« Push or Pull | Main | Confessions of a Pro-Lifer »

September 07, 2006

That Evangelicals, and more specifically, the National Association of Evangelicals, are concerned with the status of the environment is no surprise by now. During March of last year, the NAE released it infamous Call to Civic Responsibility statement, urging evangelical Christians to become better stewards of the environment. The statement was a surprise to many: All this talk of "care for the environment" is the stuff of the National Council of Churches, not those serious about Christ's call to go to the ends of the Earth, baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Cynicism aside, the NCC is still hard at work. The October term of the Supreme Court dawns in three weeks, and the NCC (along with the Church World Service, and the National Catholic Rural Life Conference) wants the Court to know what it thinks of the EPA and the Clean Air Act. Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. EPA challenges the EPA's authority to regulate carbon dioxide pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

In its amicus brief, the NCC states that "followers of the Judeo-Christian tradition are called to be responsible, just stewards of the Earth and the abundant resources that it makes available, today and for future generations. See Gn. 2:15, 9:12." The brief goes on to quote Matthew 22:39 and Mark 12:31-33 to the effect that the EPA should regulate C02 becuase "Christian ethic preaches love of our fellow humans."

Yes it does. And part of this love is giving a full profession of that same Christian ethic which also includes some nasty doctrine of man's fall and Christ's redemption. While I agree with what the NCC's amicus brief states, it is what countless other statements from the NCC do not state, namely the Christian ethic of the monogamous, hetrosexual union being the normative means God established to perpetuate His creation and fill His Kingdom, that beg the question: Why make a public argument based on your faith with regard to the environment, but not other pressing public policy issues?

I would think that the NCC could file a similar brief, drawing on biblical passages and Christian ethics, when the three DOMA cases are considered by the Court next spring. On second thought, that particular application of Christianity might offend Establishment sensibilities. (Remember that Barry Lynn, General Councel for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, is a UCC minister). As Jordan Lorence, senior council with the Aliance Defense Fund, notes, "Leftist activists trout out [the] 'Establishment Clause' argument when they want to undercut a public policy position advocated by religious conservatives and traditionalists" - but when it goes to support their policy points we get amici briefs like mannah from heaven.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at September 7, 2006 09:52 AM

Comments

Post a comment