Religion Confronting Science
by Donivan Bessinger
Chapter Five
ECOLOGY: Consider the lilies
Ordinarily we do not think of Jesus as a naturalist. However, among the characteristics which distinguished him was his effectiveness as rabbi, or Teacher. Though most of his parables were drawn from ordinary situations in daily human life, he also showed a broad awareness of all life around himself, of its dependence on other life forms, and of our dependence on them. He made many references to agriculture, vinticulture, animal husbandry (especially sheep herding), and fishing, all important to human life.
He also showed considerable awareness of relationships in the natural world beyond the farmyard and vinyard, for example:
Foxes have holes, birds have nests (Mt 8:19, Lk 7:24).
Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? (Mt 7:16, Lk 6:44).
Reeds shaken before the wind (Mt 11:7, Lk 7:24).
A mustard seed, the smallest of all seeds, when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches. (Mt 13:31, Mk 4:30, Lk 13:18). Not one sparrow will fall to the ground without your Father's will (Mt 10:29).
He also makes a powerful point about the natural mechanisms for sustaining the web of all life, which we are to consider in ordering our own lives. Further, the natural world is directly sustained by the Creator's participation:
Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. ... Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these ... Therefore, do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink' or 'What shall we wear?' ... your heavenly Father knows that you need (these things). (Mt 6:26-29, Lk 12:24-27)
The study of the interdependent relationships in this web of life in which we and other life are "fed" is called ecology. In everyday speech now, "ecology" is often used as a synonym for "environment". However, the usual connotation of "environment" distorts the concept of life and its interrelationships. It is very important that we not loose sight of just how dependent we are on all other life.
Since the environment is that which surrounds our human habitations and activities, the term is human-centered. However, in biology we cannot discern any evidence that we are the centerpiece of the biosphere. There are no special life rules that apply just to us. We are inextricably dependent on all other life, and live by the same rules. Further, the term environment seems to imply a static situation and fails to convey the incredible complexity and dynamism of our life-surroundings.
Ecology is the biological specialty which studies the mutual relationships among living organisms themselves, and with their physical surroundings. It is concerned with all levels of interacting living systems above and including the individual and the species. The key concept in ecology is interaction in large life systems.
Our understanding of life systems today is very much more detailed than that of two thousand years ago. Nevertheless, Jesus seemed to be concerned that his disciples understand something of this very complicated web of actions and interactions, of inter-relationships and interdependence, which he affirms takes place under the Creator's continuing care.
To come to a modern scientific understanding of life's very complicated organization requires us to take a look at the concept of life systems. A system is a complex of operations which exhibits self-regulation through feedback "loops". All actions within a system are controlled through signals (such as chemical messengers or nerve impulses). The feedback is a signal which is sent back to the source to tell the controller whether the action is "too much" or "not enough".
These internal "connections" let the system achieve its fine tuning and adjust to changes in internal conditions and in the environment. That means that the system maintains a dynamic balance, and within a certain range of conditions, it can "heal" itself. This self-regulating principle, which operates for the system as a whole and at all levels of a system, is called homeostasis, and the whole system is said to maintain a steady state or flux equilibrium.
Exhibit 11. System control: Feedback
loop. The pituitary
gland secretes thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) which turns the thyroid gland
function "up." Excess thyroid hormone (TH) turns the TSH
"down," keeping a proper level of TH. A life system is a
self-regulating operation controlled by many thousands of such feedback loops.
The controlling principle is called homeostasis, which means
"maintaining sameness" (steady state).
Of course, we commonly hear of "systems" in almost all fields of endeavor, especially in the computer world and in management. Systems theory is generic, and in non-living systems, the signals often are electronic signals of some sort. Of course, the most complex system is the life system itself. In a life system, there are so many tightly interconnected signals that all events within the system affect the whole. Anything that happens "resonates" throughout the system. Nothing in a life system can happen in isolation, for each level of the system is open to each of the other levels, and to the whole.
Even a single-celled organism is a system, with many self-regulated chemical reactions. It has a boundary, its cell membrane, which must be intact for its own integrity, but which is permeable, allowing intake of nutrients and secretion of its own chemical products. These are among the characteristics of all systems. For an organism, such as an individual mammal, the boundary is the skin, but a boundary is not necessarily anatomic.
At higher levels the boundary is conceptual, such as "species", "nation", "family" or some other descriptive idea. The important point is that everything that happens within that boundary effects that whole, and everything within that boundary, in some way, has to support the function of that whole if the homeostatic balance is to be maintained.
Another characteristic of a system is that it is "more than the sum of its parts": Its function is greater than could be accomplished by its component subsystems acting independently. Life systems exhibit the capacity for developing increasingly complex forms, with the result that cellular systems develop into "societies" of cells, as tissues, organs, and systems of organs that we see in ourselves and other multi-level organisms.
As we go up the ladder of complexity, we see a number of special changes. The most obvious is that there are more components (more subsystems). We also see greater modification into a larger variety of forms, and greater differentiation into a greater variety of functions. There is more organization. There is more specialization of the parts.
Exhibit 12. Generic systems diagram. A self-regulating system includes these
functions: A boundary (B) defining a controlled internal environment (INT); an
input-output processor (I/O) communicating with the external environment (EXT);
specialized subprocessors (SP); and a nuclear integrating (management)
processor (N/I). Depending on the level of description, B may be cell membrane,
skin, or global atmosphere.
All of that helps us understand that there are many levels within a system. To understand a form or a function properly, we have to consider its level of action. That concept becomes especially important when we attempt to describe human nature, for describing how brain cells function is quite a different problem from describing the function of the brain as a whole.
It is relatively easy to understand the relationships of cells and organs to organisms, for we see ourselves as the whole, and the subsystems as parts. We tend to have more difficulty seeing similar organization at larger levels, for in that perspective, we are among the parts. However, the same homeostatic life principles work in social systems (human and otherwise) and ecological systems. Indeed, there seems to be good reason to consider the biosphere itself as one living organism.
J. E. Lovelock, an English atmospheric scientist, has cited various interactions between Earth's gases in the atmosphere, its temperature control, and its life forms, all of which have led him to propose the Gaia hypothesis. He gives the hypothesis the name of the Greek goddess of Earth. Briefly stated, the globe itself influences life, and is influenced by life; the organism Gaia (the biosphere) exhibits homeostasis in keeping constant conditions for all terrestrial life.
Exhibit 13. Cosmic system,
Levels of description. All
phenomena within the universe, even at the largest scale, are determined by the
interaction of its smallest features with the deep nonlocal reality.
Though much description is physical (e.g. anatomic), some phenomena (human
ideation; knowledge systems) require symbolic description based on function.
All levels of the cosmic system function as part of one whole. Universe means
that which "turns as one."
Lovelock has described various computer studies which have modeled what Earth would be like if it were completely lifeless. If it reached a chemical and thermal equilibrium, there would be an atmosphere of carbon dioxide (with no oxygen), and saltier oceans which were mirror smooth because there would be no weather. If, instead, Earth developed a more dynamic but lifeless steady state, conditions would still be very different from those we experience in our world teeming with life. It seems probable that the steady-state version of a lifeless world would have some clouds and rain with more ocean and less land, and be hotter. There might be some little amount of oxygen, but not enough to start a fire. It wouldn't matter; there would be nothing to burn.
Thus, the conditions which exist on Earth are highly improbable from non-biological mechanisms alone. The conditions which sustain life on the planet seem to be, at least in large measure, conditions created by life itself, and the balancing mechanisms operate worldwide. Despite regional differences in the density of life populations (for example between rain forests and deserts), the composition of the atmosphere and oceans is basically constant worldwide. Earth's dynamic steady-state suggests a global homeostasis.
Of course, the time scale for the regulatory changes of such a large system is so great that it is often difficult to see the cause-effect links. Ecology has traditionally dealt with only the "parts" of this whole picture; it has been concerned with species and individuals finding a niche by adaptively relating to other species in a defined habitat. Seeing our small blue planet from space has made it easier to deal with the concept of the whole globe as our habitat.
The Gaia hypothesis is a relatively new one, and still must struggle to build a consensus in a scientific community more accustomed to thinking about "parts" than "wholes". Lovelock has written of the difficulty he encountered in getting his ideas published in scientific journals. He was also surprised that the hypothesis was more warmly received by theologians than biologists:
Things have taken a strange turn in recent years; almost the full circle from Galileo's famous struggle with the theological establishment. It is the scientific establishment that now forbids heresy. I had a faint hope that Gaia might be denounced from the pulpit; instead I was asked to deliver a sermon on Gaia at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York.
The concept of a whole Earth responding according to a global order is much
more appealing to the human spirit than the traditional scientific
"fundamentalistic" (reductionist) concept of an accidental purposeless
world ruled by chance. That traditional scientific consensus is gradually
giving way to a more holistic concept. If we are not to impoverish ourselves
spiritually, our traditional religious interpretations must also give way to a
larger picture of God's creation. To do less, scientifically or spiritually, is
to diminish our access to truth.
A particular challenge is to overcome our sometimes disastrous misinterpretations of Scripture. One example is our historical exploitation of world resources which we defended by an absolutist interpretation of human "dominion" over creation (Gn 1:28). Here especially we need to reconcile written Word with "Word spoken in creation", so that we may understand the essence of God's will about our ecological relationships.
Seen in the light of life's interdependency, dominion entails the power to name, to understand, to support other life and to be supported by it. Human life has as much right to be supported by other life as non-human life forms do. There is, of course, no alternative, and for that very reason the idea of "dominion" is inextricably intertwined with the idea of stewardship.
We also have dominion over other species in our capacity for general knowledge, as well as in our "knowledge of good and evil". Dominion is the power of consciousness. Since our human consciousness entails the power to destroy, it also demands responsibility for choices made. In no sense may we consider dominion to give permission to destroy wantonly. Dominion must be understood to mean a spiritual power to comprehend the whole, to respect and support the whole, and to decide how our actions may best serve the balance of creation.
What did Jesus mean when he said that no sparrow will fall without the Father's will? Is the Creator a puppetteer who must consciously pull all the strings of the world? That primitive interpretation will not do, in the light of modern knowledge of the automicity and complexity of creation. If we postulate the existence of a sustaining creator, we must also accept that the life processes which sustain creation are at least one expression of the creator's "Will".
At this writing, there is a political debate in the USA over whether to permit logging in the habitat of a particular endangered species of owl. Typically, the issue is simplistically polarized between "owls and jobs". However, an understanding of life systems relationships frames the issue in a much broader and longer term perspective. The issue is not merely habitat for owls, but human habitat.
Our own development as a species requires respecting all habitat, for the habitat of humans is integral with the habitat of all creatures. We seem to be headed rapidly toward stretching the biosphere beyond its capacity to heal the wounds which we have inflicted upon it in our misguided "dominion" over creation. As noted earlier, the protection of life's diversity is essential to that healing capacity.
Ever since the dawn of human consciousness, life has seemed a great mystery which compels awe and wonder. Now we understand many of life's most critical mechanisms in considerable detail. Even so, life remains a phenomenon of awe and wonder, for when we take the grand overview of life given us in systems theory, we are faced with the great mystery of the wholeness of life and of the relatedness of all things to each other.
Even though we may seem small in relation to the size of the universe, systems theory points to the importance of all things in the universe, particularly within Earth's life system. This grand vision of creation in its wholeness helps us find new meaning in some of our most sacred texts.
In the Gospel of John (1:3) we read of Christ as Logos (Word): "All things were made through him and without him was not anything made that was made." The Logos acts centrally in creation process, such that the "Father's will" is embodied (incarnate) also in the material processes of life systems. Interpreted in the light of modern physics, John's gospel seems to be telling us that the Logos is to be identified with those non-temporal dimensions which account for the physical forces. Matter itself is a tangible expression of the Word "without [whom] was not anything made that was made" (Jn 1:3).
It must sound strange to have such a deeply spiritual text cited in the context of relationships in material creation. Usually we understand the Logos as Christ, known in the person of Jesus. However, it is the great historical affirmation of Christianity, and one of the reasons for its rejection of gnosticism, that the material creation and the spiritual realm are both good and redeemed in Christ. If in "all things" we understand "all" really to mean ALL, and "things" to mean THINGS, we find greater and immediate meaning in the words "In him was life".
Speaking before an inscription "To the Unknown God", Paul in Athens says of God known in Christ, "in him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). There are both spiritual and material dimensions to our understanding that we have our being in the network or web of supporting relationships in the life system. Without that understanding, we may not continue to have our being as the human species.
To reject respect for Earth's life systems is to reject a key value embodied in the Christian message. In this special sense, ecology, like evolution, is in its essence Christian in concept. Of course I do not mean to say that ecological science is a religious enterprise, or that Christians have some special claim to it, to the exclusion of other faiths. Rather, I mean to say that the message of Christianity is more profoundly intertwined with continuing creation and its processes of wholeness than we commonly understand.
Another insight which is strengthened in the reconciling of the spiritual and scientific understandings of life systems is that each individual form of life is important and purposeful in the large scheme of things. As Jesus taught, even a tiny mustard seed carries a purpose larger than itself, and even larger than the tree which it will create; its "mission" is to become a tree "so that birds will come and make nests in its branches", and its place in the web of life relationships may be served.
In this larger context, "Faith as a grain of mustard seed" must include the concept that we too must recognize and serve that whole, for mustard seeds and all other life forms fit into the support of whatever larger purposes God has in creation. Perhaps that purpose is best expressed as the development and expansion of consciousness (as implied in the anthropic principle of physics). Perhaps it is best described as the convergence of all things into unity with the divine (the "omega point" of Teilhard de Chardin). In either case, the interdependence of life forms means that all life, not just human life, is invested with sacred place and purpose.
Clearly, we must "unify" our understanding of the spiritual and material dimensions of the Christian message. In these essays, we have encountered "unification theories" at several levels. Physicists seek to understand the physical forces as one superforce. The concept of a non-local reality underlying all material creation points to a holistic unity at the non-temporal level of existence. The theory of evolution points to the origin of all things from one source. Life-systems theory gives us a unified understanding of all life as interdependent.
At the religious level, the doctrine of the Logos unifies our understanding of spirituality and material creation and moves us away from the traditional duality between God and earth, and between humankind and earth, which have pervaded Western orthodoxy. Such a strict duality does not seem consistent with science or with a mystic vision of unity of all things in the risen Christ.
When Jesus prayed "that they may all be one; even as thou Father art in me and I in thee, that they may also be in us" (Jn 17), he did so in the specific context of the events leading toward his death. However, a study of ecological relationships, considered in its broadest possible implications, gives to that unity theme in his Gethsemane prayer, and to his teachings generally, a much broader significance. Modern systems theory reaffirms the ancient relationship between unity and wholeness, and in that light we can find in Jesus' prayer a call to wholeness of self and of all creation.
Ecology, then, as a religious issue, is not just a contrived or secondary concern that Christians adopt faddishly or optionally, or merely as good citizens "rendering unto Caesar". In the lessons of ecology we see projected even larger the great drama of the Creator uniting all things unto the Godself. When we fully "consider the lilies, how they grow", we are brought to realize how closely salvation, both biological and spiritual, is tied to our care for the biosphere.
[ Exhibit 11. System control: Feedback ]
[ Exhibit 12. Generic systems diagram ]
[ Exhibit 13. Levels of description ]
[ Notes and References ] , [
Glossary ]
[ Contents: Religion Confronting Science ] , [TOP]
_