In vastly religious Mauritius, it would be interesting to see what the various established religions say about Man’s relationship to the environment or, as you may wish to say, to Nature. (Last week we dealt with traditional religions and culture, with Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism.Today we conclude this article.)

<B>Judaism and Christianity</B>

During the past thirty years of heightened environmental consciousness, there has been intense discussion about the environmental attitudes of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Most of it has centered on the relationship between God, Man and Nature as described in the book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. According to Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and given dominion over nature and commanded to subdue the Earth, Genesis clearly awards people a God-given right to exploit the Earth. Humanity’s unique position among creatures, constituted in the image of God, confers upon humans unique rights and privileges among creatures.Man is to the rest of creation as God is to mankind. Thus if God is the lord and master of humans, so humans are lords and masters of nature. This may be called the mastery interpretation of Genesis.

Christian apologists have contested both this interpretation of Genesis and the untoward environmental ethical implications drawn from it. The unique essence of humans to have been created in the image of God confers, it is argued, not only special rights and privileges but also special duties and responsibilities. Paramount among these responsibilities is the responsibility to rule the dominion of Earth wisely and benignly. To abuse, degrade, or destroy the Earth is to violate the trust God placed upon the human race. This interpretation may be called the stewardship interpretation of Genesis.

There are thus two possible environmental ethics consistent with the Judeo-Christian world-view, depending upon its interpretation: (1) an anthropocentric, utilitarian ethic associated with mastery; (2) a biocentric ethic associated with stewardship; and citizenship. The environmental ethic associated with stewardship is both the most practical and the most acceptable interpretation consistent with the Christian tradition. Further, since it is a possible interpretation of the role intended for people by God, as described in Genesis, it seems the most plausible interpretation of the overall gist of the text as it has come down to us, and its most effective contribution to a universal environmental ethic.

Indeed, current teaching on the environment stems from the New Testament and the command to love one another. This is exemplified by the late Pope John Paul II’s statement in his Encyclical of 1991 (on which my former colleague Leon de Rosen and to a lesser extent myself at UNEP worked on in its environmental aspects). He stressed humanity’s stewardship of nature: “a way of loving one’s fellow human beings as oneself”, the Encyclical states, “is to protect the environment and natural resources on which they depend”.

The saints of the Catholic Church and other sensitive souls (e.g. Francis of Assisi) acquired “great sensitivity to all evil that harms any creature of God, and consequently to every element that makes up our natural environment”. Such teaching is being followed by many and has contributed greatly to current environmental thought.

The Anglican traditions of Christianity are particularly strong on this excellent notion of stewardship, i.e.people are the guardians, the protectors, of the environment, not its owners.

<B> Islam</B>

During the European Dark Ages, ancient science was preserved and developed by Islamic scholars.Although Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, regarded himself as a prophet of the same God and in the same prophetic tradition as those that came before him, the Islamic cultural tradition constitutes a distinctive historical and cultural context. About the relationship of human beings to nature, the Koran states that, Allah created the first man and woman. All other things are explicitly created by Allah for the sake of, the use of, and the benefit of people. According to Islam, then, people are at the moral centre of creation and are, indeed, the very purpose of the creation. As in Genesis, so also in the Koran, it is a human right to have dominion over and to subdue the Earth and all its non-human creatures.

Humanity’s role as God’s agent on earth should not, however, be confused with tyranny. Human dominion over the Earth should be benign, not only destructive. The doctrines of Islam are equally explicit and emphatic that humanity’s relation to nature should be one of stewardship not mastery.

All the creations of Allah are, as it were, divine works of art. The whole world and all of its parts are understood in Islam as ‘signs’ of the greatness, the goodness, the subtlety, the richness, and so on of the creator. To deface, defile or destroy nature would be an impious or even blasphemous act. Although humans are accorded the usufruct of the Earth, this does not include the right to abuse it with impunity, since people are very much at one with the Earth, at least while living on it.

According to Islam, all human beings are descended from Adam and Eve. Hence all human beings, regardless of race, colour, or national origin, are equally members of one extended family: no people are privileged or chosen; no one is inherently better than anyone else. In Islam, moreover, there is a strong emphasis on justice. Justice, indeed, is one of the cornerstones of the Muslim religion. Since environmental abuse and/or destruction are, more often than not, harmful to people, they are a form of injustice. To ruin or destroy the environment is tantamount to either bodily injury or the destruction or theft of property or both. Further, ignorance of the complex or delayed effects of any action is no excuse, since Islam stresses the moral importance of knowledge, no less than of justice.

<B>Conclusion</B>

The above survey shows common stances with regard to the man/nature relationship and point to humanity’s responsibility vis-a-vis the environment. Think of the value of an alliance between religion and contemporary scientific concepts and research findings. Each covers distinct views of man and the Universe, each brings distinct elements in our understanding.As a scientist and a believer, I find no conflict between them. In fact, some scientists amongst us argue that science often rediscovers concepts intuitively known to traditional cultures or revealed by and religious world views. For example,Buddhism understood the unity of all life on Earth, Taoism appears to have understood the cyclical nature of biological processes, the American Indians the concept of interdependence, Hinduism the continuity of life, Islam the equality among men, Christianity the stewardship duties of man towards nature and the key role of love and so on. These are all elements of a true environmental ethic,that is an ideal human behaviour with respect to the environment. (I have not dealt here with the huge gap that at times exist between what religions teach and what the faithful actually practice!)

From the pedagogical point of view, strict obedience to the letter of the law must always be complemented and supported by individual moral sensibility, hence the role of religious, moral and civic education. The development of an environmental ethic must be considered to be one of the ultimate goals of good education.

<B>Dr Michael ATCHIA

[email protected]</B>

<I>Note: The above descriptions of religions do not represent authoritative positions; they are only given for the sake of discussion.While every effort has been made at accuracy, any discrepancy is regretted.</I>