Presiding Bishopric Speaks of Environmental Stewardship

[smac97]

Two recent public talks by members of the Presiding Bishopric have addressed environmental stewardship.

Last week, Bishop Gérald Caussé spoke during the Saturday evening session:

Quote

Bishop Gérald Caussé spoke during the Saturday evening session of October 2022 general conference. He called care of the earth a sacred responsibility entrusted to God’s children. The following is a summary of what he said.

Bishop Caussé’s conference talk summary

Human interactions with the beauties of nature can produce some of the most inspiring and delightful experiences in life.

“The emotions we feel kindle within us a deep sense of gratitude for our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, who created this magnificent earth.”

But the work of creation is not an end in itself — it’s an integral part of God’s plan for His children. Its purpose is to provide the setting in which men and women may be tested, exercise agency, find joy, learn and progress toward returning to live with God.

“These wonderful creations were prepared entirely for our benefit and are living proof of the love the Creator has for His children.”

Our earthly stewardship can be guided by three principles:

1. The entire earth, including all life thereon, belongs to God.
2. As stewards of God’s creations, we have a duty to honor and care for them.
3. We are invited to participate in the work of creation.

“I testify that great spiritual blessings are promised to those who love and care for the earth and their fellow men and women. As you stay faithful in this sacred stewardship and honor your eternal covenants, you will grow in the knowledge of God and His Son, Jesus Christ.”

Notable quotes from Bishop Caussé’s conference talk

The care of the earth and of our natural environment is a sacred responsibility entrusted to us by God, which should fill us with a deep sense of duty and humility. It is also an integral component of our discipleship.

Our stewardship over God’s creations also includes, at its pinnacle, a sacred duty to love, respect and care for all human beings with whom we share the earth.

We participate in the work of creation whenever we cultivate the earth or add our own constructions to this world — as long as we show respect for God’s creations.

There is no stewardship more sacred, more fulfilling, but also more demanding, than that of partnering with our Creator in providing physical bodies for His spirit children and then helping them reach their divine potential.

Then, yesterday, BishopL. Todd Budge spoke at a conference at Utah Valley University:

Quote

Bishop L. Todd Budge, second counselor in the Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, spoke Wednesday at the Why It Matters conference at Utah Valley University.

Bishop Budge spoke on the importance of caring for the earth.

“We have an obligation to be good stewards, to pass to future generations an earth better than we found it through the habits and values of wise stewardship,” he said.

The Why it Matters conference will run through Friday. The purpose of the conference is to discuss 17 United Nations sustainable development goals. Also, to inspire people to make a longer-lasting world.

Good stuff.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

From the Tribune:

Quote

Two top church leaders recently preached a green gospel.

First, Presiding Bishop Gérald Caussé, the ecclesiastical overseer of the church’s vast financial, real estate, investment and charitable operations, delivered an environmental entreaty at General Conference, urging members to “use the bountiful resources of the earth more reverently and prudently.”

Days later, at Utah Valley University, Caussé's second counselor, Bishop L. Todd Budge, echoed and expanded on that message.

“When it comes to taking care of the earth, we cannot afford to think only of today,” Budge said, according to a news release. “The consequences of our actions, for better or worse, accumulate into the future and are sometimes felt only generations later. Stewardship requires feet and hands at work in the present with a gaze fixed on the future.”

Budge also highlighted ways the church — or its various departments — has reduced its environmental footprint. For instance, it has:

• Slashed water use by more than 30 million gallons a year since 2018.

• Trimmed annual energy consumption by 17.8 gigawatt hours over the same time frame, the equivalent of heating more than 13 million households.

• Recycled 3,679 tons of paper, 303 tons of cardboard, 175 tons of plastic and 173 tons of metal.

In 2017, apostle Dallin H. Oaks warned about climate change, noting that “seacoast cities are concerned with the rising level of the ocean, which will bring ocean tides to their doorsteps or over their thresholds. Global warming is also affecting agriculture and wildlife.”

I'm glad to hear this.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 6, 2022 by smac97

[LoudmouthMormon]

"Stewardship" has always been my favorite term when figuring out how to treat the planet.  "God owns it, He lets me run it, and I'm going to answer to him for how well I did it" just makes sense.  It's been such a hyperpoliticized topic over the decades, but I notice the energy isn't what it used to be. 

I was hanging out with some of my ultraprogressive gen-y and millenial co-workers last Earth Day.  They spent an entire hour discussing the thing.  There was a bit of lethargy and boredom in the discussion.  Yeah, everyone still expressed guilt at driving cars and using air conditioners, and gave tips on how to load your dishwasher to save the most water, but the oomph was far less than I've heard in the past.  The youngest and wokest person expressed the opinion "individual consumer choices simply cannot solve this problem for us - it can only be solved on an industrywide and geopolitical level."  I didn't have the heart to tell him that he was channeling 35 years of the Rush Limbaugh show with his "new" realization.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

"Stewardship" has always been my favorite term when figuring out how to treat the planet.  "God owns it, He lets me run it, and I'm going to answer to him for how well I did it" just makes sense.  It's been such a hyperpoliticized topic over the decades, but I notice the energy isn't what it used to be. 

I was hanging out with some of my ultraprogressive gen-y and millenial co-workers last Earth Day.  They spent an entire hour discussing the thing.  There was a bit of lethargy and boredom in the discussion.  Yeah, everyone still expressed guilt at driving cars and using air conditioners, and gave tips on how to load your dishwasher to save the most water, but the oomph was far less than I've heard in the past.  The youngest and wokest person expressed the opinion "individual consumer choices simply cannot solve this problem for us - it can only be solved on an industrywide and geopolitical level."  I didn't have the heart to tell him that he was channeling 35 years of the Rush Limbaugh show with his "new" realization.

Rush Limbaugh suggested that governments heavily regulate industry to protect the environment? That sounds out of character.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

"Stewardship" has always been my favorite term when figuring out how to treat the planet.  "God owns it, He lets me run it, and I'm going to answer to him for how well I did it" just makes sense.  It's been such a hyperpoliticized topic over the decades, but I notice the energy isn't what it used to be. 

I think whatever energy over-the-top environmentalists have lost, they have made up for via increased misanthropy.

By the way, is your icon from Bloom County?

Thanks,

-Smac

[LoudmouthMormon]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Rush Limbaugh suggested that governments heavily regulate industry to protect the environment? That sounds out of character.

Nope, Rush continually mocked environmentalists' notions that individual choices, even if mandated by law and universally observed by humans, would do squat for the environment.  And boy howdy did environmentalists spend decades upon decades pushing that notion.  Before it was cool to hate someone for not getting vaxxed, it was cool to hate them for not recycling, buying stuff in single-use packaging, washing your clothes on hot (or at all), owning a lawn, or a million other things.  A recent example probably still in our memories, is banning plastic straws and 6 pack rings because turtles.

Rush's constant point:  After the USSR fell, the environmentalist movement became the new home for socialists and commies, who would forward their nefarious agendas using terms like "green" and "sustainable".  And my young progressive coworker was a perfect case in point, even after realizing consumer choices ain't gonna fix the environment.

 

Yep, I'll stick with the concept of stewardship to guide my environmental choices and practices.

Edited October 6, 2022 by LoudmouthMormon

[The Nehor]

25 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Nope, Rush continually mocked environmentalists' notions that individual choices, even if mandated by law and universally observed by humans, would do squat for the environment.  And boy howdy did environmentalists spend decades upon decades pushing that notion.  Before it was cool to hate someone for not getting vaxxed, it was cool to hate them for not recycling, buying stuff in single-use packaging, washing your clothes on hot (or at all), owning a lawn, or a million other things.  A recent example probably still in our memories, is banning plastic straws and 6 pack rings because turtles.

Rush's constant point:  After the USSR fell, the environmentalist movement became the new home for socialists and commies, who would forward their nefarious agendas using terms like "green" and "sustainable".  And my young progressive coworker was a perfect case in point, even after realizing consumer choices ain't gonna fix the environment.

 

Yep, I'll stick with the concept of stewardship to guide my environmental choices and practices.

It wasn’t commies pushing it. It was corporations. Pushing the impetus to save the planet on consumers when they (even collectively) can have only a minimal impact distracts from corporations trashing things. Though I have been hearing a lot about Marxist corporations lately so words have lost all meaning and reality itself is about to rubber band us in the eye for all our collective stupidity.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

...Reality itself is about to rubber band us in the eye for all our collective stupidity.

I think it's inevitable at this point.

[Teancum]

7 hours ago, smac97 said:

Two recent public talks by members of the Presiding Bishopric have addressed environmental stewardship.

Last week, Bishop Gérald Caussé spoke during the Saturday evening session:

Then, yesterday, BishopL. Todd Budge spoke at a conference at Utah Valley University:

Good stuff.

Thanks,

-Smac

Good?  Well at least they are saying  something but it seems pretty vague.

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

From the Tribune:

I'm glad to hear this.

Thanks,

-Smac

This seems better.

[LoudmouthMormon]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

words have lost all meaning and reality itself is about to rubber band us in the eye for all our collective stupidity.

I’ve been reading the decline and fall of the Roman empire in my spare time. I’m only a chapter or two in, roughly the early 90s in US equivalent.

If you want to be more miserable and sad and anxious than you are now, a good way to do that is to read the Decline and fall of the Roman empire.

[BlueDreams]

11 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

"Stewardship" has always been my favorite term when figuring out how to treat the planet.  "God owns it, He lets me run it, and I'm going to answer to him for how well I did it" just makes sense.  It's been such a hyperpoliticized topic over the decades, but I notice the energy isn't what it used to be. 

I was hanging out with some of my ultraprogressive gen-y and millenial co-workers last Earth Day.  They spent an entire hour discussing the thing.  There was a bit of lethargy and boredom in the discussion.  Yeah, everyone still expressed guilt at driving cars and using air conditioners, and gave tips on how to load your dishwasher to save the most water, but the oomph was far less than I've heard in the past.  The youngest and wokest person expressed the opinion "individual consumer choices simply cannot solve this problem for us - it can only be solved on an industrywide and geopolitical level."  I didn't have the heart to tell him that he was channeling 35 years of the Rush Limbaugh show with his "new" realization.

You may be misreading lethargy and less "oomph" with what can often be a learned helplessness/despair that tends to be a potential by-product around studying this topic nowadays. You don't need much really to get there. The "youngest and wokest person" named a part of the equation. A few facts put together generally puts the wind out of a lot of people's sails:

1.) we're facing a problem that will effect the entire world often in monumental ways for generations to come. At best it will be hard. At worst it may be catastrophic and monumentally disruptive in ways unseen in all of modern history and feasibly human history.  

2.) The only way to really change this would take massive systemic shifts on several fronts that many countries, including the US, have been slow or hesitant to do. Without this our future gets exponentially more precarious. 

3.) And the younger gens (millenial on down) will live through this horrific transition while holding the least amount of power to make needed shifts. No matter what, we will experience an environment more degraded or distressed than what our parents and grandparents had. 

I'm an optimist at heart and I still have to fight back a sense of anxiety and dread at times when I think about this topic in terms of my personal power to shift things. 

 

Ps. The diff between Rush and the woke guy is pretty easy to find. Just ask how they feel about the Oil industries, large corporations, capitalism, etc and it'll become pretty clear that acknowledging personal powerlessness doesn't equal approval of a system that cements one's powerlessness. 

 

With luv,

BD

[BlueDreams]

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Two recent public talks by members of the Presiding Bishopric have addressed environmental stewardship.

Last week, Bishop Gérald Caussé spoke during the Saturday evening session:

Then, yesterday, BishopL. Todd Budge spoke at a conference at Utah Valley University:

Good stuff.

Thanks,

-Smac

I really liked his talk and was pleased to hear someone addressing this, as I see it as extremely important. Likely one of the most important topics we face in terms of temporal issues facing us.  Here's a few of my favorite points:

Quote

Brothers and sisters, our interactions with the beauties of nature around us can produce some of the most inspiring and delightful experiences in life. The emotions we feel kindle within us a deep sense of gratitude for our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, who created this magnificent earth—with its mountains and streams, plants and animals—and our first parents, Adam and Eve.

This is going to seem contradictory to my last post, but I think there's a dismissal or personal decisions in recent dialogue around this that's a bit of a shame. Though it is true that much of current concerns are not in most layman's control and are at best difficult for consumers to avoid without systemic/communal/societal shifts in practices, this doesn't mean there's no value in thinking of one's personal stewardship over the fraction of things that we do have a say on. His opening lines are what I've found to be true. I'm an armchair environmentalist and my spouse is likewise supportive in plans that do our part in care for the environment. Each year we've done things to shift our habits to be more conscientious of the things that we have and to be careful with bring in too much of what we don't really need. I think sometimes people picture the shifts made as a form of losing out or missing out. It's been quite the opposite in my experience. We have more as there's more sense of connection to what's around us: the earth, the environment, our community, etc. I can't fully describe the joy that comes from my yard space that if filled to the brim with flora and small fauna (namely birds and insects). There are unexpected lessons that come from the earth and the work of caring for it. A steadiness and acceptance of seasons and change. I wish everybody could find their own means to connect more to the earth around us in personal ways. In many ways we've become a society divorced from nature, even phobic of it or mildly antoganoistic at times. It's odd to watch people, say, grumble about a snow storm in UT...forgetting it's the snow that fuels needed water and protects us from things like bad fire seasons.

Quote

However, the divine gift of the Creation does not come without duties and responsibilities. These duties are best described by the concept of stewardship. In gospel terms, the word stewardship designates a sacred spiritual or temporal responsibility to take care of something that belongs to God for which we are accountable.

...

Our Heavenly Father allows us to use earthly resources according to our own free will. Yet our agency should not be interpreted as license to use or consume the riches of this world without wisdom or restraint. The Lord gave this admonition: “And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto man; for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment, not to excess, neither by extortion.”

 There's several lines in here that like these that I think give a good differentiation between stewardship and dominion. I think we've lived in a western society that for quite a while has preferred the concept of dominion over stewardship. This sense that we must have power over rather than care for. A focus on dominion gives a lot of space for  excess and extortion, sometimes unintentional, thought often not. When I say dominion I mean any idea that overemphasizes us commanding or ruling over land/resources. If we assume ownership or entitlement to a resource we're more likely to ignore the context and responsibility tied to said resource.  

Quote

Beyond being simply a scientific or political necessity, the care of the earth and of our natural environment is a sacred responsibility entrusted to us by God, which should fill us with a deep sense of duty and humility. It is also an integral component of our discipleship. How can we honor and love Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ without honoring and loving Their creations?

Again, I like this idea of adding spiritual depth to an issue that has gotten flattened into science and political concerns. To me, the culture we hold around the environment would help better inform us in social decisions around the environment. If one has a natural/deeper connection to the natural environment, a greater understanding for the value of diverse living creatures as apart of it, and a sense of respect and humility in understanding the effect we can have (better or worse) on the land, it becomes more instinctual to implement sustainable changes to our practices and adopt healthier forms of energy, materials, agriculture, etc. 

 

I could say more but it's getting late. Needless to say, I like his talk  

With luv,

BD

[Kenngo1969]

I said this the last time the subject came up, so if you'd like to ignore me this time, too, you're welcome to do so. The problem (or, perhaps better said, the challenge) when it comes to the prospect of adopting a worldwide environmental ethic in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the notion that a sizeable chunk of the world with a third-world standard of living might be asked to adopt a first-world environmental solution that, while it may work well in the latter, won't work well at all in the former.  

Often, the complaint is heard from those "in the mission field" that when people in "Salt Lake" attempt to impose a certain way of doing things with respect to how the Church of Jesus Christ operates, the people in "Salt Lake" have no idea of the challenges involved in trying to implement something that, while it may work well in "Salt Lake" or in Utah or in "The Mormon Corridor" [sic], won't work nearly the same way elsewhere.  As bad as it some people might see it for people in "Salt Lake" to foist a Churchwide solution on people worldwide, attempting to adopt a Church-of-Jesus-Christ-wide environmental ethic might be that particular problem on steroids.

[The Nehor]

16 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I’ve been reading the decline and fall of the Roman empire in my spare time. I’m only a chapter or two in, roughly the early 90s in US equivalent.

If you want to be more miserable and sad and anxious than you are now, a good way to do that is to read the Decline and fall of the Roman empire.

I am miserable and sad a lot of the time but not anxious. Rome’s fall is instructive. It was so utterly and completely predictable but those who could do something about it wouldn’t because it would impact their own personal power and wealth adversely. So they just held on and hoped the problem would go away.

[bluebell]

56 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am miserable and sad a lot of the time but not anxious. Rome’s fall is instructive. It was so utterly and completely predictable but those who could do something about it wouldn’t because it would impact their own personal power and wealth adversely. So they just held on and hoped the problem would go away.

If history is any indication, we are due for some hard times ahead.

The average civilization survives 250 to 400 years, but even the ones that keep on into the 300 year mark usually only do so after a major reorganization/change (brought on by a sharp decline and partial collapse of the old system).  It's never just been a Rome problem and is almost always predictable from the outside.  Momentum and the decline/breakdown of the civilization before the fall often makes it incredibly difficult to stop though, even for those who know it's coming.