Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

Latin America's Surprising New Eco-Warriors

By Marilyn Berlin Snell, Sierra Magazine. Posted August 29, 2007.


As North American companies raze the forests and mountains in Latin America, defense for the land is coming from an unlikely place.
Advertisement

I hear Father Jose Andres Tamayo Cortez before I meet him, his voice crackling over a public-address system, warning a young groom that in the 21st century it is not OK to come home drunk and abuse his new wife. It's a steamy day, and the small cinder block church is packed with wedding-goers. Women fan themselves. Babies wriggle and fuss. The priest's camouflage-clad bodyguards stand at the chapel door and windows, their M-16s pointed at the dirt.

I've traveled to Olancho, a lawless logging region known as the Texas of Honduras, because Tamayo has an international reputation for standing up to the logging interests, legal and illegal, that have been chainsawing their way through mountains rich in pine and tropical hardwoods. He and a growing number of Catholic clergy throughout Latin America have come to see protection of the land and water as God's work, their duty to the region's 500 million Catholics.

Although few North Americans seem to have noticed it yet, in the past few years a "liberation ecology" movement, with the church at its spiritual heart, has been taking shape from Chile to Mexico. Will the Vatican, I wonder, encourage or stifle it? Latin American Catholics have, after all, taken on what they saw as forces of injustice before.

The liberation theology movement that began to gain strength in the 1970s sided with the poor during a time when military regimes, supported by the region's oligarchs, ruthlessly suppressed social reform -- killing more than 200,000 people in Guatemala alone, most of them indigenous.

Critics of that Catholic activism, including Pope John Paul II, feared that some in the clergy were flirting with godless Marxism. Rome assigned an enforcer, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, to rein in what it saw as renegade priests and bishops. Ratzinger's policy helped derail the movement and gave his career a solid boost. In 2005, the Roman Catholic Church elected him its Supreme Pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI.

Logging is big business near Olancho, Honduras, above, and efforts to fight destructive practices there have been met with violence. Since 1998, six environmentalists have been killed, and Father Andrés Tamayo, below, must now travel with armed bodyguards.

Today both Guatemala and Honduras are embroiled in particularly contentious struggles over resources. I arrive in the spring, during the otherworldly ceremonies of Semana Santa -- Holy Week -- and just ahead of Benedict's highly publicized visit to Brazil, his first as pope to this part of the world. Drumbeats echo from village walls and tangy incense clouds the streets, along with an air of danger and possibility.

I've been in the region two weeks and traveled more than 1,500 miles on rough and scary roads by the time I visit Tamayo. A confession he makes confirms my impression that the stakes are high in this place where fragile economies and ecologies intertwine.

Tamayo, 51, is short and wide-shouldered and reminds me of the images of Mayan warriors chiseled into vine-covered temples. Yet his hands tremble as he speaks. "Sometimes I get so scared I can't think at all," he says. "I get paralyzed. I just wait for death to come."

****

Preparing for this trip, I consulted an old friend, a former priest who had lived for years in Mexico and now works at a parish in North Philadelphia. He sent me essays by American poet and farmer Wendell Berry.

In one, Berry contrasts the disembodied "rational mind" of industry and economy with a "sympathetic mind" that is moved by "affection for its home place, the local topography, the local memories, and the local creatures." The sympathetic mind believes that "landscapes should not be used by people who do not live in them and share their fate."

Central Americans have always mined and logged. Mayans adorned themselves in gold and silver jewelry and used the precious metals to decorate their temples. For centuries, though, foreigners have seen the region's resources as booty. "Our wealth," Uruguayan journalist Eduardo Galleano writes, "has always generated our poverty by nourishing the prosperity of others."

The transnational companies that now have a corner on Central American timber and metals -- most of them from Canada and the United States -- are part of a lineage dating back to the 16th century, when conquistadors began sending ships loaded with New World gold and silver back to Spain's Catholic rulers to fund the Inquisition.

Today a new breed of clergy is more inclined to side with people like Quintin Miranda, a shopkeeper I met in western Honduras. Miranda had the good fortune to grow up in the lovely highland town of San Andrés.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: catholic clergy, environment, pope, latin america

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Can Religious Support Actually Help The Environment?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Sep 3, 2007 12:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's great that some religious leaders are advocating for environmental protection on the ground that human destruction of "God's creation" is a sin. However, most religions, most notably Catholicism, are strongly opposed to doing anything about one of the two roots of environmental destruction and harm: human overpopulation. Until religions reverse their attitudes toward birth control and abortion, this will not change.

Unless human population is greatly reduced, environmental destruction will continue apace for two reasons. First, there are so many people in so many places that plants and other animals have nowhere to live. Some animals need large areas of land undisturbed by modern humans, and native plants cannot grow where humans build things, be they buildings, sidewalks, streets, or farms. Second, even if people were to consume only what they need, as a whole humans would still be over consuming if there are too many of us.

So overall, while I gladly welcome religious people into the environmental movement, I don't hold out much hope that religious leaders will do what is necessary in order to significantly reverse the severe environmental destruction that humans have been causing ever since we discovered agriculture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

eater bugs of doom
Posted by: weatherking on Sep 4, 2007 12:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love life. I have had a fairly good one having been brought up in the '50's and 60's and having seen quite a lot of the natural world before rampant destruction of it for the need of stuff and profit came about. I have been in jungles so dense that walking was impossible, but you could find a trail to take you anywhere you needed to be. It was always immensely breathtaking, the height and depth of the jungle, the beauty of the flowers and butterflies and birds all around and the smell of life all around and the sound of the creatures and even the trees. I swear I could hear the plants growing, faint rustles and creaks and groans of trees as they reached for the sun. Now in a lot of places all you can hear are chainsaws and bulldozers raping and scraping the earth, all in the name of profit and greed. We are being bad to the earth, as most of the things we rip out will not be replaced. Not to mention that the act of stealing a jungles life is laying waste to the land and waterways of the surrounding areas. Greed and power are like drugs. They consume a persons mind until they are the only reason to exist. And they will use any excuse, reason and power to obtain their satisfaction. I don't like this and a lot of other people don't like this and I w..( and I use this word very sparingly), wish that people of like mind, who don't want to see the lungs of the world destroyed, will band together to stop or at least slow down this murder of our planet. It's bad!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mining in Latin America
Posted by: Pipil Warrior on Sep 4, 2007 9:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The statement that indigenous peoples have always mined and logged in Central America is totally incorrect using the Eurocentric definition of mining and the exploitation of of the land. Indigenous peoples have a tremendous respect for the earth and it was not allowed to dig a mine or develop an open pit that would totally destroy mountains. Gold was collected by panning on the rivers or just collecting what was on the surface. Anything below the surface of the earth belonged to the underworlds and was the realm of the dead and the gods of death- a place that a human would not dare to enter without a spiritual reason. Indigenous peoples had an understanding of the relationships between humans and their ecosystems and respected the earth much more than our global corporate interests and the lust for gold and riches brought by the greedy colonizers that still remains in the hearts and minds of those that control the economic and political life in many parts of Latin America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yeah...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Sep 4, 2007 10:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.. nevermind that missionaries often work to get people off their lands and into towns (and thus, churches)... so they can help the loggers and miners onto the lands.

They may be standing up for ecology... but they are still doing what they have always done there... putting people into slavery.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re: Can religious support actually help the environment?
Posted by: vasumurti on Sep 4, 2007 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to see organized religion in the United States take up the struggle for animal rights. Religion has been wrong before. It has been said that on issues such as women's rights and human slavery, religion has impeded social and moral progress.

It was a Spanish Catholic priest, Bartolome de las Casas, who first proposed enslaving black Africans in place of the Native Americans who were dying off in great numbers.

The church of the past never considered human slavery to be a moral evil. The Protestant churches of Virginia, South Carolina, and other southern states actually passed resolutions in favor of the human slave traffic.

Human slavery was called "by Divine Appointment," "a Divine institution," "a moral relation," "God's institution," "not immoral," but "founded in right." The slave trade was called "legal," "licit," "in accordance with humane principles" and "the laws of revealed religion."

New Testament verses calling for obedience and subservience on the part of slaves (Titus 2:9-10; Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-25; I Peter 2:18-25) and respect for the master (I Timothy 6:1-2; Ephesians 6:5-9) were often cited in order to justify human slavery. Paul's epistle to Philemon concerns a runaway slave returned to his master.

The Quakers were one of the earliest denominations to condemn human slavery. "Paul's outright endorsement of slavery should be an undying embarrassment to Christianity as long as they hold the entire New Testament to be the word of God," says Quaker physician Dr. Charles P. Vaclavik.

"Without a doubt, the American slaveholders quoted Paul again and again to substantiate their right to hold slaves. The moralist movement to abolish slavery had to go to non-Biblical sources to demonstrate the immoral nature of slavery. The abolitionists could not turn to Christian sources to condemn slavery, for Christianity had become the bastion of the evil practice through its endorsement by the Apostle Paul.

"Only the Old Testament gave the abolitionist any Biblical support in his efforts to free the slaves. 'You shall not surrender to his master a slave who has taken refuge with you.' (Deuteronomy 23:15) What a pittance of material opposing slavery from a book supposedly representing the word of God."

In 1852, Josiah Priest wrote Bible Defense of Slavery. Buckner H. Payne, calling himself "Ariel," wrote in 1867: "the tempter in the Garden of Eden...was a beast, a talking beast...the negro." Ariel argued since the negro was not part of Noah's family, he must have been a beast. Eight souls were saved on the ark, therefore, the negro must be a beast, and "consequently, he has no soul to be saved."

The status of animals today is not unlike that of human slaves in centuries past. Quoting Isaiah 61:1, Luke 4:18, Colossians 3:11, Galatians 3:28 or any other biblical passages in favor of liberty, equality and an end to human slavery in the 18th or 19th century would have been met with the same kind of response animal rights activists receive today if they quote Bible verses in favor of ethical vegetarianism and compassion towards animals.

Reverend Marc Wessels of the International Network for Religion and Animals said on Earth Day 1990:

"It is a fact that no significant social reform has yet taken place in this country without the voice of the religious community being heard. The endeavors of the abolition of slavery; the women's suffrage movement; the emergence of the pacifist tradition during World War I; the struggles to support civil rights, labor unions, and migrant farm workers; and the anti-nuclear and peace movements have all succeeded in part because of the power and support of organized religion. Such authority and energy is required by individual Christians and the institutional church today if the liberation of animals is to become a reality."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This reminds me why I quit the Sierra Club in disgust (after 20+ years)!
Posted by: Pat Kittle on Sep 4, 2007 1:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In recent years the Club has been taken over by imposters who have so trivialized overpopulation that it doesn't even get lip service here in this 5-page article about "Latin America's Surprising New Eco-Warriors."

I'm sorry to say, that's not surprising.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go Catholic clergy!!!!
Posted by: anonymous black writer on Sep 20, 2007 4:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will all the differences between Protestants and all the mistakes Catholics made in the past-not that Protestants have not made their share-this is good. Go Catholic Clergy. This is more than I can say for the leadership of Christian Conservatives and Pentecostal Green Gospel followers. One and the same in alot of instances if not all. Can't blame at least some environmental concern on the "fanaticism" of the tree-hugging green. I am no card carrying true believer of environmentalism-not that that is probably a bad thing-but we could stand to treat the earth better. After all, we use its resources and depend on it for survival and sustenance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]