I’ve had many conversations over the years with many environmental activists, many of them internal. Yep, that’s right, for those of you who didn’t know, I am a reformed environmentalist. Or depending on my audience, a Christian ecologist.
One of the most challenging issues we face as Christians charged with stewardship is the interpretation of media messaging. We usually receive important science information via popular media outlets such as Live Science, Sciencing, or activist organizations like the Audubon Society or Sierra Club. Sometimes we receive it via radio or directly from the daily rag or more popular papers like the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, or New York Times.
Important clues to better stewardship are often embedded in messaging that turns us because of our conservative principles, our position on climate change, or our opinion of a certain organization or politician. To effectively streamline our efforts at being good citizens we often deal with more clear cut political issues such as abortion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, 2nd amendment, and many others. And so, the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. This statement is not saying that stewardship of the “environment,” is more important than these other “issues.”
And so the goal of this post and future posts in this same category:
To provide examples of communications that I have had with a variety of individuals in various sections of the environmental movement. My hope is that you will walk away with insight into how to glean the good stuff from an oft-biased media, find that there is a rich variety of individuals with varied objectives and practices within the broader environmental movement, and pick up a tip or two on how to graciously converse with, learn from, and minister to these folks.
Installment one: Email correspondence with an organization dedicated to protecting the world’s oceans.
First: Their email alert
Second: my short, succinct response, including a thank you, an encouragement, and a clear identification of my concern and recommendation to amend the message. In this case the issue was a statement suggesting that mother and grandmother orcas (killer whales) are more important than human mothers and grandmothers. There are often lines of thinking that go back to undervaluing human life which of course connect with the pro-abortion movement.
When I receive a response I will post it below.