Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
February 10, 2010
Free Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2007 > March (Web-only)Christianity Today, March (Web-only), 2007  |   |  
Climate Change Is Here to Stay
Debate over global warming has only intensified since conservatives targeted Cizik.



ADVERTISEMENT

The evangelical debate over global warming has only intensified since Focus on the Family chairman James Dobson, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, and 23 other conservative evangelicals called for National Association of Evangelicals vice president for governmental affairs Richard Cizik to resign in March.

"Cizik and others are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time," read the March 1 letter to NAE board chairman Roy Taylor. "In their place has come a preoccupation with climate concerns that extend beyond the NAE's mandate and its own statement of purpose."

The letter claimed Cizik was unauthorized to speak for the 30-million-member NAE on global warming, which Cizik argues is central to the Christian mandate to care for creation. "If he cannot be trusted to articulate the views of American evangelicals on environmental issues," the letter read, "then we respectfully suggest that he be encouraged to resign his position with the NAE."

Yet irregularities surrounding the letter, postmarked March 5 and not received by Taylor until five days after Focus on the Family made it public, have prompted questions about the motives behind it. NAE interim president Leith Anderson said he first heard of the letter when reporters from Religion News Service and The New York Times called him on March 2 for comment.

"That didn't help the cause," said Jerald Walz, an NAE board member and vice president for operations at the Institute on Religion and Democracy, which has criticized Cizik. Walz was not involved in writing the letter, he said, but his concerns parallel it. "Unfortunately, it was delivered in a way that caused people not to receive it," Walz said.

Other critics of the letter cited its tone.

"I felt it was not in any way a productive or redemptive way to deal with the issue," said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Land was asked to sign the letter but declined.

"First of all, I don't think the way you treat people you disagree with is to publicly reprimand them and put their job in jeopardy," Land said. "It's not how Christians should treat each other."

But Land also expressed concern that Cizik's advocacy on global warming has led to the impression that the NAE has taken a stand when many evangelicals have not.

"I do think Rich [Cizik] is well in advance of his constituency on the issue," Land said. "I don't think there is anywhere near that kind of consensus on the issue, at least among the evangelicals I know. … They're not ready to accept it is a settled fact that human beings are the major cause of global warming."

Political Players

Consensus or not, evangelical political influence makes them an important player in the broader debate. At a February 7 meeting of a Senate subcommittee on global warming, subcommittee chairman Sen. Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn., and ranking member of full committee Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., both invoked evangelicals in their opening statements.

Lieberman cited Cizik and Jim Ball, executive director of the Evangelical Environmental Network, as examples of "prominent evangelical leaders" who believe the earth is "seriously imperiled by human behavior." Inhofe, who has called human-induced global warming "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," struck back with a "correction."

"As far as the evangelists' organization goes, I'm sure that neither of you are aware of this," said Inhofe, addressing Lieberman and Sen. John Warner, R-Va., "but the Richard Cizik you refer to is on his own, and I'm sure he's being well-rewarded for doing it. He has been rejected—his ideas—by the National Association of Evangelicals."

share this pageshare this page



E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 27 comments.See all comments
Mike Atkins (South Africa)   Posted: April 07, 2007 1:38 PM
As a Christian, I would prefer to see a little less "verbal warming", and a little more respect. We all agree that we must be good stewards of the earth What we differ over is the most appropriate means to accomplish this. The very first issue is whether and how much the earth is warming - we seem to agree that it is, but maybe not the extent. Logically, the second issue is whether and how much human activity has contributed to this. Serious doubts have been raised, but it is difficult for the layman to know who to believe. How should we spend our resources to address the issue? Of prime importance is the extent to which poorer peoples will be affected. This imposes a duty (of love, not guilt) on the more well-off to care for those affected. Whether the world should spend on reducing carbon emissions or on dealing with the effects depends on the certainty of the link between increased CO2 and warming. Let us put more facts than rhetoric or interests on the table.

Felipe Roman   Posted: April 05, 2007 8:11 AM
I am amazed that this debate is even happening. I know many scientists and Christians do not agree regarding how creation happened in the past, but to question what is happening to nature in the present, namely global warming, and to call that "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people"... wow?!!??! The evidence, consensus and science regarding global warming is much more solid now than ever so to call it a "hoax" is either an incredibly ignorant or irrational comment to make... especially since its an international issue, not just an "American" issue. As a Christian I think we should not lose focus that our Christ calls us to love our neighbor and if the risks to our poorest and least-able-to-cope-with-them global neighbors are potentially great, why wouldn't we jump in and do something about it??? At the very least, look into it more if we're so suspicious. I hope the real reason for not acting is not that we are asking "who is our neighbor?" in our hearts.

Josh   Posted: April 04, 2007 10:17 PM
Wow, calm down, we can barely predict what the weather will be tomorrow yet we now call Climate Change Fact? Thats the same as saying so many people believe in evolution that it must be true... *sigh* Many Thanks to the mass media for this pleasant mess...

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search






















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Kyria.com
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com