Episcopalians Will Consider Differing Strategies to Deal with the Environmental Crisis
Episcopal News Service. May 24, 1991 [91135]
After three years of theological study, the 70th General Convention of the Episcopal Church must now decide how to demonstrate its commitment to the environmental movement.
At the grassroots, Episcopalians across the country have not waited for direction from the national church for guidance in the environmental crisis. Parishes have held workshops on the environment, participated in Earth Day celebrations, and joined in efforts to recycle wastes. Now that the concern has percolated to the highest levels of leadership, the General Convention will confront not only some impatience that the church is moving too slowly on the issue -- but also several differing strategies to respond to the environmental crisis.
One proposal, offered by the Executive Council, would require a serious reorientation by all current structures in the national church to respond to the environmental crisis. It would force the current structures in the church to consider creative approaches to environmental concerns -- and then mandate that the structures be held accountable.
Another proposal, offered by the Standing Commission on Human Affairs, would set up a new standing commission and special, separate office for environmental concerns that would prod the church.
A third proposal, offered by a coalition of environmental activists in the church, calls for establishing a separate, presiding bishop's committee on the environment to conduct research and to develop proposals and programs.
While all sides agree that the issue is greater than using ceramic mugs instead of styrofoam cups, or recycling newspapers, already supporters of the various plans are at odds about which strategy would be more effective. The fear is that "this fragile earth, our island home," as it is described in the Book of Common Prayer, may be on the path to self-destruction. And the hope is that the church will fashion a corporate response to ecological issues.
Voices of urgency and anticipation -- like the ticking of a time bomb, or a clock about to strike midnight -- are prodding the church to take a more decisive role in the crisis.
"Where is organized religion on this issue... and where is the Episcopal Church?" asked the Very Rev. James Parks Morton, dean of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York, and an international environmental activist. "How could it be that a community that has taken such prophetic leadership on issues of human rights, civil rights, peace, and social justice is totally invisible and mute, totally absent from this struggle on which everybody else is moving?"
Momentum for the Episcopal Church's response picked up at the 1988 General Convention when a resolution called for a church-wide, comprehensive study on the environment. The convention directed the Executive Council to "give high priority" to the development of a "statement of policy and plan of action regarding stewardship of the global environment" and that the plan "be presented to the 1991 General Convention for approval."
The convention also chose the environment as one of eight mission imperatives for three years, emphasizing the compelling need for the church to "act in faithful stewardship in response to the biblical teaching of the right use of God's creation."
The 1988 Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops adopted a resolution urging the Anglican Communion to explore the interrelationship of the environmental crisis with militarism, justice, and peace.
In the intervening three years, the international community has focused the world's attention on the environment. The World Council of Churches (WCC) called for a new "theology of creation, redemption and justice." A special conference on Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation of the WCC in Seoul, South Korea, in March 1990, called for "a new vision" that will "integrate our interdependent ecological, social, economic, political and spiritual needs."
In the summer of 1990 the presiding bishop appointed a Consultation on Environment and Sustainable Development to help guide the Executive Council in preparing a report for the 1991 General Convention. The consultation presented a report to the November 1991 meeting of the Executive Council in New York, saying that "the environmental crisis is a challenge of far greater proportions" than had been anticipated.
"Neglect of land, sky, and water reflects alienation of humans from one another. Inability to understand and acknowledge fully the dimensions of this challenge betrays profound and pervasive fear and denial," the consultation said. "What we face, therefore, is a fundamental human crisis, without precedent, infusing all aspects of our life."
The consultation proposed a plan of action that included establishing an Office of Environment and Sustainable Development, and a new standing commission for the church. Details of the proposal were later endorsed by the church's Standing Commission on Human Affairs, which currently has basic responsibility for environmental issues.
"It won't be enough merely to pass resolutions at General Convention in Phoenix," said Morton, one of the co-chairs of the consultation, in his address to Executive Council. He challenged the council to accept the action plan presented by the consultation and pressed for urgent and comprehensive action by the whole church.
Executive Council commended the consultation for its work, and then directed an ad hoc committee to prepare "a policy and plan, along with a statement of theological basis on the environment and sustainable development" to be presented for action at General Convention in Phoenix.
By the time the ad hoc committee report had reached the Spring 1990 meeting of the Executive Council in Portland, Maine, however, a new plan of action had emerged. It called the church to use existing institutions and structures to mobilize appropriate response at all levels to the environmental crisis.
"Our goal was not to tell the church how to respond, but to engage each other and our government on the issues," said David Beers, a council member who served as chairperson of the ad hoc committee report.
The new plan would engage the church on three levels: the Presiding Bishop's Office, the Executive Council, and a coalition of representatives of the standing commissions of the General Convention.
The council's plan would direct a system-wide reorientation of the presiding bishop's staff at the Episcopal Church Center to environmental concerns within current programs. The Executive Council would establish a special committee on the environment to deal directly with reports and legislation regarding environmental issues. The new coalition on the environment would serve as a watchdog on the church's policies to ensure that they are a continuing priority -- and that the policies are carried out.
According to Beers, the Executive Council plan would be more effective than the original proposal from the consultation, because it would not separate the environment from the entirety of the church's mission. "The real question is how to integrate the concern for the environment with broader peace and social justice issues," Beers said. He told the council that the committee "steadfastly rejected" pressure to separate the environment from other issues facing the church.
The council's report has already stirred some sharp reaction, suggesting that the debate over the church's strategy in Phoenix may contain as much heat as light.
"The resolution [to be offered by the Executive Council] is very wordy... very bureaucratic and very weak... like an elephant producing a mouse," said Morton. He added that the plan places too much emphasis on already overburdened staff people and distributes authority over too wide an area. "The implementation plan is too diffuse. Nobody really has any authority to do anything."
Morton has organized a coalition to lobby the General Convention for the original plan of the presiding bishop's consultation as put forward in resolutions by the Standing Commission on Human Affairs. In addition, the coalition proposes the establishment of a separate, presiding bishops committee on the environment to make proposals on environmental policy. According to him, the new coalition includes bishops, other clergy, and laity from across the church. The coalition is already planning a national meeting on June 15 to organize strategy leading up to the General Convention. "We will have a booth at convention and are working on strategy to get the Episcopal Church to legislate a very strong environmental program," Morton said.
"They want to lock us into a specific position, whereas what we are trying to say is that we want the whole church to enter the debate," said Beers in response to Morton's proposal. "They [Morton's coalition] want to give specific instructions, with too much emphasis on birds and turtles and styrofoam cups. They show a lack of confidence in the structure of the church and are very heavily weighted toward the traditional environmental groups."
Beers rejected the claim that the church is far behind on the environmental issue. "It is true that some parishes and dioceses are ahead of the national church. But that is the nature of the church," he said. "Policies are always informed by people at the local level and vice versa. It's a two-way street."
"We have a very good record in the area of environmentally sensitive investments," Beers continued. "We were among the first denominations to file shareholder resolutions on the environment with corporations in the wake of the Valdez oil spill." Yet, Beers admitted, there is room for pressure in the church. "The real pressure should hold the existing structures accountable. We need to help parishes understand that the issue is more than rules about disposable diapers -- that there are broader questions about justice at stake."
What the Episcopal Church needs, according to Beers, are people within the structure to connect ecological concerns with the wider mission of the church, and to monitor how the church responds to the environmental crisis. "We must make sure that people continue to ask the questions -- and then to assure the structure that 'We'll be watching,'" he said.