Today’s Daily Office Gospel reading (John 6:1-15) was John’s
version of the familiar story of the feeding of the five thousand. John writes
that when a huge crowd of people was approaching, Jesus asked Philip “Where are
we to buy bread for these people to eat?” Jesus knew what he would do to feed
the crowd, but he wanted to see what sort of an answer he got. Philip’s answer
is a non-answer, understandable under the circumstances. He points out that
even if they had the equivalent of six months’ wages to spend, it would barely
give everyone in the crowd a little bit to eat. The unspoken assertion is that
they do not have money like that to spend anyway. Then Andrew says, ‘There is a
boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish. But what are they among so
many people?”
We know the rest of the story: Jesus blesses the loaves and
fishes and the disciples distribute them. Everyone eats, and at the end they
fill twelve baskets with leftovers.
People puzzle over this miracle story or simply marvel at
it. What struck me reading it early this morning, though, was the contribution
of the unnamed boy. I imagined Jesus talking to the disciples, having this
adult conversation about how to do something that looked difficult to
impossible to do, and a little boy standing there listening. A child knows
little about the marketplace and probably has an even harder time comprehending
the size of the crowd than do the disciples. But a child with five loaves of
bread and two fish probably thinks he has a good amount of food! He doesn't
know it isn't enough; he knows that he can help to feed the crowd, and he
offers what he has.
The story from this point of view is less about the miracle
or the lack of faith of the disciples than it is about the faith and generosity
of a child who isn’t afraid to try to solve the problem. The disciples see what
won’t work with the solution of buying food or of using what is at hand; they
see failure as the only possibility because the chances of feeding that big a
crowd with that amount of food are slim to none. I imagine the child, in
contrast, brightening with the hope of being able to solve the problem.
For some reason I paid attention this morning when this
aspect of the story surfaced.
When I sat down to check the day’s news, I saw that the
State Department’s
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL Project
was expected to be released today, and later in the day it was indeed released.
The report finds that the impact on climate change is not significant; at the
same time the report does say that there are greater emissions of greenhouse
gases from the cumulative “well-to-wheels” effects of tar sands crude as
compared to crude oil from other sources. (Executive Summary, Section 4.1.1)
There is an underlying assumption that the tar sands will be mined with or
without the pipeline.[i]
Environmentalists opposed to the Keystone XL project for a
variety of reasons had hoped the report might clearly report that approval of
the project would result in a significant and harmful increase in greenhouse
gas emissions. President Obama had said that the effect on greenhouse gas
emissions and climate change was a critical piece of his decision-making on the
pipeline. Many news sources say that this report opens the way for President Obama to approve the pipeline.
There are, of course, many reasons to oppose this pipeline,
and people who are concerned about the environment we are leaving as our legacy
are not convinced that this is a harmless project. (See, for example, this
statement from the Sierra Club, this
by climate scientist Michael Mann, or these responses from
Nebraska leaders in the movement to stop the pipeline.) While leaders have
talked about the need to keep fighting, there has been some despair from the environmental
community and concerned citizens in general today because it looks as if the
oil industry with its huge amounts of money and the power and political
influence that seems to be able to buy has the less moneyed, less powerful
environmentalists in a corner. There has been an adult conversation today about
how to do something – stop the Keystone XL pipeline -- that looks difficult to
impossible to do.
But I heard Andrew say, “There is a boy here who has five
barley loaves and two fish.” And I began seeing what we have. Look over here --
there is a solar and wind powered
energy barn - that has been built in the path of the pipeline. And over there
are First Nations people in Canada who know the effects of the pollution from tar
sands mining, and people on Indian reservations in the United States in the
path of the pipeline who stand in solidarity against it. There are men and
women who write regularly to elected officials and call the White House and
talk to their neighbors about what is happening. There are grandmothers in Lincoln who bake
apple pies to give to officials who do the right thing, and who encourage others
to act in positive ways to counter despair. There are farmers and ranchers over
there ready to stand their ground. And right here are people of faith who pray and preach and teach because we are people of hope and faith who know
the outcome of the David and Goliath story and the Easter story.
We don’t know how all of this will work out, but we do know
that when we offer what we have and put our eagerness to help ahead of our
worries about our chances for success, God can find a way where we see little
chance of one. When I pray about the pipeline in days ahead, I will keep in front of me the image of the little boy offering his loaves and fish to feed the crowd.
[i]
In Section 4.1.3, the report includes this chillingly factual account of
climate change impacts that can be expected once the pipeline is built:
However, during the subsequent operational time period, the following
climate changes are anticipated to occur regardless of any potential effects
from the proposed Project:
Warmer winter temperatures;
A shorter cool season;
A longer duration of frost-free periods;
More freeze-thaw cycles per year (which could lead to
an increased number of episodes of soil contraction and expansion);
Warmer summer temperatures;
Increased number of hot days and consecutive hot days;
and
Longer summers (which could lead to impacts associated
with heat stress and wildfire risks).
The report concludes that the risk of spills from any
of these climate impacts is less than the risks of spills from other causes.
