RCA Caring for Creation Blog

Apes, Angels, and Sioux Center, Iowa

Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:03:10 GMT

Sometimes I envy people with long commutes. With my 15-minute maximum door-to-door travel time, I feel like I'm reducing NPR's in-depth interviews into modern media sound bites. Which is why I related well to a friend's blog post that started out with the comment: "My brain makes strange mental leaps sometimes. I'll bet yours does, too." Yes, it does! Often inspired by NPR sound bites and egged on by Google, my brain will piece together random bytes of information until I wonder, "How did I get on this topic?"

A few days ago I was listening to…well, um…some program on NPR that was talking about scientific testing on apes. Apparently most European Union countries no longer do testing on apes, but the U.S. still does. This discussion regarding a controversial scientific practice got me thinking about angels and Sioux Center, Iowa.

Read more.

Easter and Earth Day

Thu, 26 May 2011 14:48:00 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

Like two planets orbiting the same star, Earth Day (April 22) and Easter Sunday (April 24) came into close conjunction this year. For me, this rare occurrence emphasized the overlap of the secular and the religious, the physical and the spiritual in our lives. We should carry these two disparate, one-day celebrations throughout our whole year. In that spirit, let me share with you a few new resources and programs that have come to my attention in the past month. Some are faith-based and some are secular. I hope you will use them to further your ministry to all of creation.

Read more.

Creation Care Resolutions

Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:24:00 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

How are you coming on that New Year's resolution? I was curious what the most common New Year's resolutions are, so I Googled "New Year's Resolutions." It led me to a webpage that I did not expect. This government website, begun in 2000 under President Clinton, lists some of the most common resolutions each year, along with links to help people follow through with those resolutions. I've reproduced the list of resolutions below, but I've offered new links to send you to other places that give a "creation care" twist to keeping these resolutions.

Read more.

250 Versus 350

Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:47:07 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

Planet Money is one of my favorite podcasts. Every episode begins by revealing the weekly Planet Money indicator--some seemingly random number with significance to the upcoming story. Recently two numbers that are relevant to the climate change debate were brought to my attention: 350 and 250 billion. Note: My math teacher wife/editor requires that I point out what 250 billion actually looks like. Remember, it's actually 250,000,000,000 when written as a standard numeral.

Author and environmentalist Bill McKibben, founder of the organization 350.org, says we should fear the number 350, especially in the ratio 350:1,000,000.

Read more.

The Problem of Electronics

Wed, 17 Nov 2010 18:50:13 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

Environmentalist Annie Leonard's video "The Story of Electronics" was released on November 9. This video is a follow-up to her very popular video "The Story of Stuff," in which she explores the ways our consumer-driven economy contributes to waste and unsustainable resource usage. In "The Story of Electronics," Leonard urges consumers to demand that electronics producers take more responsibility for removing toxins from electronics; offer better, more transparent e-waste recycling programs; and stop the practice of marketing products products designed to be replaced in a very short amount of time. At the end of the video, there is a link to the Electronics TakeBack Coalition, which encourages consumers to complain to companies they believe should be working harder to make our electronics green. It also encourages proper recycling of electronics, something I have been working on with others here in Holland, Michigan. In 2008, the RCA Today bulletin insert ran a story about our first e-waste recycling event. We've now held 12 such events.

Read more and leave a comment.

What Influences Our Care for Creation?

Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:14:47 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

I attended a conference at Western Seminary last weekend entitled "The Earth is The Lord's," led by Ellen Davis and Norman Wirzba, who both teach at Duke Divinity School. The lectures and discussion focused on the Old Testament prophets and their understanding of God, humanity, and the earth. It was a wonderful reminder to me that people of faith have always struggled to understand their connection to God and his creation. More importantly, it opened my eyes to the way in which the prophets clearly saw how God desires to restore a proper relationship between himself and his creation.

While I was attending the conference I received an email directing me to a new Pew Research study showing how Americans' religious beliefs affect their views on social issues such as the environment. The part of the study that struck me was that although 81 percent favor greater environmental protections, only 6 percent of those people say that their religious beliefs have had the biggest influence on their support for tougher environmental rules. I was curious what had been the most influential on these people's beliefs. I had to look at the full study to see that education (30 percent), the media (27 percent), personal experience (18 percent), other (11 percent) and family and friends (6 percent) were the other responses.

Read more and comment.

Who Knows the Future?

Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:51:45 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

Lately, I see the energy issue popping into my life and mind from all over. This is not a coincidence, since energy is high on my interest scale. It ties into nearly every issue that one might consider under the heading of creation care. Indulge me a bit and I'll share some of these recent intrusions into my head.

My most recent ponderings began while I was reading The Climate War: True Believers, Power Brokers, and the Fight to Save the Earth, by Eric Pooley. In the U.S., there is still an ongoing debate about the validity of the science of climate change, and I had hoped this book might provide a better understanding of that debate. Though the book does not address why some believe the science and others do not, it was a fascinating story of the politics behind the debate and the headlines. The main (and very real) characters from both sides are interviewed and discussed. This includes Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund and Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy. Fred is on the far right of the left wing and Jim the far left of the right. Together, they occupy a large middle. Their fragile trust of each other is the framework for a suspenseful tale of negotiations to craft a passable energy bill. The author never seems to doubt the climate science, so if you personally do, this book might not be palatable to you.

Read more and join the conversation.

Close Friends Discussing Science and Christianity

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:48:00 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)
A few weeks ago I asked a longtime friend to sit down and talk about things we'd chosen not to discuss for forty years. I wanted to talk to him about something you never bring up in polite circles: religion, and another topic that isn't usually in that category but may need to be added--science. Often I speak with other friends who have differing opinions, but I perceived that this particular friend and I are bit farther apart. I observed that the two of us seem to agree on a lot of environmental issues, but we sidestepped our religious and scientific differences in those discussions. Or at least I did. I would call him a "young earth" conservative; I'm more of a liberal evolutionist.

We met for lunch and had a good conversation. We'd seen each other a few weeks earlier so catching up didn't take too long. I had asked on the phone if I might "pick his brain" to see how it ticked. I wanted to understand why our views were so far apart on these two subjects while we remained fairly close on environmental stewardship. The answer to the last part of the question was quite simple. Despite our differences, we both believed that God's creation was a gift and, as such, needed our concern and care. Apparently neither of our life's journeys had led us to a carefree, "God is in charge and the earth is doomed" attitude. We could have stopped at that, but I wanted to know why our understandings of science as it relates to the earth are so different.

Read more and join in the discussion.

A Gulf Lament

Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:52:06 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)
I've been feeling that I needed to write something about the gulf oil spill, since it is currently the most talked-about environmental news. I initially thought that perhaps I'd missed the opportunity, but unfortunately it appears that it will remain in the news long after I write this.

Perhaps I'll even have to revisit the topic in December. The problem is--what can I say that hasn't already been said? Here are some of the most interesting takes on the spill that I've seen.

Read more and add your two cents.

Visions of Earth

Wed, 19 May 2010 15:44:15 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

I recently flew to Baltimore, Maryland, to attend a meeting of the National Council of Churches' eco-justice working group. It always seems ironic and a bit hypocritical to fly, spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere on my way to an environmental meeting. I can only hope that the resources are spent well. We did switch one of our two yearly meetings to an online format in order to lower our group's costs and impact, so I guess we're trying to be responsible stewards.

At these meetings, I find out what other denominations are doing, which environmental issues are hot, and which ones are not. However, for me, the spiritual part of the trip is the flight. I never tire of flying--not the extra five hours stuck in Cleveland or the 3:00 a.m. arrival at the hotel, but the flying itself. The miracle of this immense aircraft, with hundreds of people and hundreds of forty-nine pound suitcases loaded on it, actually leaving the ground--that is incredible. Yet everyone except the mothers with kindergarteners acts as if this is nothing to marvel about. But what would Jesus say about this modern-day miracle? I mean, would he sit calmly in his seat reading the in-flight magazine?

Read more and leave a comment!

Truth or Lie?

Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:47:00 GMT

(from Steve DeYoung)

Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Copenhagen. Is it me, or does Copenhagen sound a bit like Armageddon?

My friends on all sides of the climate debate keep sending me all the gloom and doom of what is or isn't going to happen in Copenhagen and beyond.

"The truth is that according to thousands (yes, thousands) of scientists the "debate" is over." A friend made this statement in a recent editorial. He feels climate change is real, human-induced and I guess non-debatable.
"There is no science to support global warming!" Another friend said this in a recent email. He quoted a Wall Street Journal article. A group of U.S. and English scientists who advise the U.N's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been, in the words of the article, "controlling the peer-review process, keeping opposing views unpublished, then cited 'peer review' as evidence of their consensus." He's wondering if I will continue to believe the lie about global warming.
I got a link to Annie Leonard's new video exclaiming the fallacies of 'Cap and Trade,' the prevailing method being proposed to limit carbon emissions. But another friend linked me to an article in the online publication Grist, entitled "Annie Leonard misses the mark in her new video."
Another colleague says in his email, "As you may know, one of the few things that might actually be agreed at the forthcoming Copenhagen climate talks in the next two weeks is enhanced action on technology." He's concerned that the wrong technologies will get funded, specifically "geo-engineering technologies that use nano-particles… the risky and unjust developments many of us are fighting against."
I've also been reading a series of articles in the Wall Street Journal by Bjorn Lomborg, an economist who argues that many environmental problems are vastly exaggerated and that policy responses based on such exaggerated claims are often misguided. His concern is for those affected by these policies. He states, "...the harsh truth is that resources are limited. Money spent on global-warming policies is likely to reduce the funds available for food aid. It is therefore immoral to focus resources on doing a small amount of good in the distant future."

So, what should I think? I've been wondering for a long time about how my Christian faith should inform my understanding of the diverse viewpoints in this debate. Thinking about all these recent attempts to persuade me one way or another, the following scripture passages popped into mind. God's words to Job, "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding." And Christ's parting words to his disciples, "It is not for you to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." Do I have that Holy Spirit? If so, what is to be my witness and what kind of witness have I been?

Faithless and hypocritical for sure, I haven't sold all I have and given it to the poor and endangered. But has it been weak and non-committal too--because I haven't thrown my heart into believing that climate change is absolute truth or a mere lie? Should I be taking a side, or at least a strong position? I don't know. And perhaps these verses popped into my mind only to justify my non-position position.

I offer these self-reflections somewhat to answer my friends, but mostly for myself. I believe we should reflect continually on our faith and commitment to it. Creation Care is only one part of that faith. But because the mystery of this world is such a strong witness to my understanding of God and Christianity, I find reflecting on it very important. I hope all climate change believers and disbelievers, scientists and politicians, will do the same. I would like to think that if they did, Copenhagen might be a place where honest debate takes place about climate change, not just empty arguments over opinions and agendas. However, from what I've been hearing and reading, I'm afraid that is what Copenhagen will be about. But, without "perfect truth" maybe that is the best we can offer the creation.

While writing this, I felt the need to go to the Psalms. I was hoping to find a beautiful reminder of the wonders and mysteries of God's earth. Instead I found Psalm 2 speaking to me. I leave it with you for your own reflection as Copenhagen approaches.

Why do the nations conspire,
and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the Lord and his anointed, saying,
'Let us burst their bonds asunder,
and cast their cords from us.'
He who sits in the heavens laughs;
the Lord has them in derision.
Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
and terrify them in his fury, saying,
'I have set my king on Zion, my holy hill.'

I will tell of the decree of the Lord:
He said to me,
'You are my son;
today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.
You shall break them with a rod of iron,
and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.'
Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
be warned, O rulers of the earth.
Serve the Lord with fear,
with trembling kiss his feet,
or he will be angry, and you will perish in the way;
for his wrath is quickly kindled.

Happy are all who take refuge in him.

Steve DeYoung

Mountain Top Experience

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:27:00 GMT

Mary and I had the opportunity to visit Whitesburg, Kentucky last week. Sharman and Jeffery Chapman-Crane hosted us. Sharman has lived in Appalachia for the last 25 years and worked with the Mennonite Central Committee for the past seven. Jeff grew up in the area and is a gifted artist. We were there with other members from the National Council of Churches Eco-Justice working group to learn about issues surrounding what is know as “mountain top removal” coal mining. The Chapman-Cranes knew it was impossible to “show and tell” us the whole story in a day and a half, so I certainly won’t pretend to tell a story I don’t fully know in a few minutes.

I went there thinking the main issues of concern regarding MTR were climate change and environmental destruction, and that we should switch away from coal to cleaner energy options as fast as possible. Although I still see this as true, it is only part of the story. I now see that the main issues are probably even more immediate and more about people than the environment. The issue of whether to mine or not mine the coal is probably secondary to how it is done and who benefits or suffers. The issues are more about injustice, corporate and political complacency, greed, and coercion. The situation facing most of the people in the coal areas of Appalachia is not much different than the situation facing indigent people in the poorest countries in the world. Corporations, on our behalf, strive to earn high profits and low prices by lowering production costs. As much as possible. They do everything within their power (which is a lot) to obtain these goals, with little if no concern for poor and less powerful individuals or the environment. The result is that individual’s livelihoods are threatened and community is broken. In the short term, some have jobs and we get cheaper electricity, but the environment suffers. Often, jobs are actually lost and in the long term we all suffer.

This may sound one-sided—that I’m not recognizing the larger good that corporations do for society. That ultimately the rights of some must be sacrificed for the good of all. But after listening to the stories of several miners, a three-term county judge and a past federal mining inspector, it is hard to side with these US and foreign owned corporations. Even when the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity claims, “We believe that America can continue to make great progress in improving environmental quality while at the same time enjoying the benefits of using domestic energy resources like coal to meet our growing demand for affordable, reliable and clean energy.” You know talk is cheap. They have divided communities, polluted their water and destroyed a large portion of the forest for our coal-fed desires. I returned angry. Angry with the coal companies, myself and the politicians that have allowed this situation to worsen.

Four years after the Forest and coal is removed.

Here are some facts and figures about Letcher County Kentucky that I hope start to paint a picture for you.

If you want to see what’s happening on the large scale it truly is, go to Google Earth and zoom in on Kentucky, Tennessee and the Virginias. If you want more information, you can turn on the Appalachian Mountaintop Removal layer under Global Awareness.

You could also visit “I Love Mountains” and “Kentuckians for the Commonwealth.”

Steve DeYoung

Prayer for healing

Sat, 03 Oct 2009 18:46:00 GMT

Last Sunday I had the opportunity to hear Dr. Samuel Wells preach; he is chaplain at Duke University. Let me risk summarizing a wonderful message in a few sentences so I can get to my point. His sermon was on healing, something that at some point in our lives we all ask for, whether it be for others or ourselves. He began by asking the question “does God heal?” and ended by answering “sometimes.” This answer, however, was wedged between the assertion that what God does offer us “always” is grace and salvation.

But it is of course illness, physical and spiritual, that haunts us and causes us to pray without ceasing. I attend church every week to worship the God who freely offers us grace and salvation, but my true motive is healing. I need the mental stimulation, the fellowship, the singing and down time to restore me. So despite the fact that the message last Sunday gave me the hope of grace and salvation, it was the prayer of thanksgiving that “restored my soul.” Unlike the mature wisdom of famous university chaplains, this prayer’s wisdom dwells in the hopeful hearts of children. Written and offered by two 13-year-old members of my church family, it reminded me that healing isn’t a one-time act. As an individual, I might perceive or wish it that way. But, healing is ongoing and continual, part of the fabric of life and death. Healing isn’t “sometimes”; healing is “always.” Salvation happened with the birth of a child, and healing happens whenever life is born and reborn. Healing starts after the fall in Genesis and is completed with the new earth in Revelation. I heard that Sunday when two children spoke. And I think Samuel Wells heard that message too. “Thank you for being the one who holds us constantly…”

Here is their prayer. Please pray it for me, for you and for this world.

Steve Deyoung

A Show of Force

Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:06:00 GMT

Today is the International Day of Peace. Last Friday Mary and I went to see “A Show of Force” at Hope College. It is a one-man show exploring complicated questions about war. It was excellent. I should say it was well written, well performed, and with the exception of a few forced laughs a strain to one’s psyche. After the performance there was a panel discussion with four college professors and the actor. Discussion was thoughtful and you might even say, solemn. Questions like; could I kill, how has the elimination of the draft effected this generation’s perspective on war, what role has media, patriotism or religion played in our feelings about war, does war appeal to us on a visceral level, is there such a thing as just war? Then, someone on the panel said they had read, that in comparison to other species, humans actually fight much less. He suggested, if that is true, we should ask why have we been so successful at making peace and how might we do even better? I of course couldn’t let a question like that go, and there was never really an answer or much discussion about it that evening. I think, if it is true, I have arrived at an answer. Humans have been the best at productivity, being able to make the most out of the least. Although wars may start for many reasons, I think the major area of conflict is usually resources not ideologies. We may call them religious wars or political wars, but at wars heart, is not the hearts of individuals, but their stomachs. We can verbally fight ideological wars, but when our need (or desire) for the things of life get involved, then bullets fly. Despite all we know is wrong about this world, we humans have been very good at providing for our material needs.

However, having given an answer, let me tell you why I think our supposed peacefulness is misleading. It may be true that we fight among ourselves less than other species, but our productivity has waged war on almost every other species on earth, apart from our allies, agricultural crops and domesticated animals. Unable to verbally communicate our disputes with other species we simply assume their compliance or inferiority to ourselves. And if there is one thing they are inferior at, it is waging war! The question for me then becomes, are these just wars? Of course the criteria for a just war only takes into account human casualty. So when just war theory suggests, “intervention must be to protect life” we know they mean human life. Or this criteria, “Force may be used only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose—correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain or maintaining economies is not.” How could we maintain our economies, let alone our lives without force against other life? So trying to apply the theories of a just war to our interaction with the rest of creation is a bit silly. However, I don’t believe the idea that we are at war with most of nature is an exaggeration. Just ask a wolf, a gorilla, a tuna or a mosquito. Oh, I guess you can’t. My question still remains, when are these battles just? When is the harm done, less than the benefit gained and when is our gain so disproportionate to the harm done to all life on earth, that we are in the wrong? Just as last night we wrestled with these questions regarding our human-to-human interactions, I think we need to wrestle with these questions in our interactions with all creation. So that, unlike those famous horsemen of Tennyson’s poem, we do not ride into these battles blindly…

Forward, the Light Brigade!
Was there a man dismay’d?
Not tho’ the soldier knew
Some one had blunder’d:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

Steve DeYoung

Conservative or Liberal Opinion

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:37:00 GMT

The other day I had a pleasant email exchange with someone who had read my blog, but held differing opinions on several topics. In our exchange they made the following comment “I'm always interested in how people form their opinions. Why are there conservatives and why are there liberals when the same set of facts are available?” I’ve thought about that question several times since; at our local town hall health care meeting, reading and listening to articles on many topics debated in this country and sitting in church next to friends I know hold different political views than mine. Why would the creator make us this way? Or, is it just free will and sin. That’s the answer I always seem to fall back on. However that leaves us with three answers; your right and I’m the sinner, I’m right and you’re the sinner, or my fall back we’re both sinners and the right answer God only knows. But I suppose the answer could be as easy as the old cliché, “there isn’t a right answer.” Either path takes us forward. God works with whatever, so that the outcome is good. But does God have a preference for which path we then choose? But, the answer is probably simpler than these. The answer is that the statement isn’t true. We don’t have the same set of facts and even if we did, we’d still interpret them differently. Another words the answer is; is the glass half empty or half full? It depends on you and how you see the world and everyone around you. Trying to see the world through different lenses is hard. But, I think that is in part what Christ is asking of us when he says “love your neighbor as yourself.” People’s opinions can change but how that happens is a mystery or miracle. One that I’m sure both liberal and conservative think-tanks are studying as we think about this.

So, I thought what I’d do is tell you where I get some of my “facts”. This might give you an idea of how my opinions are formed. They aren’t necessarily care of creation focused, but they probably all do, to some extend, affect my view on that and every topic. I don’t suspect anyone is going to be “converted” to the Steve DeYoung way of thinking just because I’ve mentioned these. But be cautious!

I’m not a big TV watcher. I spend way too much time in front of the computer. So, I tend to get my news from what I added to my Yahoo front page years ago; World, Business and Entertainment news from Reuters, The BBC News World Report’s “Front Page” and “Science and Environment,” Scientific American and something called BeliefNet news headlines. If something looks interesting, I try to read more than the headline. I guess I only like interesting “facts.” My preference is to listen to longer stories when I have a chance. I listen to three podcasts pretty faithfully. Speaking of Faith, Planet Money and Inside Renewable Energy.

I get inundated with emails and snail mail from every environmental group under the sun. If I didn’t know better, or if their publications didn’t have the best nature photographs, from their stories I might think the world was ending next week. You get a bit callous regarding the next extinction, the wild place about to be lost or the corporate criminal needing litigation. However it is exciting to see how many of these organizations people support. Most people do cherish the earth even if their actions in someone’s opinion don’t always show it. I try to read a few of these now and then. Like the Union of Concern Scientist’s Earthwise, the Center for Rural Affairs’ newsletter, my local Representative, Pete Hoekstra’s weekly email and a few local group’s mailings. Then throw in what I hear on NPR radio during my short commute, various books on my night stand, a Sunday sermon and a million other “facts” that sift through the cracks and voila, one sinner’s opinion is formed.

Pitchers and Savers: The Neat Freaks vs. The Pack Rats

Sun, 23 Aug 2009 18:49:00 GMT

Yesterday the local ecumenical creation care group I’m part of had its fifth electronic recycling event here in Holland. I’m sure we collected at least 25,000 pounds of material, considering that is what we collected at the first event, which seemed as large as this one. One of the things I find interesting is people’s attitudes toward the stuff they are disposing of. There are those who, in my opinion, are throwing away perfectly good stuff, from working laptops and stereos to functional cell phones and power tools. Yes, I’m a pack rat and even confess to dumpster diving on occasion. Then there are those like me, who in sight of 100 or more computers slated for the scrap heap are still concerned to let us know that the motherboard they are handing to us is still good and has working memory on it.

Hoarders or dumpers, we all seem to have too much out of date or non-working stuff. Some of us cling to it until it is pried from our hands. Others throw something away at the first sign of a problem or the sight of a new technology. At these recycling events we see it all—the stuff and the people--and I wonder about what it means.

Today I’m wondering if my pack rat status says something about my views on the environment. Are pack rats more likely to want to conserve wild places and hoard resources for the possibility that tomorrow there is going to be a use for it they can’t see today? While neat freaks want to tidy up the landscape and utilize every bit of space to its max? Or are pack rats hoarding in fear of the unknown future while neat freaks are living today to the fullest and letting God take care of the future? I’ve never seen any studies on such things and although I could “Google” for some to print here, you can do that yourself. So maybe I’ll just raise the question for self-reflection and hope that whether you’re a rat or a freak, you’ll think about your actions before you obtain or dispose of resources of any kind.

Steve DeYoung

Building and Tearing Down Fences

Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:01:39 GMT

Have you ever built a fence on your property? Did you build it to keep something in or out? Did you feel good about building the fence or apprehensive about its limiting nature? Walls and fences have a dual purpose. And, depending on which side of a fence you stand, you may feel very differently about it.

I received an email from a friend and fellow bird watcher, who shared an article from the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology about the fence that you and I are building right now—the US- Mexico Border Fence. One would think that an organization that deals with birds would be the last to object to a fence. And maybe they are the last, since the fence is nearly completed. It has cost much more than I’d spend, but maybe the two billion is justified. The troubling part to me is that like so many things that happened after 9/11, I’m not sure we took the time to measure the costs accurately.

We as a nation usually measure costs strictly based on dollars and cents. Sometimes we may factor in some human costs, but those costs are harder to measure and the value of human lives seems to vary greatly depending on your race, nationality or social status. Then, because we are such a wealthy nation, we have begun to seriously consider non-human costs as well. Examples would be the consideration of environmental factors such as wetlands and endangered species.

I’d guess the US/Mexican border fence is not on too many people’s radar screens, unless you’re one of the 700,000 people living along the 670 miles of fence. I read a lot of environmental literature and I don’t see the fence written about often in that context either. I think because the environmental costs, though perhaps great, are not high enough to overshadow the contentious debate over immigration and drugs that swirl around the fence. Plus, surveys say that a majority of US citizens want the fence.

The fence troubles me, but I know like other fences, it is not permanent. As with Berlin wall, my hope is that today’s reasons for the fence will change or disappear and with them the wall itself.

I doubt I will see it come down and I feel like I should have been more active in opposing it in the past. But, I hope it will remind me to work today harder in resisting the forces that try to build fences between peoples and even birds.

To learn more about immigration, the fence and the environmental impacts, you can link to the Cornell article above or these other sites below. If you’re a birder, be sure to watch the video on Cornell’s site.

Discovery Channel video on jaguar and board fence
Short article covering background on the fence and its pros and cons
Homeland security site on the fence
Christian Science Monitor article

Presbyterian paper on the fence

RCA position paper on immigration

RCA Immigration survey
A UCC church ministry along the border that does immersion experience trips

--Steve DeYoung

Simply Sustainable

Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:31:00 GMT

The other night my wife, who was reading the Church Herald, said to me, “ Hey, you’re quoted in this article.” I don’t get quoted often (ever) but I knew, because I had been contacted by the Church Herald weeks earlier, what the article was about. They had asked me about “simple living.” A term that I had to admit I hadn’t thought about for quite some time. So the quote ended up as “The ‘simple living’ terminology seems to have been overshadowed by ‘sustainability,’ which is of course a much different concept.” When asked to define the difference, all my thoughtful rambling at the time was obviously just that, because no further comments were quoted. The definitions that they quote are much better, but still leave my thoughts rambling over the difference.

I think one difference has to do with political correctness. Just like “global warming” was replaced by “climate change” because it was easier to swallow, “simple living” was replaced with “sustainability.” In our scientific, economic and more secular world, it is much easier to speak of sustaining our children’s future while maintaining our needs today. That way all people can embrace the concept no matter how they define the word “need.” However, the thought that we might “need” to live simply will probably be embraced only by those who don’t believe in free enterprise and the American way. Simple living doesn’t leave open the possibility that an ever-increasing human population on a finite world can find the resources to float everyone’s luxury liner. But, perhaps more importantly, it does leave open the possibility that living simply is not simply an economic concept but a spiritual one as well—a concept that our churches might speak more about, since Jesus certainly did!

I’m going to purchase a book today; I know, I probably don’t “need” another book! So, if you’d like to have it when I’m through just email me. Some of you will remember Michael Schut’s first two books, Simple Living Compassionate Life and Food & Faith. In February this year,Money and Faith was released. I remember Michael talking about this book several years ago. I’m so glad he was able to find the resources to get it to press. I think amid all the hysteria around the “crash” and “recovery” this book might lead my mind into deeper thought and reflection on sustaining my own and everyone’s life on this planet in a “richer” way.

If you need something to watch or listen to, the online video “The Story of Stuff” or Bill Moyer’s interview with Daniel Goldman on his book Ecological Intelligence (although not from a faith prospective) are interesting treatments on sustainability. You’ll have to consider the idea of simplicity while you view.

Steve DeYoung

Slow & Fast Miracles

Sun, 14 Jun 2009 17:02:00 GMT

I have a favorite poem by Wendell Barry about the slow return of woodland.

Slowly, slowly, they return
To the small woodland let alone:
Great trees, outspreading and upright,
Apostles of the living light.

Patient as stars, they build in air
Tier after tier a timbered choir,
Stout beams upholding weightless grace
Of song, a blessing on this place.

They stand in waiting all around,
Uprisings of their native ground,
Downcomings of the distant light;
They are the advent they await.

Receiving sun and giving shade,
Their life’s a benefaction made,
And is a benediction said
Over the living and the dead.

In fall their brightened leaves, released,
Fly down the wind, and we are pleased
To walk on radiance, amazed.
O light come down to earth, be praised!

The poem reminds me not to be in such a hurry; beautiful things take time. But, sometimes, beautiful things do seem to just spring into being. One day this week I stepped out my side door and almost stepped on a baby American robin. It waddled across the driveway and with aching wings I’m sure, managed to flutter to the lowest limb of a nearby locust tree. I walked another twenty feet around the corner of the house, and there, huddled at the entrance to my woodshop, was a baby blue jay. As it cowered in its corner, I carefully opened the door so as not to disturb it. Later it hopped up the rear steps of the house and flew to the sunlit window ledge of my woodshop. And later I saw it in the bittersweet vines covering the front of the shop, or so I thought. It turned out to be a brother or sister, since the other was still sunning itself on the window ledge. In the midst of my rushing around, three beautiful little gifts had burst into my life slowing me down just long enough to wonder at the miracles around me.

My week had also brought the news of death and suffering of people I know. But for a moment it was forgotten. Do yourself a favor, and take a minute today to listen to the sound of nature praying. Then, join the prayer, whether it is the cheerup cheero of the robin or the raucous jay jay jay of the blue jay, say a prayer for and with the life around you, for it is a miraculous and beautiful gift. A minute is about all the time it should take to read another favorite poem of mine.

Here is a nice little resource you might like to use for your prayer walking.

Steve DeYoung

Oil vs Food?

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:53:00 GMT

My father grew up on a small farm in Wisconsin. I remember him telling me that his father loved to tinker with cars. My father always wanted a big Lincoln, a Continental I believe. I don’t think I inherited that love for cars. Although, over the last few years I have found myself fascinated by the new Tesla Motors all electric sports car. I’ve always been intrigued by new technology, which I guess is probably what fascinated my Grandfather about cars. They were pretty high tech back in the 1920s.

The recent controversy over bio-fuels has been on my radar screen as well. As I think about the environmental issues around ethanol, the rural RCA churches where my family grew up in Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Southern California etc. are always on my mind. Should I demonize those farmers who use their corn more profitably by shipping it to an ethanol plant instead of say, Mexico? What should I think of my friend in sales for an ethanol producer? And what do my banker friends feel about it as an investment? More importantly what should the church’s role be in the discussion? I still don’t have clear answers, who does? But that is why this video on Yahoo caught my eye and ear.

I hope it stimulates your thinking. If you want to think more about energy and food issues, there are some great movies you might watch. Perhaps even at church and discuss them afterwards. Try King Corn or A Crude Awakening.

Steve DeYoung

What do you believe?

Fri, 29 May 2009 17:30:00 GMT

Have you ever thought about why you believe what you believe? Does it make a difference to you, to others, or the world? Andrew Newberg MD says in his book Why We Believe What We Believe that there are some important things beliefs do for us

·They help us organize the world in meaningful way
·They give us a sense of ourselves
·They help us take action in specific ways
·They allow us to accomplish goals
·They help to regulate the emotional centers of the brain
·They allow us to socialize with others
·They guide us in our moral and educational pursuits
·They heal our bodies and minds

But he continues “Beliefs can also be used to suppress others, to justify immoral acts, or to propel us toward sadistic acts.” Of course which direction we’re going is also a perception of our beliefs!

What do you believe about climate change?

The Yale Project on Climate Change and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication just released a study on the perceptions of Americans towards climate change. They found that we fall into one of six camps of belief or understanding about climate change as shown on this chart.

The report which is 140 pages, raises a lot of interesting question even if you just look at the “pictures.” The chart below caught my eye but it is just one of 36 in the report.

The report can be downloaded here

Steve DeYoung

Another take on the subject.

Compromise

Sat, 23 May 2009 12:27:00 GMT

When do you compromise and when do you stick to your convictions? Both my parents served at one time on the local school board. I remember one of them saying, about negotiations with the teacher’s union, “I wish both sides could come to the table with their best offer.” Instead both sides had to start from an extreme place they knew was not going to be the end point.

In the church we don’t seem to be very good compromisers either. The issues seem too critical to give ground on. Whether the issue is homosexuality or music style, lines appear pretty clearly drawn and often not very close together.

Today I read and listened online to an interview with US Energy Secretary Steven Chu about the House of Representatives debate over the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill. Chu (a Nobel winning physicist) is obviously struggling with his knowledge of climate science and his knowledge of political realities. Should he and the Obama administration compromises on their climate legislation? What do you think? What would Jesus think?

Was Jesus a compromiser? He certainly seemed tolerant to some sinners like the women caught in adultery and to Zacheaus, but not so for the Pharisees and the moneychangers in the temple. And he always seemed to know the right thing to do. Why does the reality of our day-to-day lives seem so unclear sometimes? I sympathize with Chu; I too feel that we need strong climate legislation. So I’ll pray “if it be Thy will, move the compromises in that direction; please.” My parents taught me to be polite as well.

If you want to encourage your legislator towards lower carbon limits this site hosted by the Quakers will help you.

Steve Deyoung

Happy Birthday

Sat, 16 May 2009 12:51:00 GMT

Today is my Birthday. Thank you God and thank you Mom & Dad. I recently read the book Origins - A Reformed Look at Creation, Design & Evolution by Deborah B. & Loren D. Haarsma. It got me thinking about the current origins debate, and how that debate might affect peoples thinking about care for creation. The “origin” is of course one of (if not the) central question for both science and religion: where did we come from? It seems to me the difference between science and religion is where they look for the answer. Religion starts at the beginning with an assumption (you might say answer) that God created our reality. Religions move forward from there to assess reality. Science on the other hand starts with reality, explores it and begins to work backwards towards an answer. Different religions assess reality differently, just as different scientists get different results to their experimentations. Debate (healthy, I hope) seems to be inevitable, given the different methods of inquiry.

But what does any of this have to do with how we care for the reality of this earth. As I see it, it shouldn’t make any difference. I tend to be attracted to scientific inquiry. But, I am a Christian and I search for the answer to the question from within the Christian faith. As I understand Christianity, the creation was created good, sin corroded God’s intent for the world, but God brought the creation back to him by his loving sacrifice. I believe that when Christ taught us to pray saying “thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven,” he was showing us we should not abandon this earth, but that this reality matters as much as God’s reality. We should do and pray for God’s will whether we’re a carpenter or a prophet in the here and know. And what does God will for creation? God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. (Genesis 1:31 NIV) Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies?Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. (Luke 12:6 NIV)

Have a wonderful day celebrating my birthday! If you’re interested in studying this topic more, alongside the book, you can check out “Creationism, Evolution, and Intelligent Design: What's a Christian to Believe?” a two session study guide for adults.

Steve DeYoung

Powered by Coal

Tue, 05 May 2009 01:58:00 GMT

Are you interested in the climate and energy debate going on in the world? Here is a link to the 60 Minutes episode “Powered By Coal.” The program is a discussion with Jim Rogers CEO of Duke Energy and NASA climatologist Jim Hanson. Both agree that coal and CO2 are problems, but they have different opinons just the same. After watching it if you feel you or your church should be doing more to limit carbon emissions, you might also want to take a look at the Cool Congregations website.

Steve DeYoung

Earth day movie

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:58:00 GMT

What did you do on Earth Day? I took the opportunity to see the new Disney movie Earth. Although enjoyable, it was really a two hour trailer for the longer series called Planet Earth. One question I came away with was; besides making money for Disney what is the goal of the movie, if any? Is it to entertain, to educate, inspire, is it to worship or what? It doesn’t really ask many questions. I wondered how many people walk out thinking; yep we (mankind) know everything there is to know about nature. How many could put themselves (humanity) into the struggles of the story? For that reason, I think the creation stories in Genesis are probably a truer picture of what earth is like. Too bad they didn’t tell them in high definition.

Speaking of movies, if you enjoy documentaries and you’re a Netflix subscriber, several recent films on nature and environmental issues are available to watch instantly. Such as King Corn, March of the Penguins, A Crude Awakening, The Future of Food, The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill and others. Just in case you don’t have enough to do!

What you'll find here...

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:12:00 GMT

If you’ve come here for answers on care of creation, you may not find them. I’ve never liked answers. They’re so, final. Questions on the other hand are motivating. They keep your interest and beg you to find answers. So, I tend to ask more questions than I answer. It keeps me excited about exploring God’s world and its mysteries. Don’t get me wrong; just because I don’t have the answer, I don’t see it as an excuse for inaction. As I see it, our whole life is lived making decisions based on partial knowledge; I think you could call it faith. So while I may not have all the answers I think it is imperative that we work, take action on and address problems based on the best knowledge we have. Then we move on in faith knowing we did the best we could and hoping God will use our actions for kingdom building. I found a second opinion I thought I'd share...

Q: You write that theologians should be happy to operate in the "questioning" context of science, but they are often not. Why is that?

A: I'm puzzled by that. That kind of thinking impoverishes theology.
Science and theology are cousins on a quest for truth. The insight of science is to move from evidence to understanding, not to start with general principles that will control the whole discussion. Scientists learn that the world is quite often surprising and doesn't match our expectations. I am very happy to practice my religious beliefs in that sort of way.

From Beliefnet.com Interview with Anglican physicist-theologian John Polkinghorne

Steve DeYoung

Frontline Broadcast on Water Pollution - April 21

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:09:00 GMT

With polluted runoff still flowing in from industry, agriculture and massive suburban development, scientists note that many new pollutants and toxins from modern everyday life are already being found in the drinking water of millions of people across the country and pose a threat to fish, wildlife and, potentially, human health.

In FRONTLINE’s Poisoned Waters, airing Tuesday, April 21, 2009, from 9 to 11 P.M. ET on PBS (check local listings), Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Hedrick Smith examines the growing hazards to human health and the ecosystem.

Available online as well after April 21.