Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
An Unlikely Environmental Evangelist
I was not raised in any religion, nor do I follow any religious practices now. I don’t believe in God as a benevolent white man in the sky, nor do I believe that one needs to sit in a particular building, listening to a particular preacher, to reach out to the divine.
But I have always felt a deep spiritual connection to the natural world. When I was 8 or 9, I used to go out into the woods and sit alone in my “spot,” which was a circle of mossy stones at the top of a big stone ridge, ringed by maples and centered around a grassy glade. It was a small circle, no bigger than 10 feet in diameter. I would just sit there and look and listen to the birds in the trees above me, the small insects on patrol in the grass, feeling the wind ruffling against my face and a kind of inner exultation and delight that I can only describe as religious ecstasy.
No one taught me to do this, and it wasn’t until much later, reading personal narratives by indigenous elders, that I was able to put this early spiritual connection with nature into a broader polytheistic cultural framework.
I believe that everything in our world is tinged with spiritual significance. And I believe that human beings, because we are unique among animals in being able to see the effects of our actions on the larger landscape of the planet, and to both predict and alter the future, have a special moral imperative to do what we can to be the responsible stewards of the natural world of which we are a part.
I have never said that out loud.
But thanks to environmental activist educator Eban Goodstein, I now recognize that this is exactly what I should be doing, whenever I can, as urgently and passionately as possible.
Goodstein, who founded the national organization Focus the Nation and now heads up the Center for Environmental Policy at Bard College, writes in his 2007 book Fighting for Love in the Century of Extinction that it is crucial that people who understand the seriousness of the pivotal moment at which we stand begin to speak up—not in legalese or scientific jargon, but in the clear, ringing tones of moral conviction.
“The real problem that nontheistic environmentaists face is not a depth of passion, but a failure of moral language with which to cultivate and nuture that passion,” Goodstein says. “Unless passion about life on Earth is nurtured, and mass extinction is understood clearly in terms of good and evil, then political opposition to the great extinction wave of our generation will be weak and it will sweep across the next century unabated.”
Goodstein recommends that each of us “develop a thirty-second ‘elevator speech’ that is a response to the question: ‘Why do you care about global heating?’” What you say won’t be convincing or memorable to people unless you can quickly tell them why this issue is deeply important to you, and why they should also care.
It can’t be a laundry list of words that have been so often used they’ve become clichés: sustainability, clean energy, even droughts or wildfires. Goodstein suggests that when it comes right down to it, we should care about global heating because it is “just plain MORALLY WRONG” to ignore the prospect of the sixth great extinction of life on Earth, when we not only know it’s coming, but have a pretty good idea of how to head it off.
Given my non-religious upbringing, I’m not that comfortable with the language of good and evil or moral righteousness. And yet it is no accident that all human religions do codify a moral code that seems to be hardwired into our species.
Goodstein refers to Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson’s 1984 book Biophilia, which set the stage for evolutionary psychology in arguing that human beings have evolved to love life and work to extend life by interacting positively with our environment.
Whether we come at the issue of climate change from a religious perspective (God made us the stewards of life on Earth, we have a moral injunction to protect all God’s creatures) or a nontheistic but nevertheless spiritual reverence for the natural world, or even a simple scientific recognition that the current fabric of our ecosystem will live or die depending on human choices now, there is no doubt at all that each of us needs to get our elevator speech nailed down and go out to become evangelists for the natural world.
I don’t use the term evangelist lightly. Christian evangelists have a reputation for single-mindedness bordering on fanaticism. They believe deeply, and they are willing to take the risk of expressing their beliefs out loud, and actively trying to convert others.
I am someone who has been known to hide in my own house when the Jehovah’s Witnesses knocked at the door. I have never followed any preacher or religious dictate, nor have I ever considered trying to persuade others to any given point of view.
But the situation we face now is unprecedented in my lifetime, or human history as a whole. It demands an unprecedented degree of commitment. It demands taking the risk of climbing up on a soapbox and speaking out loudly and passionately enough to draw a crowd.
Those of us who are awake to the gravity of the prospect of environmental catastrophe need to be getting out there to try to instigate change through every channel possible: electoral politics, grassroots activism, legal challenges, moral persuasion, standing on our heads--whatever it takes to wake people up and get them moving.
So what's your elevator speech about? Mine, I think, is about love.
Whether we call it love for God's green earth, or the love for the natural world, what we mean is the same: love for our children and future generations, who should not be denied the pleasure of listening to birdsong in the trees on a peaceful spring morning, knowing that their world is stable and secure.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



17 Comments so far
Show AllRight on Jennifer - or should I say Write On !!
I think you've been evangelizing, as you put it, all along with your articles here on Common Dreams.
Your good sense and passion shine through, even if you are discussing a subject not directly called the natural world.
And that is what is needed - common sense - not so common.
Cheers,
Mike
====
I think what Jennifer is talking about is just plain love. It seems that now a days we think 'love' is some sort of sexual feeling that is selfish in nature. We just love things that give us pleasure.
What we need is much more encompassing. Maybe what I really mean is we need to have empathy, a love and concern for all life on earth. Empathy means a sharing, a caring for more than ourselves. It is the understanding and caring about the feelings of others and that includes the natural world in which we live. We need to get over our stress on the individual, and focus on the whole and connectedness of everything on earth.
It is the selfish and greedy nature of our species that is the cause of so much harm to our mother the earth and to all other life on earth. We need to be empathetic to all life in order for life on earth to continue. That is what our selfishness is threatening---all life on earth.
Total acuerdo; Love IS the strongest force in the Universe; that includes deep compassion for ALL living beings. We are all connected. The Awakening, World-wide, to the interconnectedness of all, through Love, IS happening now. We all must ,and can, do more !
siempre Paz, tiozapata, Mexico
Wonderful article. Straight to the point. Love. Yes, love. It's real and urgent.
Thank you, Jennifer, for an inspiring piece. I guess I' m an evangelist....who knew?
I don't do 'religion', but I was brought up as a Lutheran and attended Sunday school - wherein I had to learn some Bible verses. The very first one in Genesis is : "In the Beginning, God created the Heaven and the EARTH."
So, it would seem that all on the planet who read and profess that the Bible is the true word of God, they should understand how very precious our planet Earth is....and was to God (it was the First thing S/He did!!), and is most assuredly worthy of our love and protection. Without it, all of God's children...and the firmament thereof, will perish...and I doubt that would make any God-creator happy.
I think this will be my elevator speech, at least when encountering my religious friends.
Another great article by Jennifer Browdy de Hernandez. I completely agree, and I might even be practicing some of what she says we should do. As for my elevator speech, I try to "customize" it, always looking for an opening to bring up the subject, even with strangers. I guess I need to become more brash, with an even thicker skin, so as to face rejection, challenges and just plain indifference. It's not always so, and there are people who genuinely listen, even if they hear about the gravity of the crisis for the first time (from me!). Need to be on the look out for any and every opportunity to connect and network, to build a critical mass.
I'm also thinking that I should keep a list of a few websites in small bits of paper to hand out - so people can go check out for more info.
>>From the article: "I am someone who has been known to hide in my own house when the Jehovah’s Witnesses knocked at the door. I have never followed any preacher or religious dictate, nor have I ever considered trying to persuade others to any given point of view.
But the situation we face now is unprecedented in my lifetime, or human history as a whole. It demands an unprecedented degree of commitment. It demands taking the risk of climbing up on a soapbox and speaking out loudly and passionately enough to draw a crowd."<<
I've been thinking along the same lines for a while, and even made this same point here on CD a few times before:
"Are Our Oceans Dying? Phytoplankton has Declined Terrifying 40% in 60 Years"
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/07/29-4
"... maybe each one of us should get out and go on an evangelical mode - but using some techniques from direct marketers (I know, I hate both those groups, but still...). Use any and every chance to talk to people - especially youngsters, and see if we can win just one more "convert" every now and then. I don't know...ultimately the only way to take on the denial industry and the oil industry that funds them is by using citizen power."<<
When it seemed like a couple of people possibly misunderstood the word "evangelical", I even offered this clarification:
>>I used the word "evangelical" in a different meaning. Merriam-Webster defines it as:
"marked by militant or crusading zeal".<<
People should seriously consider taking a leaf out of the evangelicals' and direct marketers' books. Based on personal experience, my advice is to treat it as a statistical game: you win some, you lose some. And don't take the losses (indifference or even hostility) personally.
Very nice.
"“Unless passion about life on Earth is nurtured, and mass extinction is understood clearly in terms of good and evil..."
Too bad extinction has NOTHING TO DO with "good and evil".
Otherwise it is a great idea. ;)
one of the difficulties a lot of us face in creating the fucussed urgency around the issue of global warming is the idea that it is not simply that the planet is imperiled and we need all to do something about it right now!!!! it is that this train wreck is tied so intimately with the multitude of layers of ignorance and arrogance that underlie our social and political paradigms.
the problem isn't "out there" so much as it is staring us right in the face. and it is as multifaceted as the diverse nature of our collective lives. as such, solutions are fragmented and dilluted by arguments over the most effective immediate and longer-term plans for change.
we don't need an elevator speech as much as we/i need to break out of our cocoon and fully become the butterfly. little egos quibbling over deck chairs on sinking ships must make a profound leap into the ocean of our oneness.
how's that for stirring up some good ol' religious enthusiasm?
Creationists used to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics to argue against evolution: all systems tend toward equilibrium with their environment ('ashes to ashes, dust to dust'). Evolution imagined a world that gets more complex with time, breaking the 2nd law. But as it turned out, Earth is not in contact with one energy environment but two (the sun and space). As Earth 'tends toward equilibrium' with both environments, it actually becomes more complex, not less, in conformance with the 2nd law. Since Earth is at the right distance from the sun for creation of biological diversity, such diversity is natural and in accordance with the laws of physics. What is unnatural is the destruction of diversity. I think people instinctively recognize this. The same humans who creatively increase non-biological diversity through their various constructions (and that increase has been amazing in the last century) ALSO feel an instinctive loss inside when confronted with the possibility that Earths natural biosphere is facing an extinction event due to humankinds activities. While we cannot recall our introduced species, and much natural habitat has been irreversibly lost, we can act, we WISH to act, to preserve the biodiversity that is left. This obviously will require a battle against our inner demons: greed, overpopulation, uncaring. But the history of Earth, its creation of biodiversity in accordance with the 2nd law, our own place in that biodiversity, suggest that we will act to help the planet we have thoughtlessly wounded. But we should also measure that action against the timescale of the planet itself, not our own (puny) lives. 'Think globally, act locally' is not such a bad idea after all.
Jean Paul Sartre was an atheist, but a very moral person. The two aren't in the least mutually exclusive.
I happen to believe in a black God in the sky. What other ones could we have given the proven theory of evolution. He "made us in his image." Where do all people come from? Just a thought! Hint-- we all used to be black. God may be benevolent, but that doesn't mean putting us on automatic pilot to do what's right. If he did we couldn't take any credit and wouldn't deserve any.
"god" is a verb
as in, go god yourself
Religious evangelicals have given the word evangelism a reduced meaning.
The word evangel-ism comes from the Greek for good news or good message or even good angel.
The Abrahamic religions do a great deal of talking about good and bad angels, but their angels are designed as propaganda for Patriarchal domination and are very limited in their appearances.
There is nothing which is beyond angelic if you are looking to learn the messages.
Trees, rocks, insects, birds, rain, urine,.....whatever.
The greatest problem with the vast majority of so-called religious evangelicals is that they only want one message and they try to force the vast diversity of the universe into only that one message.
They do not want to be aware of anything which does not reinforce their need to feel superior to nature.
Not too long ago, I had an unwanted interaction with some christian evangelicals who, when I told them that they were wasting their time, asked me if I believe in the devil.
I said that IF there are devils, they had to have been the creation of their god and I told them that they might come back when we could discuss their god's vagina.
They quickly walked away.
I hope my words stayed with them at least for a little while.
Famous Pantheists:
Ansel Adams (1902–1984)
Margaret Atwood (b. 1939)
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Eriugena
Hegel
Robinson Jeffers
D. H. Lawrence
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling
Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
Lao Tzu
Alan Watts (1915-1973)
Walt Whitman (1819–1891)
God gave us this earth and this life. The life is of limited duration, but we'll take it. The earth should be given in full (or as much as we can save) to our own children and to their children.
We creatures were not given life just to be sold into an 80 hour a week job until we snap.
Sometimes its better to do right by your world and let the chips fall where they may. Be born, get educated, thumb your nose at a mind-numbing career path, give a big chunk of your life to God or to your world.
I've learned that techies, engineers, are important in the struggle to slow and then reverse climate change. Numbers of them must be freed from their obligations to support the fast car industry, the gambling industry, the luxury home building industry. I respect protesters that go to jail, but I have even more respect for people who spend their working lives on their dreams.
James Hansen has never been shy about addressing the moral dimension of global warming. Often, he characterizes the business-as-usual course of carbon emissions as a case of intergenerational injustice. We have no right to deprive future generations of a healthy planet.
I have just a slight discomfort with Hansen's emphasis: it sounds anthropocentric - as if the only concerns which matter are human concerns. Full realization of our integration into the fabric of Life cannot come about until we have lost the habit of always placing humans at the center of the moral universe.
All the same, the closing paragraph of Hansen's classic paper, The Case for Young People*, is the most eloquent invocation of moral concerns I've ever encountered in a scientific paper:
"It is a matter of morality – a matter of intergenerational justice. The blame, if we fail to stand up and demand a change of course, will fall on us, the current generation of adults. Our parents honestly did not know that their actions could harm future generations. We, the current generation, can only pretend that we did not know."
* http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110505_CaseForYoungPeople.pdf
.
Excerpt from "An Unlikely Environmental Evangelist" by Jennifer Browdy de Hernandez:
I don’t use the term evangelist lightly. Christian evangelists have a reputation for single-mindedness bordering on fanaticism. They believe deeply, and they are willing to take the risk of expressing their beliefs out loud, and actively trying to convert others.
I am someone who has been known to hide in my own house when the Jehovah’s Witnesses knocked at the door. I have never followed any preacher or religious dictate, nor have I ever considered trying to persuade others to any given point of view.
* * * * *
My Comment:
A "elevator speech" is fine for evangelizing if delivered with a compassionate even if militant focus on the other person, when there really is no opportunity to listen intently and respond in a heart felt manner to what someone with a different perspective has to say.