BOOK REVIEW: Rajula Annie Watson, Development and Justice: A Christian Understanding of Land Ethics.

Rajula Annie Watson, Development and Justice: A Christian Understanding of Land Ethics. ISPCK, 2004. No. of Pages: 395. Price: ` 260; $ 20; £ 17.

About the Author: Rajula Annie Watson is an ordained Presbyter of the Church of South India, Karnataka Southern Diocese. She is the Director of Christian Education Department of KSD, and is also the associate Presbyter of Hebich Memorial Church, Mangalore, India.

About the Book: This book was originally Annie’s thesis in one of the universities in Germany. She starts with how her professor Schwarz influenced her to choose her topic through his article which talks about Christians being other worldly- the attainment of the hereafter, thus, resulting in using the lands as means. She continues stressing that Christianity has been excessively anthropocentric and androcentric and ignores the panentheistic approach, the intrinsic value of the rest of the creation. This ignorance and attitude of human domination over nature (even the universe) coincide with the development in innovative scientific knowledge and technologies, resulting in attempt to control nature, wars between nations with sophisticated warheads becoming an onslaught on the earth, and widespread industrial pollution etc. Hence, Annie calls for a new paradigm in theology which is not a totally new theology but a different perspective and terminology in ecotheology which she puts as ‘Land Ethics’. Here, her usage of Land is not the solid ground of human’s abode but it is just the synonyms of ‘earth’.

The land in the Old Testament, whose creator and owner was God, was a gift to Israel through covenant relationship in fulfillment of His promise- The Promised Land. Hence, land was seen as the chief symbol and instrument of complete satiation and security where God dwelt, therefore holy not to be defiled. But due to their disobedience, the land which was a gift became a curse and thrust the people into exile. However, compassionate Yahweh restored them and the land was re-built and re-nourished, but they could only be the co-inheritors of the land with the aliens (people of other tribe). Thus the vision of the new kingdom of God in the new age, a redeemed earth out of its chaos became emphatic, which started the New Testament. This Kingdom of God incorporates many dimensions of salvation, but also encompasses the restoration of the earth and the entire universe. Jesus Christ, the Messiah inaugurated this Kingdom but the final consummation is yet still awaited. This new land theme provides a new and rich imagery of land, a better place, a heavenly land which could be achieved only through faith. However, Jesus thereby leading the humanity to an ethic of care for the whole creation, calls humanity to be co-workers in the building of the Kingdom of God.

Now, the verse ‘the earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it’ clearly affirms that no human has the ownership of the land without limitations. The given dominion over all the creation by the Creator to humanity is not the ultimate ownership, but rather it is a call to care for the rest of creation- to continue the work of God in creation, a call for stewardship. In the Old Testament, the stewardship of human created in the image of God means, unlike the rest of creation, humans share with God something that the rest of creation does not share. Adam was made out of the dust of the land, so humanity is part of the land and nature and yet apart from the land being the only creation in the image of God. This special privilege of humanity is given in order to administer, to represent God, in keeping the creation. This authority is more characteristic of a trustee than an owner of the land. The Hebrew verbs kabash and radah (dominion and subdue) thus attest that human can be both transcendent over the nature as well as immanent in it. In the New Testament, humanity is called to serve the creation (oikos), the vast public household (oikia) of the Creator God who became immanent in Christ who set forth the pattern of stewardship in humility.

Now, the connotation of stewardship raise questions of ‘Land-justice’ issue as to whether humanity has been ‘just’ and ‘right’ in their relationship with the creation. In the Bible the laws of justice set forth by God is divine decree to safeguard the community’s harmony and to have right relationship among God’s creation. Jesus’ conception to humanity as the poor and the oppressed also applies to the land. The redemptive justice of God- liberation and restoration, love and care, includes land and the whole of land community.

Concerning Land Ethics, scholars have made approaches in two dimensions- Firstly, the classical approach where Joseph Sittler and H. Paul Santmire are prominent. This approach vividly reflects on human relationship and responsibility where the earth is regarded as the human’s own sibling. They underline the relatedness of Eucharistic meal to God, humanity and nature, and as well to the redemption of the whole creation, and attested humanity as co-workers of God in the Kingdom of God, the new heaven and the new Earth. Second approach is the Liberation approach propounded by Leonardo Boff and Jürgen Moltmann. This approach roots in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who lived, suffered, died and resurrected for the sake of liberation and salvation of both humanity and of creation. It also sees the universal catastrophes in ‘western, scientific-technological civilization’ where they suggest a compromise between development and social equilibrium. It then emphasizes the presence of God in the universe ‘God in all and all in God’. Human dignity is the reflection of God’s love, care and liberation attitude towards the creation. Another approach is that of the feminist theology where ecofeminists question not only the patriarchal cosmology but find relation in the common suffering with nature and questions the whole structure of domination. Thus it calls out for deconstruction and reconstruction of the central symbols of tradition, focusing on the liberation of the oppressed, including the earth and all its creatures- a cosmocentric instead of anthropocentric and androcentric theology. At the same time, God being the only authentic ground of human being, rendering respect to mother earth as the ground of sustenance rather than equating mother earth to God, is vital.

About the readership: As this book is primarily intended for the readers in India, evaluation and concluding remarks are made to meet the context. India, being a developing state, has boarded inevitably on the bandwagon of development and use of all available resources and its land. Accordingly they opt to go for huge industries and megatechnology, and to intensify agriculture they introduce irrigation acquiring large tracks of land, abounding synthetic fertilizers and chemicals which all cause to depletion of the land’s health and resources. At this juncture, development should not only concern with how much is produced, but rather the questions of what, why and to whom it is being produced. At the same time distribution is a pivotal. Thus a redefinition of economics is called forth in the light of alternative models of development for the welfare of the whole of God’s creation. However science and technology in itself is not an evil, but the unwise, ignorance, greed and irresponsible use of it are the causes of land crises. This crises is not just a social problem, it is too, an ethical and spiritual problem. For this reason, approach to new earth and Land ethic should be based on new harmonious kingdom- a new awareness, acceptance and obedience to the law of justice and a relevant constructive, not a destructive mode of development.

Assessment: The author has creatively employed a slightly different term, ‘Land,’ but has failed to bring out her stance in using alternate term for earth. She has not justified herself in opting for the term ‘Land’ to ‘Earth’, though it is briefly stated that they are synonymous. Moreover, in many instances, she is found to just swap the use of earth and land which is found confusing. The author has extensively dealt with the Biblical foundations of the concept of land, stewardship and justice. But in her exegesis of the New Testament she still ends up in vaguely defining the New Land concept, the eschatological Land to be attained hereafter, which she criticizes. In other words, she fails to bring out the immanence nature of Eschatological Land in the New Testament. Her keen attempt to personify land too, can mislead as this suggests an abstract, metaphysical relationship, where the empirical reality is still the abode of humans. It would be more comprehendible to bring the relationship as members of the same family etc… instead of explicitly personifying in terms of brother, sister and so on. However, the author is immensely appreciated in her contextualizing of her theology, especially distinguishing her view on post-modern science and technology from other theologians, that science and technology in itself is not an evil but misusing it is.