Editorial

By Paul Schratz

B.C.'s new carbon tax, being held up as a first in Canada, perhaps North America, comes in response to a number of B.C. churches urging Finance Minister Carole Taylor to help save God's creation - the earth - in her next budget.

"Climate change is a moral issue, because the way we care for creation ties into how we respond to God's creativeness," said Rev. Kenneth Gray, who chairs the environment committee of the Anglican Diocese of B.C.

This is the same Anglican communion currently being torn asunder because of its inability to maintain doctrinal unity on the issue of homosexuality, but the environment is something else.

The environment committee called for a "transitional and progressive tax strategy which forces heavy polluters and heavy consumers of fossil fuels to change their way of operating."

Ministers from the Anglican and United Churches made submissions after Taylor invited public input on how to make her next budget more eco-friendly.

Vancouver's Canadian Memorial United Church also sent a message to Taylor saying the planet is inherently sacred and that protecting it from climate change is a necessity for Christians and people of all faiths. "What we are doing to the planet is not only foolish ... it's also sacrilegious. It's the destruction of a divine mode of presence," said Rev. Bruce Sanguin, who authored the book Darwin, Divinity, and the Dance of the Cosmos: An Ecological Christianity.

In an unusual sign of academic/ecclesiastical unity, 69 economists from the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Victoria, and the University of Northern B.C. also called for environment taxes in B.C.

At the University of Western Australia, an associate professor of obstetric medicine recently proposed that the Australian federal government's baby bonus be replaced with a $5,000 tax on third and subsequent children and by an annual carbon tax of up to $800 per child.

And at a recent conference, environmentalist David Suzuki suggested his audience "put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there's a legal way of throwing our so-called [political] leaders into jail" for neglect of the environment.

In the midst of this fanaticism, Pope Benedict XVI has been attempting to bridge the divide between stewardship and extremism lately. In his annual message for the World Day of Peace celebrated Jan. 1, the Pontiff acknowledged that humanity "fears for future ecological equilibrium."

While such concerns for stewardship are valid, he pointed out that the international community must base its policies on science, not a newly devised dogma of the environmentalist movement.

"Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow," he said in the message entitled The Human Family, A Community of Peace.

"It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the wellbeing of all while respecting environmental balances.

"If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

"Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken."

The Pope added that nations should "choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions" in order to co-operate responsibly on conserving the planet.

Before the world rushes to impose a new eco-religion, it needs to take a step back and consider whether it may be protecting the environment at the expense of humanity and its inherent rights and freedoms.