Juliet Schor, A Plenitude Economy, and Ecology

This is a very interesting short piece on the relationship between our economy, consumption, and ecology. I think you might find it interesting.

Is Atheism a Religion?

I was on the bus the other day and I saw this advertisement:

This made me think back to the very early days of the semester when we were talking about what constituted a religion and whether or not some forms of atheism, in their adamant rejection of religion, had somehow become religions in themselves. One of the criteria for religion that we mentioned was that its seeks to gain new followers. This seems like a good example of that as regards at least one type of contemporary atheism, and so I thought that you might find it interesting. 

The Poetry of Rumi

As promised here are a few links to poems by Rumi that have been published on the internet for those of you who are interested:

http://www.gratefulness.org/poetry/guest_house.htm

http://www.poetseers.org/spiritual_and_devotional_poets/contemp/rumibarks/

And this link is to Coleman Barks' web page. He is the primary English language translator of Rumi's work.

Whirling Dervishes

Today in class I mentioned the whirling dervishes of Sufism. You can see them here:

Especially, notice that though this combines movement and music it is not a dance as such. Notice their faces. This is a type of meditation.

In India, Spreading A Green Gospel Among Pilgrims from NPR

I heard this story on NPR this morning and I thought you might be interested because it is exactly the kinds of things that we talk about in class. No one is writing a paper on the Sikhs this term, but this is still interesting. Take five minutes and listen to this story.

Richard C. Foltz “Islam”

Foltz begins his essay saying, "it would seem that the adoption of a caring and non-exploitative eithic toward the environment by Muslims would presuppose the existence in Islamic tradition of principles which accord value to the natural world."

For all 1.2 billion muslims in the world to actually associate an environmental principle in their religion, Foltz says it must be something from Sharia law. While not all rules of Sharia are followed by all Muslims, it is the general ethical code for the religion, and, therefore, would contain an environmental guideline if there was one. This is why contemporary Islamic environmentalists are using the Qur'an as a direct resource to support ecological issues while not presenting nature as a 'false idol'.

It is up to the specific Muslim, based on different Qur'anic concepts (tawhid) if they choose to believe that all of God's creations, animate or not, are holy or if, through God's eyes, the religion is completely anthropocentric. In the environmentalists defense, the Qur'an contains accounts from the Prophet Muhammad that "emphasize compassion toward nonhuman animals." There are also judgements "against those who despoil the earth."

These are, after all, ancient texts. To appeal to all Muslims of dynamic beliefs today, Islamic scholars must modernize these ideas to create support toward the environment. For example, one scholar stressed a prohibition of relieving oneself anywhere near a water source because it polluted water and, eventually and against Sharia law, harms humans.

Renewal

I found this movie linked on NPR's website. I found the trailer interesting-- it shows how different religions are participating in environmental activism. This is the little blurb the website provides about the movie:

RENEWAL is the first feature-length documentary film to capture the vitality and diversity of today's religious-environmental activists. From within their Christian, Jewish, Buddhist and Muslim traditions, Americans are becoming caretakers of the Earth. With great courage, these women, men and children are re-examining what it means to be human and how we live on this planet. Their stories of combating global warming and the devastation of mountaintop removal, of promoting food security, environmental justice, recycling, land preservation, and of teaching love and respect for life on Earth are the heart of RENEWAL.


You can watch the trailer here http://www.renewalproject.net/

Guest Speaker Zeynib Salim

Ms. Salim brought up a lot of interesting points regarding Islam and the environment.  Her explanation of Tawhid, Allah, Koran, Kalamullah, and Amanah give an insight into the religion.  What do you think about the new explanation brought forth in this discussion in conjunction with the reading on Islam?  What does this make you think about preconceived notions of Islam and the environment?

Islam Reading

In this day in age, there is much misunderstanding and controversy that surrounds the religion of Islam. From the beginning, this article starts off by describing the definition of Islam: Peace, Obedience, and Submission. The article then goes through the history in Arabia referencing groups such as Bedouins and the Sabians and kind of the journey they took to arrive at the point of acknowledging “Allah.” It talks about the Prophet’s struggles in Mecca and his migration to Medina and the eventual success that rose out of that. With the rise of Islamic legal and theological thought in the eighth century CE, a framework had to be created and that was one based on the Quran and the sunnah of the Prophet. The Quran states five basic constituents of faith, which include belief in God, in angels, in revealed books, in God’s messengers, and in the Last Day. The five pillars include reciting the ‘Kalima’ (statement declaring you are muslim), praying 5 times a day, fasting, paying alms to charity, and making a Hajj once in your life. Does not force people to convert. The article goes briefly into the split between Shiitie and Sunni and to my surprise touched on the Sufi’ a lot more than I expected it to. In regards to Nature, Islam believes that nature is autonomous but not autocratic since it did not bring itself into being, rather God did.

The Quran also provides the community with the instrument of Jihad, which is defined as a struggle in God’s cause, including peaceful means. Throughout the history of Islam, Muslims were known to be tolerant and humane to the people they conquered; there was no policy of converting non-Muslims to Islam. There is so much dispute today around the term ‘Jihad’ as holy war. According to this reading, it seems that Islam is a pretty peaceful religion. There are extremists in every religion. They commit acts everyday but these acts are just are not publicized as much. Why do you think that Muslim’s have been targeted by the media as the main religion of extremists? What is your opinion of the Islam-o-phobia that has plagued our nation, and do you have any suggestions on how Islam-o-phobia can be solved and tolerance can be created?

One noteworthy feature of the moral teaching of the Quran is although every prophet has initially come to his people and addressed them “in their tongue” (14:4), the import of all messages is universal. If you follow your own religion and do good deeds, you will still make it to heaven. Despite the identity of divine messages, moreover, the Quran asserts that on the Last Day every community will be judged by the standards of its own book and under the witness of its own prophet.

As parts of Islam are trying to modernize, a new phenomenon of international Islamic conferences in modern Islam is to be noted since there seems to be an absence of political unity in the Muslim world. The article quotes how “Islam is the name of a total way of life and does not merely regulate the individual’s private relationship with God.” Do you think all religions are like this?

John Haught and Making Sense of Evolution

Some of you might be interested in this...and there is free food:

Making Sense of Evolution:
Darwin, God and the Drama of Life.
A lecture by Dr. John F. Haught
(Georgetown University)
At The Catholic University of America

Caldwell Hall Happel Room
November 15th 6 pm
Reception to follow
Co-Sponsored by the GSA and STRSSA
To learn more about the GSA, please visit http://Graduatestudents.cua.edu

Judaism and its Environment

Fred Dobb’s review of Trees, Earth, and Torah: A Tu B’Shvat Anthology and Ecology & the Jewish Spirit, Where Nature & the Sacred Meet affirmed my beliefs in the ties Judaism has with the environment. Dobb summarizes many of the articles within the books and compares them to each other in hopes of better understanding the Jewish ecological beliefs. As a result, I began to question what I traditionally question in many of the religions I encounter: whether this faith’s traditions are the result of continuing culture or are the result of interpreting their sacred texts. On page 81, Dobb explains that “growing your own springtime barley gives new meaning to counting the Omer between Pesah and Shavuot.” My question is: If an act of faith (such as the one aforementioned) were to hypothetically damage the environment, would the religion be willing to sacrifice their tradition for the sake of God’s creation? Later on in his review, Dobb summarizes a translation of Pri Etz Hadar as nature is the result of God and fully proves God’s existence. If this is true, why isn’t the Jewish religion focusing almost entirely on preserving nature? On the other hand, this does not only apply to the Jewish religion. Why aren’t Christians devoting many of their acts of faith towards saving God’s creation? Most importantly, why can’t the religions of the world come together under the idea of protecting the sanctity of life and creation?

Interview Questions

Topic: The Roman Catholic View on Contraception and Abortion

Interviewees/ Contacts- Parish Staff 202.785.0982

Place of Worship/Name of Religious Organization: St. Stephen-Martyr Church

1. What is the Roman Catholic Church’s position on the use of contraception?

2. According to the Catholic Church, “the natural law/ purpose of sex is procreation”. What if a couple cannot support a child financially, emotionally, physically after marriage? Are they supposed to practice abstinence?

3. Why were these policies ever adopted? When did they become popular?

4. Are there laws found in scripture that prevents couples from using contraception?

5. How does the Church view a parishioner who uses contraception and/or received an abortion yet still considers themselves an active Catholic?

6. The Catholic Church takes a stance against abortion because they see it as an act of murder. If carrying out with the pregnancy has the potential to cause harm for the mother does the church change its stance? Is that to say they value the life of the unborn child more than that of the mother?

7. Do you think that the Catholic Church’s position on these two topics will ever change?

8. Does the Catholic Church recognize that the world is overpopulated or that some people are unfit to be parents?

9. How would a sect of the Roman Catholic religion go about changing the abortion and/or contraception policies?

10. In your opinion, how many practicing Catholic’s actually follow the policies that say: no pre-marital sex, no contraception, no abortion?

ELF

http://www.ask-force.org/web/Discourse/Leader-Earth-Liberation-Front-.pdf

This is the article that I found and chose to write about from Google Scholar. It is titled The Earth Liberation Front and Environmental Terrorism by Stefan H. Leader and Peter Probst. This article is very obviously biased against the ELF for multiple reasons. First of all, looking at the title alone you can tell that they regard the ELF as a terrorist movement. Second of all, in the article while they are describing what the ELF is, the authors use words such as 'radical' and 'leaderless resistance.' When talking about the history, they relate the origins of the 'leaderless resistance' that the ELF uses to the Ku Klux Klan. All in all throughout the article you can see how the article is trying to sway its reader to look at the ELF in a bad light.

Growing up, some of my best friends were environmentalists. I never really appreciated what they did, always wondering why people were so dedicated to protecting the environment. However, after watching this movie in class, I have an entirely newfound respect for environmentalists and what they do. Honestly, and this may just the young hot headed teen in me speaking out, but after seeing how these protesters used non-violent ways to protest and they were brutally harassed by the police, pepper sprayed and basically tortured, I understand their frustration with the government and their rational for wanting to burn things down. They are not harming human beings. The statistic shocked me that 95% of America's forests are already chopped down. These people are not radicals for wanting to protect the last 5%. Obviously burning down is probably not the correct answer... but I can sympathize with them because they are in a tough position and tried to take the peaceful route, which didn't work.

Judaism

Nature, to the Jewish faith, is a bit contradictory. On one hand, it is said that "Judaism does not take nature to be inherently sacred or worthy of veneration. In fact, such worship is precisely what the Bible considers to be idolatry." While on the other hand, the original founding agrarian Jews kept "proper treatment of the soil, animals and vegetation of the land of Israel in order to maintain Israel's religious ritual purity and moral integrity."

In favor of the Jews succeeding in properly integrating good care for the earth with religion, there is the argument of the nature based Jewish holiday of Sukkot. By living in a sukkah with no stable roof, the people were able to be more in touch with God. Since God, as proven in Genesis, created the earth and all its natural baggage, they are respecting nature by celebrating. However, as time moved on and economic systems changed as well as several politically destabilizing events for the Jews, they lost their agrarian roots (no pun intended) significantly in the 10th century when Islamic law began to impose and the Bourgeoise Revolution happened. Jew then became integral parts of merchant cultures and business. Agrarian roots were found again when the Jewish people, after much harassment, succeeded in their zionistic motives and returned to Israel. Due to much conflict once again even in the 19th and 20th centuries, it was difficult to make the desert bloom. Finally, it was achieved but by secular Israelis and not the fundamental Jews we associate with the holy land.

The World of Nature According to the Protestant Tradition

I found this chapter very interesting as the authors discuss the ideas and teachings of two prominent figures to Protestantism. Personally, I was unaware of their beliefs so reading about their views on nature were helpful in determining the effects of this religion on the environment. Both Luther and Calvin showed that they have some appreciation for nature but what stands out is that they feel that nature "is first and foremost an encounter with God's creation". In my own opinion, this takes away value from the beauty in nature that they are acknowledging. While Luther and Calvin both felt that nature had been cursed because of human sin, Calvin takes the idea of humanity's use of nature further. He has a clear anthropocentric view and promotes the idea of humans having an "active life". The authors also bring up the tradition of learning about God through nature. Again, this displays how as humans we are using nature instead of respecting it. In the final section of the chapter the ecological crisis of the 1970's is considered. The reader learns that during this time the blame began being directed at Christians. During this decade, philosopher's began to warn society of the dangers of these religious traditions. Today, many continue to write about of the growing importance of moving away from the anthropocentric society in order to save the earth before it is too late.

Martin Luther and the 95 Theses

Here's a fun video about the 95 theses and Martin Luther's complaints:

“Catholicism” and “Religious Ecofeminism: Healing the Ecological Crisis”

In Genesis, God gives man "dominion" over God's creation (1:26). Soon enough, humans learned that creation is better suited for their needs if manipulated. Some translations of the text have people believing that humans can do whatever they please in the world, because it is their right to do so. In the past several centuries, the Catholic Church has made statements, from the papal arena down to parochial priests and lay people, on the subject of environmentalism. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas were two of the forefathers of the idea that Catholics should respect all of God's creation, whether or not it is vital to our own existence. These two men made sure to note that humankind is at the top of the hierarchy of nature, and other creatures fell below. Francis of Assisi, however, thought of the prior statement as misinterpreted, and in "Canticle of All Creatures" believes that creation is familial. Which of these views do you feel are true?

Later in Church history, there have been direct addresses by several popes, most notably Leo XIII and John Paul II on the subject of the common good. In their cases, the common good only deals with humankind, but both men state that the rest of creation needs to be taken care of for our own (as well as its own) well-being. Others not directly affiliated with the Church, such as Rosemary Radford Ruether and Leonardo Buff, maintain the position of ecojustice, and all of creation is equivalent. Should the Church stay with its Tradition, with the hierarchy of creation, or should it change its perspective and side with all of the earthly environment?

Radford's "Religious Ecofeminism" also deals with Genesis 1:26 verse, but instead focuses on the word "man." Radford's main point is to confirm the interconnection between the domination of women and the domination of nature. Aristotle and Pluto's claims of feminine inferiority are discussed, and ultimately lead to how a misogynistic interpretation of The Fall lead many to believe that women are subjected to serve man. Later, it is described how Christians made diverse groups into barbarians simply because of their differences, especially race, religion, and gender. Unfortunately, these actions from our ancestry live with us today, and these prejudices continue today. What do you feel is the best way for a truly equal world, both in regards to humankind as well as the rest of creation? Additionally, we have spoken about bias on several occasions in class. How would you feel if Radford was a male and wrote this piece. Would any of your opinions change on the matter?

Lynn White and "The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis"

I'm putting this up for Courtney as she was having some trouble.

“The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis” By: Lynn White

         This article is a prime example of how religion and the environment can be related. I think that the key question that White asks is “What did Christianity tell people about their relations with the environment?” If we look at the creation story in Genesis, we see our entire environment being created. At this time the environment is pure and new. If we look at the environment that we live in today, can we say the same thing? White talks about “The Christian dogma of creation”. She states that, “ God had made nature, nature must also reveal the divine mentality. The religious study of nature for the better understanding of God was known as natural theology”. Many people find God through nature and in the natural world and that is their way of experiencing faith. As the world has evolved and changed from its original state, do you think that it is harder to connect with God through nature? And do you think that this ecological crisis has affected the way that some people practice religion? Lastly, do you think that religion has influenced the ecological crisis?   

The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis by Lynn White Jr.

"Quite unintentionally, changes in human ways often affect nonhuman nature." White begins her argument by explaining that, while changes to our environment were caused by humans, they were completely unintended.

That being said, it is an issue that even after technology truly began to affect the earth with the 16th century research of Copernicus and Vesalius, research to save these environmental problems came three centuries later. Even earlier than this was the 14th century allocation of materials for cannon balls or London's 1285 smog issue form burning soft coal. What humans saw as advancement was really turning nature upside down.

White's call to action is simple: "revert to a romanticized past: make those ugly gasoline stations look like Anne Hathaway's Cottage or (in the Far West) like ghost-town saloons." But then she quickly comes to the realization that atavism and prettification are beyond us at this point in our ecological crisis.

Events from Medieval Europe's development of technology turned man into the "exploiter of nature." And with that came the amount of guilt Christianity should feel toward their impact on the environment. White claims that christianity's western ideas make man superior to nature and therefore give man the right to use it at the slightest whim.

What do you think of these ideas? Do you agree that Christianity played a large role in our modern environmental issue? If so, in what ways?

Also, do you agree that there is no solution?

Theology of Money Interview (Alex, Ashley, Catherine, Nick)

I had trouble posting this as a comment, so here it is...

1. What did you think about the text?

Catherine: I thought that very beginning of the introduction was so interesting because Goodchild points out the almost hypocritical nature of Jesus’ and the church’s demands and ideologies about wealth throughout history. Good will mentions how despite wealth being viewed as something evil, “Jesus, by contrast, warned against wealth while feasting and drinking himself” (7). He also talks about taxes from both the church and temple. The text overall, while being quite lengthy, is interesting and introduces new concepts about the church and its monetary history that I had not considered before.

Ashley: I really enjoyed the text, I actually kept reading into the actual chapters until I realized that we were only supposed to read the introduction. I thought it was very well written in the aspect of first defining religion and theology, and then merging them together through the means of money. This perspective on money was relatively new to me, so I was extremely intrigued by the way that it was so radically described ex: “Money is only an extreme and specialized type of ritual.” (Pg. 19)

Nick: The text was interesting, and I like the idea of substituting "Money" for "the devil" in the opening. Goodchild does a good starting at "money is the root of all evil" and evolving it. Additionally, I liked how he analyzed money in a way that I never thought of.

2. What do you think about the quotes on page 4 of the handout?

Catherine: I think the quote that begins with “money is indeed the most important thing in the world…” and ends with “money controls morality” is so interesting, and in so many ways is completely true in today’s society (America’s). We put such an emphasis on the importance of accumulating wealth and power, and those goals definitely drive our goals. I mean, we are all in college and I would assume that that is probably to help us become more intelligent adults to help us get a better job and eventually build up our own wealth

Ashley: Phillip Goodchild presented an almost introduction to the introduction with the quotes and parables found at the beginning of his work. The Emerson quote is my favorite of the two, alluding to the alluring attributes of money/credit; he emphasizes the dangers of money with the comparison to a rose: while they are beautiful, you might hurt yourself if you do not handle it properly.

Nick: I especially like the Herbert quote, as I think that it supplements the idea that states that we deal with money differently when we have it than when we simply think of it hypothetically.

3. God v money?

Catherine: “God and wealth are set in a competition for time” (pg. 11). I think that quote is so true. It definitely feels like people – especially getting older – either go towards fulfillment with a career and building up wealth, or can find fulfillment through religion.

Ashley: I don’t necessarily think that there is a “god vs. money” complex, I think that religious folk tend to create a larger issue than it really is. Trade naturally evolved into the concept of credit and physical money; I think the issue lies with the extreme abuse of money.

Nick: I feel that this complex comes from a literal reading of biblical text. God and money can certainly coincide, and I therefore think that Goodchild was going for a stretch with this particular idea.

4. The reinvention of money in 1694 (credit functions as coinage) thoughts?

Alex: I think this is where our modern sense of materialism and obsession with money really came into being. With the age of colonialism and imperialism in full swing there was a plethora of new goods people could buy, and with credit they were able to. People were able to get individual loans from banks in order to buy land or property at a level and means that was never possible before.

5. Could modern society survive w/out credit?

Catherine: I don’t think it could. I mean banks are starting to charge fees for people/companies to keep physical dollars in their vaults. We are getting to the point where credit and a sort of theoretical/unseen way of maintaining money and wealth is dominant. And in some ways that seems okay with me, as long as credit is monitored and the system makes sense.

Ashley: I do not think that modern society could function without some form of credit, due to the speed of development and the materialistic mentality of today. Everyone wants things now, so naturally if they can get it now, people will be more inclined to take that choice. Also some things need to be on credit. Part of my family is in the housing industry, and financing building homes is virtually impossible without lines of credit.

Nick: Once credit was introduced, there is no way to return to a life before it. Even as people see others becoming broke due to their careless spending, many continue to aimlessly spend anyway. To even be able to manage it, people need to understand that credit is a temporary and not permanent means.

6. "Where god promises eternity, money promises the world."

Ashley: Honestly, this is a very loaded quote. To some extent this may be true, but it all rests with how you treat both god and money. They have the potential to give you both theoretically, but you may not be happy with the outcome of either one.

7. Does $=modern religion?

Catherine: I think that nowadays money definitely is starting to look and feel more like a religion. The same way that people would be devoted to their religion, we see people being devoted to their assets and wealth. I don’t think this is the case for everyone in the world, and certainly not for every society, but for a lot of people without a strong hold on a religion belief I can see how money would become a substitute for that (or vice versa, with religion becomes a substitute for lack of wealth).

Ashley: I don’t think that money is our modern religion. I think that people can become obsessed with it just like with drugs, but it is an avenue to get what we want. Money allows us to build communities, however it also allows us to destroy them. Money is a tool that can be employed for good or bad.

Nick: Money is probably the number one religion in America. We tend to worship those who have it, and put all of our time and attention into it as Americans. Money ties many together, as religion does, and tends to set morals for many. As much as I personally do not approve of this lifestyle, it is very relevant in our society.

8. Do you think $100 in your hand is more powerful than the concept of $100 say on a debit card?

Ashley: I think that hard money is more valuable than credit, partially because I am very “hands on” anyway, so I would rather use cash than credit. The fact that you can see your money being taken allows people to think about what they are purchasing more, than say a little black card. The physical aspect of money also represents security and confirms the agreement between the seller and buyer. I think physical money is more valuable the higher the $ amount, due to the fact that the dollar amount is backed by physical means upfront.

Nick: Personally, I spend more money when I am able to simply swipe a card. With actual money in my hands, I find it harder to spend, and therefore I tend to think twice before making a purchase. It's a sad feeling when I have to break a larger bill, and often I will skip out on a luxury just to avoid doing so.

9. Would you want to read this book?

Catherine: I would want to read this book. It’s very interesting, but the reality is that it would take me SO long to read, so that could become an issue.

Nick: I would read this book just because I am interested to hear what his opinions are on topics mentioned later in the introduction. I may not agree with some of his thought, but I feel that this book would at least give another perspective on the topic.