The
Land is Crying for Justice
A
discussion document on Christianity and environmental justice in South Africa
Background
The
Land is Crying for Justice reflects
on the role of Christians in the struggle for environmental justice in the South
African context. This document is the product of an extensive process of
consultation and was finalised at a workshop that was held on 29 April 2002 in
Johannesburg. The workshop was administratively organised by the Ecumenical
Foundation of Southern Africa (EFSA) and was attended by church leaders,
representatives from various ecumenical organisations and consultants with a
specific interest in the environmental responsibility of the church. A list of
the participants at this workshop is added as an appendix to the document.
The
Land is Crying for Justice should
be understood as a discussion document rather than as a finished product. The
purpose of the document is to invite Christians in South Africa to participate
in a process of reflection, discussion, education, confession and action
on issues of environmental justice. It offers a resource and a stimulus that may
help Christians to engage in the struggle for environmental justice.
In using
the first person plural ("we") to refer to Christians in South Africa
collectively, the document invites everyone to interact with it critically, to
accept ownership of its formulations where appropriate and to reflect on its
implications within their own contexts. All Christian churches, Christian
organisations and individual Christians in South Africa are invited to respond
to the document and to the issues that it raises by sending feedback to the
Network of Earthkeeping Christian Communities in South Africa (NECCSA). Contact
details that may be used in this regard are provided in the appendix.
Introduction
South
Africa is a land of extraordinary beauty, ecological diversity and abundance.
However, the land that God has entrusted to us is crying for justice.
During
the years of struggle against apartheid several ecumenical documents addressed
the issues of the day. The Letter to the People of South Africa (1968), the
Kairos Document (1985), the Evangelical Witness in South Africa (1986), the Road
to Damascus (1989) and the Rustenburg Declaration (1990) may be mentioned in
this regard. In the same ecumenical and prophetic spirit, this document seeks to
address the escalating destruction of our environment that results in immense
suffering for people, for other living species and for our land as a whole.
In
responding to this challenge Christians in South Africa may recognise,
acknowledge and learn from the many voices and contributions on environmental
concerns coming from all over the world – from churches and ecumenical
movements, from the Earth Charter movement, from other religious traditions and
from environmental organisations. The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)
- 26 August to 4 September 2002, Johannesburg - also challenges the churches in
South Africa to respond to these concerns.
The
overwhelming social agenda of the church in South Africa
The
church in South Africa is already stretched to the limit by the social
challenges it has to face. For many years we have been preoccupied with the
struggle for political liberation, democracy, social reconciliation and economic
reconstruction. In addition to the classic responsibilities of attending to
those who are poor, sick, hungry, homeless, abused, elderly, orphaned,
illiterate, deaf, blind, or handicapped, the church in South Africa has to
address numerous social problems such as poverty, unemployment, violence
against women and children, education, housing, health services, corruption and
crime, racial discrimination and now, most pressingly, the HIV/AIDS pandemic. As
the stark and daunting realities of HIV/AIDS are dawning on us we may well feel
overwhelmed by such a formidable social agenda. Many local churches are
completely engulfed in counselling and comforting those infected and affected by
HIV/AIDS, and burying those who have died of the disease.
In
addition to all these social and institutional problems, we will be confronted
in the future, probably with increasing urgency, with several lurking
environmental hazards. In spite of decades of scientific and media reporting on
environmental destruction, we are only now beginning to realise that many of the everyday problems in the lives of
the poor and marginalised in South Africa are intricately intertwined with environmental problems.
·
In general, the poor and marginalised are driven to live in
physical conditions that are often of a shocking environmental quality. The
poorest often live (and work!) in urban waste dumps. Others accept employment in
appalling environmental conditions with grave risks to health (e.g. smoke, toxic
gases, pesticides).
·
In rural areas, the scarcity of clean drinking water and firewood
are at root environmental problems. Forced removals under apartheid led to
over-population and thus to overgrazing, soil erosion and exhaustion and
depletion of water supplies. Many rural people resort to poaching and forms of
deforestation as a survival strategy. This causes further environmental damage
and increases poverty, thus exacerbating the vicious circle.
·
In urban areas, people are often the victims of environmental
degradation caused elsewhere, for example by nearby industries. Before 1994
townships were often deliberately located on land that was not in demand. In
fact, most of the problems confronting people living in previously disadvantaged
areas are environmental problems - even though these are usually not recognised
as such. This is illustrated by the following examples:
q
The health
hazards caused by air pollution - either through nearby industries or through
braziers, and the burning of coal;
q
The
pollution of water supplies;
q
A very high
population density that characterises informal settlements;
q
Inadequate
sanitation;
q
A high
incidence of contagious diseases;
q
The visual
ugliness of pollution, leading to a lack of basic human dignity;
q
Regular
flooding or landslides;
q
A lack of
basic infrastructure;
q
Cutting of
trees for firewood in neighbourhoods;
q
The struggle
for political control over ever-scarcer resources.
Although
environmental degradation affects all human beings, it does not do so equally.
There is a growing recognition that the victims of environmental degradation are
also the victims of socio-economic injustice. These include various groups of
marginalised people on the economic periphery, e.g. indigenous peoples,
environmental refugees, women, children, the poor and workers in mines,
factories and on farms. Environmental injustices are indeed aggravated by
practises such as exploitative economic policies, racial polarisation, gender
discrimination and class inequalities.
Nevertheless,
we must acknowledge that the earth's health has not been a major concern of
churches in South Africa. For many of us, other social problems seem to demand
far more urgent attention than the hidden, often indirect and all too long-term
environmental concerns. Therefore we still speak of the environmental crisis
as a distant possibility that does not affect us directly and may even go away.
Many socially and economically marginalised South Africans view issues of nature
conservation as the hobby of an affluent, leisured minority who would like to
preserve the environment for purely aesthetic reasons and who seem more
concerned about wildlife than about the welfare of other human beings. The
nature conservation policies of the apartheid era provoked the suspicion that
conservation boils down to the establishment of game reserves for a privileged
few, often at the expense of the dislocation of local people. Others fear that
attention to environmental concerns may divert scarce human and financial
resources from the more pressing issues of poverty, HIV/AIDS, hunger and
employment. Indeed, finding employment now may seem far more urgent than the
long-term environmental impact of mining, manufacturing, business, farming,
forestry or fishing.
There
is, however, no need to add environmental concerns to the already over-crowded
agenda of local churches and ecumenical bodies. We need to realise that the
problems that we are faced with are all interconnected. When one starts to
address a specific concern, one is soon confronted with the impact of many other
concerns. The linkages between HIV/AIDS, poverty and the environment may serve
as an example. The ability of the immune systems of HIV-positive persons to
restrain the deadly virus is severely hampered by unhealthy living conditions
associated with poverty. All too often such living conditions are aggravated by
environmental factors. Perhaps it is more appropriate to regard the environment
as a dimension of
all other social concerns. The entire vision, life and
praxis of the church must therefore include an ecological dimension.
We
have to hear the cries for life …
We have
to hear the many cries for life clearly. We have to recognise that many people
are dying as a result of an unhealthy environment - even if the cause of the
problem is not always identified as such. We have to realise that we are on a
road to self-destruction. Already we see and experience the impact of ecological
destruction:
·
We breathe polluted air in most of our cities. Air
pollution in some provinces is, at times, as bad as the worst in the world.
Instead of being a revitalising breath of life and energy, such polluted air
causes respiratory diseases. We are particularly concerned about the health of
our children.
·
We realise that many South Africans still do not
have access to clean, safe drinking water. All too often our rivers are polluted
with toxic substances. Again, this has a direct impact on the health of millions
of South Africans.
·
We know that many of our people have been estranged
from their ancestral lands through colonialism, apartheid and economic
hardships. Others have been forcibly removed to overcrowded rural lands. The
population density is often too high to sustain the livestock and cultivation
taking place. People are longing for land and the land itself is crying out for
life.
·
We realise that our precious topsoil is being blown
away by the wind and washed into our rivers. Our land suffers from many erosion
scars. We are not sure that we will be able to produce enough food to feed all
our people. Moreover, we are worried about the nutritional value of the
processed food that we are buying.
·
We
acknowledge that the world’s ever-growing population places increasing
pressure on the provision of resources for life, such as clean water, air and
soil. The land cannot support the increasing demands placed on it.
·
We see the destruction of natural resources and
ecosystems in the name of development and job creation, but which are actually
motivated by greed and profit seeking.
·
We see the ugliness of mountains of garbage in our
backyards, streets, townships and rural villages. Everywhere we smell the stench
of burning rubbish.
·
We see rural women and girls walking ever-greater
distances to find firewood as indigenous forests and bushveld continue to
dwindle.
·
We know about the many health threats such as toxic
gases and pesticides to workers in factories, mines and on farms.
·
We wonder what the lasting effect of all the
poisonous substances around us will be on our own bodies.
·
We acknowledge with alarm and growing concern that
we are bringing about the extinction of countless creatures. Should we be leaving our children a world devoid of cheetah
or rhino, to name a fraction of threatened species?
·
We experience changes in our weather patterns and
we wonder why.
·
We fear the possibility of environmental disasters
that we only hear about in the media: nuclear hazards, the management of nuclear
waste, global warming and ozone depletion.
We now
know that human well-being is dependent on the well-being of the land. We need
to care for the land so that the land in turn can care for us. Most of us
realise that something is fundamentally wrong. We know intuitively that many of
our present practices will not be sustainable in the years ahead.
Indeed,
we have heard the cry of our land and all creatures who live from it for life.
However, it is also true that we have not yet heard the cry for life of other
living species clearly enough. We know that we have collectively, through
commercial farming, urbanisation and other "developments", destroyed
the habitats of other mammals, reptiles, fish, insects, birds, trees, plants and
numerous micro-organisms. As a result, many species are threatened with
extinction. This has happened almost imperceptibly as human hunger for land has
been legitimised in the name of "development" and progress. We have
been preoccupied with our need for food and profit and have not duly regarded
the damage caused by commercial agriculture. We are all too often oblivious of
the plight of domesticated animals – not to mention the ill-treatment that
household pets are often subjected to.
We
realise that …
We
realise that these cries for life have to be understood within the context of
the complex socio-economic realities of our times, which are strongly influenced
by globalisation. While we recognise the reality of globalisation, it should not
be driven just by a culture of greed for the benefit of the already affluent
minority of the world's population. Other concerns also need to be addressed,
such as the widening gap between the rich and the poor, the need for economic
"development" in low income countries, particularly in Africa, the
legacy of colonialism, the dominance of neo-liberal capitalism, the role played
by trans-national corporations and by institutions such as the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organisation, the debt trap, the
legacy of "development" and development aid, and the current global
economic order as a whole.
We
realise that these issues are highly complex and that all analyses remain
provisional. Nevertheless, there are a number of concerns that must be
highlighted:
·
Environmental
justice:
Concerned citizens all over the world have come to the conclusion that the
current economic dispensation is exploiting people and the biophysical
environment alike. It is indeed crucial to comprehend the link between economic
injustice and environmental destruction. The struggle for environmental justice
seeks to challenge the abuse of power that results in the situation that
marginalised people have to suffer the effects of environmental damage caused by
the greed of others, especially the powerful. It seems clear to us that the
present economic order perpetuates the unequal access to natural resources and
contributes towards environmental destruction.
·
Limits to
growth: There
are ominous signs that the exploitation of renewable and non-renewable natural
resources will continue well into the future. Our land, once luxuriant and verdant, our most valuable natural resource,
has been exploited ruthlessly. Few politicians and economists seem to
recognise the reality of limits to (industrial) growth. Growth
is seen as the key to create sufficient wealth for the ever-increasing needs of
our people, even
when the demands are ever increasing with burgeoning population growth.
They argue that the size of the proverbial cake must be enlarged or otherwise
any discussions concerning the cutting and distribution of the cake will remain
meaningless. The classic question as to how to provide justly for everyone in
the face of a basic scarcity receives a simple answer in this paradigm: by
producing more and more.
However, we have to realise that
unlimited growth is
ultimately not possible on a finite planet. It will simply not be possible for a
growing population to enjoy ever-higher levels of consumption. The real limits
to the earth's carrying capacity preclude both unlimited growth in human
population and an increased consumption of the earth’s resources. Moreover,
there are limits to the earth's ability to absorb the waste products of our
economic activities. It will not be possible for every person on earth to adopt
the wasteful use of resources that the world's affluent minority currently
enjoys. Of course, this assessment raises numerous issues of justice and equity.
While the standard of living of the world's poorest billion people must clearly
be raised, the affluent will have to accept living within planetary limits.
·
Sustainable
development:
The World Council of Churches (WCC) helped to draw the attention of the
global community to the need for sustainability. At its Nairobi assembly in 1975
the WCC called for a "Just, Participatory and Sustainable Society".
The social agenda of the church was reformulated at the 1983 Vancouver meeting
with the motto "Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation".
This emphasis on sustainability has to be understood within the context
of the "limits to growth" debate at that time. Since the 1980s
"sustainability" has become a key concept in environmental
discussions all over the world. Against the myth that economic growth can be
sustained without qualification, many have called for "sustainable
development". The word "development" helped to draw attention to
issues of justice and to the plight of the world's poor. Sustainable development
is, in the famous definition of the United Nations Commission on Environment and
Development, "development that meets the needs of the present, without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
Unfortunately,
the notion of sustainable development has often been abused. It has become a
euphemism used by entrepreneurs for "business as usual", i.e. an
emphasis on economic growth, qualified by some environmental cautions. When
faced with a choice between development and a sustainable environment, the
interests of developers and entrepreneurs (who can often provide short-term
economic gain in terms of employment) regularly seems to be given a priority.
In the interest of economic growth, governments too tend to attach a higher
priority to development initiatives than to environmental protection.
Subsequently, a conceptual tension between "sustainability" and
"development" has emerged. The question is whether development can
be sustained if this rests on the assumption of continued economic growth. The
notion of "sustainable development" cannot be clarified if the ongoing
controversies around "development" are not resolved. This problem is
made more complex by the sometimes destructive impact of development aid.
·
Conflicting
voices: The
major cause of environmental destruction has often been disputed. Some argue
that the increasing human population poses the most serious threat to the
environment. Infinite population growth on a finite planet is certainly not
possible. Several major environmental problems are indeed linked to a human
population that exceeds the carrying capacity of the land, e.g. deforestation,
soil erosion, desertification, the depletion of wildlife stocks, poaching, etc.
This suggests that impoverished countries, especially in Africa, carry a special
responsibility to check their birth rates. In response, it has to be
emphasised that the poor are often not the cause but the victims of these forms
of environmental destruction. In many cases the exploitation of the environment
by the poor is a consequence of their poverty and their being exploited by the
economic structures that create the wealth of the rich and powerful. Others
therefore argue that the most serious environmental problems are caused by the
gluttonous consumption of those in affluent economic centres. Such high
levels of consumption lead to a range of environmental hazards such as the
depletion of resources, industrial pollution, mountains of garbage, toxic and
nuclear waste, acid rain, ozone depletion, global warming, etc. They maintain
that affluent countries have achieved their standard of living by depleting
their own environmental resources as well as those of the countries that they
colonised and exploited. It is estimated that the resources used and the waste
produced by a child raised in an affluent context is up to 30 times that of a
child raised in rural Africa.
These
observations again raise major concerns of justice and equity. In South Africa
the environmental impact of an affluent lifestyle needs to be highlighted,
particularly in the light of severe economic inequalities and because of the
potentially destructive economic power, technological sophistication and
decision-making power of the affluent. The poor are often forced to exploit the
environment to survive while the affluent can afford to be environmentally
concerned, even though they have a far greater environmental impact than the
poor. It is nevertheless clear that all forms of exploitation of our land have
to be resisted. We have to address the pervasive industrial rape of the earth by
the affluent and the crude deforestation and degradation of the land by
the poor, especially in marginal rural areas.
·
Consumerist
lifestyles: We
have to acknowledge that our South African society is characterised by a
wastefulness of precious resources and the over-consumption of some alongside
the deprivation of others. The insatiable demands of the affluent all too often
lead to an egocentric lifestyle, overindulgence and selfish pleasure seeking.
Many of us have become preoccupied with money and with a demand for material
possessions that is seemingly limitless and often insidious: the more one has
the more one wants. Sadly, not only the affluent, but also the poor are
caught in the trap of consumerism. Through exposure to the advertising industry,
lucrative "competitions", lotteries and casinos the poor long for
material possessions that they have little hope of procuring. The desire to
have, more often fuelled by the advertising industry, saddles those who can
least afford it with mounting debts. Such a culture of consumerism can only lead
to the fragmentation of community life and to spiritual emptiness. Moreover, it
is extremely wasteful and environmentally destructive. We must realise that the
earth can satisfy the needs of all, but not the greed of those bent on insane
consumption.
We
acknowledge that …
We must
admit that we have not fulfilled our responsibility and prophetic obligation to
promote the well-being of the whole earth community. In fact we have each,
wittingly or unwittingly, contributed to environmental destruction both in what
we have done and what we have left undone. We have condoned or closed our eyes
to practices that are harmful to people, other living species and the earth
community. We confess that we have all too often, each in our own way, been part
of the problem and seek God's forgiveness in this regard.
As South
African Christians each of us has to examine his or her own conscience before
God in considering the following questions:
·
Have we
polluted God’s precious resources such as water, soil and air?
·
Have we
stood aside while some have been denied access to these gifts of God?
·
Have we
legitimised and allowed others to legitimise economic activities and policies
that drained and destroyed the integrity of our natural resources (e.g. through
mining, industries, agriculture and over-fishing)?
·
Have we
really allowed other living species the space to flourish?
·
Have we
become enticed by the lure of wealth and power and have we condoned the human
greed and consumerism that so often governs our own lives?
·
Have we been
enticed by a throw-away society that pollutes the human environment with
reckless abandon?
·
Have we
abused the land that God has entrusted to us?
·
Have we
shown disrespect for the sanctity of life, both human and other forms of life?
We
have to re-examine our theologies …
The
challenges posed by environmental degradation also require us to re-examine our
theologies. We must admit that we have not always remained faithful to the
gospel in this regard. We have not remained prophetically alert to discern the
signs of the time.
·
We have
adopted and defended a notion of stewardship that allows for an aggressive
domination of the earth community. As keepers of the land we have to learn that
we do not own the land, that we cannot use and abuse the land for our own
purposes.
·
We have
usurped the authority of God and put ourselves as the centre of creation. We
have regarded the created order as being there for the benefit of humans only.
We have regarded ourselves as the crown of creation but we have brought misery,
not joy, to the earth. We have to learn that a position of responsibility
implies service, not domination.
·
We have
allowed theologies to flourish that disengage God from the world, that are
preoccupied with the soul and that disregard what is bodily, that look for
salvation from the world and not of the world, that long for what is heavenly
and that do not cherish the gift of the earth. We have to learn to re-integrate
the Christian doctrines of creation, sin, providence, salvation and the final
destiny of creation with one another.
·
We have
legitimised male-centred attitudes and practices and have remained silent in the
face of the exploitation and rape of women, children and the earth.
·
In
struggling to establish a culture of human rights we have not established a
culture that considers the rights of other living beings.
·
In our
search for a liberating, contextual theology we have not given sufficient
attention to developing an ecological theology. In our struggle for freedom we
have neglected a concern for the liberation of all of creation.
We
affirm our faith …
God's
creative, nurturing, redemptive and innovative love for the whole of creation
forms an integral part of the self-understanding of the Christian tradition.
Affirming that the earth belongs to God, the Old Testament prophets hoped
that God's reign would be established all over the earth. This hope included
God's dwelling with the people of God, the forgiveness of sin, the spiritual
transformation of people, the conversion of nations, the establishment of
justice and peace, and the transformation of nature. The New Testament proclaims
that God has acted in Jesus Christ to fulfil this hope. Through the death
and resurrection of Christ, God has overcome the effects of sin and evil to heal
the broken creation. The church lives in the hope of the final redemption
of creation in the new heaven and the new earth.
We will
not be able to ensure a sustainable future in South Africa unless we ourselves
are sustained and nourished by a new vision. For Christians, this has to be a
vision of God's abundant grace. Perhaps the Christian conviction that "The
earth belongs to God may provide us with a beautiful and stimulating vision that
can inspire us in our responsibility towards earthkeeping. The earth in all its
beauty, splendour and fragility has an intrinsic worth as part of God's
creation. All Christians in South Africa have to remind themselves of the
radical implications of this vision.
·
In the
struggle for a democratic political order
we are still challenged to maintain a vision of a free, non-racist, non-sexist
society in which every citizen may participate and contribute towards decision
making at all levels of society. If the earth belongs to God, domination of one
person or group over another is unacceptable and has to be resisted.
·
The vision
that the earth belongs to God calls for a just economic order, free from greed, domination, exploitation, and
manipulation. The land and its means of production ultimately belong to God, not
to any one of us. The produce of the land and the well-being of all its
creatures are in God's hands. The rules that we establish for God's household
through the economy have to reflect God's love for the whole earth and God’s
compassion for those that suffer.
·
The
resistance against all forms of human domination is important in every sphere of
social life. If the earth belongs to
God, then no one has the right to dominate and abuse other people. Instead, we
are called to cultivate mutuality and equality in marriage relationships, mutual
respect between parents and children, and free and open participation in social
institutions. Our social well-being is dependent on the emergence of a vibrant civil
society.
·
The vision
that the earth belongs to God has important ecological
implications. It calls for a sustainable community of all living beings.
This implies the need for a healthy ecosystem. It also requires a new vision
of the place of humanity within the whole of nature. The relationship between
humanity and nature cannot be one of domination and exploitation. Instead, a
new vision of
mutual enhancement, respect and equity is
called for.
·
The vision
that the earth belongs to God remains a thoroughly religious vision. It challenges any rival powers, authorities,
ideologies, idols or gods, seeking to establish domination or control over
others. The Christian vision is that the origin, life and destiny of the earth
are in God's hands.
In a
context of widespread anxiety about the future, the vision that the earth is not
of our own making emerges with new power and significance.
We
recognise our responsibilities …
We
recognise that the church as the carrier of this vision can make a profound
contribution to foster a just and sustainable society. The church in South
Africa, in particular, is in a unique position to play an important role in this
regard. There are three important reasons for this:
·
The church
is one of the organisations in South Africa that can make a difference. This is
because local Christian communities enjoy trust from people at grassroots
level - more than any political party, labour union or community organisation. Together,
Christian churches indeed form the largest, most influential and most active
organisation in the country.
·
The church
is a unique source of moral leadership.
From the time of the prophets, God has inspired men and women with moral vision
and courage to call for the establishment of God’s justice and righteousness.
There have been notable examples in our own country of people who fearlessly
stood for what is right. The same
prophetic courage is needed today in the face of environmental destruction.
·
The Biblical
roots of the church and the history of Christianity is full of examples which
can be retrieved to support the kind of ecological vision which is required today to face the ecological
crisis.
We
acknowledge that we have not always realised our responsibility and the enormous
potential of Christian churches in South Africa, despite their many
shortcomings, to make a difference towards the well-being of the whole earth
community.
We
commit ourselves to …
We
commit ourselves to revisit every aspect of Christian life in the light of the
challenges posed by our environment. We have to foster an ecological form of
liturgy, spirituality, pastoral care, healing, mission, education, discipleship
and stewardship of land, particularly church land. We have to help address
numerous environmental issues at a personal, community, national and
macro-economic level.
We call
upon all Christians in South Africa to commit themselves …
At a
spiritual level:
·
To an
integrated spirituality that acknowledges God’s creative, nurturing,
corrective, salvific and innovative love for the whole of creation and not only
for humanity;
·
To attend to
environmental concerns in the celebration of liturgy, Christian education,
pastoral care and the stewardship of land, particularly church land or land
owned by Christians;
·
To read the
Bible with an ecological sensitivity, to discover that the earth and all its
creatures are intimately interwoven with God's loving concern for humanity;
At a
personal level:
·
To use and
share the earth's resources wisely, to minimise the use of non-renewable energy
sources and to search for alternative energy sources;
·
To reduce
pollution and to help recycle waste products;
·
To educate
people, especially children, to respect all forms of life and to consider the
impact of their lifestyles on the environment.
·
To
rediscover the virtues of simplicity and frugality and to challenge the culture
of greed, materialism, hedonism and consumerism;
At a
local and national level:
·
To
contribute wherever we live and work towards the healing of the whole earth
community;
·
To speak out
about local economic and environmental injustices, wherever they are caused by corruption and the economic exploitation of the poor and
dispossessed;
·
To
collaborate actively with other local organisations that share similar
environmental objectives;
·
To call on
local governments to address emerging local environmental problems immediately;
·
To
participate constructively in the debates in civil society on environmental
controversies, including, for example, the re-launching of nuclear
programmes, food security, the production of genetically modified foods and
seeds, fishing quotas, the fluoridation
of our water supplies, local waste management and the construction of various
roads, dams and other "development" projects.
At a
global level:
·
To seek a more just, equitable and sustainable
economic order;
·
To speak out
against and to resist economic and environmental injustices wherever
they are caused by the forces of globalisation, unfair trade agreements, the
management of Third World "debt" and Structural Adjustment Programmes;
·
To confront
those in positions of power in local and national governments, inter-governmental
bodies, business and industry, trans-national corporations and institutions such
as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade
Organisation with the environmental impact of their decisions;
·
To resist
threats of militarisation, to help healing the damage caused by war and to work
for peace and justice on earth.
·
To nurture
and foster the renewal of life and to resist the many threats to life;
·
To pray for
the healing of the earth.
We
therefore pray …
We give thanks to You our
God for life
for
the wonder of creation
and
its amazing variety.