Do you feel that sacrifice has a central role to play in addressing the climate crisis? If so, what might that look like? Are there other ways to stem the changes? Join Rev. Sue Browning for a service where we will reflect on the personal dilemmas related to the climate crisis and environmental justice.  

The service was in person and on Zoom.

Sermon, “A Link in the Chain”. Rev. Sue Browning, April 14, 2024

Reading  “Individuals Can’t Solve the Climate Crisis”

(The Guardian, Anders Levermann)

“Personal sacrifice alone cannot be the solution to tackling the climate crisis. There’s no other area in which the individual is held so responsible for what’s going wrong. And it’s true: people drive too much, eat too much meat, and fly too often.

But reaching zero emissions requires very fundamental changes. Individual sacrifice alone will not bring us to zero. It can be achieved only by real structural change; by a new industrial revolution.

Looking for solutions to the climate crisis in individual responsibilities and actions risks obstructing this. It suggests that all we have to do is pull ourselves together over the next 30 years and save energy, walk, skip holidays abroad, and simply “do without”. But these demands for individual action paralyze people, thereby preventing the large-scale change we so urgently need. We do not just need the 5-10% of the population willing and able to put time, money and effort into change. We need everyone to turn the tide towards sustainability worldwide.

There is hope that lies in the fact that we do not have to wait for each individual on Earth to become a better person and save the planet. All we need is to create a consensus within society that we should not destroy our home and demand that governments make this their first priority.”

Sermon “A Link in the Chain”

During the story in Thoughts for All Ages today, the Arapahoe grandfather – a medicine man – shared, “the circle means all living things are related to each other on our Mother Earth” and “our Mother, the Earth, is alive and that if we respect her, she will respect and take care of us.”

Mother Earth – the entirety of plants and animals, water and air. Stories told in the sustaining structure of a Tipi – homes built as a circle.

Beautiful images. Care for Mother Earth – connect with Mother Earth – nurture the relationship with Mother Earth – and all will be well.

If only.

If only nurturing this connection to Mother Earth would correct the damage of greenhouse gases and rising air and water temperatures.

If only thinking of life as circles…as interconnected circles…as images of connection…as chains of connections would right the wrongs and reset the the health of the planet. If only.

But, what if it’s not a naïve view? At least not entirely.

Might building and sustaining of relationships be the fundamental strategy for long-term sustainable change that grounds all corrections? Might relationships be where we should start, continue, and stay focused in our work on climate change?

The reality is it is hard to stay the course to stay focused on addressing climate change. It is overwhelming. We question if our personal actions make sense – even matter. We watch the politics in frustration. In the missing solutions of policy and government, should individuals try to fix the planet one at a time?

Professor Elizabeth Cripps studies the efforts of climate justice, and writes on the psychology of climate work. She names this feeling that it’s all too much and that we’re too ineffective as ‘Climate Apathy.’ She’s looked at the doomerism. She notes,

“I hate that climate change is destroying the world my children and others will inherit. I hate that it is already killing people. But when almost everyone around me is acting as if everything is completely fine, how can I make myself do anything about it? How can you? How can any of us?”

She has recommendations – find others with similar views, consider the children, spend time in nature, and consider the long term. She reassures, “… our ‘people’ are out there: countless engaged, passionate citizens working together for climate action.”

Think about the relationships that could have impact …

Relationships to each other.

Relationship to nature; to Mother Earth.

Relationships across generations.

Government is how society living out values in relationship.

We are NOT called to go it alone.

In fact our ’go it alone’ individualistic strain contributed to the mess.  In so many ways we prize a rugged independence; we value self-sufficiency. We are often so impressed with a ‘head-down, determined, facing-down the wind (alone)” determined mindset.

We trust an inner voice calling us: Do whatever you need to do to survive and thrive. To always be on-the-ready to go it alone. To work harder, faster, more efficiently. To carry the burden.

It’s worth reflecting on what brought us to climate change…to a climate crisis.

In simple terms, lots of people, using lots of ingenuity brought us climate change. Farming was updated to produce gobs and gobs of food, and to do so cheaply. Cars and planes made travel faster – communities stretching wider, and factories created to assure we had medicine and more goods and more energy to support all of the above.

The focus has been the stuff, and a life made better through this ‘progress.’ A focus on self and personal needs.

And on our own – feeling alone — we lean into scarcity – a fearful belief there is only so much. If you have more, then I have less. There is a sense life is a continual trade-off of material goods – of fixed resources. Secure what I need; ready for a long winter. It has led us to hold on dearly to what we have. Survival.

The model has not been grounded a take what you need and leave earth the way you found it. Along the way, we’ve centered profits and lost sight of the collective impacts, and collective discernment. Our shared needs have not been centered and harm has been done.

I note these dynamics not to move us to guilt or shame (which don’t resolve issues), but to recognize patterns and to remind us there are other ways of being.

In his book, ‘A Holy Curiosity’ Rev. Bruce Marshall explores the concept of harm, and considers big harms to be ‘evil.’ He finds, “Evil enters this world as ordinary people pursue ordinary dreams and ambitions of life. Evil comes into the world through people who see themselves as good, trying to do good things. … Evil occurs when we cut ourselves off from relationship with the earth…Evil festers when we cut ourselves off from one another.”  

With blinders on we don’t do as well as we do whe in connection with one another. We do better when we see ourselves as linked – as sharing our destiny. And we do have choices to make.

And we each have real personal dilemmas which impact the environment.

• What will I eat? Meat? Animal products? Pay more for local?
• How will I heat my home? Do solar panels make sense?
• Should I change out my gas stove?
• Chemicals in my yard? Should I even have grass?_
• What about recreation – Skiing, boating?
• Travel?
• What car should I buy?
• Where to live? How close to the coast?

Are these relational decisions? Should they be? Could they be? Can you find a frame these in a way that shapes personal questions as relational questions?

In the late 1980s we had our first child and I recall our struggle about diapers. We decided cloth diapers were the responsible environmental decision. It was relational, sort of – our peers were doing it and we wanted to look good. We bought the environmental need as well. We did have limits. We had a diaper service and we did sort of think of the gas used, hot water and bleach used. It went ok. Then child two – terrible sleeper. A relational choice (our sanity) led to ‘ok, we’ll do paper at night’ … and the slippery slope. Child #3 never saw a cloth diaper.

We wanted to be environmentally performative, and yet were guided by needs of the child and sleep.

We each make choices for our family, for convenience, for aesthetics and for the joy of a ski run or visit to a national park.

Our earlier reading, Prof. Anders Levermann takes some pressure off the individual. He’s not saying we shouldn’t behave responsibility in our environmental choices, but he notes the anomaly of expecting individuals to fix major structural changes – and the ways this backfires into an environmental paralysis – a contributor to climate apathy.

His view taking individuals off the hook is challenged some by colleague Steve Cohen who notes.

“My argument here is that it is the thought process, the analysis of environmental costs and benefits, that is at the heart of an individual’s responsibility for environmental sustainability. Individuals are responsible for thinking about their impact on the environment and, when possible, minimize the damage they do to the planet … individual change and collective system-level change are interconnected …change requires individuals to understand the need for change along with a well-understood definition of the problem.”

Awareness is key. There is no one formula for your choices – we make diaper choices – we look at balance, and we choose knowing there is a balance. The solution is not guilting everyone into individual sacrifices.

There are connections. Even the bigger structural work is relational. It needs to start for a collective view, and a recognition that while some resources are fixed, the bigger picture is not.

When we list what we value – joy, connection, care, love, there is not a limit. When we consider creativity there is not a limit. When we consider partnerships, there is not a limit. The hope – some call it earned hope (vs. fanciful hope) comes in the connections and the creativity in finding new ways.

We have examples. Last fall this congregation explored environment issues in the the book “The Big Fix.”

The authors encourage work at the local community and state levels, reminding us many big matters (eg. the electric grid matter.. It is relationship driven work, combined with good science and engineering. The book flags the price of delays, sharing examples of good renewable solutions which have held up by the very environmental regulations in place to protect us. Relationship driven work is needed to cut through red tape. Finally there is a call to be consistent and stay on message in the work to change course.

I remind us of these forward-thinking initiatives – the potential for technical ways to reduce greenhouse gases, and so many other forms of chemical, and noise and light pollution. It is in the collective we find what together we might figure it out. In the works in community the shared hope.

In another example of collective efforts, our Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministries in Maryland targeted five measures related to climate for the 2024 legislative sessions. Four of five priorities were adopted. In brief,

• plans for a pilot thermal energy

• Legal standing in environmental and natural resources protection proceedings.

• Energy efficiency, conservation, and greenhouse gas emissions.

• Home improvements contractor policies.  

And UUFE is in final steps of joining Interfaith Partners for the Chesapeake. Our name will be out there as a formal partner. We’ll share ideas, successes, and accountability with one another. We’ll partner with congregations to acquire the knowledge, skills and support we need to raise awareness to protect and restore the waters of the Chesapeake region. We’ll come together – across a range of faiths – across difference – in hope, not despair, and to stay the course on actionable goals. See Carol Meredith, Dave Stevens or others from Social Justice with your questions. (Note: The agreement was signed April 21, 2024.)

All examples that we are a link in a chain and not individuals working alone, or a congregation working alone, but part of a larger whole pooling ideas, labor and creative ideas.

It feels less onerous than a ‘tough-it out’ and ‘sacrifice dearly’ model to repair and correction for the envirmonment. It’s not that there is no need for sacrifice – for personal change and adjustments – but more that sustainable solutions are rarely found in pressuring individuals hold back time and again.

The hope – what Cripps calls ‘earned hope’ – is most likely when we admit climate change is overwhelming, and from there look to one another.

The poem in the meditation reflected on the challenge of being in a collective mindset – it ‘owned’ the reality that our individual experience is what we wake up to each day. It remined us the work of understanding the common needs is a process.

From the reading,

“And if it’s true we are alone,
we are alone together,
the way blades of grass
are alone, but exist as a field.”

(From “Belonging”   by Rosemerry Wahtola Trommer)

Progress is being made. An earned hope is warranted. And the path ahead is together.

And the relationship guiding it all is our reciprocity with Mother Earth. We’re called to consider the image of circles…interconnected circles. We are a link in the chain.

May It Be So