Aquinas Help or Hindrance: Part III

I actually found an article discussing environmentalism within the context of patristic theology.  Low and behold, our friend Aquinas was one of those theologians discussed - with some promising results!  The article, entitled "Valuing Earth Intrinsically and Instrumentally:  A Theological Framework for Environmental Ethics" and written by Jame Schaefer, appeared in the scholarly journal Theological Studies in 2005.  Schaefer argues that Aquinas held a "sacramental view of creation." As a creation of God, the earth allowed human beings access to God by observing God's handiwork.  In that regard, creation was holy to Aquinas.  Schaefer quotes Aquinas as naming "exorbitant use of God's creation . . . wasteful, immoderate, disordered, and vicious."  (792) So, if we take Schaefer seriously on these points, Aquinas is our ally in this environmental battle.

On the other hand,  Schaefer also credits Aquinas with a hierarchical view of creation, with humans at the top. (790-791)   Though he is clear that Aquinas believed that "use by humans is limited to using other creatures to sustain human life, not to satisfy superfluous desires", it provides a possible springboard for those who would say that creation is useful only in the ways that it is useful to human beings.  If one argues that clear cutting of the Rainforest is necessary to sustain human life, then said clear cutting becomes reasonable under Aquinas' theology (though Aquinas might argue the viability of that necessity).

However, even using this loophole to excuse consumption of the planet, the buck stops when we get to Bangladesh.  Here, it is apparent that human survival is imperiled by our imprudent use of resources.  At that point, the only possible recourse for those who would continue to plunder the earth is to argue hierarchical value among human beings.  If some human beings are more "perfect" than others, as Aquinas would have put it, then those more "perfect" humans would have a greater right to sustain their lives than those who are less perfect.  Our society seems to argue by its actions that it believes this to be true.  That those who have greater access to the world's resources, those who control a greater percentage of wealth, are, in fact, intrinsically more valuable than those who control little to no wealth and resources.  That, perhaps, is what is most disturbing about this crises.  Certainly, if asked point blank if they believed themselves to be more valuable than the poor, most anyone living and consuming in the world's wealthiest nations would answer an emphatic 'no'.  Sadly, what we do argues otherwise.