Catholic Exchange

Earth’s Revenge &#0151 Gaia Is One Unhappy Lady

If you watch nature shows, you may notice how often writers use terms like "nature's wrath" and "nature's fury" — even though we no longer believe that earthquakes, storms or lightning are caused by angry gods.

Or maybe we still do.

The headline of a recent New York Times article read, "On Screens Soon, Abused Earth Gets Its Revenge." The story was about upcoming films that depict the planet's efforts to "even the score" against the human race.

In these films, the "victim" isn't a person or group of people — it's "the environment." And the "enemy" is, you guessed it, us!

As the article pointed out, this plot line isn't limited to films with an obvious environmental message like the 2004 release The Day After Tomorrow.

For example, if you say Transformers to parents, they'll think of a cartoon series. The only thing they would expect a Transformers movie to advocate would be the purchase of yet more action figures for their sons to leave scattered around the house. Yet in the film version Earth is devastated, not by robots like in the Transformers cartoons, but by "environmental change."

Likewise, whereas the original Creature from the Black Lagoon was a kind of evolutionary monster, the updated version is the product of big pharmaceutical companies' desecration of the rain forest.

Then there's the upcoming film The Happening by the writer-director of Sixth Sense and Signs. In it, nature, under siege from humanity, sets out to reduce the number of people. Things like wind and flowers become deadly weapons in the hands of our hacked-off adversary, Mother Earth.

Now, horror as punishment isn't new. In books and movies, the threat coming from the monster was often the personification of our guilty consciences, the result of our own folly and pride.

But now, it's personal. A vengeful Earth insists in "culling the herd," whether by freezing, drowning, or poisoning humans. Only after it has reduced our numbers to a level where it no longer feels threatened by us will it relent in its punishment.

This should sound familiar. Hardly a year goes by without some environmentalist saying publicly what others say privately: The world would benefit from a drastic reduction in human population. If we won't control our population, nature will do the job for us.

What also should sound familiar is the way that Earth is spoken of as if it were alive. It's in keeping with the "paganism-lite" that permeates much of our culture, especially our pop culture.

Like the real thing, paganism-lite treats nature and natural forces as if they were sentient beings with a will. Intelligent people will use the word Gaia, the name of the Greek earth goddess, without a hint of irony. Of course, real pagans would sometimes engage in human sacrifice to appease these angry gods or supernatural beings. The proponents of paganism-lite aren't ready to go that far. At least not yet.

That's why, instead of sacrificing people in bogs, they make movies about angry bogs. Instead of trying to appease Poseidon, they depict Manhattan under twenty feet of water. Because reducing human population is one thing — reducing studio profits, that's quite another.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Pax Christi:

         I enjoyed the article, "Earth's Revenge," but would disagree with part of its analysis of Enviropaganism as "paganism lite," namely "real pagans would sometimes engage in human sacrifice to appease these angry gods….The proponents of paganism-lite aren't ready to go that far.  At least not yet."

          Oh, but they have.  And for quite some time – only the form of public worship and testimony are different.  There is no shortage of examples of the correlation between the Enviropagan agenda with that of the pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, anti-family crowd.  With that in mind, it is well to note that, historically, goddess religions have been some of the bloodiest and most destructive, both in terms of human (especially infant) sacrifice, and in promoting a very anti-family view among devotees.  Women were associated with power, not with life, even in fertility cults.  This view of women continues today in both the Enviropagan crowd and among pro-choice groups.  Today, abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, as well as anti-family policy agendae of all sorts are constantly proposed and promoted by Enviropagans to reduce the population sufficiently to appease the overtaxed earth goddess.  In ancient times we had temple priests and scribes; today, we have the television and certain elements of education policy in public schools.  It is no secret that anti-life forces and environmentalist extremists refer to each other for authority.  And it is no secret that the death toll — and the toll on the human family — have been the highest in all our long and grim history.

          Now, granted, most people who have abortions or who opt for euthanasia are doing it for very subjective reasons: I have yet to hear of more than one or two who have aborted because they wanted to, as Dickens put it in A Christmas Carol, "reduce the surplus population."  I have, however, known of a couple of people who have given this as the reason for killing their child — what they thought was a worthwhile sacrifice to appease Mother Earth.  Even if Gaia-worship never factored into a decision to euthanize, abort or, for that matter, to contracept, our society in general accepts the congruity of this bloodbath and the outright war against humanity as a proper relationship with the earth as though it were a sentient someone responding to our decisions.  The earth is consiously refered to as being raped by humans who deserve raw justice; the earth is a woman vulnerable to depradation and has absolute power over us at the same time — only we are too stupid and proud to give her proper worship.

         The anti-life, anti-family, promiscuous trend today is congruous with the idea that a woman is either merely someone vulnerable to exploitation or an isolated, raw will-power.  She is not considered a someone who gives and protects life.  Enviropaganism asserts this, both of human beings and of "Mother Earth."  The only difference between old paganism and "paganism-lite" is that the old objectified everthing — hence lending itself to ritualized public worship and to giving misunderstood forces personal names; the new subjectivizes everything, becoming merely an extension of personal experience and will, and so lends itself to rallies, to public confessions and support groups on T.V. as its public liturgy.  An isolated will is a subjective will, but a collective gives it public force and mutual self-affirmation — hence a host of real dangers.

         This subjectivity is why today's paganism is so fraught with fear and depair: all subjectivism is jugement by definition.  Imagine: how many thousands of people caught up in this religion "worship", as it were, by judging themselves and all humanity?  These judgements are often as formulaic as a prayer, a curse, or other ritual acts : how many movies, articles or news anchors use the same language daily to judge humans to be both a disposable threat to the earth, and a perfectible guardian of the same?  The "imperfect" human beings must be reduced in number by abortion, or not be allowed to "waste resources needlessly," hence, euthanasia.  Those who are allowed to live have to be perfect, hence cloning, fetal stem cell research, and all manner of social engineering. 

    Public declarations of judgment upon the guilty are the earmarks of both enviropaganism and the anti-life worldview.  Their standards for judgment are perfectly congruous, even if not perfectly identical.   Now, it is no coincidence that the word Satan means accuser or adversary.  It is also no coincidence that Judas judged — Jesus as deluded and himself as condemned — and so Judas took his own life.  He recognized guilt, but locked himself up with it in his heart and mind.  All alone, he was his own judge, jury and executioner.  Today's "isms" merely extend this subjectivism into a false sense of objectivity through collective, public declarations of guilt, and a sad, desparate frenzy to exact that judgment on all humanity.  The axis of Enviropagans and anti-life groups cry "foul" when we look to objective reality to call evil evil, and good good.  We are accused of imposing our will on others.  No, we are merely pointing to a will outside our own.  Why can they not see it?  It takes a virtue sorely lacking: hope.

    Since evil is really the absence of a good that should be there, what is missing in Enviropaganism/Anti-humanism?  Where is mercy?  Hope?  Even when Pandora opened the forbidden box, releasing evil into the world, a frail winged creature– Hope — flew out too.  But it takes objectivity to grasp and mete out mercy.  It takes acceptance of objective reality to accept love and freedom — hence, hope.  It takes all of these to accept human beings as we really are.

    But — and here is a point to consider in the debate over whether religion should or should not be the foundation for an apologetic –I contend that it first takes mercy, love and freedom to accept objective reality, for reality is not merely a matter of cause and effect, but of love.  The non-religious can, indeed, point to logic, to cause and effect, to science to present how things work.  Only reality based on love, however, sufficiently factors in a complete and truly human membership in that reality.   God is love — and reality itself — "I AM WHO AM."  Forgetting this would not be wise; reminding the world of it may just be the solution.

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Environmentalism has become the new religion. See more at …http://romancatholicinfo.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=168

Leave a Reply