintains duality between humanity and nature. In this binary situation, humanity has been given superiority over nature.
After the publication of the article written by White, a lot of debate arose for and against in this regard. In this chapter, I shall make an assessment as to why White and other critics regard Christianity as the cause of ecological crisis. The first thesis provided by White in this regard, can be called despotism. Such a portrayal of Christianity is also found in the works of Yi-Fu Tuan387 and Jeanne Key388. But, there are also a number of pro-Christian critics who have rejected the allegation brought against Christianity. They believe that Christian religion supports stewardship
386 All these verses are from Genesis; Lynn White uses these verses in defense of his thesis.
See: White, 1967.
387 Tuan, Y.-F., 1984. “Treatment of the Environment in Ideal and Actuality”, Dominance and Affection: The Making of Pets, New Haven: CT: Yale University.
388 Key, Jeanne, 1985. “Preconditions of Natural Resource Conservation”, Agricultural History, 59, pp.124-35.
approach and hold the view that human beings are the caretaker of nature. They also say that human beings have got the responsibility to God to ensure that nature is taken care of. In the subsequent sections, I will make an evaluation of the ideas related to despotism as well as stewardship.
7.2 Judeo-Christianity: Anthropocentrism as Ecological Despotism
Regarding nature, Christian religion assumes that only human beings can understand things and they are able to change the material world. This view of anthropocentrism regards human beings as those who are made in the image of God who blesses them thus: “be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”389 In this verse God instructs Adam and Eve to subdue the earth, because, He has given them superiority over the rest of the creation.
Through this idea of superiority of the human race, Christianity separated humanity and God from the earth.
Lynn White’s thesis is supported also by Robert J. Moore390, who argues that the verse 1:26 in the holy Bible implies that God has given sovereignty to human beings over the cosmos. And, through verse 1:28 (mentioned above), God has allowed human beings imperialistic behavior towards nature. This divine mandate for the human beings provokes them to destroy nature. In Genesis 1:26, the supremacy of humanity is established. Thus, Christianity speaks of human’s uniqueness. Christian thinkers such as Saint Paul and Saint Augustine stated that God gave the divine power only to human beings, who alone possess the eternal spirits. It is the human beings who are possessors of eternal soul. Not any other beings in this earth possess it. The eternal soul is the indicator to make a differentiation between human beings and on-human-creatures. In the City of God, Saint Augustine is found to refer to the process of interpret separation between human beings and the ‘non-spiritual’ part of the whole creation.
389 Genesis 1: 28
390 Moore, Robert J., 1990. “A New Christian Reformation”, in Ethics of Environment and Development : Global Challenges, International Response, eds. By Engel, J. Ronald &
Engel, Joan Gibb, Tucson: University of Arizona Press, pp. 104-113.JChrreformation',
A number of thinkers, along with Peter Singer, agree with White who thinks that both The Old Testament and The New Testament lack proper consideration about animal interests. As an animal ethicist Singer defences is relevant to animal ethics.
On the basis of this stance, he argues that in Genesis there is “…myth to make human beings free their supremacy, and their view power. Man alone is made in the image of God. Man alone is given dominion over all the animals and told to subdue the earth.”391 Singer further comments that Judeo-Christianity gives us the idea that the act of killing animals is permissible because human beings have got a special place in the whole creation. Singer is quite consistent in his argument, except the exposition of St. Francis; the whole Christian tradition has given humanity above all. Thus, it seems that the dominion approach is the mainstream of thought in Christianity.
However, it may be argued here from the environmental ethical point of view that animal does matter, as life of others’ living does, whether it is the life of human beings or great apes. So, it will not be wrong to show that the Christian trend, which contributes much to the issue of environment, has been very unimpressive at times.
Any critic may explore the information on the basis of Gospel that Jesus does not tell the people that the other beings in the world of nature, such as living beings, plants, and animals are without any value. The verses 6-7 in the Gospel show the God as a preserver of species. Therefore, Singer’s criticisms of the Christian approach to ecology do not perfectly represent the overwhelming sense of Biblical literature.
We all know that Judeo-Christianity is a monotheistic tradition in the realm of religion, which declares that God is the only creator of the universe and that this universe is characterized by the diversity of things. Throughout the whole history of Judeo-Christianity, we come across various trends and communities all of which show, in most of the cases, a dualistic approach. This dualism points towards that of body (physical) and soul as well as that of nature and the supernatural entity. In fact, this dualistic approach is the enemy of environmental reconstruction. Concepts of dualism are found in the works of Plato who influenced Christianity throughout the middle ages. His thoughts influenced also Protestantism, Catholicism, Manichean, Catharianism form of Christianity. Christianity was influenced by the Platonic notion, which states that “essence is the more real than that of physical something”.
391Singer, Peter, 1985. “Prologue”, Ethics and the New Animal Liberation Movemen, In Defense of Animal, ed. By Singer, Oxford: Blackwell, p.2.