This is a historical year for elections world-wide. This is also a time for unprecedented ai-enabled misinformation. The Misinformation Hub by AI and Faith focuses on how misinformation, particularly within faith communities, poses significant challenges that require both technological and ethical solutions. The hub offers a comprehensive overview of the types of misinformation, such as fabricated, manipulated, and misleading content, and explores the differences between misinformation and disinformation, with an emphasis on intent.
Recognizing that faith communities are particularly vulnerable to misinformation due to the trust placed in religious leaders and the close-knit nature of these groups, the hub stresses the importance of equipping these communities with the tools and knowledge to critically assess information. This includes understanding how misinformation spreads, especially through social media and other digital platforms, and the role of AI in both perpetuating and combating this issue.
AI’s role in misinformation is twofold: while it can amplify the spread of false information through algorithms and bots, it also holds the potential to identify and mitigate misinformation. The Misinformation Hub highlights various AI tools and strategies that can be used to detect and flag false information, but it also cautions that AI alone is not sufficient. The integration of AI with ethical and religious wisdom is crucial, as it allows for a more holistic approach to addressing the problem. The hub encourages faith leaders and communities to engage with AI in ways that align with their values, promoting the responsible use of technology in combating misinformation.
The hub also provides practical advice for individuals and communities on how to approach misinformation. This includes verifying the sources of information, being cautious about what is shared online, and fostering a culture of critical thinking within faith communities. By combining AI with ethical principles derived from religious teachings, the Misinformation Hub aims to create a more informed and resilient community that can better navigate the complexities of the digital age.
The project calls for a collaborative effort between technologists, ethicists, and faith leaders to ensure that the solutions to misinformation are not only effective but also align with the moral and spiritual values of the communities they serve. Through education, awareness, and the responsible use of AI, the Misinformation Hub seeks to empower individuals and faith communities to become active participants in the fight against misinformation.
Last month, I attended the 38th conference of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. The conference was held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. It’s important for people of faith to learn about AI and talk about AI with the people who are doing the actual work with these technologies. Who are these people? They are a mixture of academics in the social and natural sciences, as well as scientists and engineers in technology and research companies. For example, Microsoft’s Chief Science Officer, Eric Horvitz, was at the event.
Attendance was over 4000, drawing people from all over the world, especially China. Breakout sessions focused on specific problems or segments of the field. For example, “Formalizing Robustness in Neural Networks: Explainability, Uncertainty, and Intervenability.” One of the sessions I attended was on “AI-Driven Personalization to Support Human-AI Collaboration.” There was just one session on philosophy and ethics, which in the technology space is usually referred to as AI alignment. This is the work of making sure that AI technologies will align with human values. It was interesting to hear papers about research being done to develop the ethical inputs of various AI programs.
This was a huge event, but religious ideas and persons were not particularly visible. While I could not be at the dozens of sessions that were held over the several days of the conference, including the pre-conference and post-conference tracks, I did not hear in the proceedings or read in the published materials of the conference anything about religion. The exception being the event’s social media app where some attendees had posted interest in having separate meetups for Mormons and Muslims. Muslim women were almost the only visibly religious individuals at the conference. I saw one Jewish man with a Yarmulke, and no doubt I was very visible in my friar’s habit. Of course there were religious people there who were not religiously visible. For example, I had a good conversation with a graduate student from Poland who is Roman Catholic.
I left the conference feeling more informed, inspired, and concerned. The general tenor of the conference was positive. There were very few comments in presentations on the potential harms of AI. When they were given, they were brief. Again, it was a massive event. There may have been more extended conversations about these dangers. For example, there was an all-day session I didn’t attend on, “Diversity, Belonging, Equity, and Inclusion.” This was the seventh annual workshop held on that topic in the thirty-eight years of the conference. Like with any new technology, AI will bring both positives and negatives to the world. One positive development I learned about was in health screening. In some areas, it has become more accurate due to AI. This will save more lives by detecting the presence of diseases like cancer earlier, leading to people getting treated earlier.
Attending the conference strengthened my belief that people of faith, from across the world’s religions, have an important part to play in thinking deeply about this technology. Philosophers, theologians, faith leaders and scholars have spent centuries pondering questions about what it means to be human and how to flourish as human beings. We often call this wisdom. As human beings our track record with wisely engaging emerging technologies is mixed. Often, we quickly embrace new technologies without any deep reflection about how they will shape our lives and the world. I’m glad for organizations like AI and Faith. The more we can bring together the people doing the AI technology work with the wisdom of the world’s religions the better. There will be controversies, but I trust, a wiser engagement with AI. AI-related technologies will increasingly shape our lives, for good and ill. The more reflective we are about them, the more the good can be realized and the bad minimized. If you desire, you can click here for a short reflection on the conference and how we should respond from the perspective of my own faith tradition.
The Rev’d Dr. Kevin Goodrich OP is an Anglican Dominican priest, spiritual director, theologian, and scholar.
We are excited to announce the launch of the AI and Faith podcast! AI and Faith is a community of expert technologists, professionals, and faith leaders bringing the ancient wisdom of the world’s major religions to the ethics of artificial intelligence. One way we do this is by interviewing people from our community of over 150 experts in 13 countries and five continents, as well as folks outside our community, about important topics related to Artificial Intelligence. Our experts have significant experience applying faith ethics to their work at the intersection of AI and education, disinformation, warfare, climate change, humanity, and other critical areas.
The AI and Faith podcast is currently available on our website, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon music, Google Podcasts, and Youtube music. Be sure to listen in and follow us on your favorite social media platforms to access our exclusive, original content. Episodes will be released twice a month on Thursdays. We hope you’ll join the conversation.
In this podcast episode Elias Kruger and Maggie Bender talk about the latest news in the tech world, Generative AI. How can this new tech change the way we create and consume content? Introducing the paradox of hope and despair, this episode brings innovative thoughts on this topic. Listen to it now on your favorite platform.
In a previous blog, we introduced our first scenario for the AI Futures project. Here we present our second scenario, Planetary Regeneration, which envisions high geopolitical cooperation that rises to meet the challenge of climate change. This hopeful scenario is not without its painful chapters yet it illustrates a viable path to a flourishing future.
Also, please be sure to check out our AI 2045 Writing Contest. This will be one of the scenarios used for the stories.
Every crisis is an invitation for change. Death and destruction often come before renewal can begin. 2025, later known as the Year of Reckoning, rocks the planet to its core. Climate change chaos comes early with massive floods, droughts, deadly hurricanes, and Tsunamis. Furthermore, acidification of significant portions of the ocean causes massive extinction of marine life and serious disruption to coastal economies along with food shortage.
While all these things were happening more frequently, the intensity and relentlessness of 2025 were unheard of. Modern civilization had never experienced such instability before which may explain the unraveling that followed.
Climate chaos rocked the geopolitical system sending the world economy into a nosedive. Pervasive disruption in the supply chain sent food soaring. Fortune 500 companies collapsed overnight unable to come through with their commitments to debtors and employees. The financial system collapsed as millions orchestrate a sudden run-on-banks desperate for cash. Unemployment reaches 30% in major areas of the world. Most communities experience chaos and violence where the market is no longer able to regulate day-to-day transactions. Cities across Latin America become battle zones run by gangs and militias as governments are unable to pay for standing police forces.
Fragile regimes in Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Central America descend into bloody civil wars. While middle-income and rich countries’ government hold, there are pockets of anarchy everywhere with a steep increase in crime and lawlessness. Scarcity of food, jobs, and basic services rekindle old wounds of inequality and racial strife. In collapsing economic systems, the battle between the haves and have-nots violently played out on the streets.
Economic armageddon and localized anarchy eventually leads to a nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan. Decades-old grievances over the partition that happened nearly a century earlier combined with extreme drought exacerbated animosity in the region which quickly escalates into armed conflict. The world watches in horror as Karachi is decimated by an atomic bomb killing half of its population. Pakistan retaliates hitting Delhi with a powerful bomb that kills millions. Before things get worse a UN coalition led by US, China, Britain, and Russia descend on the region to ensure the war stops. A treaty is signed and an UN-led multinational army is stationed in the region to ensure peace is maintained.
Dall-e impressionist rendition of global cooperation
A Reeling world rally behind an UN-led coalition to rebuild the affected nations and ensure global cooperation and sustainability becomes paramount. In an unprecedented move, the UN general assembly votes for a 30 day global period of mourning to bury the dead from the war and natural disasters which later were reported to reach 100 million. A long period of mourning inaugurates 2026 when for a whole month, the world experiences a voluntary COVID-like stoppage.
Transportation is kept to a minimum along with the essential services. It is also a time of reflection where a global consensus emerges that the world politico-economic system must undergo sweeping change. A summit is called where all head-of-state converge in New York to draw out plans for a new economy to emerge. With the image of nuclear devastation fresh in their minds, humanity goes to work to re-imagine a new social order.
The global commons embarks on a 20-year plan to regenerate the planet. At the heart of the plan is a resolve to not let the 100 million fatalities of 2025 be in vain. In the depths of grief, humanity enters a liminal space and a global consciousness emerges permeating large swaths of the population. While some resist cooperation, a courageous remnant rallies around a cry for regeneration.
AI development is not immune to the year of reckoning. As part of the rebuilding of the social order, AI research undergoes a complete re-prioritization. In a 2026 global AI summit, industry leaders are joined by policymakers, clergy, and civic leaders to re-align AI priorities. At this gathering a global fund is established for research in 6 key areas 1) Green AI; 2) Finance AI; 3) AI Education; 4) AI Health; 5) Governance AI (explainable and anti-corruption) 6) General AI (project GAIA). Funded by corporations and world governments, grants are made available for research under the condition that the findings are shared widely and transparently. A ban is established on AI warfare. They also opt for a global tax on robotic automation to fund massive programs to re-tool displaced workers.
The human metanoia starts paying off as early as 2033. After 7 grueling years of rebuilding, re-directing, and reforming, a globally coordinated effort to move countries to a circular (doughnut economy) economy takes hold. Global warming halts at 1.5 while distributive economies start ensuring no one gets dropped from the donut bottom half. There is still inequality but the basic needs of food, housing, basic healthcare, and education are mostly addressed.
Dall-e rendition of beauty from ashes using Van Gogh’s style
Global cooperation becomes the norm and national allegiances are slowly replaced by regional commonwealths based more on biome similarities than political constructs. International zones are established around the main ports of entry to the West in the Mediterranean and the US southern border. Opportunity cities are erected to receive migrants coming North giving them enough support and preparation for either a migration to a new home or a return to their place of origin.
The Catholic church follows Pope Francis’ lead. Inspired by Laudato si, the church takes a decisive turn towards dialogue with other religions, a greater focus on earthcare and service to the poor. In a watershed event, women are allowed to be priests and in 2043, the first woman pope emerges. This reform is not without turmoil. Internal conservative factions threaten to break off and some dioceses keep to traditional ways in open defiance of Roman leadership. Jesuits and Dominicans turn more conservative as a counterweight to Franciscan dominance. On the ground, mass attendance and baptism decline globally with the exception of Sub-Saharan Africa and pockets in Asia. In the US and Europe, small study groups, inspired by the “comunidades de base” pop up all over providing needed liturgical innovation and a strengthened focus on environmental and equity activism. By 2045, they amount to a significant and growing minority whose influence spills way beyond its numbers.
In spite of effervescent renewal movements in the fringes, mainline attendance, and financial clout diminishes over time. Many churches, seminaries, and parachurch ministries that were dependent on the parish system collapsed as greying congregations do not rejuvenate. Buildings turn into libraries, museums, community centers, and businesses. The only exception is large urban cathedrals that are able to wade through the crisis. Sub-Saharan Africa also follows an outlier path, where congregations follow more native liturgy and seek to distance themselves from the dying institutions of the North.
After the year of reckoning, Evangelicals undergo a deep metanoia turning away from dispensational fears to an Isaiah 9-inspired call to care for the earth. Missions expand to include environmental work. While still holding to a traditional view of the Bible, influential pastors lead the way to the greening of evangelicalism. Pentecostals dive deeper into mysticism and more nature-friendly spiritual practices.
Sunday church attendance declines but weekly events bring new demographics into the fold as congregations experience deep transformation. Solar panels, workspaces, and community gardens become commonplace. Climate deniers become a minority of holdouts in rural and suburban pockets. Evangelicals embrace the switch to digital forms of gathering creating strong global networks to spread a more green-conscious gospel.
In spite of tremendous green progress in institutional Christianity, the fringes continue to grow steadily in this period as many decide that organized Christianity is no longer an option but Jesus is still “alright with them.” Without coalescing around any one movement, this growing group makes its presence known first in Europe and North America, eventually in Latin America, pockets of Asia, and urban areas of Sub-Saharan Africa. They grow along with the global middle class and pursue spiritual practices mediated primarily through digital means. These are also active in the metaverse where they experiment with VR/AR and AI-assisted faith practices. They are both reviled and admired by mainstream Christianity and mostly align with a greener faith focusing on the connection of all things.
In this podcast episode Elias Kruger and Maggie Bender continue their conversation about the future from the last episode taking a closer look into how we can imagine realistic futures by using key macrodrivers of change. The conversation also unpacks one of AI Theology’s latest projects. Listen to it on you favorite platform (links bellow).
To understand better this conversation, take a look at this scenario grid.
January often puts us in a posture of reflection. New beginnings invite us to adjust, ponder and experiment. For example, per my wife’s wise encouragement, I started drinking 2 liters (64 ounces) of water a day. I also joined the local gym and started to work out 3 times a week. These two actions, and assuming I stick with them, will pay dividends for my health for years to come. I could have done it anytime before but for some reason, it took the coming of a season of reflection to jumpstart in the right direction.
Yet, this is not a post about making new year’s resolutions. It is instead an invitation to reflect on how we can show up to the conversation around Generative AI as its imminent disruption becomes more apparent. Stable diffusion, Chat-GPT, Lensa, and LaMDA filled the news with possibilities, fear, and confusion last year. While these technologies were fermenting for years, 2022 was a “coming out” of sorts when the world realized the potential behind generative AI.
Text, image, and sound generators are now available to the masses, opening avenues for multiform novelties. It has not been without controversy, resistance, and caution. A wave of backlash is mounting which is part of the process when a disruptive innovation emerges. Even so, the only certainty is that things won’t be the same.
These developments only make this work all the more important which leads us to the following question: what will it take to be AI theologians in a time of deep disruption? For those struggling to relate with an increasingly out-of-touch term like theology, let me phrase this dilemma in a different manner: how do we engage with these new AI technologies to ensure they build (not destroy) a flourishing future? If the underlying fear is that AI will redefine our humanity, what would it take to steer them toward a future we all want to live in?
1) Monitor and understand technology trends
For those new to the area, it is important you immerse yourself with accurate and helpful information about AI technologies. Reading two articles that sound an alarm based on an ill-thought-out worst-case scenario is not a replacement for understanding. Social Media and the Internet in general are chock-full of these. They often lead to misinformation, confusion, and in some cases despair.
A better approach is to expose yourself to a broad array of sources. The implications of any new technology are very hard to predict. They hinge on many factors such as economic cycles, evolving social norms, legislation, and speed of adoption. Furthermore, applications like generative AI will have the greatest impact through innovators that can capitalize on it for commercial ventures. Many of these will fail and few will rise to the top. Remember the dotcom revolution promised in the early ’00s? Only a few companies from that time are still in business.
The best you can do is to browse multiple sources on the matter and ponder their diverse informational signals. While this is a daunting task, you don’t have to do this alone. At our AI theology FB group we are constantly curating and discussing new developments on the AI front. This is a good place to start. There are also emails and publications you can sign up for. One that I would recommend which is free is TLDR which offers a daily sampling of top developments in the world of technology. In short, don’t form an opinion based on one alarmist article. Keep an open mind while patiently looking for diverse sources to see what emerges. The future is open.
2) Stay in dialogue with ancient sources of wisdom
In a time of fast change, one of the temptations is to disregard wisdom from the past. We get so immersed in our time that and over-estimate the uniqueness of our predicament. This kind of chronological pride will make us deaf to ancient voices of wisdom. While our challenges may feel immense, humanity has been around for a while the commonalities that bind us are more substantial than it is apparent.
For Christians reading this, that will mean returning to the Bible. Yet, that should not be the only source. I would encourage all of us to engage with the rich theological heritages. Among these, I recommend paying special attention to the contemplative tradition which is also known as Christian mysticism. Rigid dogma will not serve us well and unfortunately, Western Christianity is full of it.
I would also encourage expanding our horizons beyond Christian roots. It is time to draw from Eastern sources which include the great Asian faiths like Hinduism and Buddhism and also our Abrahamic brothers and sisters in the Muslim and Jewish faith. Ponder on Rumi’s poems, attend to the stories from the Vedas, and learn to meditate with Buddhist monks. Our global challenge calls for an extensive search for wisdom wherever we can find it.
3) Stand in the paradox of hope and despair (with self-care)
Another temptation is to follow a knee-jerk reactive way of engagement – to wish that we could turn back the block of time to a period when this technology did not exist. Wedded to nostalgia, this can be fuel for powerful political movements such as the resurgence of right-wing nationalism. They can slow the tide of history, for a while. But ultimately, they are bound to fail.
A better strategy is to stand in the paradox of hope and despair. What does that mean? It is actually a spiritual practice in which you hold together all the potentialities and the risks of these new technologies in tension. You consider them equally, not trying to solve one or another but contemplating reality for what it is.
Can we hold in tension that this innovation will leave many without a job while also opening space for unprecedented art? Can we ponder that it will both democratize creative skills to the masses while also concentrating power and wealth on the few who control the platforms that offer it? Finally, would we consider the tension that while this new technology could empower many to leave poverty and help us address climate change, it will most likely be used for commercial uses that are non-essential?
Weigh different futures being offered with an open mind while also paying attention to the issues that arise as you learn about Generative AI. It goes without saying, that this process can be emotionally draining. That is why I also urge you to attend to self-care in the process. Look for life-giving spiritual practices that will ground you in what is good and beautiful. Stop, listen and rest. While these are timeless practices they are becoming all the more essential to anyone hoping to keep their sanity in a world of dizzying contradictions.
4) Engage in activist imagination
The ultimate question is: what will we do about it? Some are called to engage in the legislative process in order to protect those who will be harmed by these new technologies. Others will engage in the hard work of building new ecosystems that harness the power of these technologies for the flourishing of life. Others will solve intractable business problems leveraging the power of Generative AI.
I want to call out to a task that may be less obvious but is becoming all the more important: activist imagination. That is, we use imagination as a way to encourage others to act. It is meant to be transformative and paradigm-shifting not simply an experience to be consumed but an activity to enliven citizens.
In a situation where the possibilities are legion, anticipation starts with imagination. It is futile to try to predict how these technologies will transform the world. Yet, imagining multiple possibilities can better prepare us to face what will come next. Can we prepare this generation for what’s coming? A place to start is painting vivid pictures of what could be.
Predicting is a form of control but imagining is an invitation to ponder. The prophetic task of our time is to imagine possibilities (both good and bad) and invite our listeners to consider the impact of their actions in the present. Like the Hebrew prophets, we call out for people to repent, change their minds and go a different way. This is not limited to “scorched earth disaster” scenarios but also to pictures of hope that can inspire positive change
Like present-day prophets, we sit in the paradox of hope and despair and invite our audiences to choose life today so we can all have a future tomorrow.
20 years ago the life was very different from today. Can we predict the future by thinking about the past? Join Elias and Maggie in a conversation about how the past can help us envision the future. Listen now to the 6th episode of the AI Theology Podcast.
In the last few months, we have been busy working on a book project to describe plausible futures in the intersection of AI and faith. After some extensive brainstorming, the scenarios are finally starting to come alive (need a refresher on the project click here). After selecting our macro drivers, we have settled on the foundations for our 4 scenarios that form the backdrop for the stories to be written. Here is what they look like:
Each quadrant represents the combination of drivers that undergirds that scenario. For example, in the Q1 scenario, we have National (divided geopolitical system) Green (lower climate change impact). In short, this represents a future where the effects of climate change are delayed or lower than expected but where cooperation among nations is worse than it is today. How can such a combination even be possible?
Now that the parameters are set, the fun part of describing the scenarios can start. In this exercise, we try to imagine a future that fits within these parameters. For Q1, we imagine the global order deteriorating as nations turn inward. On the climate change side, we see a better or delayed outcome even if that seems counter-intuitive. How can a divided world somehow escape the worse of climate change? These difficult questions create the tensions from which creativity can flow.
What does that look like? Before a full description of the National Green scenario, let’s kick it off with a poem that evokes the feeling of this world.
Repent Before it’s Too Late
A world that hesitates like a wave in the acidifying sea Tossed by unharnessed winds Shifting from action to inaction
Division cuts deep Why can’t we come together? The arguing continues Polar caps whiter
Build up, tear down Hot summers linger “Each to its own” rules the day Parochial thinking Global shrinking
AI advances by competition Slowed by economic stagnation Focusing on security and independence It scarcely brings real transformation
National colors of allegiance Taint Green Xianity into a shade of brown of scattered complacency
Wedded to their turfs the church keeps Christ divided Petty speculations Keep clergy from coordination
Humanity stands at the valley of decision Will it choose life Or deadly, slow oblivion?
Gradual change can come too little too late. This scenario is based mostly on a continuation of the present. The 20s decade witnessed gradual climate decay with growing local and regional challenges. The geopolitical order drags along as US and China become major poles of influence, followed by the EU. Polarization within countries increases as political regimes oscillate between democracy and authoritarianism. This vacillation in direction stifles international coordination on climate leading to increased regionalization. In 2028, the Paris agreement collapses yearly climate conferences stop as the US, China, India, and Russia pull out from conversations.
By 2030, climate change is undeniable, but the lack of international cooperation on how to address it leads to scattered and uncoordinated efforts. Powerful nations think in terms of “energy independence” which ensures that fossil fuels remain an option for many even if they do not play the same role as in the past century. Mother nature seems patient with humanity, giving gentle reminders for them to mend their ways in the way of increased floods, droughts, and the melting of the ice caps. Yet, the gradual impact is scarcely enough to jolt humanity out of its enchanted oblivion. Affected areas in the developing world lack the clout and the resources to catch the world’s attention. The overall sense is that if we could just figure out how to work together, maybe we could avoid the worse.
As the 2040’s begin, a growing portion of the population no longer believes in stopping climate change. The hope now is simply to stem and adapt to the gradual but decisively transforming effect of a warming planet. In 2045, as the temperature rises by 2-degree celsius, well beyond UN goals, humanity hits a decision point. It must repent before it is too late. Yet, can it come together as a unified front? Can humanity heed nature’s call to repentance or will they be betrayed by half-measures that can no longer prevent the worse? Will it turn a corner or slowly descend into a Malthusian trap?
Nationalism leads to competition rather than cooperation. Tech development accelerates due to a tech “arms race” as nations strive for energy independence and the superiority of AI, supercomputers, weapons, and communications. While generalized war is absent in this period, there is a growing build-up of arms. This overall climate of mistrust guides and hamstrings national investments in tech. Tech dev + adoption is characterized more by competition and parallel acceleration than by shared research or resources. Cybersecurity becomes more of an emphasis here than in other scenarios.
AI adoption and development are uneven as international cooperation wanes. For example, AI justice slows downs as interests in this area are overshadowed by security concerns. Digital assistants take hold but increasingly become an artifact for developed nations with little use to the global south. Deepfakes and text generation develop more towards political propaganda within regions. The Metaverse mirrors the trend toward nationalism becoming more regionalized rather than the global commons it promised to be. AI/VR advances here take hold in the western versions of the metaverse and make some progress in China. The rest of the world is mostly cut off from it. Green AI advances within the confines of research institutions and government-funded labs in western nations. The benefits don’t trickle down to the global south.
Christianity mirrors many realities of this divided world. The Catholic church becomes more traditionalist and more distributed, therefore less tied to Rome. Even so, the Vatican emerges as a haven for cooperation in a regionalizing world. A string of progressive popes speaks up for the environment following Pope Francis’s lead. Yet, strong conservative factions, more in line with Pope Benedict, hold increasing power both in the West and in the global south. Green consciousness is present but not a forefront preoccupation for traditionalists that remain caught up in theological and liturgical debates.
Mainline Protestants doubled down on green aspects of Christianity but without the evangelistic component. The focus is more on education than pushing Christian people to action. Their influence wane as their decline in the West continues. They are also unable to gain a foothold in the global south being no match for evangelicals who by now are well-established even as their growth slows down.
Evangelical Christianity in the US takes up the green consciousness, wedded to a national push for energy independence. Good eco-theology comes in through the back door, so to speak, marshaled to support US national interests. Overall green consciousness in culture is embraced and evangelicals attempt to use this as an evangelism tool–“look how Christianity does such a good job of advocating for a green, sustainable world”. Emphasis on positive comparison between Christianity and other religions in this regard: “Christians are more green than Muslims, Hindus, etc.” captures a bit of the mindset. While greener, they remain militant and disinterested in interfaith dialogue. Missionary networks endure even in a more divided world but the focus continues on personal salvation, with a bit of green consciousness on the side.
Christian roots of green consciousness find independent expression, less tied to mainline church or institutional Christianity. Organizations like CTA, Biologos, EACH, and others grow, but become more secularly focused and theologically diffuse as a result. They fail to coalesce around common causes and weakened global cooperation ensuring its impact is also limited and only a shadow of its potential. While emerging as a viable alternative to organized Xianity, its lack of cohesion translates into multifold affinity groups that coalesce around narrow missions rather than a movement with a broad vision for transformation.
I often write on the intersection between technology and theology. Yet, sometimes, I veer off this framework when I believe there is some important that needs to be said. I do this sparingly because I want to honor the focus of this portal. It also saves me from being all over the place with my writing (which I have a tendency to do as my reading and interests are pretty broad).
Without further ado, let me jump right to it. In this piece, I argue the following:
Creation care is woefully inadequate for addressing the current global existential crisis we face with climate. What we need is a complete overhaul of our relationship with nature, one that can only come if we are willing to listen to other religious traditions.
There are a number of reasons why that is the case but the main one is that creation care fails to re-connect us with nature. It also fails to challenge the glaring millennial-old blind spot of anthropocentrism, embedded in Christian theology from the very beginning. In short, if we are serious about meeting this climate challenge, we must put humanity back in its place: right in the middle of nature.
Photo by Alesia Kazantceva on Unsplash
The Climate Challenge
What else could be said about this topic? Yet, allow me to frame this one more time. Firstly, if you are not convinced humans are affecting climate, well, I have no time to prove that to you. Go look up the science and then draw your own conclusions. Secondly, for those of you anxious about this topic, take solace: every crisis is an opportunity. Yes, the crisis is real and yes, we caused it. This is, however, no reason to despair and give up. Instead, it is an opportunity to embrace as an invitation (albeit with serious consequences if we reject it) to change our relationship with this planet.
The problem is not in the Bible per se but in the Christian anthropology that developed afterward. The Genesis creation story may lend itself to ideas of appropriation and abuse, however, the central problem lies elsewhere. I am talking about Imago Dei, the Latin term for the idea that we are God’s mirror image. Why is that a problem? By trying to elevate humans to the pinnacle of Creation, just slightly below God and angels, theologians set us on that (sorry for the cliche) dreaded slippery slope of human worship. More specifically, we fell prey to the sin of anthropocentrism. Our current age, calls for a re-definition if not a full abandonment of this concept.
We have been so obsessed with putting God in God’s place that we became blind to our unacceptable disdain for other living beings. If there is such a thing as white and Christian supremacy, then well, there is also human supremacy that goes unnoticed. This climate change is a real opportunity for us to step down from our human-centric altar so we may worship God on the dusty ground, right along with all nature.
Creation Care
The concept of Creation care is not very old. Most likely started being circulated in the late 80s as some Christians finally started catching up to what environmentalists were already saying. It was a way to tie theology with environmental concern. While well-intentioned and much needed, the move towards creation care falls short in many accounts.
First, it leaves the ghost of Image Dei undisturbed and unchallenged. If at first, Creation care indicts us as the villain, it also elevates us as the heroes – the caretakers that will reverse the climate crisis. The onus stays on the human and creation is still nothing more than a piece of property that must be cared for.
Second, it does little to reconnect us with nature. This is probably the biggest problem of our current crisis. In a technological age, we have grown irreversibly disconnected from nature, and in turn from our humanness. People out of nature are, well, less human. This disconnection is also what makes behavioral change so difficult. We simply are not feeling directly the impact we are making in the biosphere. That is, in big part, because when you live your life in climatized indoor places nature becomes as alien as it can be.
Visiting Shamans
If Creation Care is not the path, where do we go from here? Well, a good starting point is Genesis 2:7, reminding us that we came from dust. That is, we are part of the Earth, not an alien being that descended on it. We are not caretakers, but earth itself and connected to all beings on this planet. We are an extension of it. Before appointing ourselves responsibilities, we must first recognize our earthiness.
That’s a start but not enough to repair the damage of centuries of misguided theology. Unfortunately, the path of repentance must lead us out and beyond Christian tradition. It starts by humbly recognizing that while our tradition bears witness to our connectedness to the earth, it has made it mostly an afterthought. We must look for those that have better emphasized this reality in their belief and practice. Traditions that preceded and survived the contamination of Modernity and its nature-severing effects. Traditions that Christendom has also violently tried to suppress.
Once we open up to learn from other traditions, the possibilities are multifold. One of them is to sit at the sweat lodge and learn from the First Nations of the Americas. The very people displaced by our arrival on this continent may very well offer the wisdom needed to guide us back to the God of nature. Not through romanticization or appropriation, we should humbly sit in their circles silently with an attentive ear. Only then may we have a chance to hear the whisper of God calling us back to nature over the deafening sounds of modern technology.
Conclusion
Learning from First Nations’ religion is only one of the many paths to move beyond creation care. The good news is that there are many options here. Yet all of them require a significant shift in theology where special revelation is no longer the exclusive property of the Judeo-Christian tradition. It requires a recognition that the Bible or the traditions emanating from it alone may not be enough to save us from ourselves. It calls for an openness to respectfully incorporate concepts from other religions.
Are we up to the challenge? I certainly hope so and our planet prays it so.
