Loma Linda University's Ecology Weekend

image: 
tons.jpg

The Loma Linda University Church made a statement about Creation Friday evening: Adventist Christians (and others) have a moral duty to care for it.

The church is hosting its eighth annual "Mind and Spirit in Dialogue" convocation this weekend, entitled "Adventists and the Ecology Crisis."

Sigve Tonstad, an M.D./Ph.D. who serves as faculty member in both Loma Linda University's School of Medicine and its School of Religion, took the lectern first. His address, "All Creation Groaning in Labor Pain," decried factory farming on three bases: ecological, ethical, and eco-theological.

Tonstad pointed to statistics showing a steady decline in the number of American farmers corresponding with the rapid rise of industrial farming and an increase in acres of farm land. The point? Fewer farmers are doing more farming in an increasingly mechanized industry.

His presentation recited and elaborated on an his article in the Summer '09 volume of Spectrum, "'Swine of the Times': Ecumenism, Ecology, and Ethics in the Era of Factory Farming."

Ecological Crisis
Meat consumption is rising fast, particularly among affluent countries around the world, Tonstad revealed. Poorer nations eat far fewer animal products, and affluent nations import meats from poorer countries. The rate of production and consumption of animals is unsustainable because forest lands must be cleared to make way for livestock grazing.

Among the other major ecological issues at steak (pardon the pun), Tonstad pointed out that antibiotic use for livestock has increased massively, up from .09 million pounds in 1950 to 44.3 million pounds in 1986 according to the Institute of Medicine Data. The trend has continued sharply upward.

The unintended consequence has been a proliferation of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria (MRSA) that infect not only livestock, but also humans. This has direct impacts on health care; health insurers are increasingly unwilling to cover patients infected with MRSA in hospitals, though the bacteria passes easily from human to human (and from animals to humans).

Furthermore, data has clearly demonstrated that increased livestock populations contribute far more to greenhouse gas emissions than household emissions, aviation emissions and vehicular emissions.

Ethical Concerns
While the ecological crisis must be a huge consideration where Creation care is concerned, for Tonstad, the ethical concerns with meat consumption matter more.

Tonstad cited gross abuses of factory farm animals as reasons to consider avoiding meat. Quoting from Nathanael Johnson's Harpers Magazine article, "Swine of the Times" (from which Tonstad culled his own article), Tonstad noted that factory fresh pigs never see sunshine. They are fed, cleaned, monitored, stabbed, cleaned, cut and packaged by machines. Humans are not needed.

The ethical problems include crowding, violation of animals' instincts, removal from natural habitats, human indifference to suffering... The list might go on for pages. Factory pigs endure sores, tumors, cysts, bruises, torn ears, swollen legs…roaring, groaning and tail biting. They make imaginary nests with imaginary straw because their instincts and their environments don't match.

Eco-Theological Considerations
The ecological crisis has deep roots in theological understandings, particularly, a faulty understanding of dominion. For Tonstad as for many who construct eco-theologies, Genesis is foundational.

In Genesis 1:20-22, God commands the earth to teem with living creatures in the water and in the sky, and God pronounced a blessing on them. God's first blessing falls on non-human creation, Tonstad points out. Later, God also blesses the humans with very similar language (vs. 28), and finally God blesses all creation along with the seventh day (2:3).

This theology of blessing, Tonstad suggests, includes legitimacy, something like a bill of rights, and implies inter-relatedness and interdependence.

In Romans 8:19-21, God gives the pulpit to non-human creation.
We should not miss the sense that non-human creation knows something about God, and might even teach us about God, says Tonstad.

Tonstad insists that the blessing given to non human creation has not been rescinded.

During an audience Q&A following his presentation, Tonstad responded to a pointed question about dominion. Citing Ann Coulter, who has suggested that the biblical notion of dominion includes a warrant to rape and to exploit the earth, Tonstad countered saying that God delegates to human beings responsibility to act toward creation as God acts. God acts by blessing, Tonstad said. If God delegates responsibility to human beings, does that take away the aspect of blessing? Tonstad said there is no way to extract an exploitative theology from the Genesis text.

The book of Revelation Revelation has a vision of healing for all creation, says Tonstad. Its goal is not just saving human beings, but saving the earth because there is no other place for human beings. We are earth beings. We share common ground with the earth, so to speak.

The Mind and Spirit dialogue continues Sabbath afternoon with, among other things, an interview and panel discussion with General Conference president Jan Paulsen.

Comments

It seems to me that an apocalyptic world-view will always be at odds with environmentalism. It is hard to stir up enthusiasm for measures to save the Earth for your children and grand-children when you believe it'g going to be destroyed by God within your own lifetime. Ann Coulter no doubt channels the viewpoints of such people when she argues as quoted above.

Jared, thanks for this fascinating report. I think the way factory-farmed animals are treated is just disgusting, and as Christians we have a responsibility to help society develop ethics to prevent this abuse.

Quite apart from the ethical & theological implications though, practical considerations should dictate we live in a sustainable manner. The idea that Christ will come soon, so depleted resources don't matter, is very simplistic thinking.

Christians in every age (particularly the first century after Christ), have believed they were living in the end of time. We believe the same, but we don't know this for sure. Earth may go another 1,000 years, or even 2,000, 5,000 or 10,000 years before Christ comes again. If we are bad custodians of earth's non-renewable resources, we're potentially setting up future generations for a very miserable existence.

From the article:
--
During an audience Q&A following his presentation, Tonstad responded to a pointed question about dominion. Citing Ann Coulter, who has suggested that the biblical notion of dominion includes a warrant to rape and to exploit the earth, Tonstad countered saying that God delegates to human beings responsibility to act toward creation as God acts. God acts by blessing, Tonstad said. If God delegates responsibility to human beings, does that take away the aspect of blessing? Tonstad said there is no way to extract an exploitative theology from the Genesis text.
--
Coulter, who is a humorist we must remember is saying that God said: "Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours". She is probably more correct then the numerous politically correct who decry her statement. In the Genesis story God does not tell them how to use the earth responsibly. After all the most common understanding of the Genesis story has it that God killed animals just to make clothes for the only two people in the world because they were ashamed at being naked. Kind of exploitative of God if you ask me. Probably would have been a good time to teach them how to spin wool or make linen, but no the story is God skins some animals.

Every animal, exploits it's environment for its own survival whether it is a game trail or a nest or a burrow. What the Genesis story says is that mankind is the top of the food chain because we have the minds that make us more powerful than most animals. Ultimately with the knowledge comes the power to compete with or destroy even the strongest animals.

Then of course God destroys everything but as Tonstad says:
"there is no way to extract an exploitative theology from the Genesis text.." I think his copy of Genesis must be different from mine. Then again as do most Christians he appears to read all kinds of things into the Genesis stories. Which may be a strength as much as it is a weakness if we first realize that the story does not work as a literal account or an actual history of God or man. In which case both Tonstad and Coulter can be correct in their assertions. That God did not posit to the first people how to care for the environment that the world is exploitable by man and animals and just because God did not forbid or extol something does not mean that we should or should not do something. That we have to use some practical knowledge so that subsistence living is not really God's demanded life for humanity and neither is living so high on the hog that the earth cannot support us.

Ron

Agra-business impacts soybeans, corn, wheat, potatoes, et al.
Even organic farming. The case for vegetarianism must be based on something more than ethics and ecology. Tom

Based simply on economics, raising corn and soy beans for cattle feed and then slaughtering those animals for human food is far more costly than the direct distribution of food grown for humans. This is the costly trial on ethanol from corn: it used far more water and proved much more costly than gasoline.

For carnivores, grass-fed cattle are not only more healthful, but should be the choice for those who eat meat. One of the largest beef producers here in California only a few miles from where I live, is vigorously fighting the projected laws for regulating beef production. If there is a continued swing to more vegetarians, at least for less meat, perhaps that will no longer be a problem for the cattle growers.

Post new comment

Because conversation is our mission, we publish all comments immediately. We simply request that you focus on the posted topic, and not attack anyone or use profanity. Please sign your post. Consistently used pseudonyms are acceptable, but "anonymous" is not. Adding links to commercial web pages for promotional purposes is not allowed. A link to your personal blog is welcome. This site is a place for thoughtful conversation and a healthy exchange of ideas and perspective; rants and tirades don't further this mission and are not appropriate. We reserve the right to delete comments which do not follow these guidelines. Thank You!
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comments are limited to a maximum of 5000 characters.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

User login