It could well be argued that destruction of the human habitat is the great crisis of the twenty-first century. Similar to the threat of nuclear war that humanity faced in the twentieth century, the ecological disaster that looms ahead, is a problem faced by the entire human family, threatening, as it does, the survival of life in all its forms in every country on earth. Few would doubt that unless the nations of the world awaken to the magnitude of the crisis, and take concerted action, the viability of life on this planet is increasingly in doubt. In 1993, the Union of Concerned Scientists sounded yet another alarm in the document, "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity." Bearing the signatures of 1670 scientists, including 104 Nobel laureates, the warning begins: "Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about."

It is perhaps not surprising that these scientists consciously drew from among the deepest religious traditions of the West to define the challenge. What the scientists indicated will be required is a "change in our stewardship" of the earth. The word stewardship implies that humanity does not own the earth, but rather is entrusted with its care. Christians, Jews and Muslims, among others, believe that it is no less than the Creator God for whom we keep this world in trust. Therefore, there is no greater spiritual responsibility than to care for the planet that God has placed in our hands.

Not only did the scientists recognize that the threat to the environment is a problem with ethical and even theological dimensions, they also recognized that it is a problem that cannot be solved without the help of religious leaders, and people of faith everywhere. Indeed, the religious communities have a special responsibility because elements of our religious traditions have been invoked to justify abuse of the natural world. For example, a famous verse from the first chapter of Genesis has been interpreted as giving humanity untrammeled right to exploit the planet: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28) This verse has frequently been invoked to justify exploitation of creation in the name of the Creator.

It would appear that the Bush administration has taken a literal reading of Genesis 1:28 as providing the principle that will govern its conscience with respect to environmental policy. From the beginning, the President made it clear that he favors opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. He has said that "all public lands" everywhere should be considered as targets of opportunity for oil and gas producers. Further, he reversed a campaign promise to impose controls on carbon dioxide emissions, even though carbon dioxide is the single most important global warming gas. Bush wrote in a letter to four Republican Senators that carbon dioxide was "off the table" as far as federal regulation is concerned. This is an astonishing statement given his earlier recognition of the necessity for such regulation. Thus far, it appears that the Bush policy is to talk about preserving and protecting the environment, but at the same time to act so as to encourage and enable corporations to exploit the environment free of government interference.

Bush policy may be summed up in a phrase: "Praise God, but pass the pollution."

There is, of course, a giant contradiction between the Bush policy on education and its policy on the environment. With respect to education, Bush advocates rigorous testing combined with a willingness to shut down failing schools. One might well call it a tough love policy with respect to school administrators and teachers. Those who do not perform according the a standard defined by the government will be shut down. Well, if tough love is expected to work with respect to school systems, why won't the same approach work with respect to the corporations that pollute the air we breathe and the water we drink? Why not test and then shut down corporations that persist in sending up dangerous amounts of greenhouse gases? Set up standards, monitor results, and if a corporation fails to curtail its environmentally destructive activity, shut it down. Could it be that the only real difference between schools and businesses in this regard is that the majority of school administrators are Democrats whereas the majority of corporate executives are Republicans?

The Union of Concerned Scientists was right. This administration will not take strong actions to preserve, protect and defend the environment unless and until it awakens to the fact that it is morally reprehensible to praise the Creator while continuing to trash God's creation. Don't expect team Bush to become born again environmentalists until people of faith -- including sufficient numbers of evangelical Christian voters -- see that we cannot be faithful to God without being the stewards of creation that God calls us to be.