Love for creation – a New Testament approach
Introduction:
What role does the love of neighbour play in a theology of creation in times of climate change? I will answer this question briefly from a Christian perspective with the help of the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Parallel things may be to be said on the basis of other scriptures. Especially since the Second, the so-called New Testament is based upon Jewish scriptures tradition lines can easily be found between these two scriptural bodies. I even dare to say that everything which will be written here is hopefully written as if a Jew would look over my shoulder and could say “yes” to the writing.
First thought:
Standing up for climate protection presupposes that we see our neighbours in all people, indeed in the whole of creation.
In the New Testament Gospels, the question “Who is my neighbour?” is posed in the example story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37). A reversal in the direction of the question is important for the interpretation: while verse 29 still says “Who is my neighbour?”, verse 36 reads: “Who …. has become neighbour to the one who fell among the robbers?” Since the answer is “a Samaritan”, someone foreign (some say hostile) to Jewish cult, it becomes clear that the commandment to love is to be extended universally and is not just limited to people in need, but that people in need make those who help them their neighbour.
No existing being is excluded from this universally extended commandment of love, even the sparrow and a blade of grass are included. When people in distant regions suffer hardship and poverty due to climate change, when animals die out, when the forest dies, some of us suffers too.
Second thought:
Standing up for climate protection requires that the idea of climate justice becomes the principle of all action and therefore also of church action.
In the Gospels of the New Testament, the question of “better justice” is posed in particular in the Gospel of Matthew (Mt 5:20) and answered in an exemplary manner in the pericope of the “double commandment of love” in Mt 22:34-40: Matthew calls for justice that is orientated towards the commandment of love. Matthew’s “closeness to reality” is interesting: the rich young man (Mt 19:16-22) is actually supposed to renounce all his possessions. However, he is not in a position to do so, but “went away sorrowful”. And the Matthean commandment to love one’s enemies (Mt 5:43-48) also appears to be an almost impossible requirement to fulfil. In Matthew, love of neighbour and love of enemy are high ideals that are not easy to put into practice. In Matthew, this possibility of actually being overtaxed or failing is seen in the light of the request for forgiveness in the Lord’s Prayer (Mt 6:14f) and the statement to forgive not just seven times, but seventy times seven times (Mt 18:21f).
Climate justice thus requires a new “economy of frugality” that is orientated towards the common good of all. Such an ecological and social economy will have to take steps away from the ideology of unlimited growth and the profit maximisation of individual companies.
The third thought:
Extending our love to all living beings on this earth, taking a special stand for the poor and enabling greater justice are made possible by the proximity to the reign of God.
The point of the pericope of the “double commandment of love” in Mark 12:28-34 lies in Jesus’ statement: “You are not far from the kingdom of God”, which is already a central theme of Jesus’ proclamation from Mark 1:14f: “The reign of God has come near.” The radical devotion of God to human beings is to be matched by a radical devotion of human beings to human beings, to God and to human beings’ environment.
The reign of God is not a distant utopia, but a concrete vision that can be realised in daily life. Michael Kopatz, for example, demonstrates this with his eco-routine approach, in which he makes the careful use of resources in daily routines the rule of our actions.
Concluding remark:
I will conclude with a quote from 2 Corinthians by St Paul: “The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor. 3:6):
The letter that kills stands for an outdated agenda of lifestyle and policy-making that is incapable of providing sustainable answers to the ecological challenges of our time.
The life-giving spirit is different: it symbolises opening up to what has so far seemed unattainable, a path of international justice and solidarity, the path of a global culture of peace and sustainability – and the small counterparts of these great words in the daily lives of each and every one of us. We all know that we should embark on these new paths, but it is “the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”. We can deal with this productively if we see ourselves as people moved by God’s energy and seize the associated opportunities together – aware that we may fail, but knowing that we are supported by God’s love in everything.
Other faith traditions can approach the theology of creation in a parallel way from their own scriptures.
Dr Hubert Meisinger
Centre Social Responsibility of the Protestant Church in Hesse and Nassau
Albert-Schweitzer-Str. 113-115
D-55128 Mainz, Germany
