362
J. M. Luetz and R. G. Leo
whilst working within their respective theological traditions. Perspectives shown in
Fig. 18.4 are presented along a right-left continuum: The Dominion Prism is presented
first, whereafter discussion of the remaining prisms will then move from ‘right’ to
‘left’.
1. The Dominion Prism
The dominion prism is the one that has the longest history in the wider public
consciousness, probably due to Lyn White’s (1967) famous article (see above). The
dominion prism is based on the passage of scripture found in Genesis 1: 26–28.
Interpretations of this passage hinge on how we understand the divine command
in verse 28 to “fill the Earth and subdue it”. It is the use of the word ‘subdue’
in most bible translations that gives the dominion prism its name. In recent years,
there has been some attempt to reform the dominion prism. The historian Peter
Harrison has found that in the early years of the industrial era people saw themselves as restorers of the natural world rather than exploiters, believing they were
restoring a ‘fallen world’ and ‘cultivating’ or ‘civilising’ the ‘wildness’ of nature
caused by ‘the Fall’ as recounted in Genesis 3. To them, “[v]irgin territory was … a
constant reminder of past human sin and present human idleness” (Harrison 2006b,
p. 29). Others have tried to ‘soften the language’ and place the Genesis 1 command
within the wider socio-historical context of ancient Mesopotamia. Theologian John
Rogerson’s argument that the command to ‘subdue’ the Earth is actually a “reconciliation with nature” strategy whereby subjugation becomes a process of bringing “an
ongoing and dynamic process” under a managed control rather than enforced domination (Rogerson 2010, p. 28). Nevertheless, the concept of subjugation has primarily
been associated with acts of (dis)possession, ecological destruction, conquest and
colonialism.
2. The Stewardship Prism
Based on Genesis 2: 15 in which God places humans in the garden “to work it and
take care of it”, this verse is the hinge on which the stewardship prism rests. The
garden is seen as a metaphor for the Earth as a whole and humanity has a divine
injunction to ‘steward’ or care for it. The Earth is also seen as a gift for human use
due to the command to ‘work it’. Yet the instruction to ‘care’ for the Earth whilst
working it is usually seen as a moderating command that limits and prevents inflicting
wanton destruction and extractive overuse. This prism is the dominant perspective
in evangelical churches today (Goldberg et al. 2019). It is worth noting, that as a
prism, it still tends to separate humanity from the natural world as it encourages a
way of thinking that positions humanity as the ‘source’ of the solution. According
to Genesis 2: 15, humanity is placed into the garden as an ‘addendum’ to an already
operating and self-sustaining ecosystem. Theologians Himes and Himes (1990) view
the anthropocentric tendencies of Christian stewardship to be quite dangerous as it
can encourage a propensity to focus on human agency and problem solving (by
‘stewarding’ the environment) whilst silently removing God from the scene. As a
result, human beings tacitly assume oversight of the Earth and move to centre stage
J. M. Luetz and R. G. Leo
whilst working within their respective theological traditions. Perspectives shown in
Fig. 18.4 are presented along a right-left continuum: The Dominion Prism is presented
first, whereafter discussion of the remaining prisms will then move from ‘right’ to
‘left’.
1. The Dominion Prism
The dominion prism is the one that has the longest history in the wider public
consciousness, probably due to Lyn White’s (1967) famous article (see above). The
dominion prism is based on the passage of scripture found in Genesis 1: 26–28.
Interpretations of this passage hinge on how we understand the divine command
in verse 28 to “fill the Earth and subdue it”. It is the use of the word ‘subdue’
in most bible translations that gives the dominion prism its name. In recent years,
there has been some attempt to reform the dominion prism. The historian Peter
Harrison has found that in the early years of the industrial era people saw themselves as restorers of the natural world rather than exploiters, believing they were
restoring a ‘fallen world’ and ‘cultivating’ or ‘civilising’ the ‘wildness’ of nature
caused by ‘the Fall’ as recounted in Genesis 3. To them, “[v]irgin territory was … a
constant reminder of past human sin and present human idleness” (Harrison 2006b,
p. 29). Others have tried to ‘soften the language’ and place the Genesis 1 command
within the wider socio-historical context of ancient Mesopotamia. Theologian John
Rogerson’s argument that the command to ‘subdue’ the Earth is actually a “reconciliation with nature” strategy whereby subjugation becomes a process of bringing “an
ongoing and dynamic process” under a managed control rather than enforced domination (Rogerson 2010, p. 28). Nevertheless, the concept of subjugation has primarily
been associated with acts of (dis)possession, ecological destruction, conquest and
colonialism.
2. The Stewardship Prism
Based on Genesis 2: 15 in which God places humans in the garden “to work it and
take care of it”, this verse is the hinge on which the stewardship prism rests. The
garden is seen as a metaphor for the Earth as a whole and humanity has a divine
injunction to ‘steward’ or care for it. The Earth is also seen as a gift for human use
due to the command to ‘work it’. Yet the instruction to ‘care’ for the Earth whilst
working it is usually seen as a moderating command that limits and prevents inflicting
wanton destruction and extractive overuse. This prism is the dominant perspective
in evangelical churches today (Goldberg et al. 2019). It is worth noting, that as a
prism, it still tends to separate humanity from the natural world as it encourages a
way of thinking that positions humanity as the ‘source’ of the solution. According
to Genesis 2: 15, humanity is placed into the garden as an ‘addendum’ to an already
operating and self-sustaining ecosystem. Theologians Himes and Himes (1990) view
the anthropocentric tendencies of Christian stewardship to be quite dangerous as it
can encourage a propensity to focus on human agency and problem solving (by
‘stewarding’ the environment) whilst silently removing God from the scene. As a
result, human beings tacitly assume oversight of the Earth and move to centre stage