This question touches on one of the most important issues of our time: broadly speaking, the role of the human person in creation. The fundamental answer is found in the text of Genesis (1:26), sacred to both Christians and Jews, in which God says to the man and the woman he had created: “Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth.”
This marvelous teaching really has two dimensions, both of which are linked to one another. First, the world is created with human beings as its capstone, and it is for the good and enjoyment of human beings that other creatures exist. Second, human beings, consequently, have a responsibility to care for other creatures and things in a sensible way.
It is helpful to note that the word “dominion” used here in the English translation is related to the word Dominus — or “Lord” — because this fact reminds us that the care human beings give for everything entrusted to them should be just as respectful and loving as God’s own care for us as his creatures. One might even say that it is through human beings that God himself intends to exercise his care for the rest of his creation.
Both of these dimensions are important. Too often, debates about environmental issues seem to divide people along fault lines characterized by one of these values, perhaps with too little appreciation for the other.
Some may defend every initiative aimed at maximum utilization of the earth’s resources for the sake of economic prosperity and human freedom, without sufficient regard for the detrimental effects of such initiatives on the environment.
At the same time, others take offense at any human activity that alters the pristine condition of nature, neglecting to see clearly enough that it is responsible and sustainable use, rather than not using natural resources, that best characterizes the twofold aspects of humanity’s relationship to creation.
Pope Francis in 2015 wrote the encyclical letter Laudato Si’ — taking its first words (in English, “Be praised!”) from the “Canticle of Creation,” in which the Pope’s namesake, Saint Francis of Assisi, praises God for the sun as “our brother,” the moon as “our sister,” while mentioning with similar affection the various elements of nature such as wind, air, water, fire, earth, and even bodily death.
The first chapter of the Pope’s encyclical describes the concrete challenges and questions of the present moment regarding humanity’s care or neglect of the environment: pollution and climate change, an adequate water supply for all, the interrelatedness of various species and elements within the world’s ecosystems, and the hazards of an unjust, inequitable effect of these problems on different groups of people.
The second chapter, entitled “The Gospel of Creation,” is a beautifully comprehensive description of the light that faith sheds on the human relationship to the rest of creation in the context of God’s care for the world.
And the third chapter presents an insightful picture of the ways that technology has amplified the stakes of the imbalances in that relationship, also involving the earth’s nations and peoples in a complex global system in which our actions may have effects far beyond our own shores.
All three of these chapters are crucial guideposts for those who wish to carry on a serious discussion and — where called for, a debate and even argument — about the issue of our obligation to care for the environment.
But it is equally important to imitate the humility exemplified by the Pope’s encyclical. While the second and third chapters outline principles solidly grounded in both human reason and Scripture — and are therefore likely to be the object of widespread agreement — the first chapter, entitled “What Is Happening to Our Common Home,” involves a certain way of seeing things, specifically identifying causes and effects, leading Pope Francis to affirm that “we need to acknowledge that different approaches and lines of thought have emerged regarding this situation and its possible solutions.”
Various opinions can and do exist regarding the actual effect of certain human activities on the environment. Even more, people may have differing opinions regarding which specific policy measures will most likely have a net positive effect, not only on the natural environment but also on the full human environment, including jobs, economic prosperity, and governmental structures and policies.
I think the simple answer to your question, “Do we have a moral obligation toward the care of the environment?” is a resounding “Yes!” But as to the question of precisely how we exercise this obligation together, it will be very important to listen respectfully and with open minds to different opinions.
The obligation in question here is one that no one can fulfill alone; we must all tend to it in unity and charity.
Msgr. Michael Magee
(Living City, USA)
