A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

First Things and climate denialism

John Schwenkler with an excellent post taking down First Thing‘s resident climate change denialist, Thomas Sieger Derr.

I’m not sure if I’ve changed or it has, but I used to really enjoy reading FT and was a faithful subscriber for about ten years. It introduced me to a lot of contemporary theology offered at a level that was still relatively accessible to the layperson. In particular, the essays of its former editor, James Nuechterlein, first exposed me to the notion of evangelical catholicity within Lutheranism, an influence in my ultimately joining the Lutheran church.

Which makes it all the more dispirting to see the magazine descend (further?) into right-wing hackery. Maybe I’m looking back through rose-colored glasses, but it seems to me that it used to offer more of a diversity of viewpoints, even while being distinctly conservative. It’s not like there’s some logical connection between traditional Christianity and climate change denialism; surely FT could at least find someone with actual scientific credentials to write about this stuff.

, , , , ,

3 responses to “First Things and climate denialism”

  1. Joe Carter

    Maybe I’m looking back through rose-colored glasses, but it seems to me that it used to offer more of a diversity of viewpoints, even while being distinctly conservative.

    So a diversity of viewpoints would entail following the standard line without dissent?

    Reply
  2. John Schwenkler

    I’m not entirely sure about this, but I think it was the 2004 essay (“Strange Science”; I think I linked it in my post) that Derr wrote in favor of climate change denialism – er, skepticism – that was one of the last straws for me.

    And yes, Joe, the magazine does “follow the standard line without dissent” far too often for many of its erstwhile readers, and I don’t think that what Lee had in mind when he talked about diversity of viewpoints was the practice of regularly granting a forum to ideologically-motivated denial of scientific facts in the service of further destruction of God’s creation. And what, by the way, was the last time that FT published an essay encouraging people to take the threat of global warming more seriously?

    Reply
  3. Lee

    John – exactly. I mean, FT is obviously free to publish whatever it wants, but when it publishes stuff like Derr’s piece it really makes itself look like a tool for the GOP agenda rather than an independent “journal of religion and public life.”

    FT–to its credit–published pro and con pieces on both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. But I don’t recall ever reading a FT piece that seriously grappled with the challenges of climate change. (A cursory search of the site didn’t turn anything up, though I’d be happy to be proven wrong.)

    But what puzzles and alarms me the most is the idea that, somehow, traditional orthodox Christianity and climate-change denialism go hand-in-hand. Is it simply a matter of sticking it to “liberals”?

    Reply

Leave a comment