Rocks 1

Maura Rocks
Colby Dickinson
History of Christian Thought
4/10/14

At Home in the Web of Life, The Christian Moral Imperative for Environmental Liberation
and Ecological Praxis
When discussing the current global ecological crisis, ones mind often jumps to images of
environmental destruction. The earths waterways, mountaintops, glaciers, and forests are shrinking and
distorting as society continually and unceasingly pollutes and strips them of their resources. Often, this
ecological conversation stops at universal calls to recycle materials, conserve energy, or utilize alternative
forms of energy, but rarely does the larger society draw connections between the ecological crisis and a
moral imperative to be an active steward of the earth and an advocate for the earths most marginalized
communities. Ecological theology offers Christians and understanding of the role they play in creation
and the divine characteristics of the earth. In addition, environmental liberation theologians grow off of
that care for the earth and argue that the experience of the poor is inextricably linked to the earth and a
care for creation is essential to our understanding of Christian morals.
In this paper, I intend to discuss the communities in rural Appalachia and the various ways that
their oppression and liberation are undeniably linked to the environment and environmental degradation.
But first, I will explore the connection between traditionally held Christian views of theology and the
environmental crisis, looking particularly at the role of ecological theology, stewardship theology, and the
general call for Christians to engage with the earth rather than assume dominion over it. I will then
transition into a dialogue with environmental liberation theology, highlighting the connectedness of
environmental crisis, social poverty, and oppression. In this conversation, I offer theologies of liberation
from two prominent environmental theologians, namely Leonardo Boff and Jos Ramos Regidor. In
culmination of this paper, I will discuss the Christian call to ecological praxis and sustainability especially
in the context of the environmental devastation occurring in Appalachia and seek to understand the
ecological crises of resource extraction and land devastation through these specific theological lenses.
Until the 20th century, the ecological crisis and environmental issues had not been topics of
intense study within theological circles. In 1967, historian and philosopher Lynn B. White wrote a short
but jarring piece entitled, The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis, and offered the thesis that
Christianity and the traditional anthropocentric Christian view on the world was large contributor to the

Rocks 2
environmental degradation and crisis.1 According to White, the Christian religion not only establish[es]
a dualism of man and nature but insist[s] in the belief that it was Gods will that man exploit nature
for his proper ends.2 White continues with a harsh critique of Christianity's heavily anthropocentric and
instrumentalist worldview, one which was edified and shaped by technological achievements of the
modern era. He claims that Christianity bears a huge burden of guilt by encouraging the idea of mans
limitless rule of creation.3 In fact, he traces the development of instrumentalist technology over centuries
and illustrates the extremely irresponsible exploitation human beings have committed against the planet.
He writes, surely no creature other than man has ever managed to foul its nest in such short order. 4
Whites great condemnation against humanity, specifically the Christian religion, for contributing
substantially to the ecological crisis, has garnered a great response from the theological world, spanning
over the past forty years, thus ushering in a new waves of theological scholarship on the environment, the
earth, and the natural world. Many ecotheologians reference Whites critique of Christianity when they
begin their theologies. White, though influential to many and to the greater movement of ecotheology,
became secondary after ecotheology found its footing. In the next section, I will discuss more fully the
span across which ecological theology spreads.
Ecotheology, or the theological and faith-based response to the current ecological crisis has a broad range
of disciplines and areas of focus. The entire study of ecotheology has, at its center, a pivotal human
obligation to acknowledge and live in care for Earth and Gods creation and lifes home, while seeking
justice for biodiverse otherkind as well as humankind. 5 The main premise of ecotheology often begins
with a response to the claims that Lynne White and his contemporaries expressed in 1967. In a sense,
Christian theology has rediscovered the value of every earth community to God, who continues to
create, sustain and redeem the whole.6 From this vantage point and this increasing reconciliation
1 Lynn White, The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis, Science 155, no. 3767 (10 March 1967): 1205
2 White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis, 1205.
3 White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis, 1207.
4 White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis, 1204.
5 Dieter Hessel, Rosemary Radford Reuther, introduction to Christianity and Ecology, by Dieter Hessel and
Rosemary Radford Reuther (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), xxxiii.

6 Hessel, Dieter, and Rosemary Radford Reuther, forward, xxxv.

Rocks 3
between Christianity and the environment, ecotheology can be done with compassion and a sense of
openness. And rather than operate under an antiquated world-view, ecotheology offers a humble way of
proceeding into ecological and environmental scholarship and activism with a sense of commonality,
universality, and equality. Ecotheology seeks to acknowledge the immense privilege human beings
possess and examine the ways in which humans exploit that privilege through extracting and destroying
the planets resources.
While this paper is intended to focus on a specific sub-topic within the greater school of
ecotheology, I want to quickly touch on the various levels and themes found within ecotheology. First,
ecotheology is operating under a reorientation in understanding and consciousness, especially in how
humanity understands its place in the greater cosmos and, from a Christian viewpoint, the understanding
of ones position in the world as part of a greater communion of subjects in a dynamic relational
system.7 It follows that ecotheology looks to explore the complex relation between cosmology,
spirituality, and morality and the vocation of humanity as part of a universal, even cosmological,
system.8 It leads from these understandings and reorientations that ecotheology does not stop at
scholarship, dialogue, and definitions, rather a praxis, a practical and radical embodiment of justice for
and with the earth and the earths marginalized communities is required. The purpose of a Christian
ecological theology is give purpose and understanding to environmental solidarity and justice. And, as I
will highlight later in my paper, the plight of the earth and of people, particularly the most abused, are
seen together in eco-justice moments and ecotheology.9 Ecotheology, as a study, is an essential
component to an understanding of a humans place in and obligation to the planet and the greater cosmos.
Lynne Whites greatest critique of Christianity in his 1967 work was its insistence on dominion and the
assumption of humanitys free, untethered use of nature for individual needs and wants. The greatest
trend I have identified in ecotheology is the attempt to respond to that critique with a redefinition of the
human vocation on Earth. Theodore Hiebert enterers into a theological discussion on the human vocation
and traces the trajectory of human vocation, beginning with the book of Genesis. The two creation
narratives offer two different hints of the first intended vocations of humans, namely the human as
priest and the human as farmer.10 The first creation narrative discusses humankind made in the
7 Hessel, Dieter, and Rosemary Radford Reuther, foreward, xxxv.
8 Hessel, Dieter, and Rosemary Radford Reuther, foreward, xxxv.
9 Hessel, Dieter, and Rosemary Radford Reuther, foreward, xxxvi.
10Theodore Hiebert, The Human Vocation: Origins and Transformations in Christian Traditions, in Christianity
and Ecology, ed. Dieter Hessel and Rosemary Radford Reuther (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), 136-

Rocks 4
image of God who receive an edict from God to assume the dominion over every organism that
moves upon the earth.11The directive to humanity is clear, and in this understanding of the human role,
humankind assumes a level of impressive authority and control. 12 It is important to note the context in
which the first creation narrative was written in order to understand this elitist definition of the human
vocation. The creation of Genesis 1 is often attributed to a priestly community in ancient Israel, and
as anthropological studies have illustrated, the priests of ancient Israel held positions of authority and
power in Israelite society.13 The role and status of priests, therefore, reflected in their conception of
humankinds role in the world of creation, as one of dominion, power, and authority. 14 The creation of
Genesis 2, however, offers an alternative view of humankinds earthly vocation as a humble farmer. In
this creation motif, human beings are not set apart from the rest of creation, both plants and animals are
produced by God out of the same arable soil from which the first human was made. 15 This distinction of
origin in Genesis 2 important because it sets a different tone for what role a human is to play within
creation. In addition, rather than grant humans dominion, God offers them a simple instruction, to till, or
cultivate, the gardens soil.16 The distinction between the two passages is astounding: Genesis 1 views
humankind as distinct from other forms of life and the master of creation while Genesis 2 views
humankind as related to other forms of life and the servant of the earth. 17 As the tradition has
continued, both of these views have been championed by different groups at different times. They each
offer something to think about, and help broaden the definition of a vocation. In other words, elitist
dominion is not the answer, rather there are a multitude of answers to the question of vocation, but they
are all rooted in an understanding that God created human beings to work with the earth compassionately.
138.

11 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 135.

12 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 138.
13 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 136.
14 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 136.
15 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 139.
16 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 140.
17 Hiebert, The Human Vocation, 140.

Rocks 5
Through a better understanding of the human vocation, especially as it applies to the environment and
stewardship of the Earth, Christians are better able to understand the role they are to play. If a vocation of
stewardship, rooted in moral imperative, rather than a license for irresponsible and untethered dominion is
instilled in every Christian, the future of the environment already looks less grim. A radical statement of
the primacy of Gods creation over the wants of human beings is jarring but necessary for a response from
humanity.
While care for creation ethics are important elements of environmental theology, the ecological
crisis does not end with a conversation about stewardship, rather environmental liberation theologians call
for a liberation of the earth of its oppressed peoples from destruction and degradation. Since we have
established and the connection between humanity and the created world and have discussed the differing
approaches to human vocation, it is important to take the next step toward understanding the lived
experience of the oppressed Earth. Two inseparable imperatives exist within environmental liberation
theology: a call to care for creation and a call to work for care for the poor, marginalized, and oppressed.
Before we can enter into a conversation about environmental liberation theology and this deep linkage
between the earth and the poor, we must understand the roots of a theology centered on the experience
and context of the poor and marginalized. Contextual theologies, according to Steven Bevans in his book,
Models of Contextual Theology, are described as,
a way of doing theology in which one takes into account the spirit and message of the
gospel; the tradition of the church; the culture in which one is theologizing; and social
change within that culture, whether brought about by western technological process or
the grass-roots struggle for equality, justice and liberation. 18
This idea of a theology rooted in ones lived experience is an essential component to understanding
contemporary theology. Contextual theologies are dynamic and based on the particularity of a given
context. Liberation theology is a specific type of contextual theology introduced to the world by Fr.
Gustavo Gutierrez in the 1970s. Gutierrez, a priest living in Peru, offered the poor and marginalized of
Latin America a sense of hope in a newly defined and historically relevant God. This God, according to
Gutierrez, demands compassion and justice for the poor. This God suffers alongside the poor. Liberation
theology, as seen by Gutierrez, is deeply rooted in the call to have a preferential option for the poor and to
challenge the traditional understanding of power and privilege within the context of society and especially
within the context of the inner Church.19 He writes that the most important point is to ponder
18 Steven Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, (NY: Maryknoll - Orbis, 1992), 1.
19 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation. (NY: Maryknoll - Orbis, 1984), 101.

Rocks 6
[Liberation Theologys] significance and to examine the meaning of Christianity itself and the mission
of the Church in the world.20 Gutierrez writes in his famed theological work, A Theology of Liberation,
to know God is to do justice and to love God is to establish just relationships and to recognize the
rights of the poor.21 An important caveat of liberation theology is the movement of the poor for the poor,
in other words, liberation is being effected by the victims themselves, the poor themselves. 22 Rather
than depending on the paternalistic systems of charity and goodwill, the poor make themselves into
historical agents of their own liberation.23 The poor, in recognizing their oppression and the injustices
perpetrated against them, unite and fight for their collective rights. Liberation theology stresses the
strength of a critical political, social, and economic unit in the face of an unjust, typically capitalist,
materialist Western society.
When discussing the context within which ecology and environmental interests lie, it is important to
understand what populations are most affected by ecological crises. Leonardo Boff and Jos Ranis
Regidor are both prominent Latino liberation and ecological theologians, who write within the context of
the global south. Their context is one of oppression at the hands of dominant, paternalistic nations,
extreme poverty, and vast ecological destruction, especially in the form of deforestation and loss of
biodiversity. They draw distinct parallels between their ecological context, their geographical context, and
a history of domination and oppression from outside forces, namely powerful countries with unstoppable
economic interests and a society driven by intense privilege and consumption.
Leonardo Boff, one of Gutierrezs contemporaries and a prominent environmental liberation
theologian, engages with the various ways that liberation theology relates to the ecological crisis. Because
the original liberation theology of Gutierrez was not focused explicitly on ecological concerns, Boff
engages in a construction of ecological liberation within the context of Gutierrezs work of the 1960s. He
writes that even though liberation theology did not discuss the environment, that does not mean that the
poor are not impacted by ecological problems, in fact, they poor are related directly to them, since they

20 Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation, 143

21 Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation, 143
22Leonard Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, in Ecology and Poverty, ed. Leonardo Boff and Virgil
Elizondo (London: SCM, 1995), 71.

23 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 71.

Rocks 7
are members of nature and their situation objectively represents an ecological aggression. 24 Boff a case
for social ecology and socio-cosmic democracy, one that factors in a new courtesy toward creation,
to liberate the earth from great exploitation and cruel exclusion. 25 Boff expands this notion of liberation
to the entire cosmos and attempts to change the way we see our place in it. Boff encourages a movement
to understand the human mission as one that is an expression of earth itself, and that human beings
were created for the universe and not vice versa. 26 Once humans recognized the larger earthly
community of which they are a part, they must look with a preferential for the poor and for all species that
are not appreciated as part of the greater community. This new ecological liberation requires a society
that is non-consumerist and respects the rhythms of the ecosystems, and promotes the common
good not just to humans but to the other beings in creation. 27 To Boff, this sense of ecological
liberation theology is an attempt at greater, more radical inclusion and an awareness of the greater cosmic
reality that exists in the created world.
Boff and Regidor engage in a more critical social critique of Northern culture of the satisfied, and the
privileged ability to ignore the devastation of the poor and of the earth. 28 Jos Ranis Regidor writes that
this consumerist, northern culture is unable to see the interweaving of the social crisis and the ecological
crisis, because often the North is sheltered from the negative effects of its consumerist society and
dominant perspective.29 This critique of the westernized nations is central to an understanding of
liberation, because often these northern cultures of privilege and consumerism contribute to the
oppression of the poor. Liberation theologies, especially of the poor and earth ecology, are essential for a
northern mindset because they expose an alternative reality of life and demonstrate to northern readers the
ways that they may be complicit in perpetuating injustice. The particular emphasis from the perspective
of nature is also helpful in illuminating the reality of the global south and the disproportionate oppression
that is people and its environment face. Regidor cites the debt every human owes to nature, especially for
24 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 70.
25 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 74.
26 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 75.
27 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 75.
28 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 76.
29 Boff, Liberation Theology and Ecology, 78-79.

Rocks 8
the damages produced by technology and economic interests that have organized its exploitation by
using limitless violence.30 While Boff keeps his analysis of the human impact on ecology more mystical
and idealistic, Regidor offers concrete examples of the many ways in which this western notion of
dominion, consumerism, production, and consumption creates devastating pollution and
environmental erosion that threaten life on earth. 31 Regidor lists environmental plagues such as green
house effect, warming of the climate, desertification and the destruction of forests, various levels
and causes of air and water pollution as well as the storage of toxic waste and placed the greatest
onus on the North as a society that produces 80% of elements that destroy ecosystems. 32 And not only
does the North selfishly use most of the resources and contribute heavily to pollution, it sends its toxic
wastes to the poor, whether that be to the poor in Northern communities or Southern poor. In addition,
the injustices and oppression of consumerist-fueled devastation are amplified by a Northern populace who
is indifferent to the harm they are causing to the earth and to other human beings.
Regidor offers a solution to move away from the anthropocentric paradigm characteristic of the present
development model, and offers an ecological paradigm, that engages in a self-other dialectic with
nature. If we are to move away from this anthropocentrism, we need to acknowledge the otherness and
the intrinsic and autonomous value of nature.33 Regidor introduces a concept of human solidarity with
nature, a solidarity in which humans can interact with creation and utilize it with a sense of balance and
harmony. When oneself establishes the value of what is other to him/herself, a relationship is established
and strengthened through each encounter. Can humans return to the days of Genesis 2, when they were
called to cultivate the land, when they loved and respected the otherness of creation? How can we
reconcile the massive amounts of technology we use to oppress and exploit nature with a desire to live
more harmoniously with the earth? How can we be allies of an earth liberation when our own interests
and consumerist lifestyles often contradict that message? Regidor responds that in the essence of this
ecological paradigm lies in a culture of limits and quality of life, that is able to create a new type of
economy which does not give priority to profit and unlimited consumption. 34 While the answer is not
30 Jos Ramos Regidor, Some Premises for an Eco-Social Theology of Liberation, in Ecology and Poverty, ed.
Leonardo Boff and Virgil Elizondo (London: SCM, 1995), 85.

31 Regidor, Some Premises for an Eco-Social Theology of Liberation, 85.

32 Regidor, Some Premises for an Eco-Social Theology of Liberation, 85.
33 Regidor, Some Premises for an Eco-Social Theology of Liberation, 86.
34 Regidor,Some Premises for an Eco-Social Theology of Liberation, 86.

Rocks 9
simple and the solutions to global climate change and poverty are not absolute, Regidor, Boff, Gutierrez,
and many other theologians working in a context of social and ecological poverty, raise the issues,
acknowledge the patterns, and look for the world to respond.
When speaking about responses to liberation theologies, the most critical aspect lies in the method of
praxis. Praxis, or the practice of living ones faith, is an essential component to being a Christian. Praxis
on behalf of the Church community within the context of the ecological crisis is extremely important, not
only because of the call to be stewards and cultivators of the earth but because praxis allows individuals
to grow closer to injustice and gain a deeper understanding of systematic oppression. Patricia Mische
highlights many concrete ways in which Church communities can engage in ecological praxis to develop
a culture of ecological responsibility and to advance systems in order assure ecological integrity at
local, bioregional, national, and global levels. She also highlights the role that a Church community can
play as effective actors in the development of effective policies. 35 She states that religious communities
are in a perfect position to contribute to the development of a global culture of ecological responsibility
as Church praxis has special relevance for the development of inner governance and a culture of
ecological responsibility.36 Mische offers a solution, a local solution to the global crisis. Church
communities play a significant role in creation and in the support of a particular community. The basic
teachings of Christianity, such as to love ones neighbor, has implicit ecological content, because by
extent, loving ones neighbors includes respect for the rights and needs of future generations, thus
encouraging responsible stewardship and sustainable practices. 37 Christian communities are the nucleus
of social change, and there is definite hope in the communal and sacramental character of a Church
community. Rather than an individualistic and dominating version of Christians, a Church community
demonstrates the open love and radical inclusion of the faith. If anywhere, an ecological praxis and
solidarity movement can begin in a Church.
This concept of Church leadership and praxis in the area of environmental liberation theology is
actualized in the Appalachian region of the United States. Appalachia, a stretch of land covering much of
the eastern part of the county, is known for its majestic beauty and its excessive resource depletion. I
35 Patricia M. Mische, The Integrity of Creation: Challenges and Opportunities for Praxis, in Christianity and
Ecology, ed. Dieter Hessel and Rosemary Radford Reuther (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), 591.

36 Mische, The Integrity of Creation, 592.

37 Mische, The Integrity of Creation, 594.

Rocks 10
visited the rural Appalachian mountains this semester and was struck by the ecological devastation of the
area. Hydraulic fracturing, coal mining, mountaintop removal, and water pollution are the largest causes
of environmental degradation in the area. And all of these are caused by outside industrial interest. The
consumption-based economy of United States runs off resources that have been stripped from the land
and the people of the Appalachians. In the spirit of ecological subsidiarity and praxis, the Catholic
Bishops of Appalachia have offered multiple responses to the ecological crisis facing the Appalachian
land and people through pastoral letters. In At Home in the Web of Life, written in 1995, the Catholic
Bishops of Appalachia cover the environmental and social degradation of the Appalachian region and the
exploitation of the land for materials and the people for cheap labor. For example, in the section titled, A
Culture of Death or Life? they enter into a dialogue about how the rest of culture views Appalachia:
"We are confronted by an even larger reality, which can be described as a veritable
structure of sin. This reality is characterized by the emergence of a culture which denies
solidarity and in many cases takes the form of a veritable culture of death.' This culture is
actively fostered by powerful cultural, economic, and political currents which encourage
the idea of society excessively concerned with efficiency . . . . In this way a kind of
conspiracy against life' is unleashed."38
The pastoral letter continues with a discourse on many ways that Appalachia is underappreciated and
oppressed by the greater American society. The letter takes on a decidedly hopeful tone, and one that
possesses a sense of strength and empowerment.
The Catholic Bishops offer a treatise on ecological liberation theology for the people of
Appalachia that compassionately challenges those in our society that prey on the vulnerable region for its
labor and resources. Similar to Boff and Regidor, the Catholic Bishops of Appalachia draw direct
connections between the ecological destruction and the social injustices perpetrated against the poor and
marginalized of the Appalachian countryside. They state that they do not see the crisis of nature of nature
as separate from the crisis of the poor, but both as a crisis of community. 39 Both the people and the
land are victims of the same materialistic consumer society which promotes the culture of death
especially when they are treated like useless waste from the throw-away consumer society. 40 These
38 Catholic Bishops of Appalachia, At Home in the Web of Life, ( Webster Springs: Catholic Committee of
Appalachia), 3.

39 Catholic Bishops of Appalachia, At Home in the Web of Life, 4.

40 Catholic Bishops of Appalachia, At Home in the Web of Life, 4.

Rocks 11
stark realizations, that people and the earth are being destroyed and thrown away, are intended to be a call
to action and a call to a new life. The Catholic Bishops of Appalachia are calling for the end of
oppression and exploitation through the development of sustainable communities. By promoting
sustainable communities, the people and the land of Appalachia are given the opportunity to thrive again
rather than suffer at the hand of economic and commercial interests. This sustainable path allows the
people and land of Appalachia to take advantage of technology, advancements, and their own rich
gifts in social and ecological cooperation to promote authentic local communities rooted in Gods
sacred web of life.41 This Appalachian environmental liberation theology provides hope for the future of
the region and for the future of the environment.
In At Home in the Web of Life, the authors describe the Appalachian community as a web of
life, and in which a sustainable community exists for people and the rest of nature. 42This idea of the
entire created world as a sacred web allows for a greater understanding of the all-encompassing and
intensely intricate nature of humankind and otherkind that God has created to exist on the earth. The
Christian response to the ecological crisis has been one of compassion both for the poor and those
affected by environmental crises and for the created world and all its living creatures. There is a growing
sense of responsibility and duty to maintain and steward the earth and an encouragement to for humanity
to step away from the paternalistic sense of dominion. This theory liberation rooted in the experience of
the poor and marginalized offers us a new way of looking at the many ways our habits, actions, and
culture contribute to the degradation of ecosystems and communities. And it is through this
understanding of our own complicity that we can acknowledge the privileges we hold, engage more fully
with the environment, and live lives in a way that uplift the voices of the poor and promote a sense of
hope for the future.

41 Catholic Bishops of Appalachia, At Home in the Web of Life, 10.

42 Catholic Bishops of Appalachia, At Home in the Web of Life, 4.