In Grateful Memory of a Theologian Named Rosemary

Not many Christian theologians have been named Rosemary. In fact, not many Christian theologians before this century were women. But Rosemary Radford Ruether was a noted theologian and a leader of feminist liberation theology. She was born on November 2, 1936, and died in May of this year. 

Claremont School of Theology photo

Rosemary Radford was born in Minnesota, the daughter of an Episcopalian father and a Roman Catholic mother. When she was 12, her father died and she moved with her mother to California where she attended Catholic schools.

Rosemary graduated from prestigious Scripps College, a private women’s school in southern California, and then earned M.A. and Ph.D. degrees at Claremont School of Theology, a United Methodist institution.

While still a student at Scripps, she married Herman Ruether in 1957, and eight years later they had three children—and she had her Ph.D. and was authoring a book. During her lifetime, she wrote 36 books and more than 600 scholarly articles and also gave a formidable number of public lectures.

Ruether’s teaching career was spent entirely in Protestant schools: Howard University, Pacific School of Religion, and Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary where she taught the longest. But she was a self-identified Catholic for her whole life.

Rosemary Radford Ruether is best known as a pioneer feminist theologian and an advocate of ecofeminist theology. Her major books are Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (1983) and Gaia and God: An Ecofeminist Theology of Earth Healing (1992).

The subtitle of the second chapter of Ruether’s 1983 book is “Male and Female Images of the Divine,” and she concludes with a subsection titled “Toward a Feminist Understanding of God/ess.”

There is strong opposition to any reference to a Goddess in Christianity, since that term is always feminine, but little opposition to the use of Christianity’s use of God, which has overwhelmingly been seen as male, at least until recently. Ruether’s term helped correct that theological error.*

To overcome the powerful and long tradition of envisioning God as male, Ruether uses the Goddess image to emphasize that God is equally female, which is the same as saying that God transcends gender bifurcation.

With regard to her ecofeminism, Ruether was the first to connect publicly the domination of the earth with the oppression of women. In her 1992 book, she sought to “demonstrate the interconnectedness of domination and deceit, the social systems of power over women . . .” (p. 8).

Ruether is also known as a critic of such traditional Roman Catholic stances as birth control, the ordination of women, papal infallibility, and the rejection of liberation theology. In 2008 she published a slim book under the title Catholic Does Not Equal the Vatican: A Vision for Progressive Catholicism.

In that book’s Introduction, she calls for a church that is multicultural, that acknowledges its fallibility, lives by grace, is liberated from sexism, is democratic, and is committed to the poor and the oppressed (see pp. 4~11).

Rosemary Ruether was a liberation theologian and modern prophet. In my university lecture on liberation theology (both in Japan and at Rockhurst U. here in Kansas City), I introduced Gustavo Gutiérrez, James Cone, and Ruether.

Just as Gutiérrez wrote about liberating the poor in South America from economic exploitation and Cone wrote about liberating African Americans from racism, Ruether wrote about liberating women from male domination. All three advocated that liberation on the basis of their Christian faith.

In Four Modern Prophets (1986), author William Ramsay summarizes the work of four modern theologians who epitomized the struggle for freedom and justice. Those four are Walter Rauschenbusch, Martin Luther King, Jr, Gustavo Gutiérrez, and Ruether.**

Ramsay contends that much of Ruether’s theology was an effort to apply the teaching of Jesus “to contemporary concerns, not only sexism but also racism and economic oppression” (p. 87).

When I heard of Ruether’s death back in May, I was saddened that the voice of this prodigious theologian and prophet had been silenced, but I am grateful that she continues to speak through her numerous books and articles.

_____

* In February 2015, I made a blog post titled “Using Gender-Neutral Language for God.” (Inexplicably, there have been over 3,000 pageviews of that post.)

** I have previously posted blog articles about the first three of these (see especially here, here, and here). I am happy now to be making this post about Ruether.

The Power of Pictures

“Use a picture. It’s worth a thousand words.” Arthur Brisbane (1864~1936), a high-profile New York journalist and editor, penned those words 111 years ago in a 1911 newspaper article. That seems to be the origin of the much-used expression that you have heard repeatedly. 

This post is about two specific photos that were made public fifty years ago rather than about the power of pictures in general.

One of those images is now generally titled “Napalm Girl.” It is the photo of Phan Thi Kim Phuc, a nine-year-old Vietnamese girl, taken in 1972 by Associated Press photographer Nick Ut (who was born in Vietnam in 1951).

“The Girl in the Picture” was the title of my 7/10/11 blog post, which includes a reproduction of the photo, so I will not write more about that powerful picture here.*

The second picture, and the main subject of this article, was also made public in 1972. Different names have been used for it; the one I prefer is “Tomoko and Mother in the Bath.”**  

Kamimura Tomoko was born blind and paralyzed with congenital “Minamata disease” in 1956 and was 15 at the time the picture of her and her mother bathing was taken. She died in December 1977 at the age of 21.

“Minamata disease,” a type of mercury poisoning, was the name of the malady suffered by those who were born with various deformities in and around the small city of Minamata in Kumamoto Prefecture, Japan. Tomoko was just one of nearly 3,000 people who contracted Minamata disease.

American photojournalist W. Eugene Smith took the picture of Tomoko being bathed by her mother in late 1971. Smith (1918~78) was widely known because of the outstanding photos he took during World War II. But many commentators regard “Tomoko” as Smith’s greatest work.

The iconic photograph was first published in the June 2, 1972, edition of Life magazine as the centerpiece of a short Minamata photo essay.

The movie Minamata, which premiered in Berlin in 2020, was released in the U.S. in February of this year. It features Johnny Depp, who does an outstanding job of portraying the not-so-likeable Smith. 

Although there are various historical inaccuracies and other defects in the movie, it pictures well the suffering of so many families in Minamata and the culpability of the Chisso Corporation, the Japanese chemical company which for 34 years polluted the water supply near Minamata.

The climax of the film is Smith’s photographing Tomoko and her mother. And, in actuality, upon its publication in 1972 the photo became world-famous, significantly raising the international profile of Minamata disease and the struggle of the victims for recognition and compensation.

Minamata is about 120 miles due south of Fukuoka, the city to which June and I (and our two children at the time) moved in 1968. Although the tragedy of children born with Minamata disease was known, in part, since the 1950s, I don’t know when we first began to hear about it.

In the summer of 1971, shortly before Smith arrived in Minamata, we came back to the U.S. for a year, so perhaps we didn’t become aware of the dire situation in Minamata until after Smith’s photo essay in Life, including “Tomoko and Mother in the Bath,” was published the following year.

In February 1988, I went to Minamata with a group of Japanese Christians who wanted to learn more about the situation there and to consider how to do more to not only help the victims but also to help stop the polluting practices of companies such as Chisso.

While there are lingering effects of Minamata disease, that sad episode is largely over. But the fight against industrial pollution, in all countries including the U.S., is an ongoing one.

The Trump administration did away with a great many restrictions established by the Environmental Protection Agency. And if (when?) the GOP gains political dominance this year or in 2024, industrial pollution will likely be a problem that will again have to be addressed more actively.

Powerful pictures protesting pollution may become imperative again.

_____

* If you want to read even more about this picture, check out “'Napalm Girl' at 50: The story of the Vietnam War's defining photo,” a CNN article posted last month.

** Although Tomoko’s surname was “Kamimura,” because of the misreading of the first Japanese character of the family name, the photograph has sometimes been erroneously known as Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath. 

Jane, Good for All the Earth

Earlier this month, Dr. Jane Goodall celebrated her 87^th birthday. Born in London in 1934, the famous anthropologist spent much of her life in Tanzania studying chimpanzees. She has also become one of the leading spokespersons advocating care for all the earth.  

Photo from The Jane Goodall Institute

Jane Goodall and the Media

Like most of you, I have heard of Jane Goodall for decades. But maybe unlike many of you, I was never particularly interested in her or in her work. I guess I thought there are more important things to do than to spend years and years studying chimpanzees.

My recent interest in Goodall, though, was spurred by a perceptive article about her in the December 30 issue of The Christian Century. After reading that article, “Why Jane Goodall reminds me of Dorothy Day,” I wanted to learn more about her and her work.

So, about six weeks ago June and I watched Jane, the 2017 documentary, which followed her life and career from 1960 when she left her home country of England to live for decades in the Gombe forest of Tanzania.

Jane Goodall: The Hope is the new 2020 National Geographic film about Goodall. We just subscribed to Disney+, the only place where it seems to be available, in order to watch it last week at our usual “Friday night at the movies.” It is mostly about Jane’s work from 1986 to 2019.

Both of these documentaries helped us understand how Jane Goodall and her work studying and advocating for chimpanzees is, truly, good for all the earth.

Jane Goodall and Earth Day

As you probably know, April 22 is Earth Day; this year’s theme is Restore Our Earth. EarthDay.org has helpful information about various activities, which begin today.

National Geographic is kicking off Earth Day with a free virtual concert special on April 21. (Read more about that here.) Jane Goodall is scheduled to make an appearance at that concert. 

Goodall is certainly a worthy spokesperson for Earth Day. In April 2002, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed her a United Nations Messenger of Peace, honoring her for a remarkable career as an environmentalist and her “dedication to what is best in mankind.”

She has done so much for the earth over the last 30 years that a National Geographic photographer who has traveled extensively with her calls Goodall the “Mother Teresa of the environment.”

And the subtitle of the Christian Century article about Goodall refers to her as “a secular saint.”

Jane Goodall and Chimpanzees

Eight years ago today (on 4/20/13) I began my first blog post about Earth Day by citing Psalm 24:1. In the NIV translation, that familiar verse says, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it.”

We usually think of “all” in this verse as referring to human beings, but perhaps we should think of all as also including chimpanzees and other living beings. Jane Goodall certainly did, and does.

And maybe Jane Goodall’s meritorious lifework is an example of how “Understanding One Thing is to Understand Everything,” as I wrote about in my February 27 blog post.

As shown in the 2020 documentary, since 1986 Jane has been working tirelessly to save the environment for her beloved chimpanzees—and for the people in their shared environment—and, then, to save the whole earth from environmental destruction.

Indeed, Dr. Jane’s work over the past 60 years has been good for all the earth. May God help each of us to follow her example in our own small ways.

_____

** Here is the link to The Jane Goodall Institute's website, with links to her impressive “Roots and Shoots” organization as well as to her “Good for All News” website.

A Notable Nomination: Haaland for Secretary of the Interior

The first two Native American women ever were elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018. One was Sharice Davids of Kansas City, from the 3^rd congressional district of Kansas.* The other was Deb Haaland of New Mexico.

Now, Rep. Haaland is poised to become a member of President Biden’s Cabinet. 

Who is Deb Haaland?

Debra Anne Haaland was born in Arizona 60 years ago last month. She is an enrolled member of the Laguna Pueblo, a Native American people group who has lived on the land that is now the state of New Mexico since the 1200s.

Haaland identifies herself as a 35th-generation New Mexican, her mother being a Native American woman. Her father, however, is a Norwegian American.

(It’s interesting how Haaland is Native American because her mother was, but Obama was never considered White even though his mother was.)

Haaland was 28 when she started college at the University of New Mexico, and she gave birth to a daughter, Somáh, four days after graduation in May 1994.

As a single mother, Haaland was sometimes dependent on food stamps. Still, she went on to law school and earned her J.D. in Indian law from University of New Mexico School of Law in 2006.

Haaland’s rise to political power began when she was elected to a two-year term as the chair of the Democratic Party of New Mexico in April 2015.

To What Was Deb Haaland Nominated?

On Dec. 17, President-elect Biden announced that he was nominating Haaland as the next Secretary of the Interior. As such she would be the first Native American to serve in the President’s Cabinet.

Secretary of the Interior isn’t a particularly ostentatious position, but it is an important one. According to this website, the Department of Interior (DoI) is

a federal executive department of the U.S. government. It is responsible for the management and conservation of most federal lands and natural resources, and the administration of programs relating to Native Americans, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, territorial affairs, and insular areas of the United States, as well as programs related to historic preservation. . . . The department was created on March 3, 1849.

Seal of the DoI

Why Is Deb Haaland’s Nomination Notable?

The infamous Indian Removal Act was promulgated in 1830 and especially from then until the “Indian wars” ended in December 1890 (as I wrote about in my Dec. 26 blog post), there were sixty years of repeated cruel treatment of the Native peoples in U.S. territory.

Moreover, most Native Americans did not or could not become U.S. citizens until the Indian Citizenship Act was signed into law in 1924. And even after that, it was not until 1957 that Native Americans were allowed to vote in all states.

While things are better for Native Americans now than they were 130 years ago or 97 years ago, many of those who want to maintain their ethnic identity still have to face discrimination and “second-class” citizenship.

So, after all these years, it is notable that Biden chose a Native American, who is a sitting U.S. Representative, to be the new Secretary of the Interior, responsible for “the administration of programs relating to Native Americans.”

In addition, since environmental issues are a major concern of the new administration, Haaland, consistent with her Native American heritage, is a strong advocate for environmental justice—and has been openly criticized for that by Representative Pete Stauber (R-Minn.).

I hope Rep. Haaland’s confirmation as Secretary of the DoI will be smooth and that she will do well as a member of the Cabinet.

+++++

* The church June and I are members of is in that district, and Rep. Davids (b. 1980) was strongly supported by most of our fellow church members in the 2018 election and in 2020, when she was re-elected.

TTT (Things Take Time)

For many years, I have used the abbreviation TTT for my book Thirty True Things Everyone Needs to Know Now (2018)—and I still encourage people to read that book. But this post is about a different meaning of TTT, one that I learned from a Japanese friend decades ago: things take time. 

The Presidential Election: TTT

As everyone knows, the U.S. elections were held two days ago, on November 3. But the results of the presidential election are not certain even now, although it is most likely that the Biden/Harris ticket will narrowly win.

The election results for most states won’t be “officially certified” until November 23 or later. And actually, the result of the presidential election is not official until January 6, the day a joint session of Congress meets to count electoral votes (cast on December 18) and declare the winner.

Things take time, and this year it is taking a much longer time than usual for the apparent results of the presidential election to be ascertained—and who knows what will happen between now and Dec. 18 or Jan. 6.

There will be recounts, lawsuits, angry tweets, and falsehoods told by the likely loser, who late on election night made numerous false and misleading statements in speaking to his supporters (see here).

The Return to Normalcy: TTT

As I wrote in my previous (Oct. 30) blog post, the election of Joe Biden would be the beginning of a return to normalcy as the many abnormalities I mentioned in that post—and that was by no means a complete list—would be righted.

However, even if Biden is inaugurated on January 20, current adverse conditions in the nation won’t get better immediately. Things take time.

The ongoing effects of the pandemic, the lingering economic/unemployment challenges for many, and current cynicism about government, etc. will take a long time to overcome and for there to be a sense of normalcy again.

Some, no doubt, will be disappointed, feeling that change/recovery is happening too slowly. There will likely be criticism of the new administration for not doing enough fast enough.

But, again, things take time—and patience seems to be much more difficult for us USAmericans than for the people of Japan, whose national beginning is said to have been in 660 BCE, a very long time before 1776.

The Re-building of Environmental Protection: TTT

Over the past nearly four years, we have seen much that has been wrecked in this country—and it takes much longer to build, or re-build, something than to wreck it.

The lead article in the October 31 issue of The Economist reports, “Of the 225 major executive actions in a studiously catalogued list of the Trump administration’s deregulation 70 . . . are environmental rollbacks.”

With broader criteria, an articlein the Oct. 30 Washington Post claims that “as Trump’s first term winds to a close, he has weakened or wiped out more than 125 rules and policies aimed at protecting the nation’s air, water and land, with 40 more rollbacks underway.”

There are numerous critical challenges that the new President faces. Of immediate urgency, of course, is controlling the spread of the covid-19 pandemic and dealing with the lingering problems caused by it.

But perhaps the biggest challenge, the one that is most critical for the future well-being of the country and the world, is re-building programs necessary for protecting the environment—and then taking bold measures to combat global warming.

Things take time—but dealing wisely and effectively with environmental issues is something that needs to be done sooner rather than later.

Taking Care of Mother

Although it is still three weeks until Mother’s Day, I am writing today about taking care of Mother Earth. This week marks the 50^th anniversary of Earth Day, so it is a fitting time to think about taking care of our planet. 

The First Earth Day

Earth Day was first observed on April 22, 1970. Do you old-timers remember that important event that celebrates its 50^th birthday this week?

To be honest, I don’t remember that day. I was living and teaching in Japan at that time, struggling at the beginning of a new semester to teach Christian Studies in Japanese to hundreds of university students. And at home, June was in the third trimester of her pregnancy with our third child.

Actually, though, for the first 20 years, Earth Day was mainly an event celebrated in the U.S. and did not become international until 1990. But those early years were important for the environmental movement in the U.S.

Gaylord Nelson, the Democratic Senator from Wisconsin, was the founder of Earth Day. In 1995, Nelson (1916~2005) was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in recognition of his environmental work.

In its beginning, Earth Day was bipartisan in its support and appeal. The co-chair who served with Sen. Nelson was Pete McCloskey, who was at the time a Republican U.S. Representative from California.

One of the ongoing effects of that first Earth Day was the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). President Nixon proposed the establishment of the EPA in July 1970 and it began operation in December of that year after he signed an executive order.

The Clean Air Act of 1963 came under the aegis of the EPA, and then the Clean Water Act of 1972 and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 were signed into law by President Nixon.

Yes, taking care of Mother Earth used to be a bipartisan concern.

Earth Day Now

There are extensive plans for the celebration of Earth Day 2020, and I encourage you to check out the website (here) for this year’s events, which they say will be “the largest secular observance in the world, marked by more than a billion people.” 

Enthusiastic observance of Earth Day in the U.S. is especially important now, for the Trump Administration has rolled back many of the programs/activities that started 50 years ago.

Ten days ago, PBS posted “During the Coronavirus Crisis, the Trump Administration’s Environmental Rollbacks Continue.” And it has already been two and a half years since PBS aired “War on the EPA” on their 10/11/17 Frontline presentation.

Much of that war on the EPA, as documented in the PBS program, was led by Scott Pruitt, DJT’s first appointed head of the Agency. Pruitt, a conservative Southern Baptist from Oklahoma, served as head of the EPA from February 2017 to July 2018.

It was no surprise to learn (from this 3/27/18 CBN article) that Pruitt was “one of President Donald Trump's Cabinet members who sponsors and attends a weekly Cabinet Bible study led by Ralph Drollinger, president and founder of Capitol Ministries.”

(If you missed reading my previous blog post about Drollinger, check it out here.)

Things did not improve much when Andrew Wheeler became head of the EPA in February of last year. He previously worked in the law firm that represented a coal magnate and lobbied against the Obama Administration's environmental regulations.

Yes, much needs to be done to take care of Mother Earth—not only because of what is being undone now but also because of the many necessary things that have not yet been done.

And don’t forget, as I quoted at the beginning of the only other blog post I made about Earth Day (here, seven years ago), “The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein” (Psalm 24:1, KJV).

My Favorite Farmer

Wendell Berry, the inimitable farmer, who is also a novelist, poet, essayist, environmental activist, and cultural critic, is celebrating his 85^th birthday today. Please join me in wishing Mr. Berry a Happy Birthday. 

Photo of Berry by Steve Hebert of the NY Times

Favorite Farmers?

I now refer to Berry as “my favorite farmer.” Why would I do that? (And who would even have a list of favorite farmers?!)

Well, I am the son of a farmer, and I would have to say that my father (1915~2007) was my favorite farmer—even though my appreciation for him, of course, was for far more than his being a farmer.

Another of my favorite farmers was Clarence Jordan, the founder of Koinonia Farm in Georgia. I have long had great admiration for Jordan, and in commemoration of the 100^th anniversary of his birth, in July 2012 I posted a blog article titled “In Praise of Clarence Jordan.”

My appreciation for Jordan (d. 1969), though, was primarily because of his public words and actions rather than because of how he farmed.

Wendell Berry is now my favorite living farmer—but just as for my father and Clarence Jordan, it is for far more than his being a farmer that I admire him and seek to honor him today on his birthday. Still, his being a farmer is also of significance.

Becoming a Farmer

In the summer of 1964, Berry moved back to Kentucky, to a small acreage on the Kentucky River near where he was born in 1934. In the 1964-65 academic year, I lived in east Kentucky, serving as pastor of the Clay City Baptist Church and making numerous trips to Louisville where I was a graduate student.

As I regularly crossed the Kentucky River south of Frankfort on I-64, I didn’t know the man whom I would later call my favorite farmer lived downstream, not far from where that river flows into the Ohio River. In fact, it would be several years before I would even hear the name Wendell Berry.

Through the years, however, I began to hear more and more about Berry and became increasingly impressed with him as a farmer, as a writer/poet, and as an environmentalist. His is truly a prophetic voice that needs to be heard and heeded today.

Small Farmer, Large Influence

Since from back in the 1970s, many of us have used what we thought was a good slogan: “Think globally, act locally.” It was with some consternation, then, that I recently discovered that Berry did not particularly like that slogan.

Berry emphasizes the importance of thinking locally as well as acting locally. One of his essays is titled “Think Little.” In that 1970 essay he writes, “For most of the history of this country our motto, implied or spoken, has been Think Big. A better motto, and an essential one now, is Think Little.”

Thinking little, in part, means seeking to change one’s own lifestyle and consumption habits for the sake of the environment rather than trying to change the world.

Berry writes in that essay, now republished in The World-Ending Fire: The Essential Wendell Berry (2017),  

If you are concerned about air pollution, help push for government controls, but drive your car less, use less fuel in your home. . . . if you are fearful of the destruction of the environment, then learn to quit being an environmental parasite. . . . To have a healthy environment we will all have to give up things we like; we may even have to give up things we have come to think of as necessities (p. 55).

Through the decades Berry has lived out his ideals on his small Kentucky acreage. He has farmed with horses rather than with tractors. And one of his well-known essays is “Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer” (1987).

In this modern world, there probably can’t be many people who think like and especially who live like Wendell Berry. Nevertheless, the world is certainly better off because of the way he thinks and lives—and because of the way he has been able to share his wisdom so widely, despite not using a computer.

Berry’s is not the final word on the issues he addresses. But his is, indeed, a good and important word that needs to be considered with utmost seriousness.

What about the Green New Deal?

Most of us are quite familiar with the term, and the significance, of what was known as the New Deal in this country. But in recent days we have been hearing about the Green New Deal, a relatively new idea that deserves serious thought and positive action.

The Proposal for a Green New Deal

On February 7, Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) introduced a Green New Deal resolution in both the Senate and House of Representatives. That 13-page resolution can be found here.

Markey (b. 1946) was a U.S. House member from 1976 to 2013 and has been in the Senate since then. Ocasio-Cortez (b. 1989), as you probably know, is the outspoken new House member who is often just called AOC.

When presented, Markey’s resolution was co-sponsored by ten other Senators—mostly names you know quite well, such as Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren.

While it is a long way from something being presented as a resolution and it actually being legislated, this is surely a significant start for serious consideration of a vital issue.  

The Purpose of the Proposal

The title of the 2/7 resolution is “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal.” Its purpose is to elevate awareness of the fearful realities of global warming along with other environmental issues and to set forth goals for Congress to consider over the next ten years.

Rather than being a proposal for detailed legislation, the Green New Deal (GND) resolution is a statement of what will most likely be necessary to meet the challenge of ever-worsening climate change. It presents the need for massive infrastructure programs and many other imperative actions for the creation of a sustainable future for our society and the world.

Thus, the GND resolution is a challenge to bold, creative, and long-term thinking about the most crucial issue of the present-day.

So, What About It?

One of my favorite op-ed writers is Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. His February 7 article was titled, “A ‘Green New Deal’ sounds like pie in the sky. But we need it.”

I fully agree with Robinson when he writes that “climate change is the biggest, most important story of our time. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will judge us by how well we meet the challenge, and so far we are failing. Miserably.”

Of course, there are those who staunchly oppose the proposal for a Green New Deal. The main criticism is that it smacks of socialism.

DJT no doubt had the GND in mind when he said in his SOTU message that “we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country.” He then went on to assert, “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.”

It must be recalled, though, that the New Deal proposed by President Roosevelt and enacted by Congress in the 1930s was also castigated for being socialist legislation.

Even among those who inveigh against socialism today, however, there are not many who are willing to give up their Social Security, which was one of the most important parts of the New Deal.

Just as the New Deal helped solved some of the most serious problems in American society many decades ago, the Green New Deal is a proposal for solving even potentially greater problems for the U.S., and the world, in the coming decades.

In the view from this Seat, the sooner the Green New Deal proposals are enacted, the better!

TTT #8 God Loves All of Creation

Everyone has heard much about God’s love. But do we sufficiently comprehend the extent of that love? Probably not. This article about God’s love is adapted from the first section of the eighth chapter of Thirty True Things Everyone Needs To Know Now (TTT), available in its entirety by clicking this link.

God’s Love Is Not Just for Humans

To begin with, it is important for us to realize that God’s love is not just for human beings. Perhaps Christianity through the centuries has been the most anthropocentric of all of the world’s religions.

There are, however, many references to God’s concern for nature in the Hebrew Bible that Christians call the Old Testament, and Christian environmentalists have increasingly called attention to those passages. For example, Psalm 145:9 declares, “The Lord is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made.” But have we really thought what it means for God to love all creation? Probably not sufficiently. 

Emphasis on God’s Beloved Creation

To address the lack of adequate concern for the natural world, back in 1983 at the Vancouver Assembly, the World Council of Churches (WCC) encouraged member churches to commit publicly to addressing environmental concerns as part of a common effort to promote Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation. That became known as the JPIC process. (The image below was the logo of that Assembly.) 

Then in 1990, the WCC sponsored the World Convocation on Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation in Seoul, Korea. One study unit in this program was called “Creation as Beloved of God.”

Creation, the physical universe in its entirety and not just human beings, is loved by God. That was the important emphasis of the WCC in the 1980s and 1990s.

There has been a similar emphasis in the Catholic Church: Pope John Paul II’s message for New Year’s Day 1990 was titled “Peace With God the Creator, Peace With All of Creation.” Reflecting upon that important message, Elisabeth A. Johnson, a noted Catholic theologian, wrote in 2001 about “God’s Beloved Creation.”

God’s Love and Our Love for Creation

Most people seem to have long thought that the purpose of the natural world—the purpose of all the plants, animals, and minerals in the world of nature—is primarily to supply the needs of human beings.

The creation story found in the first chapter of Genesis certainly does sound as if humans are the “crown of creation.” When the first human couple was created, “God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion . . .” (1:28).

The English words subdue and have dominion, however, may not be the best to convey what the Biblical writer really had in mind. To grasp that maybe we need to consider more fully the implication of these words: “So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them” (1:27).

The idea of humans created in the image of God has nothing to do with how we look; it has everything to do with our capacity to be loving and caring as God is. If God loves the physical world—and certainly God does—then we humans created in the image of God must love and care for the world also.

Since God loves all of creation—which includes the physical world, the world of sticks and stones, of plants and animals, the whole world of nature—it is incumbent on us human creatures to love/care for the natural world also.

My fear is that we are failing in that sacred task.

Is Politics Trumping Concern for the Planet?

“Politics is generally a mediocre to horrible platform for change.” That was a statement left by an anonymous person on my previous blog article. I am not sure what all the writer was suggesting, but how else can important changes be made in society?

 In this country, and many others, all major legislation that has made great and important changes for the betterment of society has been passed through the political process.

 One hundred and fifty years ago, in December 1865, the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, and slavery was officially abolished.

 That Amendment, however, was defeated the first time it was voted on in the House of Representatives: in June 1864 it fell thirteen votes short of the two-thirds needed for passage.

 That vote was along party lines. No surprise there. But later it received sufficient votes in the House and significant change came through the political system.

 Eighty years ago, in August 1935, the Social Security Act was signed into law by President Roosevelt, and Social Security has become one of the most appreciated of all government programs. But there was considerable political opposition at first.

 Many Republicans and some conservative Democrats were fearful about the program's influence on the economy, and some objected because they thought the program was socialistic.

 After a week’s debate in June 1935, the Social Security Act was passed in the Senate by a vote of 77 yeas, 6 nays, and 12 not voting. Five of the negative votes were by Republicans, but a majority of those not voting were Democrats. But here again, long-lasting, significant change came through the political system.

 In the case of so many Southern Democrats voting against the 13^th Amendment, most probably truly opposed freeing the slaves. And in the case of Social Security, the vote on which was not completely partisan; those who opposed it likely really did think it was not viable fiscally—or that it was socialistic.

 But what about current issues—such as legislation designed to combat global warming? On December 12, an historic agreement was made at the COP21 meeting in Paris. As Thomas L. Friedman wrote in his Dec. 16 op-ed piece for the New York Times, the Paris Climate Accord is “a big, big deal.”

 (COP stands for Conference of the Parties, referring to the countries that have signed the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; the COP in Paris was the 21st such conference.)

 The Paris agreement was highly praised by President Obama and political leaders around the world. It also received high praise from Pope Francis (him again!). In his address at the Vatican last Sunday, Pope Francis praised world leaders for reaching the historic agreement.

 Almost immediately after news of that significant agreement by 195 countries was announced, though, Republican politicians began to denounce it.

 Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said that President Obama is “making promises he can’t keep” and should remember that the agreement “is subject to being shredded in 13 months.”

 Such statements are surely made for political reasons rather than because of concern for the welfare of this planet and its inhabitants.

 In almost all of the world’s countries, while there may be disagreement about solutions there is almost universal agreement among politicians that global warming is a real problem.

 Only the U.S. has strong opposition to combatting global warming—and that is mostly because of opposition to President Obama, it seems.

 One cannot help but feel that Republican politics is trumping needed concern for the planet and our future.

Four Concerns about the New Congress

In early January 2015 the 114^th U.S. Congress will convene for the first time. As a result of the Nov. 4 election, both chambers will be controlled by Republicans.

Senators in the 114th Congress

Some of the new senators, such as Joni Ernst of Iowa and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, are quite conservative. Consequently, I have four serious concerns about the new Congress.

Personally, I will likely be impacted little by the new Congress. In fact, my modest portfolio might grow even more than it has in the past two years. So my concerns are not personal.

But my Christian faith compels me to love all people, especially the weakest and most vulnerable people in our country, as well as to care for the earth God has placed us on. So from this perspective here are four of my greatest concerns about what the new Congress and the new Missouri legislature will, or will not, do.

(1) My first and biggest concern is for the poor people across the nation, the people (and especially the children) who do not have enough to eat, who do not have adequate housing, and who do not have sufficient health care.

Conservative, Tea Party type legislators seem to be primarily interested in reducing the size of government and lowering taxes. Cuts in welfare, or the so-called safety net, are common proposals for those with this mentality.

But, for the well-being of a sizable percentage of people in poverty, in addition to sustaining their welfare provisions there needs to be an expansion of Medicaid eligibility.

Missouri is one of many states where the latter is badly needed. But with the new General Assembly, that likely won’t be done.

And while their efforts will not be successful, the U.S. Senate will possibly try to repeal “Obamacare,” removing millions from healthcare insurance.

(2) I am also concerned about the new Congress exercising adequate care for the environment. Republican congresspeople, such my Missouri Sixth District Representative Sam Graves, repeatedly criticize regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, whose purpose is to protect the earth for the coming generations.

And it is quite likely that Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, a global warming denier, will be the next chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Heaven help us!

(3) Concern for the children of “illegal immigrants.” Immigration reform has long been a major desire of the President and many legislators.

The Senate passed a comprehensive bill last year, but the House never even took it up. I am very concerned that this needed legislation will not be passed and that the President will take executive action leading to turmoil and even greater dysfunction in Washington.

(4) Concern for women and gays/lesbians as there is the likelihood of further anti-abortion laws and rejection of LGBT rights.

One does not have to agree with women who seek an abortion or of gays/lesbians who want to have legal marriages in order to uphold their civil rights.

If the new U.S. Congress passes legislation necessary to help the poor of the country to survive and to raise what is often a wretched standard of living, passes legislation that will protect the environment for the sake of our grandchildren, passes legislation that will give dignity and stability to the past and future immigrants into this country, and if they pass legislation that respects the freedom and dignity of women and LGBT people, then perhaps the election results were all right.

But until I see all the above happening, I will continue to have grave concerns about the election outcome on November 4.