Life Skills of a Sustainable Consumer

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

I had the opportunity to share in an online forum the life skills of a sustainable consumer. Given the time allotted, I came up with a list as shown in the picture. Let me briefly describe each one of these life skills.

Be a smart and wise spender. This a basic life skill that any one can practice at the earliest possible time. This simply means spending within one's means or income. Since we are now living in a VUCAD  (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, disruptive) world, our source of income is unstable, to say the least. Spending lower than what one earns is important to manage one's balance sheet. This can be done by applying sound financial management, such as buying only the essential items and saving for the future.

Invest in your future. Saving is not easy, especially if one has trouble making ends meet. But given an opportunity to save, this life skill is a must in preparation for one's future. The life expectancy among Filipinos is about 71 in 2020 compared to about 54 in 1950. Thus we need  safety nets as we advance in age, such as by investing in loan associations or cooperatives that provide higher annual interest earning, getting health insurance, creating a retirement fund, and by leading a healthy lifestyle. 

Reduce your ecological footprint. The country's supply of natural capital (biocapacity) is lower than the population's demand (ecological footprint). Thus, the Philippines has been on an ecological deficit since the 1960s. Our strategy under the new normal should include the "surgical operation" that Atty. Tony Oposa has been advocating -- CPR! This means conserving, protecting and restoring our life systems or natural resources. Some of the ways by which we can practice this life skill is by reducing, reusing and recycling products through zero waste management. Another way is by doing plant-based diet --more food derived from plants and less from animal products.

Practice ecocycle thinking. This is a higher form of life skill that builds on the previous ones. The reference document is nature itself and her laws. Francis Bacon said that "nature to be commanded must first be obeyed." Barry Commoner rephrased this as "nature knows best" in his four laws of ecology. Just as nature recycles every single drop of water, human beings should learn biomimicry to solve human problems. This life skill demands that the materials that society produces should be assimilated by the environment without damaging the natural capacities and services. It also challenges people to use more renewable resources and less non-renewable resources, to avoid stock wastes that require "garbage cemeteries" or landfills, as well as to turn away from a throw-away society that is driven by unbridled consumerism. 

Be a green consumer. Being a green consumer or a green purchaser is a life skill that requires a mindset that favors green products, eco products, products with green labels, organic products or products that have the lowest possible carbon dioxide equivalent footprint in the entire life cycle. As a sustainable consumer, one should avoid "willful ignorance" in choosing and buying items sold in the market place. Consumers have the power to influence the consumption and production patterns into something that approximate the infinity business model.

Invest in natural capital. One can develop this life skill through gardening, natural farming, tree planting, rehabilitating coral reefs, etc. As a sustainable consumer, one can also say no to products that are derived from environmentally destructive activities. At the community level, this can be done through sustainable development approaches like agroforestry, organic agriculture, community forestry, and by protected areas management, such as establishing marine sanctuaries and ecotourism sites. Investing in biocapacity or natural capital is a strategy that complements the reduction in ecological footprint.

Life Skill: Compassion

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

Compassion is hard to practice because our default mode is self protection. Anger occurs as the brain releases catecholamines that trigger a short-term burst of energy. J. Blair (2018) defines anger as “a response to a perceived threat to oneself or to another. It is a response to frustration”.

Anger is neither a pleasant experience nor a proper moment to make decisions. For sure, no one wants to work with an unpleasant person - the bearer of anger. To overcome anger, we redirect (not suppress) it. One way to redirect anger is by distraction — read a book, go to a beach, take care of your plants, or write a letter to the concerned person to express your frustration and then burn the paper or delete your file.

Another way is by reappraisal - listen, check the context, understand the events, etc. Reappraisal can help us become more compassionate. In the process we also train our brain — the supramarginal gyrus of our cerebral cortex — to differentiate our own emotional condition from that of other people. Thus, we have the power to manage anger and the capacity to practice compassion.

Let’s keep in mind Aristotle’s words of wisdom: “Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy.”

Life Skill: Personal Code of Conduct

 A. Salces Cajes, PhD

Also known as the moral code, code of honor, ten commandments or decalogue, the personal code of conduct states the ethical norms that guide you in deciding which decision or action is right or wrong. Such ethical norms represent the standards or ideals that you set for yourself. 

Your code serves as the terms of reference for your conscience when it makes an evaluation about the rightness or wrongness of an action, decision or behavior. If your code is consistent with your credo and values, then you gain confidence in the quality of your choices and actions.

Since your code represents the most sacred character of your being, it has a normative function --it regulates your conduct. In case you  violate your code, your conscience can trigger you to stop, repent or take a positive or affirmative action. It tells you to say sorry or repay an injury that has been done.

If there is such thing as honor among thieves, the right thing to do is for good men and women to have a superior set of moral compass to make this world or our communities, organizations, and homes better places to live in. 

Some examples of a code of conduct include the following:

• I shall abide by the principle of beneficence or ahimsa by doing good and avoiding evil;
• I shall protect my personal integrity at all times;
• I shall observe zero tolerance to corruption;
• I  shall treat and respect other people as my kapwa.

The True Decalogue by Apolinario Mabini is good source of a code of conduct:

First. Love God and your honor over all things: God, as the source of all truth, all justice and all activity; your honor, the only power that obliges you to be truthful, just and industrious.

Second. Worship God in the form that your conscience that God speaks to you, reproaching you for your misdeeds and applauding you for your good deeds.

Third. Develop the special talents that God has given you, working and studying according to your capabilities, never straying from the path of good and justice, in order to achieve your own perfection, and by this means you will contribute to the progress of humanity: thus you will accomplish the mission that God himself has given you in this life, and achieving this, you will have honor, and having honor, you will be glorifying God.

Fourth. Love your country after God and your honor, and more than you love yourself, because your country is the only paradise that God has given you in this life; the only patrimony of your race; the only inheritance from your ancestors; and the only future of your descendants: because of your country you have life, love and interests; happiness, honor and God.

Fifth. Strive for the happiness of your country before your own, making her the reigning influence for reason, justice and work; if your country is happy, you and your family will also be happy.

Sixth. Strive for the independence of your country, because you alone can have a real interest in her aggrandizement and ennoblement, since here independence will mean your own freedom, her aggrandizement your own perfection, and her ennoblement your own glory and immortality.

Seventh. In your country, do not recognize the authority of any person who has not been elected by you and your compatriots, because all authority comes from God, and as God speaks to the conscience of each individual, the person chosen and proclaimed by the consciences of all the individuals of a whole town is the only one that can exercise real authority.

Eighth. Strive that your country be constituted as a republic, and never as a monarchy: a monarchy empowers one or several families and lays the foundation for a dynasty; a republic ennobles and dignifies a country based on reason, it is great because of its freedom, and is made prosperous and brilliant by dint of work.

Ninth. Love your neighbor as you love yourself, because God has imposed on him and on you the obligation to help one another, and has dictated that he does not do unto you what he does not want you to do unto him; but if your neighbor is remiss in this sacred duty and makes an attempt on your life, your freedom and your priorities, then you should destroy him and crush him, because the supreme law of self preservation must prevail.

Tenth. Always look on your countryman as more than a neighbor: you will find in him a friend, a brother and at least the companion to whom you are tied by only one destiny, by the same happiness and sorrows, and by the same aspirations and interests.

Because of this, while the borders of the nations established and preserved by the egoism of race and of family remain standing, you must remain united to your country in perfect solidarity of views and interests in order to gain strength, not only to combat the common enemy, but also to achieve all the objectives of human life. (http://malacanang.gov.ph/8132-the-true-decalogue-by-apolinario-mabini/)

On Human Rights

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

The concept of human rights is usually traced to the year 539 BC when Cyrus the Great declared the freedom of the slaves saying that all human beings are equal in race and that they could choose the religion to believe in and practice. Indeed, it has a long and tumultuous history, but some countries are able to advance and protect human rights better than others.

So, what are human rights and why are they important?

Human rights are ultimately derived from the natural wants of human beings. The natural wants are inalienable and fundamental to every person. An act to deny the fulfillment of such natural wants would dehumanize a person. 

People, for instance, will not survive for a long time without water to quench their thirst. Thus thirst is a natural desire and quenching the thirst is a natural want. When someone denies the fulfillment of this natural want, the person will eventually die or cease to exist as a person. If someone limits access to water, then the affected persons will not be able to fully develop and realize their potential. In the process, they will become weak, unhealthy, susceptible to disease, and their mental development is affected; hence unable to make intelligent or wise decisions.

Natural wants are needs, and needs are part of our being. But some needs are more important than others, as thinkers like Abraham Maslow suggests. Others think that needs are fundamental and interrelated, and that there are needs that are common to all people regardless of time, race or place.

Through the State, the human needs are positively recognized and protected; hence, these human needs become human rights. Some States, however, are better than others in formulating and implementing the policies and laws to protect and promote human rights.

"Right" in Pilipino means karapatan. This implies something that is due to a person (nararapat), which a rational person is duty bound or morally obliged to fulfill (dapat tuparin). In Visayan, "right" means katungod that also implies a duty or moral obligation (katungdanan) to fulfill.

The idea that some rights are more important than others is generally acceptable. The challenge is how to operationalize or live out the reality that there are different types, limitations and possible conflicts of human rights.

Life Skill: Statement of Core Values

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

Your statement of core values naturally flows from the credo. Values are the bases by which you distinguish the right from wrong action. The core values are your “non-negotiables” regardless of the circumstance, time or place. As such, values can be understood as the ethical foundations of human actions, intentions and decisions.

One way of determining your core values is by listing down the major actions or decisions you have made in your life. Review the list and then identify the reasons why you choose such actions or decisions. These reasons are manifestations of your values, i.e., why you do the things you do.

Core values can help students in deciding the kind of future that they will create, the profession that they would like to pursue, or the organization that they would like to work for after graduation. For professionals, core values are determinants in choosing your lifestyle, workstyle, advocacy or friends.

Inventory of Core Values. Come up with a list of three to seven core values or your “non-negotiables”. Describe these core values so that they are clear to you and for other people. Make sure that these values are consistent with your credo. Examples of core values are the following:

· Catholic values: Sanctity of life; Fidelity in relationship

· Mulan (the Movie): Honor; Duty

· Knights (of King Arthur): Courage; Justice

· Leadership: Integrity; Empathy

· Islamic values: Honesty; Kindness

· Filipino values: Hospitality; Loyalty.

 Describe the Core Values.  By describing the core values, you articulate the meaning and implication of these values to yourself and to other people. Examples of descriptions of core value are the following:

·  Jose Rizal, Patriotism: "I wish to show those who deny us Patriotism that we know how to die for our country and convictions."

·  San Miguel Corporation, Sustainable Development: “We advocate sustainable development - We believe in using only what we need and integrating sustainability practices into our operations. Water stewardship, energy optimization and reducing waste are our key environmental priorities.”

·  Author, Obedience or Loyalty: “I will obey and follow the right management instructions to the best of my abilities. I will refuse and oppose instructions that my conscience could not accept.”

Life Skill: Personal Credo

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

A personal credo is a set of beliefs guiding your thoughts, behavior, and attitude. It may also consist of principles to live in life. The credo can be distilled from your faith, culture, tradition, upbringing, lessons gained, and experiences.

A credo is important because it serves as one's center of being. When you are exposed to different individuals, groups, experiences and ideas, you will also become susceptible to beliefs and principles that are different from your own.

"Find your center" is a healthy reminder when you are unsure about the decision to make or the action to take. This is especially true when you are confronted with options or temptations that will affect your future. 

In the end, you will have to live and deal with yourself. So, make sure that your personal credo is grounded on ideas and ideals that are consistent with the best available sources of knowledge and wisdom. As a quote, which is attributed to the Vedas, say: "At the center of our being is a truth that shines brighter than a thousand suns."

You may refer to the examples below in crafting your personal credo.

• I believe in karma -- that good and bad actions will respectively yield positive or negative consequences to me in the near or far future. -- Author
• I believe in the inherent goodness of human beings, the beauty of our planet and her creatures, the grandeur of the universe and the wisdom of the Creator. -- Author
• I believe that life has meaning and my search for that meaning challenges me to live life to the fullest. -- Author 
• I believe that someday people will "live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

From time to time, you need to revise or enhance your personal credo. In my case, I do it at least every year, each time I am facing a major decision to make, or when I read something that catches my attention. This poem entitled "To Have Succeeded" by Ralph Waldo Emerson is a good source of a personal credo:

To laugh often and much; To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; To earn the approbation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; To appreciate beauty; To find the best in others; To give of one's self; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to have played and laughed with enthusiasm and sung with exultation; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived -- this is to have succeeded."

Life Skills

by A. Salces Cajes, PhD

Life Skill refers to the right combination of knowledge, skill, attitude, and behavior that will help a person in coping with what the World Health Organization (WHO) describes as the "demands and challenges of everyday life." In Filipino, it simply means "Kakayahang Mamuhay". The context is right or proper living or "mamuhay ng maayos, mabuti at matiwasay". These terms, of course, need to be properly defined. But at this point, let's just use these terms as we know them -- i.e., not in the bad sense.

As I gain experience and knowledge, including hopefully wisdom, I'm sharing some insights on Life Skills that anyone can apply in their respective professional or life journeys. The articles about this topic will be simpler and personal. The "label" is "life skills" for easy reference.

Most of the lessons that I've gained are products of my reading, studies, interactions with experts and ordinary human beings, training programs, professional experiences, etc. Let me then share with you some of the life skills that I've learned and gained with the hope that these may help you in coping with the demands and challenges that may come along your way.

In relation to this topic, my related professional experiences include managing programs and projects for more than 25 years, leading people for about the same number of years, conducting organizational studies, running training sessions on strategic, operational, and risk management for the public, private an civil society sectors. I have also served as assessor of the Philippine Quality Award for a couple of years.

Caveat: Let's learn from others, but let's think and act for ourselves.

Sustainable Development: Perspective from the Philippines

Click here

Weber’s Theory of Social Class

by Alan S. Cajes, PhD

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber

A social structure has different dimensions, namely, class, status, and power. These dimensions are key factors that cause social differences or social stratification. Social class refers to people who have similar economic interests. There are four social classes that serve as the means for people belonging to such class to gain a position in life or to attain satisfactions. Status is a recognized level of social esteem that can be ranked as high or low based on the status of other people. It can be positive or negative in its evaluation and consequences to people. Power is understood as organized power through a party. A party as organized power can refer to a political party, labor organization, business council, NGOs or professional association. A party holds and exerts influence in society.

The Weberian concept of a social class is a reaction and an extension to the Marxist theory of a social class that is mainly defined in economic terms. For Weber, social classes are not just defined by the presence or absence of private property, and the means and factors of production. People are not simply rich or poor, exploited or exploiter, proletariat or bourgeoisie. Weber did not remove the Marxist concept of social class from the equation. He recognized it, and then extended it. 

For Max Weber (1864-1920), a social class implies a group of people having similar economic needs, expectations, and interests. There are four social classes, namely, the privileged class (people who own property and have education), the intelligentsia (those with no property), the petty bourgeoisie (the farmers, shopkeepers, professionals), and the working class.

Class differences are factors in stratification in the sense that one can distinguish a higher class from a lower class. Similar to classes, status or the “effective claim to social esteem” can also be ranked as high or low based on the status of other people. It can be positive or negative in its evaluation and consequences to people. Although status could cut across social classes, it is usually the people who have high status who also belong to the higher classes. Moreover, organized power or party is a factor in social stratification. Just like status, party can cut across social classes. However, it is usually the privileged class who hold organized power.

Levels of social class, status, and party may differ from one person to another or from one society to another, but economic power (held by the privileged class) usually goes with organized power and high esteem or status. Social stratification should therefore be analyzed using the shades or dimensions of a social structure not just purely on Marxist economics.

Reference: 

Weber, Max, 1978, Economy and Society (2 vols) (edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich) Berkeley: University of California Press.

From Domination to Stewardship: A Change in World View

By Alan S. Cajes, PhD[1]

One of the passages in the Bible that has perturbed me as a Christian Catholic and as someone whose work involves environmental management states: "Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth."[2]

When I was younger, this passage is alright because I have been taught in school that “man” is the apex of creation. As I gain more experience in undertaking environment-related teaching and research tasks, however, this biblical decree started to trouble me. Did God really command that we, human beings, subdue (to bring somebody/something under control, especially by using force)[3] our planet and have dominion (authority to rule; control)[4] over the non-human forms of life? If yes, is this a reason why we have the propensity to cause damage to our environment?

The usual answer that I get from persons I asked about my concern is that we need to understand the context of the passage and that the text should not be taken literally. This answer did not put a closure to what has been my concern for quite some time – to understand the meaning and implication of the biblical passage.

As it turned out, there are others who find the passage problematic. Thomas Berry, in a paper that he read at Harvard University said:

“The university can be considered as one of the four basic establishments that determine human life in its more significant functioning. These four are the government, the church, the university and the commercial-industrial corporation - the political, religious, intellectual and economic establishments… They all presume a radical discontinuity between the non-human and the human with all the rights given to the human to exploit the non-human.”[5]

Berry did not say that the Church committed an error because of its interpretation of Genesis 1:28. He also did not criticize the wording of the passage. He said that “the creation story in Genesis 1 is the story of the victory of the Heavenly Father God over the Mother Earth God. The first commandment, therefore, is ‘Thou shalt have no Mother Earth God.’”[6] This was Berry’s response to the questions asked by Daniel Spencer, who “was struggling to make sense of the Genesis creation accounts’ themes of human dominion and stewardship in light of my geological understandings of Earth’s origins and my concerns for how dominion interpreted as domination had contributed to massive ecological degradation.”[7]

In 1966, Lynn White delivered a lecture entitled “The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis” at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. White claimed that the roots of the ecological crisis could be linked to the Judaeo-Christian theology, which separated humans from nature and then made humans dominate nature. He said:

“Christianity inherited from Judaism not only a concept of time as nonrepetitive and linear but also a striking story of creation. By gradual stages a loving and all- powerful God had created light and darkness, the heavenly bodies, the earth and all its plants, animals, birds, and fishes. Finally, God had created Adam and, as an afterthought, Eve to keep man from being lonely. Man named all the animals, thus establishing his dominance over them. God planned all of this explicitly for man's benefit and rule: no item in the physical creation had any purpose save to serve man's purposes.”[8]

White pointed out that modern Western science, which enabled humans to exploit nature, “was cast in a matrix of Christian theology” and that the impetus for the “dynamism of religious devotion” was “shaped by the Judeo-Christian dogma of creation.” He said that the “implications of Christianity for the conquest of nature would emerge more easily in the Western atmosphere… The Christian dogma of creation, which is found in the first clause of all the Creeds, has another meaning for our comprehension of today's ecologic crisis.”[9]

In 1972, Arnold Toynbee wrote “The Religious Background of the Present Environmental Crisis’ stating that the solution to the environmental problems is possible if humans revert from the Weltanschauung[10] of monotheism to the Weltanschauung of pantheism, an older and universal world view. He asserted that the present-day assault against nature is due to the influence of a religious cause that gave rise to monotheism. He claimed that the command to have dominion over other creatures in Genesis 1:28 allowed the directed humans to exploit nature. In a 1973 article, he said:

This doctrine is enunciated in one sentence in the Bible. “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” (Genesis I, 28)… Genesis I: 28 gave the license; Genesis III: 19 provided the incentive. In 1663, this read like a blessing on the wealth of Abraham in children and livestock; in 1973, it reads like a license for the population explosion and like both a license and an incentive for mechanization and pollution.”[11]

In 1975, John Passmore wrote “Attitudes to Nature” saying that the predatory attitude against nature is present in the writings of St. Paul. To Passmore, the Graeco-Christian arrogance became Christianity’s official position until recent times. This attitude of Passmore is based on his reading of Romans 8:21 “that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God (New International Version).” Passmore takes on the position that Paul considers creation as merely an instrument for human liberation.

A year before White’s classic paper, Pope Paul VI promulgated Guadium et Spes  (Joy and Hope"), the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, on December 7, 1965. The document stated:

“For man, created to God's image, received a mandate to subject to himself the earth and all it contains, and to govern the world with justice and holiness; a mandate to relate himself and the totality of things to Him Who was to be acknowledged as the Lord and Creator of all. Thus, by the subjection of all things to man, the name of God would be wonderful in all the earth.”[12]

This declaration did not sit well with some people, who were concerned about the anthropocentric slant of this passage. Emeka Obiezu expressed disappointment that “…the Second Vatican Council continued this apparent arrogant and dominion theme…that excludes any ecological concern.”[13] Joseph Xavier was cautious: “It may not be an exaggeration to say that there is an ‘anthropological concentration’ in Gaudium et Spes.”[14] He explained, however, that this “anthropological orientation… is very important for fundamental theology today.”[15] Thirty years later, the same theme was noted by Larry Rasmussen in John Paul II’s encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (Gospel of Life). It states:

“Everything in creation is ordered to man and everything is made subject to him: "Fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over ... every living thing" (1:28); this is God's command to the man and the woman... We see here a clear affirmation of the primacy of man over things; these are made subject to him and entrusted to his responsible care, whereas for no reason can he be made subject to other men and almost reduced to the level of a thing.”[16]

The issue that I am trying to resolve is whether the passage in Genesis 1:28, specifically the terms “subdue” and “dominion”, can be interpreted as a license to destroy the natural environment. As has been shown earlier, there are scholars who consider the anthropocentric slant of the passage as the root cause of the current ecological crisis, and that the Catholic Church has been reluctant to give up such anthropological orientation. Despite this reluctance, it should be pointed out that the Catholic Church has always placed Genesis 1:28 in the context that humans are beings created in the image of God, thus humans have the responsibility to take care of the Earth as the “co-operator with God in the work of creation.”[17]

In 2015, the Church finally addressed the issue squarely when Pope Francis issued an encyclical, "Laudato si', mi Signore," or "Praise be to you, my Lord. It states:

“We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us. This allows us to respond to the charge that Judaeo-Christian thinking, on the basis of the Genesis account which grants man “dominion” over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28), has encouraged the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as domineering and destructive by nature. This is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church. Although it is true that we Christians have at times incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures, nowadays we must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures. The biblical texts are to be read in their context, with an appropriate hermeneutic, recognizing that they tell us to “till and keep” the garden of the world (cf. Gen 2:15). “Tilling” refers to cultivating, ploughing or working, while “keeping” means caring, protecting, overseeing and preserving. This implies a relationship of mutual responsibility between human beings and nature. Each community can take from the bounty of the earth whatever it needs for subsistence, but it also has the duty to protect the earth and to ensure its fruitfulness for coming generations. “The earth is the Lord’s” (Ps 24:1); to him belongs “the earth with all that is within it” (Dt 10:14). Thus God rejects every claim to absolute ownership: “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine; for you are strangers and sojourners with me” (Lev 25:23).”[18]

Pope Francis emphasizes that human dominion “over the universe should be understood more properly in the sense of responsible stewardship.”[19] He explains, “Once the human being declares independence from reality and behaves with absolute dominion, the very foundations of our life begin to crumble.” This is possible, he said, quoting John Paul II’s Cenesimus Annus, because “instead of carrying out his role as a cooperator with God in the work of creation, man sets himself up in place of God and thus ends up provoking a rebellion on the part of nature.”[20]

Incidentally, the Hebrew word khabash (subdue) is used when one is dealing with a hostile enemy. When used in relation to the environment, it could mean that “we subdue the earth because without such subjugation the harshness of nature would yield death for us rather than life.”[21] In this sense, “subdue” becomes synonymous with an Old English word tammian (Latin, domare; Greek, daman) which means to tame or to make nature “not afraid of people, and used to living with them.”[22] On the other hand, the Hebrew word radah (dominion) is used in the royal sense (kings have dominion over their subjects and territories). It means “to have dominion, rule, dominate”[23] or “authority to rule; control.”[24] The same word, however, is used in the Scriptures to mean something else:

· “You shall not rule over him with severity;”[25]

· “…of Israel, you shall not rule with severity;”[26]

· “And the upright shall rule over them in the morning;”[27]

· “May he also rule from sea to sea.”[28]

Of particular interest is Psalm 72 (A Psalm of Solomon) entitled “The Reign of the Righteous King.” It depicts a ruler (one who has dominion) as righteous, just, and savior.[29] Thus dominion can be taken in a positive sense or what Pope Francis calls “stewardship” because the Earth belongs to God and we are the stewards of God’s creation.

The rise of Pope Francis is, in a way, a fulfillment of Lynn White’s proposal that was included in his 1966 paper. He said:

“Possibly we should ponder the greatest radical in Christian history since Christ: Saint Francis of Assisi…Francis tried to depose man from his monarchy over creation and set up a democracy of all God's creatures.

…The greatest spiritual revolutionary in Western history, Saint Francis, proposed what he thought was an alternative Christian view of nature and man's relation to it; he tried to substitute the idea of the equality of all creatures, including man, for the idea of man's limitless rule of creation. He failed….Since the roots of our trouble are so largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not. We must rethink and refeel our nature and destiny. The profoundly religious, but heretical, sense of the primitive Franciscans for the spiritual autonomy of all parts of nature may point a direction. I propose Francis as a patron saint for ecologists.”[30]

At last, a new version of Saint Francis put an end to the controversy. I am pleased to be a witness of this unfolding. Toynbee did say that “only a change in world view[31] could heal the planet.”[32] This new world view brought about by the new interpretation of the Genesis 1:28 approximates what Berry calls the ecozoic era or “the geologic era that Earth is entering – when humans live in a mutually enhancing relationship with Earth and the Earth community.”[33] As Berry said:

"In this new context every component of the Earth community would have its rights in accord with the proper mode of its being and its functional role. In each case the basic rights would be for habitat and the opportunity of each being to fulfill its role in the natural systems to which it belongs. Humans would be obliged to respect these rights." [34]

---

[1] Associate Member, National Research Council of the Philippines; Member, American Association for the Advancement of Science

[2] Genesis 1:27 “God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them;” 1:28 God blessed them, saying: "Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth." (NAB).

[3] https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/subdue.

[4] https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/dominion?q=dominion.

[5] Thomas Berry, "The University: Its Response to the Ecological Crisis", a paper delivered before the Divinity School and the University Committee on Environment at Harvard University.

[6] Quoted by Daniel T. Spencer in “Thomas Berry: An Overview of His Work,” http://thomasberry.org/assets/attachments/Worldviews_ThomasBerryReviewEssay_Spencer_2017.pdf.

[7] Daniel T. Spencer, “Thomas Berry: An Overview of His Work.”

[8] Lynn White, “The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” https://www.cmu.ca/faculty/gmatties/lynnwhiterootsofcrisis.pdf

[9] Lynn White,  “The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis.”

[10] “A particular philosophy or view of life,” https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/weltanschauung?q=weltanschauung.

[11] Arnold Toynbee, “The Genesis of Pollution,” The New York Times (September 16, 1973).

[12] Guadium et Spes: 34. This passage cites as references Gen. 1:26-27; 9:3; Wis. 9:3; Ps. 8:7 and 10.

[13] Emeka Christian Obiezu, Towards a Politics of Compassion: Socio-Political Dimensions of Christian Responses to Suffering (AuthorHouse: August 14, 2008.

[14] Joseph Xavier, “Theological Anthropology of ‘Gaudium et Spes’ and Fundamental Theology,” Gregorianum Vol. 91, no. 1 (2010): 124-136.

[15] Ibid., p. 133.

[16] Evangelium Vitae: 34.

[17] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus: 37, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_01051991_centesimus-annus.html.

[18] Laudato si': 67.

[19] LS: 116; Love for Creation. An Asian Response to the Ecological Crisis, Declaration of the Colloquium sponsored by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (Tagaytay, 31 January-5 February 1993), 3.3.2.

[20] John Paul II, Centesimus Annus.

[21] Genesis 1:28, To “Subdue” and “Have Dominion Over” Creation, https://christopherbrown.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/genesis-128-to-subdue-and-have-dominion-over-creation/. See also https://biblehub.com/str/hebrew.

[22] https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/tame_1?q=tame.

[23] https://biblehub.com/str/hebrew/7287.htm.

[24] https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/dominion?q=dominion.

[25] Leviticus 25:43 (NAS).

[26] Leviticus 25:46 (NAS).

[27] Psalm 49:14 (NAS).

[28] Psalm 72:8 (NAS).

[29] Psalm 72: 1-4 .

[30] Lynn White, “The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis.”

[31] In simple terms, it refers to “a person’s way of thinking about and understanding life, which depends on their beliefs and attitudes”, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/world-view?q=world+view.

[32] Arnold Toynbee, “The Genesis of Pollution.”

[33] What does Ecozoic mean?, https://ecozoictimes.com/what-is-the-ecozoic/what-does-ecozoic-mean/.

[34] Thomas Berry, “The Great Work: Our Way into the Future.”(Bell Tower: New York, 1999), 80.