I’ve been thinking about shaming language, rhetoricÂ meant toÂ motivate others to action by attempting to arouseÂ feelings of guilt,Â unworthiness, or disgraceÂ —howÂ unhealthy it is, not just for people’s psychologicalÂ well-beingÂ but also for the environment.Â So I thought I’d run a couple of posts about howÂ using guilt to motivate folks to change their behavior toward the earth and its natural resourcesÂ might beÂ an environmentally unsound practice.Â
“Guilting the lily” appeared originally at Times and SeasonsÂ August 30, 2007Â .Â You might find the discussion that ensued on that post interesting (please overlook the font glitches that appeared inÂ the postÂ and comments when T&S changed its format).
The editors cite in theÂ Preface to New Genesis: A Mormon Reader on Land and Community an unidentified 1991 report* that places each of the thirty largest Christian denominations in one of five categories based on their environmental stances. The categories were: 1) Programs Underway: denominations engaged actively in national environmental programs; 2) Beginning a Response: denominations beginning to engage in national environmental programs; 3) At the Brink: denominations preparing to take the plunge into action on the national environmental level; 4) No Action: denominations not taking any action as yet; and 5) Policies of Inaction: denominations that, as the editors put it, are â€œformally committed to inaction.â€
Bet you canâ€™t guess where this unidentified report set The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: yep, firmly in the â€œformally committed to inactionâ€ category. Continue reading Guilting the lily