“God wants us to care for the earth”
- Interview of Richard Cizik, 54, vice-president for governmental affairs at National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) a group with 30 million members.
- his pro-Bush conservative is now an improbable and important leader to save the environment in the US.
- The NAE has 30 million members.
New York-What do you mean by “Creation Care”?
-This is not an ideological diversion. It’s not a linguistic kind of adaptation from environmentalism although some people think that. It is rather simply a biblical understanding of what Genesis to Revelation teach from the beginning to the end about what is our responsibility as Christians for this Earth. And this “Creation Care” is taught in places like Genesis 2:15. God want us to care for the Creation. Hence Creation Care. It is a lost concept in America. The preachers of America have been derelict in their biblical duty to teach.
-How do you explain that Evangelicals were not involved in the fight to protect the environment so far and that you stand out among evangelicals on that matter?
-I have my opponents. It should not be an oddity for an Evangelical to fight for the environment. It should be a normal function of the average believer. And churches throughout America should realize their personal, political and even our society’s technical responsibility. But first and foremost it is our biblical duty as Christians to conserve. In other words we believe it comes straight from the Scriptures to be conservers of what God gave us because he told us to be stewards of it.
-Why don’t you talk about environmentalism?
-Well the term environmentalism has had a left-wing political bias that it is some sort of democrat, liberal, East Coast latte-sipping idea. As opposed to a biblical concept that is a conservative idea. Because of this association of environmentalism with left-wing politics, population control, big government and all the rest, evangelical Christians have bought a bill of goods from right-wing politicians, talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh and others that this is somehow for somebody else and not for us. So they are putting their conservative political views ahead of the Bible. Republicans have courted the evangelicals. 78% of them voted for George Bush. We have to run upstream. I have my critics, who came out against me after we had a major meeting of evangelical theologians and scientists last January in Washington DC. Critics said I have no mandate to do that, which is wrong. I had a mandate from the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) to hold an historical dialogue between the finest scientists in the world such as E.O Wilson, the biologist, and evangelical leaders. Our goal was to show that instead of being at war with each other, science and religion should be collaborators on the things they can agree upon, namely that this Earth is worth preserving.
-You quote the Book of Revelation 11:18 that says that God will destroy those, who destroy the Earth. Does it mean for you that the polluters are going to be held accountable for their actions?
-I am not sure that one can take that verse and say precisely what is meant by it. You cannot say one verse proves this truth. I do not do that because it is very easy to take a verse out of context and make it a proof text. On the other hand, is it clear from the Scriptures that we have a responsibility. When we die and give this Earth back to God, He is going to ask us in my opinion “what did you do with what I created?” He has assigned us that Biblical duty. Will polluters be judged? Well, according to the Scripture, judgment begins in the household of God. So the very first people, who should be accountable are Christians. Government officials will be held accountable to a Higher Standard. In the Bible, Pilate says to Jesus: “Don’t you know I can release you or crucify you?” Jesus replies to him: “you have no powers except those given to you from Above”. In other words, the authority of the public official comes from God Himself and He has to use it wisely.
-Could we imagine you working long term with democrats like Al Gore to protect the environment?
-Al Gore called me up on his cell phone to ask me if I wanted to collaborate with him. I said “of course”. Any thinking evangelical should go and see his movie. If you are willing to think and consider new ideas, you should go and see it. Gelett Burgess, a famous American poet once said “If in the last few years, you haven’t discarded a major opinion or acquired a new one, check your pulse. You may be dead.” Some people are so unwilling to consider new ideas, they might as well be dead. These are some new ideas. It is forcing divisions in the evangelical world. It is challenging politicians. But the fight for the environment is a moral issue.
-What do you think about George Bush’s reluctance to impose greenhouse gas emission caps?
-Last year, he said we are addicted to oil. This year, he acknowledged that climate change is real. By next year our goal is to put a bill on his desk with caps on emissions. And then hope that he will sign it. Maybe by next year, George W Bush will be ready to do so, because he is a politician. And if the democratic Congress is able to put a good bill on his desk, I think George Bush will sign it.
-So would you work with democrats?
-Absolutely. Here is the point. Evangelicals have voted disproportionately for republicans. In the congressional elections in November 2006, sizeable numbers of evangelicals have voted for democrats in key races. Evangelicals have historically supported republicans but if given a good candidate, they will vote for a democrat. My challenge is to work with republicans, because they are the ones, who need to get religion on the environment.
-How do you intend to get this bill done?
-I met this past week with Senator Barack Obama, Senator McCain, Hillary Clinton and some republican lawmakers about these issues. Our goal is to persuade them they need to act in the public interest. We have a threat to climate change. It is a transcendent issue. It poses a threat to the very survival of species, it poses a threat to habitat destruction. Pollution is a threat to health never mind climate change. We need to do something about it.
-How can you explain this overreaching mistrust of evangelicals toward science?
-It goes all way back to the Scopes monkey trial in 1925 as it was called (a teacher in Tennessee had taught his students about evolution despite a law there forbidding any such teaching at the time). I think evangelicals are intimidated by science. I do not see a conflict between science and religion. Religion cannot answer questions of faith. And faith cannot answer questions of science. There are two different worlds that answer different questions. Can they collaborate on climate change? Absolutely. Great scientists are people of imagination. So are people of faith. I would imagine a world in which religion and science can work together to so something to save this planet from the catastrophic impact of climate change.
-Are perceptions on climate change evolving among evangelicals?
-Absolutely. A year ago, when we released the Evangelical climate initiative, there was a sizeable turnout from the media but this year, when we announced our cooperation with scientists on climate change, the religious media was twice what it was year ago. The religious media is now taking us seriously. When that story goes over 2000 Christian radio stations and 250 TV channels, when we take our message to our 45 000 churches that represent 30 million people, as well as the 100 million evangelicals in this country, then politics will begin to change.
-Will climate change issues play a significant role in the presidential elections in the US in 2008?
-Yes. There is not a single republican or democrat running for the White House, who is not going to have to face the voters on this issue. I happen to think that people want more than what George Bush said in his State of the Union speech (n.d.l.r.: in January 2007). You have many bills on climate change in Congress. The NAE does not have a policy position on climate change. I personally think that a cap-and-trade program is a good option.
-What about the Kyoto protocol that George Bush rejects?
-People accuse me to be anti-capitalist and anti-American. Anti-capitalist? The largest corporations in America today support a cap-and-trade program. Even in the utility industry. If we don’t do it now, it will pose severe threats to the environment.
-So should the US go back to the negotiating table on the Kyoto protocol?
-Absolutely. It failed in the US Senate because it did not include China and India. But both countries want to see the leadership of America, which emits 25% of the greenhouse gases. Let’s be leaders. We are not ostriches with our heads in the sand on other issues, so why should we be ostriches on this issue?
-You are now playing a prominent role on the environment. Will one see you next year alongside a republican or a democrat?
-I will stand alongside anybody, who will do right on this issue and do right by the Creation.
-But are you still a republican despite the lack of attention by the Bush administration on climate change issues?
-Good question. I am non-partisan. Historically, I have been a republican. But am I still a republican? We will see in 2008. If the republicans nominate a candidate for the White House, who is not willing to support major action on climate change, then I may vote with a democrat.
-Are you going to work with environmentalists?
-When the times comes, yes. At this point, we need to develop our own voice. I am not calling environmentalists names. That is what some right-wingers do. Actually, I don’t call my fellow evangelicals right-wingers. I call them corner-dwellers. They dwell in corners and just talk to one another. We need to get people out of their corners and talk to each other. It is good for business to be green. I want the 300 000 houses of worship in America to be green. If these 300 000 houses of worship in America were to reduce their energy consumption by 25%, they would save annually $500 million, 13,5 billion kilowatt hours of electricity, 5 million tons of CO2, the equivalent of 1 million cars on the road, the planting of 1,4 million acres of trees. If they reduced their consumption by going to the new kinds of light bulbs, if they shifted their vehicles to hybrid like I have done in my own home, if they did all of these things, that is what they would save.
-What have you done specifically to fight against climate change?
-First of all, we sold our recreational vehicle and bought hybrid vehicles. A year ago, when our heat pump went out, we replaced it with a new system, that is 50% more efficient. We replaced our oven and microwave with energy efficient appliances. To reduce our carbon footprint on the earth, we are contributing $400 a person – we are 4 of us in the family – to the carbon fund. By doing that, they tell us we will have close to a neutral footprint. And last thing, I recently had a body burden test. It is the most exhaustive test of my body for chemicals. I found out I have a high level of mercury and of other chemicals in my body. Very interesting. My goal is to get 25 evangelical leaders to do the same test. And then, they will discover the personal implications of pollution.
Jean-Cosme Delaloye / New York
Read on the same topic: God’s green hand in the USA
Comments
