Reconstruction 6.3 (Summer 2006)
Return to Contents»
When the Well Runs Dry: An Exploration of Water Conservation and Blue Theology / Margaret H. Ferris
Abstract: Worldwide, freshwater is becoming scarce as the Earth's population increases, the effects of pollution and global warming shrink available resources, and agriculture demands rise. As theological communities offer distinctive contributions to the dialogue, theologians need to address the crisis and provide appropriate analysis and solutions from the perspective of "Blue Theology". This paper formulates such an approach, offering some of the first efforts made towards addressing the global water crisis through a theological lens. Within the Abrahamic tradition, the essay examines: how water is specifically beloved by the Divine; and the implications of God's love of water. The paper next discusses how water is either esteemed or ignored by contemporary culture in the West, particularly in the U.S., arguing that communities of faith can be innovators of social change. Blue Theology may thus engender a shift in consciousness and cultural practice from a model in which water is perceived as instrumentally valuable to one in which water is respected as intrinsically valuable. Lastly, the essay reflects upon some of the ways in which a secular community might also stimulate a re-evaluation of water by using the tools and analysis appropriate to a secular body.
<1> There is an impending global water crisis that is little known or discussed in the United States. The World Health Organization reports that 1.1 billion people worldwide lack access to safe drinking water and that this number will rise rapidly in the coming decades.[1] Not only is water scarce in many parts of the world, in many communities water is being polluted by chemicals from agricultural runoff, industrial byproducts, and by tailpipe emissions. Additionally, water is being depleted from underground aquifers and river systems, which threatens the long-term sustainability of ecosystems. Despite such dire realities, there has been little conversation among the American public of the growing water crisis or how to begin to confront it. Indeed, few people in America know where their water comes from or what economic or ecological price is paid to deliver it so reliably to their taps. However, as Benjamin Franklin wrote, "When the well is dry, we learn the worth of water."[2] In the coming years, American communities will begin confronting water scarcity, and must decide how we will both protect and conserve water so that there will be enough water for human beings and the ecosystems from which we draw our water.
<2> In the coming years, as freshwater becomes increasingly polluted and scarce, water conservation will become a pressing ecological issue. Due to the essential nature of water, because it crosses political borders, transcends economic boundaries, and is such a fundamental cultural and religious symbol, all academic disciplines will contribute to the conversation, and among them, while not as intuitive as biology or economics, theology will have an important contribution to make. As they have for the past 30 years for the global ecological crisis, theologians will be called upon to devise theological responses to the water protection and conservation.[3] Theologians will begin to discuss how water, as a part of the ecological crisis, must be analyzed so as to understand the role water plays within the larger, global ecosystem. In addition, theologians will address how water scarcity is a humanitarian and justice issue, and theologians will work to devise appropriate critiques and pragmatic, meaningful responses. Theologians will also examine the many cultural roots of our fundamental assumptions about water, and investigate the religious significance of water, which may give a great deal of insight into why we treat water as we do and how we may learn to change our behavior to be more conserving and protective of such an essential resource as water.
<3> This article begins this process with an exploration of water from a theological perspective. I intend to show that water is not only valuable for biological and economic reasons but also valuable intrinsically. The reevaluation of water through a theological lens is a part of what I have termed "Blue Theology," and it is a valuable exercise for both secular and faith communities.[4] [5] For faith communities, examining underlying assumptions about water uncovers the traditional significance of water as shown in the biblical texts and in the Christian tradition of justice. For secular communities, such an exploration is a model of how a community might discover unarticulated yet detrimental assumptions about water. Further, for both communities it is a call to action to devise their own models of value of water—to discover how water is valuable and how it is to be cared for by all communities. What I most hope in developing such an exploration is to raise awareness on three fronts: (1) that water is important to secular and faith communities, and has profound cultural meanings; (2) that Christians, and other people of faith in the Abrahamic tradition, have a deep responsibility for caring for all of Creation as a result of their religious commitment to the belief that God is the creator and sustainer of the world; and (3) that all people who look to the Bible as a spiritual authority have tremendous spiritual and political (grassroots) tools for activism.[6]
Water’s Significance in the Abrahamic Tradition
<4> Water has a constant presence in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament with over 600 references to water. [7] [8] In many passages, water connotes a precious thing, in others a powerful and fearful force, and in other passages it represents purity and vitality. Nonetheless, water is taken for granted in the modern West, and therefore its ubiquitous and abiding presence in the scriptures is overlooked and misunderstood.
Clues from the Landscape
<5> Water was clearly very important to the communities that wrote the biblical texts. How do we know the significance of water in the text? There are many clues. First off, we know that water is important by looking at the modern-day biblical lands, which are, as they were 3,000 years ago, semi-arid, dependent on rain for most water, and lie between two regions that traditionally have been well-watered, Egypt and Mesopotamia. Today, Israel-Palestine receives between one to forty inches of rain annually, and precipitation is the primary source of water for the entire region.[9] Rainfall varies widely by geographic region. In Jerusalem, the annual average rainfall is forty inches, similar to the amounts received in cities such as New York, Boston, and Washington, D.C. On the coast, in Tel Aviv and Jaffa, the rainfall is dramatically less, averaging twenty inches a year, similar to Flagstaff, AZ; and the rainfall in Elan, in the Negev dessert, is one inch a year. The rain is also exceptionally seasonal, with almost all of it falling between November and April; water must be stored or drawn from deep wells during the summer months. It is well understood that life depends upon the careful conservation of water during the crucial dry season, for without water there is no hope of continued life. Lastly, Israel-Palestine lies between two regions, Egypt and Mesopotamia, that are watered by annual riparian floods, which are more dependable than rains. While Egypt has almost no precipitation, it receives more than 80 billion acre-feet of water per year from the annual flow of the Nile.[10] Several ancient sources, including some in the biblical texts, attest to how well understood this difference was. Romans and Egyptians each expressed amazement that any settled, semi-agricultural population could live depending on unpredictable rains and minor rivers.[11] From these observations, we may see that the region’s water is scarce, and was, by necessity, a central part of everyday life.
Clues from the Biblical Text
<6> We also know that water was important because water shows up in the text countless times, and in numerous forms, from numerous literal uses to sophisticated symbols. For example, several texts in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament describe various uses of water, make references to bodies of water, and abundantly use water-based symbolism .
<7> The characters in the Bible use water all the time, and the ways in which water is mentioned are surprisingly mundane. Among the descriptions are those of water being brought for washing, for drinking, and to water animals. For example, water is often provided to guests to wash: "Let a little water be brought and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree."(Genesis 18:4)[12] Also, there are many instances of water as drinking water: " So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away." ( Genesis 21:14) And lastly, it is common to mention the watering of livestock: "But some shepherds came and drove them away. Moses got up and came to their defense and watered their flock." (Exodus 2:17) Many other examples abound, with equally mundane descriptions. What is the significance of these texts? They demonstrate how central a part of everyday life water was, yet also reveal that water was not taken for grated by the communities. It was acknowledged that life did not exist without access to potable water, and that, when living in a climate where water was not readily accessible, people must center their lives around making sure that they had reasonable access to water, e.g., living within a half-day walk to a source of fresh water. Further, water was not wasted but was protected and cautiously cared for.
<8> Water is also an important geographic landmark in the biblical texts, which makes evident what people paid attention to and valued. Seas, rivers, wells, and springs that appear are often mentioned. We have the instance of Numbers 20:13, "These are the waters of Meribah, where the people of Israel quarreled with the Lord", which identifies a spring of water in this and several other later passages. In Deuteronomy 3:8, the River Jordan is mentioned: "So at that time we took from the two kings of the Amorites the land beyond the Jordan, from the Wadi Arnon to Mount Hermon." A third example of water as geographic landmarks is the mention of the Euphrates River, which in this instance is used to designate how far the community must travel: "Resume your journey, and go into the hill country of the Amorites as well as into the neighboring regions…the land of the Canaanites and the Lebanon, as far as the great river, the river Euphrates." (Deuteronomy 1:7)
<9> We also know about the significance of water through economic clues because water was so valuable that it was protected from harm and from theft. Indeed, wellheads were often covered by heavy stones that acted as limits on usage. The stones were so large that it would require several people to roll them away. We see an example of this in Genesis 29:2-3, when Jacob meets Rachel at a well:
As he looked, he saw a well in the field and three flocks of sheep lying there beside it; for out of that well the flocks were watered. The stone on the well’s mouth was large, and when all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone from the mouth of the well, and water the sheep, and put the stone back in its place on the mouth of the well.
<10> Additionally, we can see how vital and valuable water was through the story in Genesis 21, in which Abraham must protect his wells. While living in Gerar, Abraham’s well is seized by men of the local king, Abimelech. Abraham complains to Abimelech and then gives him a gift of livestock, including seven female lambs. In response, Abimelech asks why Abraham has specifically included the lambs in the gift. Abraham replies, "These seven ewe lambs you shall accept from my hand, in order that you may be a witness for me that I dug this well." (Genesis 21:30) The well was so precious to Abraham, and his household, that he marked the agreement to return the well with the remarkable gift of the young, fertile ewes. Lastly, in the Exodus narrative, we see an example of access to water being purchased. In the text, as the Israelites enter the desert wilderness, God says to Moses, " You shall purchase food from them for money, so that you may eat; and you shall also buy water from them for money, so that you may drink." ( Deuteronomy 2:6) The verse acknowledges that water was so dear to the desert communities that they would have very little to spare, and that they should be properly compensated for the sacrifice of giving water to thousands of Israelites. Overall, these and similar biblical passages communicate to the modern reader how important water was to the ancient Israelite community.
<11> Next, let us examine how the symbolism of water in the biblical texts demonstrates how central and important water was to the ancient communities. Water is an important symbol in both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. In the Hebrew Bible, we see that water has a presence as a symbol in many of the foundational stories in the texts: the creation account, the flood narrative, the Exodus, and the wandering in the wilderness. Indeed, it is impossible to imagine the stories of Genesis and Exodus without the presence of water.
<12> One of the best examples of water as a recurring symbol in the texts is a biblical motif that uses water to signify fertility and promise: the woman met at the well. We see the recurring motif in four Hebrew Bible passages: in the first two instances, the characters—Abraham’s servant (as proxy for Isaac) and Jacob—are searching for a wife. In the second two instances, the characters of Moses and King Saul are not in search of wives but when each arrives at the well he meets a group of eligible women. Why do they meet the women at wells, rather than other places? Because in the stories, the wells connote several important characteristics about the women: their purity, their fecundity, and the fulfillment of God’s promise of progeny for the descendents of Abraham. In the first examples, Isaac and Jacob’s stories, the women are unmarried and are as pure as the water that they draw. In Isaac’s story (Genesis 24), the text declares, "The girl was very fair to look upon, a virgin whom no man had known." (Genesis 24:16). In Jacob’s story (Genesis 29), the text does not overtly say, but it is clear that Rachel is a virgin. We will see below how the symbolism of water within the motif of the woman met at the well, particularly as it indicates the purity of the woman, will be played upon in the Gospel of John. In each story, women are expected to draw water for the man, which may be seen as symbolic of sexual coupling and producing offspring. After water is drawn from the wells, each meeting in the first three stories culminates in a marriage (Isaac, Jacob, Moses). In the instance of King Saul, where water is not drawn, the meeting does not produce a marriage contract and Saul’s failure to secure a bride foreshadows the failure of his reign. The motif of the woman met at the well is related to the promise made by God of progeny for Abraham and his descendents. Water plays an important role in this motif, indicating that life exists only when it is nurtured by life-giving sustenance, which is given by God in the form of water from wells and through God’s promise to Abraham.
<13> In the New Testament, water also has an important symbolic role. In many instances in the New Testament, water is used as a symbol in the text to tie it back to an older story found in the Hebrew Bible. For example, there is the story of John 4, where, on his way to the Galilee, Jesus meets a woman at Jacob’s Well in Samaria. There are two ways in which the text indicates that the text is related to the Hebrew Bible: by placing the narrative at Jacob’s Well, and by using the familiar motif of a woman met at a well. In the instance of John 4, the motif is turned on its head. Unlike the patriarchs and King Saul, Jesus goes to the well explicitly for water to drink, which alerts the reader that water will not symbolize fertility but rather something new. Further, the woman is not pure—the text tells us she has been married to five different men and lives with a man who is not her husband—nor is there a promise of marriage in the meeting between Jesus and the Samaritan woman. It seems that the author of John is using the motif to draw attention to the "living water" that Jesus offers to the woman, as opposed to the water from the well. He is contrasting the literal well-water with the "living waters," the water that gives everlasting life that is only received from him. Yet, even though the water that Jesus offers to the Samaritan woman is not aqueous water, by using the metaphor of water, the text still indicates how central and irreplaceable water was as a symbolic allegory to the communities of the Bible.
<14> There are other ways in which water is an important symbol in the New Testament, the most significant being baptism. Let us briefly look at baptism, a straightforward but rather multi-faceted symbol. Baptism represents a cleansing, a washing away of sin, but another facet is also there—that of rebirth. Baptism represents first a death, i.e. being covered or immersed in water, and then also a rebirth, i.e. emerging from the waters. It is a powerful message because not only is it a washing of the soul, but represents a death of the old way of life and entry into a new way of being.
Water is Beloved by God
<15> understanding water to be good and precious to God, humanity may then change its relationships to water, from largely exploitative ones to relationships that recognize the intrinsic value of water, and thus act to conserve and protect water. We can easily see that water is important in the biblical text, to the communities out of which the Bible was created. But is water important, or even precious, to God? Yes, the texts attest to this.
<16> In several biblical passages, water is given by God as a life-sustaining gift. One example is the Exodus narrative, when God provides water to the Israelites in the desert by commanding Moses to strike a rock so that water might pour out and water the community. Here, water is God’s gift that rescues the community from certain death. Another example is the prophetic dream of Ezekiel. In the book of Ezekiel, the prophet has a dream that a spring bubbles up from beneath the altar of the Temple in Jerusalem and becomes a river that emerges from the Temple, over the threshold, and out toward the East. The river flowing out to the East is a clear allusion to the Garden of Eden, from which four rivers flowed toward the East. The promise of the prophet’s dream is that of an ever-flowing river of sweet water, which is a pledge by God of a future life without fear of drought, indeed a life of great abundance, for Israel.
<17> Water may also be used by God to test the community, and thus while the gift of water represents the faithfulness of Israel, the withholding of water represents the faithlessness of the people to God’s laws. There are several instances in the Hebrew Bible in which God threatens to withhold the rains, the primary source of water, from a faithless Israel. In Leviticus 26:3, God declares that if the people "follow my statutes and keep my commandments and observe them faithfully," rains will be provided. The gift of water by God is connected to proper observance of God’s laws and to faith in God. In Deuteronomy 11:17, God threatens to withhold rains from the Israelites who are wandering in the desert if they are worshipping other gods. The text is direct and unconditional; if the Israelites turn from God, "he will shut up the heavens, so that there will be no rain and the land will yield no fruit; then you will perish quickly off the good land that the Lord is giving you." When God bestows rainfall on the land, it is a gift for faithfulness. Hence, God could bestow or revoke water from the people or the land, and did so in direct relation to the worthiness of the people. We may see expression of this belief in the biblical texts in passages such as Ezek 34:26, and Hosea 6:3, where rain represents God’s blessing and in passages such as Isaiah 28:2, 45:8, and Hosea 10:12, where the absence of rain represents Divine judgment and Divine righteousness.
Implications of God’s Love for Water
<18> The Judeo-Christian tradition reveals that the interpreters and leaders of religious communities understood that water was a central part of God’s relationship to the world.[13] There are several ways that Judeo-Christian tradition demonstrates God’s particular interest in water. Three traditions demonstrate God’s interest best: the Jubilee Year, the principle of bal tashit, and the doctrine of peace and justice. The Jubilee is an extension of the Sabbath Year, and is set aside so as to remember that the Earth is the Lord’s and humans are to respect and conserve it in an orderly way. Humans are allowed by the Torah to use the land and its vegetation to sustain themselves. However, in the seventh year, agriculture of any sort is not permitted. In the text, God commands: "Neither the field nor the vineyard might be tended, and what grew was public property to be used equally by freemen and slaves, natives and strangers (Leviticus 25:5-6)."[14] The Sabbatical year served dual purposes: to provide for the fertility of the earth and to reestablish the principle of God’s ownership of the land. The Jubilee year comes after the seventh sabbatical year and further reestablishes God’s ownership of the land by the law which ordains that all property that had been sold in the preceding forty-nine years must be returned to the original owner or owners during the observance of the Jubilee year. Leviticus 25:23 is the basis of the Jubilee year: "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is Mine: for you are strangers and sojourners with Me." The radical nature of the Jubilee year promoted a strong environmental ethic by creating a respect for the land and an understanding that it did not ultimately belong to humans but only to God.[15]
<19> Next, the principle of bal tashit, or "do not destroy," which originated in the Deuteronomic laws regarding warfare, creates an overarching ethic of conservation of creation. The tradition of biblical law in Judaism avoids abstraction, preferring to use interpretations of concrete laws. Bal tashit specifically addresses the destruction of trees as a guerrilla tactic of warfare—so-called "scorched-earth" combat. The rabbinical tradition expanded bal tashit to prohibit the unnecessary destruction of creation. According to religious scholar Norman Lamm, Abraham Isaiah Karelitz, a modern Orthodox rabbi and leader in Israel, decided that bal tashit prohibits the diverting of a river or stream, although it does not demand personal sustaining care of the individual tree. Rabbi Karelitz says this is because bal tashit is a command to all Israel against the destruction of anything that is of value, economic or otherwise. Lamm also cites the application by 18 th century Hasidic scholar Rabbi Shneour Zalman of Ladi of bal tashit to unowned property. Lamm writes, "His reasoning is that if the Torah disallowed needless destruction of property of an enemy in war time, it certainly forbids destruction of ownerless property."[16] Further, bal tashit can be extended to include objects of human creation, which are in actuality God’s creation once removed. Richard Schwartz explains that the interpretation is clear: "Whoever breaks vessels, or tears garments, or destroys a building, or clogs up a fountain, or does away with food in a destructive manner, violates the prohibition of bal tashit. (B. Kiddushin 32a)"[17] The extension of the bal tashit principle by the rabbis serves to assure that there is no unnecessary waste or meaningless destruction of that which is of potential benefit. Both the tradition of the Jubilee and bal tashit can be applied to water without hesitation. As water is central to life, to conserve water is certainly in keeping with the conservation of the land, property, and vegetation.
<20> In addition to the biblically-based principles of the Jubilee year and bal tashit, specific Christian doctrines—the teachings of justice and peace—support an interpretation that water is important to God. Christianity has a long tradition of social justice with special attention to the poor and the oppressed.[18] As the poor, the last and the least, were so central to the ministry of Jesus Christ, all Christian theologies must address how they impact the poor. As theologian Stephen Scharper states, "any theological response to the environment that does not address systematic poverty and oppression of the majority of the world’s people is inherently flawed."[19] By ignoring water famine and pollution of water systems, Christians fail the poor. The poor are typically the first to be impacted by environmental degradation, and have less access to economic and political power that could protect them from future harm. Thus, as God has indicated a special protection of the poor, by association God has a high value on clean water. Due to their marginalized political and economic power, the poor’s well-being is even more closely tied to water, and to protect and conserve water is part and parcel of protecting the poor. It is notable that this is a secondary value of water by God, a valuing of water for its instrumental powers, rather than its inherent value, which is expressed more directly through the above principles of Jubilee and bal tashit.
<21> Similar to Christian teachings on poverty, we may discern a secondary value of water in the Christian doctrine of peace. Christianity has long been doctrinally opposed to war, despite the historical reality that Christian leaders have incited many wars.[20] There are few natural resources that incite more rancor and hostility than water. Increasingly water disputes incite military action, from region against region to nation against nation. International water expert Peter Gleick explains that water has the potential to create conflict in three ways: water as a military or political goal, water as a weapon of war, and water as a target of war.[21] Some believe that water conflicts have the potential to cause constant regional and global conflicts, and that security from war lies in fair and sustainable management of water resources worldwide. Hence, the equitable distribution of water may also be understood as important to God, as an important element in avoiding the outbreak of violence among people and among nations. As seen above, water is directly and secondarily important to God, as a sustainer of life and as a critical part of social interactions in every region around the globe.
Ecotheology, A New Theological Interpretation
<22> There is a third way in which we can uncover God’s love of water—the theological interpretation of Ecotheology. Ecotheology is a relatively new field of theology, begun in the early 1960’s in response to the growing understanding of how human economic development was dramatically and negatively affecting the Earth.[22] There are several branches of Ecotheology, ranging from the conservative to the radical, but each shares the beliefs that the Christian community has, since the eighteenth century, ignored the ecological principles intrinsic to the biblical texts, and that Christians have elevated the status of humanity so much that they have created an anthropocentric doctrine that needs careful deconstruction and mindful reconstruction . Several religious studies scholars have shown that the divine relationship is not anthropocentric but Gaia-centric. In the field of Ecotheology, it is generally agreed that God’s love of the world is apparent, as demonstrated by religious scholars who have reexamined passages such as the creation accounts (Genesis 1 and Genesis 2). Further, the covenant that God makes with the people is not that of crowning a king but of appointing a viceroy or a steward. God loves all the birds and each leaf on each tree, as we may see in Matthew 6:26 and 6:28. God also loves all the plants and creatures of the rivers, lakes and seas (Genesis 1:12), and the water itself (Genesis 1:10). The created order is good, and is beloved by God, and is not merely of instrumental value. By demonstrating that the original meaning of the text has been overlooked or misinterpreted, and that the care of all of creation is God’s intention, religious scholars have re-imagined the relationship of faith communities to the world.
<23> I have based my concept of Blue Theology on such theological interpretations of Ecotheology. As Ecotheology asserts that the whole world is important and loved by God, Blue Theology identifies water as important and loved by God, both for its intrinsic value and also for its instrumental value to all creatures and ecological systems on Earth. Blue Theology finds that water is precious to God, and therefore precious to faith communities, and others, and should be stewarded (protected and conserved) by human beings. Further, as the water crisis around the globe increases, water becomes an urgent social, economic, and ecological issue. My concept of Blue Theology draws on, arises from, all of the above discussions.
The Value of Water
<24> Unlike the historical communities of the Bible, we are neither water-literate nor do we value our water. We merely expect it to be there. How do we know that we do not value water as a community? There are several indicators.
<25> First, in the American West, we use too much water and wastefully use it.[23] In arid and semi-arid regions where water should be conserved, residences and business over-water their landscaping and, moreover, cultivate vegetation that is inappropriate for the climate. These behaviors are typically based on water-illiteracy and older gardening practices that come from regions, such as the East Coast of the United States, where rainfall is abundant. In commercial and residential properties, it is commonplace to use inefficient appliances, such as washing machines and dishwashers, as well as toilets that use much more water than necessary. Yet, the inefficient machines are not replaced because the economic cost of replacement is considered too high and the benefits to households and communities are considered so low, or esoteric, as to not be worthwhile. In regions where we import water from thousands of miles away, we use potable water to irrigate when we could use less treated water or reclaimed wastewater.
<26> Second, we do not protect our groundwater, river systems, or oceans from pollution. We dump sewage into our oceans and we underfund enforcement of anti-pollution laws so significantly that polluters are minimally deterred. We also over-harvest our groundwater and river water, and we over-dam our major rivers. Overdrawing water has a deleterious effect on watersheds, even changing water temperatures in streams and rivers, which in turn negatively impacts marine life.
<27> Third, we don’t recognize water’s true economic value. Rather than reasonable assessment of needs and available resources, we allow historic water agreements to determine both water rights and water rates, especially in the Western United States. As a result, agriculture in the American West—particularly in California’s two leading agricultural regions, the Central Valley and the Imperial Valley—is cheap because water is subsidized, making the true cost of agricultural products misrepresentative of the true cost of bringing the crops to market. If we genuinely valued water, we could include water costs in the overall cost of a commodity rather than considering the water costs to be externalities.[24]
<28> Each of these sets of behaviors indicate that we only value water for what it provides us in the aggregate: a lifestyle of luxurious abundance in the face of the physical realities of scarcity and intermittence. Further, these behaviors show that we are unable, or unwilling, to rethink how we value water in the U.S., from California to Kansas, Washington to Arizona.[25] The real costs to use, and overuse, water are unknown. In addition, the false abundance of water, due to technological advances that allow for the importation of water from hundreds of miles away, leads to false security and ridiculous uses of water, such as massive outdoor fountains at every hotel in Las Vegas and eighteen-hole golf courses planted with water-intensive grasses in undeniably arid cities such as Palm Springs and Phoenix.
<29> As we have seen, water is highly valued in the texts of the Bible, and is valued by God. What is apparent from our brief examination of water in the Judeo-Christian tradition is that we must move away from a paradigm where water is valued merely for its instrumental uses into a paradigm in which water is appreciated for both its instrumental and intrinsic values. Let us now move to a discussion of how we might reclaim some of our traditional respect for water and stewardship of it.
Water as Intrinsically Valuable and the Action Demanded by Such an Ethic
<30> We protect what we value. If we do not value water, we will never protect it, no matter how much we say we want to. Our culture tends to protect economic interests most vigorously. Water experts agree that the cost of water will increase year to year because the competition for water will drive up costs. Some believe that, as the cost of water goes up, a commensurate re-evaluation of water’s worth will inevitably occur. In fact, some economists and free traders have welcomed higher prices for water as a natural means to encourage conservation. However, attempts to attach value through markets, or other economic incentives, is problematic because, unlike other commodities such as sugar or corn, water is a non-negotiable resource and there are no substitutes for water. If the price of water becomes too high, the poor will lose access to water, which is an unacceptable outcome.[26] As an alternative to looking to economic forces to create value, communities may instead look at cultural traditions and adjust their attitudes in order to re-establish the idea of water’s value.
<31> I see our "rehabilitation" as a very long-term process. In Western Europe and North America, particularly in the United States, we are a people of plenty, especially when it comes to water. We have robust water treatment and delivery systems, our clean water regulations are strong and generally well-enforced, and the costs of water for the ratepayer are relatively low. As such, because our everyday water needs are almost guaranteed to be met, we forget or underestimate how vital water is. Yet, we can shift our awareness and change our behavior. A current example of an entire region that has had to readjust its value system is the city of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast of Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina struck in September 2005. Thousands of residents were without a water supply for weeks and months and have learned how life grinds to a halt without it. In all likelihood, the survivors of the hurricane have a renewed respect for both the destructive power of water and for the absolute, non-negotiable necessity of potable water to everyday existence.
Steps Necessary for a Community to Initiate a Re-evaluation
<32> A re-evaluation can be forced on a community by catastrophic disaster, such as the 2004 Tsunami in Southeast Asia or Hurricane Katrina. Economic forces, as mentioned above, may also cause a community to drastically re-think how it values such a central resource as water. The oil crisis of the mid-1970’s is an excellent example of how forces beyond the control of local communities introduced radically new economic realities, and also of how the communities responded to rising oil prices by re-evaluating their relationship to petroleum and the elements of a petroleum-based economy, such as larger cars. Yet, communities can also be initiators of the process of re-evaluation. Communities are in a constant state of re-inventing themselves in reaction to all sorts of factors, particularly when the community sees that it has misunderstood its core values or has strayed off course and must right itself. Two long-term examples of how change has been initiated and adapted (and which are still in process) are the Civil Rights movement and the anti-drunk driving campaigns. Fifty years ago, each change seemed improbable and insurmountable, yet today the underlying principles of each movement are commonly accepted. Additionally, for change to be effective, a community must fully consider and enact each phase of change. Many communities attempt to initiate significant changes only to find themselves thwarted by an inadequate planning process or by having goals that are too large. Below, I shall describe the three major phases of change, and some insights into why they are crucial.
<33> The process of re-establishing the value of water begins with the identification of the water crisis in which we find ourselves and the reasons that the crisis came to be, which I shall call the inquiry stage. Foremost within the inquiry stage is an evaluation by communities of the role they have played in the onset of the crisis, the values that underlie the actions that led to the crisis, and whether those values are still close to the communities’ core values. If the community finds that its values have shifted over time away from its central beliefs, then it needs to take time to rediscover its central values. If the community finds that its actions do not correspond to its core values, then the community needs to seek new actions that do correspond to its values. Above, we have seen many possibilities for how a faith community in the Abrahamic tradition might investigate what the authoritative sources say about water, and how carefully they must be examined within their own cultural contexts (so as to truly understand them).
<34> After the inquiry stage, the community next moves to a stage where it will prioritize its actions, a planning stage. This is an important step for a community that genuinely wants to effect meaningful change. The theologian and Christian Realist, Reinhold Niebuhr, explained the importance of achievable goals, and the agreement within a community of how to move forward in concert to realize its goals. After moving through the inquiry stage, a community must then identify major goals, and the steps that are necessary to achieve each goal. Next, the community must carefully prioritize the goals within an overall action plan, as it cannot act on each goal at once. As a realist, Niebuhr was a discerning critic of how change actually occurred, and warned against initiating change that missed crucial planning steps due to an impatience to "get things done." Idealism must be tempered with sober practicality. To create an agreed-upon prioritization of actions within a community seeking meaningful change is a necessary step. Thus, in the planning stage, communities that have decided they are ready to make meaningful changes should agree what are the most immediate goals, and then ask how they might go about achieving each goal.
<35> Lastly, it is my belief that in the final phase of instituting meaningful change, which I call the implementation phase, communities should take on one or two goals at a time. This is for the same reason as above, i.e. the lessons learned from Christian Realism. When groups become idealistic and decide to make radical changes, or there are too many goals, or poorly articulated goals, change rarely occurs and disillusionment almost immediately blossoms. Richard Wightman Fox, a historian and biographer of Niebuhr, wrote, "He exhorted his readers and listeners to take responsibility for their world while warning them against the temptation to try to perfect it."[27] The temptation to perfect the world, while undeniable, is exactly why setting priorities is crucial for communities that seek to do good. Niebuhr insisted that we must be willing to accept the limits of humanity, as we are doomed to sin despite our best intentions, and we must also accept that we will fail. Niebuhr asserted that sin always accompanies the quest for love and justice, even in the most earnest and righteous of people, because of humanity’s limited nature . Keeping this in mind, working toward one or two reasonable goals is more likely to engender success, as the community will be more focused on the steps necessary for significant change, and less likely to be sidetracked by the temptation to create perfect solutions. As Niebuhr often said, the task is to find "proximate solutions to insoluble problems."
How Faith Communities May Innovate Change
<36> There are several ways in which faith communities can be initiators of change and models to other communities: by proclaiming that water is valuable, by creating water awareness, and by mounting water conservation projects. As faith communities find that they place a high value on the conservation of creation, and on water as a fundamental part of creation, the act of publicly proclaiming their values and embracing a mission of conservation as being church business is a tremendously powerful step for the faith community, and for their fellow faith communities that may look upon them as a model. In addition, faith communities may begin to teach themselves about the water crisis and Ecotheology, as well as what appropriate responses are. Further, the faith community may be a disseminator of water-literacy to the larger public. Churches, temples, and mosques have traditionally been both meeting places and centers of education. As such, they can be very effective educators on the new understandings of water, and the whole of creation, in the scriptures and the new theological interpretations that have arisen from Ecotheology, as well as discerning general knowledge (e.g. basic understandings of methods to conserve water such as low-flow shower heads). Moreover, churches, temples and mosques may be incubators for activism, initiating conservation projects for themselves and becoming models for other institutions within their civic communities.
<37> Recognizing water as intrinsically valuable is a starting point. Faith and secular communities come to this point in different ways but will inevitably reach this point before they can take on change. In the final section of this paper, I’ve described how a faith community might move through the stages of inquiry, planning, and implementation. An example of one faith-based community doing just this work is Pilgrim Place, a Christian retirement community in Claremont, California, which launched a conservation project to reduce their water consumption by half. The conservation project was initiated in response to a lecture on Ecotheology by noted theologian John Cobb, who is a resident of Pilgrim Place. Cobb asked the Pilgrim Place community if their energy and water practices were in concert with their Christian values. He encouraged the community to find ways to express their faith in God as loving all of creation though a program of conservation. In response, the community set themselves the task of altering their lives so as to conserve fifty percent of the water that the community used within five years. They went through each of the steps that I have described above: identification/evaluation of values (inquiry), prioritizing actions (planning), and making changes one or two at a time (implementation). Through public and community-wide education campaigns, retrofits of toilets and irrigation systems, and changing landscaping plantings, the community successfully decreased its water consumption by fifty percent in four years—one year ahead of schedule.[28] Pilgrim Place is an excellent model for other faith communities, showing how conviction can be harnessed and channeled into major changes.
How the Model of Faith Communities May Apply to Secular Communities
<38> Thus far in my paper, I have examined the methodologies a faith community might employ to re-evaluate its relationship to water and to implement positive changes so that its actions are in keeping with a belief that water is intrinsically valuable to human beings and to God. For secular communities, a very similar process would occur. Certainly, the questions in the inquiry and planning stages, and the goals that will be enacted in the implementation stage would be different. For example, the faith community would keep their process grounded in a theological outlook—how do we know that God loves water and how do we value water?—so as to model God’s values and intentions. A secular community would do this differently. For a secular community, the questions might be: "what do we know is most important or most basic to us as a community—is it the health and life of all the members of the community? Is it more specific, perhaps access to a bare minimum standard of clean water for drinking and hygiene? How then does the community express these values?" Yet, as all communal groups, secular or faith-based, successfully create change through similar patterns or frameworks, the implementation structure would be the same for secular groups. By going through the process of inquiry and the planning, a community will come to work out its values and can implement conservation measures that will work.
In Conclusion
<39> By examining water through a theological lens, I have demonstrated how valuable water has been within the Abrahamic tradition, in scriptures, teachings, and interpretations. We have also seen that water, as a part of creation, and in and of itself, is very dear to God. Hence, finding new ways to relate to water, as valuable intrinsically and instrumentally, is in keeping with the work of theology and the mission of faith communities that profess faith in the God of Abraham. This process, as well as that of instituting change within faith communities, is a central part of my work on Blue Theology. It is my belief that Blue Theology can be an important contribution to modern faith communities around the globe, as well as being a part of the practice of modeling water conservation programs that help secular communities re-imagine how to relate to water. While I recognize that the methodologies used by faith communities will need to be adapted to the concerns and values of secular communities, I firmly believe that faith communities are excellent incubators of change within larger secular communities.
Bibliography
Fox, Richard Wightman. Reinhold Niebuhr: A Biography. New York: Pantheon Books, 1985.
Gleick, Peter H. The World's Water, 1998-1999: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources. One vols. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1998.
Gordis, Robert. Judaic Ethics for a Lawless World. New York: A Centennial Publication of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1986.
Lamm, Norman. Faith and Doubt: Studies in Traditional Jewish Thought, Second Edition (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1986.
Oleson, John Peter. "Water Works." in Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. VI, ed. D.N. Freedman, et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Postel, Sandra. Pillars of Sand : Can the Irrigation Miracle Last? New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1999.
Scharper, Stephen B. Redeeming the Time: A Political Theology of the Environment. New York: Continuum, 1997.
Schwartz, Richard H. Judaism and Global Survival. New York: Vantage Press, 1984.
World Health Organization (WHO). Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report. Geneva: World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000
Notes
[1] World Health Organization (WHO), Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report, ( Geneva: World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000), p. 1. [^]
[2] Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard’s Almanac, 1733. [^]
[3] C.f. John B. Cobb, Jr., Is it Too Late? A Theology of Ecology ( Denton, Texas: Environmental Ethics Books, 1995); Robert Booth Fowler, The Greening of Protestant Thought ( Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995 ); Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation: a New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of God ( San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985); and Dieter T. Hessel and Rosemary Radford Ruether, ed. Christianity and Ecology: Seeking the Well-Being of Earth and Humans (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000). [^]
[4] Dissertation in progress. Margaret Ferris, Blue Theology: An Ecotheology and Ethic of Water for Southern Californian Christians ( Claremont, CA: Claremont Graduate University, expected Fall 2006). [^]
[5] I shall use the term "faith community" to describe communities that center themselves around an in-common confession of faith. I do so because there are so many religious communities in the United States, and around the world, that range from liberal to orthodox religious beliefs, are diverse ethnically, geographical, economically, and politically. By using a broad term, I hope to continually remind the reader that there is not one type of religious community. [^]
[6] While I work primarily in the Christian tradition, I do not claim that Christian theology is the only correct interpretation of religion. As such, in this article I will use the term God to refer to the divine entity that is held as the creator and sustainer of the world by three major religious communities: the Jewish, the Christian, and the Muslim. Hence, when I use the term God, I use it in an ecumenical manner. My argument does not turn or depend upon a particular meaning or definition of God (e.g., omnipotence). However, my argument does assume a loving, non-wrathful God, incarnate and engaged with the entire world. [^]
[7] It is a scholarly convention in the field of religion to refer to the first collection of scriptures as the "Hebrew Bible." Some Christian scholars still use the less neutral name "Old Testament", while others prefer to use "First Testament." I choose to use Hebrew Bible because it is the most widely used in American academic circles. Some call the second collection of scriptures, those of the Christian tradition, the "Greek Bible", though this is complicated by the fact that there is another text, called the Septuagint, that is a pre-Christian Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Some scholars have chosen "Second Testament," to recognize that the twenty-seven books of the Christian tradition were written after the Hebrew Bible. There are also scholars who use "Greek Scriptures" and "Greek Testament." Other scholars still prefer the adjective "New" to indicate that, in the Christian tradition, the second collection of scriptures supersedes the first, and therefore use "New Covenant" and "New Testament." Please note that the term "Testament" derives from Greek and Latin words, and it is usually understood to mean "covenant", rather than "testimony." While I am uncomfortable with the implication of the "new covenant" replacing the "old covenant," I nevertheless choose to retain the term "New Testament" because it is still the most widely used in the academic field at the present moment. [^]
[8] There are 629 references to water in the New International Version (NIV) Bible and 636 in the King James Version (KJV) Bible. [^]
[9] A small amount of water arrives from outside the region, from the runoff of snowmelt from the Mountains to the North, in Lebanon and Syria. However, the water is unpredictable, and all but dries up by summer. The primary benefit of this water is that it recharges artesian springs in the region, mainly in the central hill area of the region. [^]
[10] Sandra Postel, Pillars of Sand: Can the Irrigation Miracle Last? (New York : W.W. Norton & Co., 1999), p. 74. [^]
[11] John Peter Oleson, "Water Works." in Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. VI, ed. D.N. Freedman, et al. (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 883-93. [^]
[12] All biblical citations are taken from the Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version, unless otherwise noted. [^]
[13] Here, I am excluding Islam, as I am not familiar enough with either the sacred writings of Islam or the traditional teachings of the religious leaders through the centuries within the different branches of Islam. It is very important to include Islam within the conversation of Ecotheology, and a theology of water conservation. However, I cannot say with certainty, as I can with the Judeo-Christian tradition, that the teachings of religious leaders throughout the centuries demonstrate a clear ethic of conservation. [^]
[14] Robert Gordis, Judaic Ethics for a Lawless World (New York: A Centennial Publication of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1986), p. 121. [^]
[15] Many commentators on the Jubilee year have lauded it while simultaneously "admitting" that, as a cultural practice, it was never enforced or perhaps even practiced in pre-Christian Judaism. However, Robert Gordis suggests that it was indeed an integral part of the practices of the Jews. He states that the Talmud provides a record of that end of the practice, ten years prior to the destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C.E., which suggests that it was the practice of one of the kingdoms for at least a small amount of time. He further argues that the practice is still alive today in Modern Israel by "ultra-pious Jewish groups." C.f. Gordis, Judaic Ethics for a Lawless World, p. 122. [^]
[16] Norman Lamm, Faith and Doubt: Studies in Traditional Jewish Thought, Second Edition (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1986), p. 172. [^]
[17] Richard H. Schwartz, Judaism and Global Survival (New York: Vantage Press, 1984), p. 46. [^]
[18] In describing the tradition within the Christian churches, I do not intend to imply that such a tradition is absent in Judaism or Islam. I believe that there are corresponding traditions within each, but I am less familiar with the scholarly work in each of these fields and cannot speak with authority, as I can regarding the Christian traditions. [^]
[19] Stephen B. Scharper, Redeeming the Time: A Political Theology of the Environment (New York: Continuum, 1997), p. 165. [^]
[20] Christian teachings against war have often been ignored. I do not dispute that the churches have not embodied their own teachings. However, what I am attempting to call attention to is that Christian churches do teach that peace is a vital part of Christian doctrine, and most modern churches strive to work toward an increase in peace around the world. [^]
[21] Peter H Gleick, The World's Water, 1998-1999: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources, One vols. (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1998), p. 107. [^]
[22] Some scholars mark the beginning of Ecotheology as a distinct field of theological inquiry with the publication of Joseph Sittler’s article "A Theology of the Earth" in Christian Scholar in September 1954 and Sittler’s 1964 book-length treatment of the subject, The Care of the Earth and Other University Sermons. Many theologians mark the awakening of their ecological consciousness with the books Silent Spring by Rachael Carson (1962) and The Population Bomb by Paul R. Ehrlich (1968). [^]
[23] By "American West", I refer to the areas of America that are past the 38th Parallel, which are generally more poorly watered by rainfall, and, when there are substantial populations, must inordinately rely on imported water (water delivered by aqueduct or by damming and diverting a river). It may seem that I am over-generalizing, but I prefer to maintain the term "American West" as it demands an awareness that water scarcity is an enduring problem throughout the West, and not a local crisis for one state or one city. In may be well known that Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah lack water, but it is less commonly recognized that most of lower California (from San Francisco to San Diego), the eastern halves of Oregon and Washington, and much of Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, and Colorado are semi-arid or arid climates. Some seemingly "green" regions, such as San Diego and the Central Valley of California, are almost entirely dependent on imported water and, in the near future, lack the carrying capacity for their rising populations or the demands of industrial-scale agriculture. Furthermore, it must be acknowledged that many regions in the well-watered East are showing signs of water-scarcity. C. f. the U.S. Drought Monitor website http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html, which is updated weekly. Hence, while water-scarcity is a problem well-known in the Western U.S., citizens all over the country, and in many other parts of the world, may find themselves needing to discuss scarcity and initiate large-scale and continuous conservation measures. [^]
[24] In the field of economics, externalities are benefits or costs that are unaccounted for in the price of a good or a service. Pollution is often referred to as an environmental externality. Externalities are often discounted as having no impact on the market, or on the overall economic picture, but many critics of economics argue that economics is an inauthentic and misleading science because it tends to categorize costs and benefits that it cannot explain as "externalities". [^]
[25] While water-scarcity and the valuing of water are very pressing issues in the American West, the impact of Western water policies is felt all over the U.S. and beyond. This is partially because states such as Arizona, Nevada, and California are experiencing rapid growth, and partially because of the economic machine that states such as California represent ( California, by many estimates, is the fifth largest economy in the World). It is imperative that citizens of the American West begin to address the value of water. At the same time, it is also very important that other Americans, indeed people worldwide, become aware of the impending international water crisis and how few cultural, economic, political and religious tools we commonly have with which to face the crisis, let alone devise meaningful, long-term solutions. [^]
[26] Often, when faced with rising costs for water, poor communities wind-up having to ration water and to use polluted or contaminated water, which in turn causes short- and long-term health crises. [^]
[27] Richard Wightman Fox, Reinhold Niebuhr: A Biography (New York: Pantheon Books, 1985), p. 167. [^]
[28] The conservation project was assisted by a partnership with a local water agency, which provided at low cost low-flow showerheads and dual-flush low-flow toilets. Pilgrim Place has also consulted with local experts on landscaping conservation, including experts from the Harvey Mudd College faculty and staff (HMC is an esteemed science and engineering undergraduate institution located in Claremont). Such cross-fertilization adds to the overall impact of Pilgrim Place’s conservation program. [^]