All Comments for: What Cizik's Resignation Means for Creation Care | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > December (Web-only)

Christianity Today, December (Web-only), 2008 |

What Cizik's Resignation Means for Creation Care

While some celebrate, others lament advocate's departure from National Association of Evangelicals.

Sarah Pulliam | posted 12/16/2008 02:26PM

Conservative evangelicals who saw environmentalism as alarmism welcomed Richard Cizik's resignation as the National Association of Evangelicals' Washington lobbyist last week.

But evangelicals and scientists ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 28 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

JohnS

Posted: December 18, 2008 11:32 AM

To me the question about global climate change is purely a factual one, is our carbon output contributing or not? If it is, we owe a moral duty to the God created Earth and future generations to do something about it. If it is not, at the very least cutting fossil fuel use (particularly imported oil) in favor of cleaner and/or renewable energy makes sense from an economic and strategic point of view. The SHAME in this is Cizik resigned not over that, but that he dared to have an open mind on gay civil unions. Maybe he's wrong, but that the NAE can't even allow for discussion of dissenting points of view is truly disturbing. This is not abortion where arguably babies die, it's givng gay couples the same legal rights as straight couples, and while there are arguments against it, at least it's arguable. I seem to recall a certain Jewish carpenter who got in a lot of trouble with the orthodoxy of his day for thinking outside the box as well...

Bob	Posted: December 18, 2008 9:30 AM

Even if there is no concrete evidence that global warming is created by burning fossil fuels [ergo: man made], can anyone argue that we should burn even increasing amounts without concern? Certainly no one could argue that burning fossil fuels is a good thing and should be encouraged. In light of that, care for the creation mandates that we do what we can to maintain the planets well being and trust God to take care of factors beyond our control.

Howard Pepper

Posted: December 18, 2008 1:12 AM

There is no benefit to people polarizing on the question of whether or not global warming or "climate change" is man-made. Certainly we know that temperatures and climate patterns have fluctuated a lot over times past, when humans were either not present or only in small numbers, having little environmental impact. What that may or may not say about today's situation is a separate issue. So in terms of Cizik's "green" advocacy, is it not biblical as well as prudent for Christians to advocate that we put high priority on creating as little pollution as possible? And doesn't that hold regardless of who is right on extra CO2 in the atmosphere? I can't see that the issue is either protecting the economy OR creating energy more cleanly and renewably.... Wouldn't a "green revolution" have at least as much benefit for the economy as the ineffective moves made so far? And in the process, be a conservative move -- conserving all we can of non-renewable or slowly renewing resources?

Kaisen

Posted: December 17, 2008 9:02 PM

"Creation Care" Thank you kindly to you servants with feet of clay. Is that the dumb cluck phrase you have coined to empathize the seeker sensitive pew warmers just like "Global Warming" is supposed to invoke the secular dumb clucks into lock step? Please work on a new phrase, the cat is out of the bag and "Creation Care" will now be the clue that the harlot of Babylon is propagandizing towards the low hanging fruit that doesn't understand the use of language. Has anyone ever heard of Jesus? Or is the presupposition about environment more important?

jacarch

Posted: December 17, 2008 3:15 PM

Evangelicals do not build upon global warming as the principle for appropriate stewardship of the physical environment. We do build upon our identity as humans created in God's image and given the responsibilty of caring for this planet. We do not need political agendas to obey and honor our God. in the long run, we lose credibility and truth in our actions by following the currently correct political agenda. We do seek to protect, improve and enjoy the natural gifts God has given us.

Gary James

Posted: December 17, 2008 2:52 PM

Why do we as Christians ignore scientific evidence. the vast majority of data, over 95%, indicates that man does significantly contribute to global warming. While it is uncertain the exact degree of this effect it is clearly very significant. Whatever the exact degree of effect, does it not make sense do whatever we can to stem global warming before Miami is under 3 feet of water and polar bears only live in zoos. As to those who fear that fighting global warming might cause economic hardship, there is every reason to believe that those who create green technologies will prosper. Should they not be American Evangelicals? Moreover, doing the right thing is supposed to be costly. Who said "count the cost"? The lesson of Mr. Cizic's forced resignation is do not voice dissent. If you disagree with the "old guard" keep quiet. Is this really our belief, our stand on freedom of thought, freedom of speech?

Ernest

Posted: December 17, 2008 1:26 PM


Clarification: It was NAE President Leith Anderson, not most-recently-quoted economist Bill Anderson, who said in an earlier interview that the NAE will still support creation care.

Charitas

Posted: December 17, 2008 1:03 PM

This article is rather poor, not really news, not really commentary, not really a summary. Global warming will be the buzz word hot button that will set off this blog (this planet is burning! heil Hitler!) One is not necessarily a poor steward just for refusing to drink the 'global warming' Cool-Aid. When our Lord comes to judge this planet, who is going to demand from him an environmental impact statement for bowling ball sized hailstones, the sea turning to blood, and the sun scorched earth?

Fernando Guilarte

Posted: December 17, 2008 11:45 AM


This is a clear case of Christians sticking to the extremes rather than finding balance at the center. Environmentalism is one of those areas where maintaning a balance and a unbiased view is almost impossible. I do not know what Cizik's position on homosexuality was before joining the environmental cause but I guess one has something to do with the other.

Don	Posted: December 17, 2008 9:52 AM

Cizik resigned because of a moral issue which has noting to do with the environment. It's unfortunate that the good he did may not accomplish as much as he wanted. The jury is still out on the causes of Global Warming and one must not get on their horse and charge windmills before all the evidence is gathered. If global warming is man made then definitely it must be addressed. If it is due to natural cycles in the weather patterns than billions of dollars could be channeled elsewhere such as feeding the hungry and aleviating poverty. Let's not ecuse moral inconsistancy with the environment regardless of who espouses morally lax values.

EEF	Posted: December 17, 2008 8:23 AM

There seems to be a great deal of polarization in this article and in the debate on global warming. As I see it Cizik's resignation was not because of his stand on global warning or "creation care", but for his statements regrading shifting his position on civil unions fo same-sex couples. I applaud his efforts on calling attention to the envoirnment, and the need to be good stewards of the world God has made us stewards over. However, I believe Cizik has failed to be a good steward of somthing that God has indicated is very important to the well being to the well being of the people that inhabit the earth. Namely the marriage reltionship between a man and a women. Any "civil union between same-sex couples" is, according to scripture, and abomination before the Lord, and polutes the social well being of civilization. We are called to be good stewards of all He has created.

Jeff M

Posted: December 17, 2008 6:14 AM


Amen, Kirk! Perkins' statement was absolutely ludicrous, but par for the course.

RJR_fan

Posted: December 17, 2008 3:09 AM


Once again, CT demonstrates its editorial mandate -- "trendier than thou."

Stuart, New Zealand

Posted: December 17, 2008 2:20 AM

I'm probably like most evangelicals in believing that Richard Cizik is wrong about gay civil union, & I agree that this view disqualifies him from leadership in a group which is meant to represent a broad range of evangelical viewpoints. But to somehow try to link views on gay marriage with basic commonsense environmentalism makes me wonder what planet Mr Perkins lives on! Being theologically conservative is not the same thing as being politically right wing, and you are allowed to use your brain & not just parrot back the views of right wing extremists & Fox News. Leaving aside fluctuations in temperature, why not consider the fact that CO2 is entering the oceans at a rate never before recorded & changing the pH of the water so rapidly that many species may die. There is very good evidence that our increase in CO2 emissions is the cause. In Genesis 2:15 we are called to care for the Earth. It's not our sole aim, but neither can we ignore this call of God.

ML	Posted: December 16, 2008 11:15 PM

As important as environment might be it takes second place right behind poverty. We have people who are willing and able to work and we have needs. The thing that's missing is money. I don't understand why our governments don't print money and pay people to develop infrastructure and produce the goods that are needed. In North America we need energy, we could be building energy generating facilities such as solar and wind, all we need is money. It seems to me money is more important than people in western civilization, money is nothing but a tool for easier trading, if we have the manpower and the need than we simply should put more money into circulation but instead of giving it to the banks we need to give it to those who produce the goods. Bankers and money managers don't contribute a dime to our economy, we may need a few of them but they certainly have proven that they don't deserve to be paid any more than a good tradesman. We need to stop gambling in the market place.

ounbbl

Posted: December 16, 2008 11:07 PM

In the history of our planet, ice ages came and went. What caused to warm it up to have ice melt away? Unless we humans detonates megatons of hydrogen bombs several to destroy our civilization as we know, I'm not sure anyone has proved global warming is human by-product. It does not mean we as human as well as Christians don't have to be concerned about our environment and our waste of resources and mad clamor for economy progress and prosperity. On the other hand, so-called ultra environmental activism is another agenda driven political ideology work of the flesh. We Christians have nothing to do with conservative vs. liberal political propaganda.

Chuck Milliken

Posted: December 16, 2008 11:05 PM

Has the planet warmed up over the past century? Yes. Have human efforts caused this to any significant degree? I think the answer is clearly no. The correlation between fluctuations in the sun's energy output and global temperature is simply too close to be a coincidence. Environmentalism is simply worshipping the creation, rather than the Creator, and it is done for political reasons among those who know the science, and is an alternative to worshipping the true God for those who don't.

Dee	Posted: December 16, 2008 9:43 PM

It seems to me that the National Association is very flawed. Some body needs to seek God's face in electing leaders. You are either blind, dumb or without discernment. First their was the "Pastor" from New Life Church in Colorado, now Richard Cizik who also seems like a fruit cake. Get some genuine believers as leaders who would bring glory to the Kingdom of God. You might be fooled but God is not. Get a grip.

lewsta

Posted: December 16, 2008 9:07 PM

Recorded temperatures HAVE been steadily increasing for two decades. Why? The stations that we rely on for these data have been compromised by encroaching development.. parking lots, heating units, buildings, car parks, and have recorded artificially increased numbers. www.surfacestations.org has proven this. Also, NOAA have applied a "correction algorithm" to the amassed data that skews it inaccurately. We project those skewed data to the rest of the planet, and of course temps have "increased". And the cause IS man made. Not ONE SHRED of evidence supports the pseudo-science that CO2 is a "greenhouse gas", yet one cannot read a newspaper without mention of this "fact" as if true. Good stewardship of our world IS a right thing, but often would be improved by leaving behind this AGW nonsense, much of which increases the environmental load foisted upon us by the green shamans of "science". I can see this as an "issue" for the church, just as throwing off the Brits was 240 years ago.

MC	Posted: December 16, 2008 8:22 PM

How is it that so many people have accepted this junk science? It's factual that North American cattle flatulence produces far more greenhouse gases than all our motor vehicles combined. And we only have 14% of the cattle population of the world. The Bufallo population a couple hundred years ago was almost as many head as we have current cattle and how long were they here? How is it that the animals can produce orders of magnitude more greenhouse gases over the last few thousand years than humans ever have and yet 'we' are responsible for so called 'global warming'? Plus significant numbers of measurements and scientists express doubt about the occurence of warming - use your Google folks. John G. has it right.

Karen

Posted: December 16, 2008 6:46 PM

Dear Mr. Perkins - I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, and I believe that global warming is caused by humans. How is my belief connected with the moral issues of the day, i.e abortion, gay marriage, etc.? Also, where in Scripture does it say that a Christian must believe that global warming is occurs naturally? Just because someone believes that global warming is caused by humans does not mean that the person is on a slippery slope morally. Mr. Perkins needs to stick to speading the Gospel.

David Warren (Registered User)

Posted: December 16, 2008 6:01 PM

Is Creation care biblical? Yes. Is the situation man-made? Well, yes, in the sense that it was the sin of Adam which led to a despoiled Creation to begin with? Is global warming real? It scarcely matters, since God is going to destroy the Earth, anyway. Is global-warming hysteria called for? Absolutely not. It is more deception, leading up to the time when a world leader will seem to have all the answers for all the problems, probably including environmental ones. Secular scientists, their toadies in the media, Al Gore and his sycophants, and their "useful idiot" allies, the "Christian Left" (yes, I'm talking about you, Jim Wallis) will continue to deceive the populace in their efforts to plunge us into a Third World society. -- From John G. (NOT David Warren! What is wrong with this site?!)

Jorge

Posted: December 16, 2008 5:47 PM


What will Cizik's Resignation mean for creation care? What an absurd question. I didn't litter before. I organic garden. I recycle. I will continue with or without Mr. Cizik. If they choose Genghis Khan to replace him I will still work on being a good steward. Again, it's a useless, silly question.

P.	Posted: December 16, 2008 5:35 PM


What utter nonsense on the part of Tony Perkins. The issue of global warming and Christianity are not related at all. Mr. Perkins needs to go back and study his Bible. Christians are absolutely free to believe any way they'd like on the subject of the environment. Perkins is like the Pharisees and others who heaped nonsense on to the Law, adding to it things that God did not intend.

Kirk Rowland (Registered User)

Posted: December 16, 2008 4:17 PM

Amy, Perkins just doesn't want Christians to start thinking like Libruls on any issue. It's like the domino theory: if you start straying from the right wing authoritarian status quo on any one issue you may just re-think other issues and draw your own conclusions rather than just blindly follow the ideas that good christians are supposed to believe. For example, you stop believing the Fox News line on global warming, and the next thing you know, you start questioning if the Iraq war and the Global War on Terror really is God's will.

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment