The Differences Between the Dark Green Religion and Eco-theology.

In his book The Dark Green Religion: Nature, Spirituality, and Planetary Future, Bron Taylor draws a clear distinction between green religion and dark green religion. He explains that green religion is basically the environmentally friendly actions of religious people who see these actions as part of their religious obligation. This approach is based on the anthropocentric view of the world, where people believe that human beings are the most important entity in the universe. Anthropocentrism interprets or regards the world in terms of human values and experiences. Thus, any sort of environmentally friendly activities are taken in order to promote and comfort the existence of humans. Dark green religion, on the other hand, views nature as sacred, with its intrinsic value, worth of reverence. 

Adepts of the dark green religion have criticized Abrahamic religions, especially Christianity, for their contribution to the separateness of humans from nature. One of the first voices in this discourse was that of Rousseau who expressed the criticism of revealed religions in that they lead humans into the type of lives that limit the freedom and well-being of all beings. These accusations have sparked new movements within existing religious groups towards ecological consciousness that was named “religious environmentalism” or “the greening of religion”. In part as a response to this innovation historian Lynn White pointed out the religious roots of a destructive, anti-ecological, Western world-view that insisted that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends. The primary cause for this is seen in the story of creation suggesting that man should dominate nature. In response to such charges, many scholars and religious ecologists point out that dominion is more accurately interpreted as stewardship, or the caring and keeping of the earth, because it is the God’s creation. Other scholars point to Jesus’s constant illustrations from nature to demonstrate aspects of God. Ecologically oriented scholars go on to find much merit in the “land ethic” of the Hebrew Scriptures and the idea of a Sabbath for all, animals and the land included.

White’s argument, though, was more complex than merely placing the blame on the Genesis text. His main argument is that it is the anthropocentrism (human-centeredness) of Judaism and Christianity, reflected in the creation story, that poses a major problem. He also points out that this problem concerns not only religious populations, but also those who are no longer religious, but have already been deeply conditioned by the anthropocentrism imposed by Christianity, which sort of removed God from nature by separating the creation from the Creator. While nature could reveal God, it did not have value in and of itself. This “removal” of God or the sacred from the world through matter-spirit dualism opened the way for the scientific exploration of the natural world. Most scholars view the scientific, industrial, and cultural revolutions of the period 1500-1700 as particularly crucial in understanding the modern world-view. Carolyn Merchant in The Death of Nature (1980) argues that the result of this wide scope of change was the disintegration of a more immanent and organic view of nature, and the ascendancy of the modern, mechanistic world-view that sees nature as dead, or inert, and atomized. Thus, we can see that Christianity (and other Abrahamic religions) by proposing the first step to the human-nature split, have thus influenced a whole chain of events that in their own ways have further reinforced this separation. 

It is also important to recognize that Christianity held mixed messages about nature. Such a figure as St. Francis of Assisi points to a plurality of Catholic views. In fact, as White pointed out, many still look to St. Francis as an exemplar of Christian ecology, to the point that Pope John Paul II named him the patron saint of ecologists. White said that the type of biocentrism demonstrated by St. Francis could provide the antidote to the anthropocentrism of Christianity. If religion were to turn to biocentrism, it could, in White’s opinion, reverse the environmental decline that it has caused. Many, even his critics, agree with White’s ending conclusion that we must either “rethink our old religion” or create a new one for religious and moral systems must address the ecological crisis. Contemporary Christian scholars offer the idea that religion must be contextualized along with the changing World, and eco-theology can be considered a valid form of properly contextualized evangelical theology, even though it is more closely linked to the contemporary context than it is to traditional forms of Christian doctrine. For eco-theology, the starting point is in the condition of the created order, which requires a different set of theological presuppositions. One example of the theological presuppositions of eco-theology can be found in the Earth Bible Project’s six eco-justice principles which were developed in order to provide the guidelines for reading biblical texts from a non-anthropocentric perspective. These principles are: 

– The principle of intrinsic worth: the universe, Earth and all its components have intrinsic worth/value.

– The principle of interconnectedness: Earth is a community of interconnected living things that are mutually dependent on each other for life and survival.

– The principle of voice: Earth is a subject capable of raising its voice in celebration and against injustice.

– The principle of purpose: the universe, Earth and all its components are part of a dynamic cosmic design within which each piece has a place in the overall goal of that design.

– The principle of mutual custodianship: Earth is a balanced and diverse domain where responsible custodians can function as partners with, rather than rulers over, the Earth to sustain its balance and a diverse Earth community.

– The principle of resistance: Earth and its components not only suffer from human injustices but actively resist them in the struggle for justice.

As we can see, these principles resemble those of the dark green religion, proving the dynamic towards a blending of religious approach to nature. The main distinction between dark green religion and eco-theology may one day become not so evident, while the world’s religions reshape their views of nature and spirituality. 

Resources:

1. Bron Taylor The Dark Green Religion: Nature, Spirituality, and Planetary Future 2019, University of California Press
2. Kearns, Laurel (2003)The context of Eco-theology. The Blackwell Companion to Modern Theology (466-484) Retrieved from:https://users.drew.edu/lkearns/eco-theology.pdf
3. Spencer, Andrew, J. Beyond Christian Environmentalism: Ecotheology as an Over-Contextualized Theology Themelios Vol. 40 – 3 Retrieved from: https://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/beyond-christian-environmentalism/
4. Habel, Norman, C. The Earth Bible Project   Retrieved from: https://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?ArticleId=291