Reading and Discussion Questions for Burton-Christie and Kearns

Burton- Christie discusses a number of key theologians post-New Testament. Some of these thinkers were "orthodox"; some went in other directions. I have indicated their dates and given some links on each if you want to check them out.

Irenaeus of Lyon - ca. 120-203 CE - http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary/irenaeus.html and http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/TOC.htm#TopOfPage

Clement of Alexandria - ca. 150-230 C.E. http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary/clementa.html and http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/clement.html

Tertullian - ca. 155-225 http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary/tertullian.html and http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.html

Origen of Alexandria - ca. 185-253 CE http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary/origen.html

Augustine of Hippo - ca. 354-430 C .E. article from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/augustine/

1. Burton-Christie’s thesis comes out clearly in his first few sentences:

The early Christian tradition expresses a profound ambivalence regarding the natural world. On the one hand, it affirms continuously the goodness and spiritual significance of the natural world, an affirmation rooted in two central convictions—that the world as created by God is good and that the Incarnation of God in the person of Jesus Christ has transfigured all created matter. On the other hand, the early Christian tradition expresses genuine suspicion regarding the dangers of the wrong kind of attachment to the things of this world. At times, this suspicion expressed itself as a fear of, even a revulsion toward material reality, toward embodied existence, toward the cosmos as a whole. However there were also times when this suspicion of the world was understood in broader, more symbolic terms, a way of articulating the need to resist values believed to be antithetical to the Gospel. Much early Christian theological reflection, as well as the liturgical and spiritual life of the community, was affected by this deep-seated sense of ambivalence toward the living world. (1)

NOTE: While there is a great deal of debate about whether one can really categorize a variety of groups and thinkers under the one banner of gnosticism, there is general agreement that a number of groups and writers were very dualistic and rejected the world as material and evil. (for a brief definition of gnosticism see http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary/gnosticism.html)

4. From what you know about Christianity in this early period (perhaps through Phil 320 Ancient) is Burton-Christie’s analysis convincing? If we assume that Burton-Christie is correct about early Christian ambivalence towards nature, how might this affect modern Christian views on the environment?

5.  Do you think Burton-Christie's focus on the synthesis with Greco-roman philosophy lends credence to criticisms of Lynn White?

1. This article is a sociological/anthropological analysis rather than a philosophical essay. However, researchers always bring particular perspectives and presuppositions to their research. How would you characterize Kearns’ point of view? What elements of her article provide clues to her perspective?

NOTE: This article was published in 1997. Kearns indicates her field research took place between 1987 and 1992 with "follow-up research through 1996: (350).

2. One of the reasons I assigned this article was Kearns’ typology of models of Christian environmentalism on 351-352. Although there are likely a number of ways to divide up the pie, the fact that Kearns defines several ideal types begins to indicate the wide variety of positions that exist. Kearns divides U.S. Christian environmentalism into three types: Christian stewardship, eco-justice, and creation spirituality. She notes that these are ideal types and that there is often overlap. How does she define each type/model? What characteristics does she use to delineate the categories? What do her categories include? What do they exclude?

3. In this article Kearns focuses largely on the Christian stewardship model which she sees as largely appealing to conservative evangelicals. What does she say these stewards see as their main tasks (354)? What do they see as obstacles in accomplishing these tasks (353-58)? What role does the biblical story of Noah play?

4. What factors does Kearns think played into "the emergence of religious, and specifically Christian environmentalism"? (358-60) How would you evaluate her analysis of the origins? Does the "tool-kit" metaphor on p. 360 work?

5. Kearns’ conclusion on 360-361 summarizes her assessment of the positions and significance of the Christian stewardship model. With what elements of her assessment do you think the folks she is describing would agree or disagree? Why?

6. How does Kearns’ description of a Christian stewardship model resemble and differ from the Jewish stewardship model we encountered in our previous readings, especially in Kay and Ehrenfeld and Bentley?

Kearns mentions a number of religious environmental organizations. Many of these groups, have websites. If you are interested, here are some links:   The National Religious Partnership for the Environment can be found at http://www.nrpe.org/ This organization includes links to the partners (Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Council of Churches of Christ, and the Evangelical Environmental Network.  The North American Coalition for Christianity and Ecology (NACCE) is located at http://www.nacce.org/    I could not find a website for the North American Coalition on Religion and Ecology. The best reference I found was http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/orgdisplay.asp?Org=NAC400  An interesting point-counterpoint between Calvin DeWitt mentioned in Kearns' article and Ronald Nash can be found at http://www.equip.org/free/DE403.htm