Reformed World vol 57 no 1 (2007)

7/30/2019 Reformed World vol 57 no 1 (2007)

1/102

1

Editorial

Five young theologians The Georges Lombard Prize is awarded every other year to

the three best essays written by theological students or young pastors who are under 31

and belong to one of the member churches of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

The theme of the 2005-2006 edition was Water, source of life: socioeconomic, theologicaland interreligious perspectives. The recipients of the prize were Anderson Jeremiah (India),

Clifford Rawlins (Trinidad and Tobago), and Carola Ruth Tron (Uruguay). Their essays are

published in this issue ofReformed World. Two other young theologians join them here:

the Presbyterians Aimee Moiso (USA) and Claudio Carvalhaes (Brazil).

and two prophets Andr Biler, the author ofCalvins Economic and Social

Thought, challenged the Protestant churches in Switzerland to engage their members to

contribute three per cent of their income to a development project. Milan Opocensk, the

former General Secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, challenged the

Reformed family to realize that the integrity of our faith is at stake if we remain silent or

refuse to act in the face of the current system of neoliberal economic globalizationBiler passed away in December 2006, at the age of 93, and Opocensk in January 2007, at

the age of 75. Jean-Pierre Thvenaz, Edward Dommen, and Alastair Hulbert bear witness

to their legacy.

Orthodox-Reformed dialogue Following the agreements on the doctrine of the

Trinity (1992) and on the doctrine of Christ (1994), Orthodox and Reformed theologians

representing the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the World Alliance of

Reformed Churches turned their attention to the doctrine of the church. This issue of

Reformed Worldbrings together the results of ten years of work on ecclesiology.

Odair Pedroso Mateus

^

^


2/102

2


3/102

3

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Privatization of water -a theological critique andensuing challenges for the church

Anderson H. M. Jeremiah

What is the theological rationale behind privatizing the basis and source oflife, which sustains and nurtures life, and moreover comes to represent Gods presencein creation? asks the young Indian theologian Anderson Jeremiah. He describes thenotion of water privatization, offers biblical and theological perspectives on theprivatization of water and identifies the challenges which it raises for the publicwitness of the church. Jeremiah is an ordained minister of the Church of SouthIndia, Vellore Diocese. He is currently a postgraduate research (PhD) student at NewCollege, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. His work as a rural parish ministeramong the Dalit people propelled him to do further research in theology from theDalit perspective. This essay won the Lombard Prize 2005-2006.

Water, without any ambiguity, is accepted

as the source and basis of life on this planet

earth. Every form of living being and

biological life owes its existence to water,

which sets apart the earth from the rest of

the planetary universe. In other words, water

becomes a precondition and harbinger of

life.

This fact of life flashed into my mind on

a hot and humid day back in my city,

Chennai in southern India, when I was

desperately looking for water to drink. To

my agony I found out that the water supplier

had not turned up that day. I frantically

called to check what had happened and they

told me that their supply van had broken

down and they would come in an hours time.

All that I had in my refrigerator was some

coke!

That is when I realized that, after all,

this source of lifedoes not come free; I need

to depend on private water distributors to

provide drinking water to me in this

privatized pay-for-your-life world, since the

water tap of the ineff icient municipal

system (the primary reason for privatizing is

the inefficiency of the public sector!) has

not seen water pass through it for days if

not months, although basic necessities like

water are supposed to be the right of every

citizen and the responsibility of the

government.


4/102

4

This paper tries to look at the impending

privatization of water distribution in India

from a theological perspective and develop

the idea of a responsible church. This paper

progresses at three levels. Firstly, it presents

a brief overview of privatization, a global

perspective of water privatization and

considers some specific cases from India.

Secondly, it shows the basic biblicalsignificance of water and the Christian

theological foundation for a community of

sharing. Finally, it lays bare the essential

characteristics of a responsible church in

the context of privatization. This paper is

not exhaustive. Rather, it raises points for

further reflection.

1. Privatization

Privatization is often assumed to entail

commercialization and commodification, tothe extent that the terms are, at times, used

interchangeably. Privatization requires

change of ownership, or handover of

management, from the public to the private

sector.1 Privatization is the accumulation

of property and ownership of the right to

excludeothers from using it.2

This idea of privatizing in order to prevent

conflict and preserve scarce resources is a

key to capitalism, since it also creates the

scarce condition to make it competitive.Inequality is a by-product of this process.

The ma rk et is fo r th os e wh o have

purchasing power and not the impoverished.

Furthermore, the term privatization

could be interpreted as the process that

involves the participation of private

companies in the distribution and

maintenance of public services with the

government infrastructure at various levels

of agreement and not necessarily controlling

the assets. There are ardent supporters and

advocates of privatization as the norm and

future of the world.3

The privatization of water The world

is waking up to the reality of the preciousnature of water. Some of the facts about

water are startling.4 In this context the

attitude to water has changed. The

important step in recognizing the economic

value was taken in Berlin, Germany. As the

statement says:

Water has an economic value in allits competing uses and should berecognized as an economic good. Withinthis principle, it is vital to recognize firstthe basic right of all human beings tohave access to clean water and sanitationat an affordable price. Past failure torecognize the economic value of waterhas led to wasteful and environmentallydamaging uses of the resource. Managingwa ter as an ec onom ic good is animportant way of achieving efficient andequitable use, and of encouragingconservation and protection of waterresources.5

Th is at tit ud e to wa rd s wa ter as an

economic entity has led the private sector

to cash in on the need for safe drinking

wa ter . The comm un it y th at ha s the

economic potential makes use of this

privilege and the low-income category is left

to the mercy of governments.

The recent trend of governments to


5/102

5

entrust to private companies the

responsibility for securing water resources

and for distributing water is an issue of great

concern. Apart from paying a fee to the

government, private companies would earn

a huge profit by selling water to the public.

The re we re ef for ts to enha nce the

government policy to accommodate this

process.Considering the fact that governments

lacked funds and expertise, private

companies, which were on the high following

the neoliberal market economic boom,

jumped in to provide the service, exploiting

the inability of the public sector

infrastructure. This is true of many

developing countries. India is no different.

Within a neoliberal setting it is believed

that governments should play the role of a

facilitator by allowing the market to carryout the social functions.6 It is too attractive

a proposal for governments to refuse.

When it comes to wate r, the is sue

becomes rather complicated due to the very

attitude of people towards water. It is an

essential part of human life. In the words of

the World Council of Churches, which

probably summarizes the peoples view,

Water is a symbol of life It is a basic

condition for all life on Earthand is to be

preserved and shared for the benefit of allcreatures and the wider creation.7 Water

has a special place in the spiritual life of

many world religions. It is an accepted notion

that all human beings, irrespective of their

economic background, have a right to use

water.8 The UN states that, The human

right to water entitles everyone to sufficient,

affordable, physically accessible, safe and

acceptable water for personal and domestic

uses.9

But with the definition of water as an

economic entity, water has shifted from a

human right to a commodity that needs

to be bought.10 It is very obvious that the

poor become the victims of this effort toprivatize water distribution by the private

sector as they cannot afford to pay for and

buy it. Although this privatization argument

is furthered from the stance that it would

enable better efficiency in the preservation

and distribution of water, and would serve

the poor better, very little evidence comes

in support of this.11 An Indian journalist

describes this situation as follows,

Developing country governments that

are under the charmed spell of the pro-privatization World Bank, AsianDevelopment Bank and othermultilateral organizations have comearound to a consensus that water is acommodity. On the other hand, civilsociety groups firmly believe that wateris a natural resource that belongs equallyto all people and should stay a publicutility. World Bank sponsored studiesindicate that the urban poor already payfive times the municipal rate for waterin Abidjan, Cte dIvoire; 25 times morein Dhaka, Bangladesh; and 40 timesmore in Cairo, Egypt.12

Although the organized private sector

does not yet have a monopoly on water, the

distribution and sale of bottled/packaged

mineral water within the context of the


6/102

6

lack of a proper drinkable water supply by

the municipal system assumes an

importance that cannot be ignored. Maude

Barlow and Tony Clarke, severely critiquing

this process, comment:

The commodif icat ion of water iswrong ethically , environmentally andsocially. It insures that decisions

regarding the allocation of water wouldcentre on commercial , notenvironmental or social justiceconsiderations. Privatization means thatthe management of water resources isbased on principles of scarcity and profitmaximization rather than long-termsustainability . Corporations aredependent on increased consumption togenerate profits and are much morelikely to invest in the use of chemicaltechnology, desalination, marketing andwater trading than in conservation.13

This destructive developmental processhas to be countered in order to save the

earth and the human community which

demands strict measures and policies

protecting the natural resources and

upholding human rights . I t can be

achieved only when governments take the

responsibi l i ty and provide legal

frameworks for safeguarding the interests

of the whole of creation and not just private

individuals and corporations.14 The poor

are the hardest hit by this process.

International experience tells us that they

pay more than anyone, since water has

become a commodity control led by

multinational companies and soon will no

longer be a natural free source.15

Some cases of privatization of water

in India The Indian situation on the

privatization of water is yet to assume the

status of a national problem. But the recent

developments spearheaded by new

economic policy and neoliberal free market

champions are rather concerning.

The pace with which public sector units

are being privatized for better performanceand the few MNC (multinational

corporation) water distribution projects that

are being tried around the country, definitely

point to the eventual handing-over of

important functions of the government,

citing inefficiency, to the private sector for

better performance.16 In actuality the

economic growth reported in India is

widening the urbanrural divide which is

deteriorating the already polarized country.

Slums are growing faster than the cities ontheir peripheries as a direct result of the

new market economy that neglects the

rural sphere, further complicating the

situation.17 In order to sustain urban

industrial development, water resources are

diverted from rural areas. The leftover water

in the vil lages is either polluted or

contaminated, driving the helpless villagers

to move to urban centres and end up in

slums.18

Within this context, when we observethe Indian governments water policy, we

see mixed results. Though it claims that 90%

have access to potable water, it does not

mention the percentage of people whoactually get it and how often they get it.There seems to be no answer.19 With the


7/102

7

growing demand for water coupled with the

inefficient functioning of the government

water distribution system, private companies

have staked a claim to do the job, but at a

price. This development can be looked at

on two levels.

Small-scale privatization domestic and

local commercialization of water As

explained through my own experience inthe beginning, Chennai is one of the

countrys water-starved cities. It depends for

its water needs to a large extent on the

dwindling ground water. The water tanks

too remain dry due to the failure of the

monsoon rains. With the heat and humidity,

water consumption is very high. Exploiting

this situation, more than 200 legal and 400

illegal water packaging units have sprung

up, utilizing the bore well water on their

own small lands to meet the needs.According to a press release, in the past

few years the people of Chennai have paid

$10 million to these companies for 3.7 billion

litres of potable water.20 Perceiving the

profitability of this market, bigger players

like Nestle, Parle, Aquafina (Pepsi) and

Kinley (Coca-Cola) have invested heavily and

even bought out some of the smaller

companies. Adding to the water woes of the

neighbouring villages, these companies have

sunk deep bore wells to feed their factories,deteriorating the water sources in those

villages.21

Continuing failure of the municipal water

distribution system promises a good future

for these companies. The Chennai Metro

water authority has also adopted another

method of utilizing private vendors to

provide and distribute water to the major

unserviced area by spending a huge

amount.22 This is indirectly promoting and

encouraging private water vendors. Instead

of investing in a long-term plan, energy is

being spent on a short-term solution.

Personal experience shows that for many

reasons even this water is not available to50% of the population in Chennai. Those

individuals or shops that can pay more

money can very easily buy out the water

from the vendors, leaving the poor people

waterless for days, if not weeks.

Large-scale industrial and multinational

takeover of water distribution and

maintenance The fol lowing are the

archetypal mega projects of the modern

market world that are at various stages of

execution in India.The water distr ibution system in New

Delhi, following the privatization of

electricity, has been handed over to Vivendi

and Degremont; the latter is taking up a

design, build and distribute system in Sonia

Vihar, New Delhi.23

Tirupur is an industrial town chosen by

the state government of Tamilnadu to

experiment a private build, operate, own and

transfer model. This project was given to

Bechtel and other Indian companies whichhave formed a consortium.24

Vivendi had secured water management

worth US$ 7.5 million in Calcutta, and in

Bangalore along with the Northumbrian

Water Group (NLI), secured a pilot project in

water management and distribution, which


8/102

8

would lead to a 30 year contract in 2000.

Even Chennai has handed over its water

service management to Vivendi.25 Apart from

these, there is this host of Coca-Cola and

Pepsi establishments around the country

involved in monopolizing water sources and

causing severe ecological destruction, which

needs no explanation.26

The effects of these developments canbe generally summarized in the following

points:

1. The price of privatized water involves

the cost of purification, upgradation and

distribution, which is unaffordable by the

poor.

2. Unsustainable and uncontrolled water

mining, with profit as the only motive, leads

to an alarming fall in the ground water level,

which is the primary source of fresh water.

3. Privatization leads to the formation ofwate r monopolies thereby el iminat ing

public control over this resource.

4. In the absence of the legal

implementation of quality control ,

individuals and companies driven by profit

compromise on water quality, thereby

causing a serious threat to public health.

5. In order to feed the growing urban need

for water, villagers are robbed of their

remaining water resources, driving them to

abandon their villages and move to urbancentres.

6. It is true that government agencies

fail miserably due to deep-seated corruption

and lack of transparency in theirtransactions, thus causing privatecompanies to flourish.

All the above-mentioned points could be

substantiated through the cases that were

briefly presented earlier. One of the

fundamental problems is that the people

who have money survive somehow; it is the

poor who become the victims in this whole

transaction. They form a large majority (65%)

of the Indian population, and are excluded

and driven to the edge of despair and death,which is a gross violation of human rights.27

To summarize in the words of Maude Barlow,

an activist, Leaving water in the hands of

private companies which are driven by

commercial concerns and are not

accountable to anyone is socially and

environmentally immoral. 28

2. Biblical significance of water anda Christian perspective onprivatization

The biblical creation story in Genesis lays

down some of the fundamental

understandings of water.29 In the beginning

the spirit of God was hovering over the water

(Gen 1.2) even before creation began,

signifying the fact that water is a pre-creation

source and becomes the basis for the

creation that followed. Heaven and earth

were called out of the waters (Gen 1.6-10).

The waters were blessed with abundant

living creatures (Gen 1.20-21). God uses

water to nourish and sustain creation, and

gives it as a blessing on the whole of creation

(Gen 1.20-23, 2.6). Water becomes a means

of Gods creation. In other words, it is the

lifeline of Gods creation. It is also important

to note that water can become a tool of


9/102

9

destruction in the face of human

wickedness (Gen 7.1-24) and ecological

destruction (the 2004 tsunami and

hurricane Katrina in 2005).30

The New Testament carr ies on th is

symbolical importance of water. Johns

gospel31 abounds in references to it. During

Jesus baptism, water becomes the context

of divine revelation (Jn 1.31-33). It is alsoconsidered to be purifying in nature, as it is

closely identified with the Spirit of God.32

Living water (Jn 4.10) is another expression

that needs our attention, as it signifies the

new life which Jesus promises. The gospel

of John also narrates two important healing

stories by the pool side (Jn 5.1-9 & 9.1-14).

The purpose of this brief biblical overview is

to highlight the creational thinking that

underlines the significance of water in

human communities as life-giver andsustainer of this complex ecosystem. It is

important for us, as Christians, to recognize

this aspect of the life and ministry of Jesus

Christ. The presence of water ensures life

and the absence of it spells death. In other

words, water comes to represent the divine

among creation.

Thes e pr ec ed ing po in ts on the

significance of water demand an answer in

the light of water being privatized. Can there

be a theological justification or explanationof this development? What is the rationale

behind privatizing the basis and sourceof

life, which sustains and nurtures life, and

moreover comes to represent Gods presence

in creation? Ultimately, how do we treat

Gods gift to humanity? What are the

experiences of the early Christians on the

issue of private possession? Does privatizing

water amount to privatizing God?

Acts 4.32-35 holds the key to the early

Christians understanding of this issue. In

very clear terms it is mentioned that they

shared everything and had everything in

common. Importantly, there was not a needy

person in their midst. Ulrich Duchrowinterprets that it was not an accident that

the early Christians had this practice; it is

an outcome of their experience with their

master Jesus Christ, who prophetically

condemned the attitude of accumulation

and insisted on sharing and gaining

abundant life. They continued it because,

through this fellowship of a sharing and

caring community, Jesus Christ became alive

in their midst. The early Christians

represented a community without need, acounter community of sharing.33 Throughout

the centuries this idea of a shared common

life occupied the heart of the Christian

message. In the understanding of the early

church fathers, private ownership is rather

sinful and the common use of goods

manifested the fellowship in Christ which

is Gods will for humanity. Joan L. ODonovan

substantiates this:

Within the practice of the church, the

original use was more closelyapproximated by the communalownership and distribution of goodsthroughout the clerical and monasticestates, but was also reflected in thegiving away of superfluous property to thepoor by all estates of the church. As muchas the fathers, the medievals viewed the


10/102

10

private amassing of wealth, retained andpreserved by property right for exclusiveuse, as a violation of the divine ownersindentation that the earths abundancebe shared in charity and distributed justlyfor the sustenance of all, love and justicebeing bound together. () They concurredin their predecessors indictment ofavaricious accumulation as robbery ofthe needy, taking from the poor whatbelongs to them by divine and naturalright.34

Property and economic exchange, human

industry and market trade have to be fairly

and righteously dealt with, Luther claimed.35

It is important to pick up these threads from

Christian theological history i.e. that there

is no Christian justification for privatization

or claim for exclusive use of resources; rather

we are expected to share and live in a

community. Exclusive ownership and

accumulation are even considered to beagainst Gods will.

Common good is the norm, since

Christian theology makes it very clear that

we do not own anything but God, and all

the earths resources need to be just ly

shared among all in other words; this is the

Christian ethical basis. Furthering Calvins

idea of our resources as Gods gift and we as

stewards,36 Kathryn Tanner says that there

should be a non-commodity exchange

rather than a commodity exchange, putting

the emphasis on giving rather than

accumulating. One partakes in the

community not for personal reasons but to

be part of a self-sustaining society,37 which

stands in opposition to the commodity

contract of capitalist transaction.38 This

ushers in the idea of common sharing and

possession as against private accumulation.

It is not the individual but the community

that is at the heart of Gods gift.39 The

necessity of non-competitive relations is

crucial in sustaining this community, self-

sharing for the good of others.40 In other

words,

The si gn if icance of th e ethi c ofcommon good and stewardship, sinceownership is defined in the light of lovefor the neighbour, an essential mandatefor Christians because it is the necessityof all of us to promote justice and protectthe common good by working togetherwith neighbourly love.41

In the light of the foregoing discussion,

the WCC statement makes a clear point on

the issue of privatization of water:

The centrality of water to life, and theexperience of water as a gift are twosources of the affirmation of water as abasic human right. Just as the biblicalJubilee declared that land belonged, inthe final analysis, to God and not to anyparticular individual, so water should bepart of the global commons and a socialgood. To treat water as a gift of God andhuman right implies that clean freshwater should be available to meet thebasic needs of all living beings, rather

than be treated as a private commodityto be bought and sold.42

We can conclude that any privatization

that excludes and denies the rightful use of

resources is against Gods will and more sowith the water which God uses to create,


11/102

11

nurture, sustain and heal the whole of

creation. The multinational companies that

are trying to privatize water are actually

trying to privatize life itself, thereby excluding

and denying to a large section of humanity

their right to livelihood through the unjust

structures of society. This process requires

serious consideration within the ecclesial

community.

3. Challenges for the church

The church exists in modern society as

the work and instrument of Gods justice.43

These defining words of Jrgen Moltmann

summarize the purpose and mission of the

church in our times. The church, which

stands in the historical tradition of being a

counter community, promoting the values

of justice and love, the importance of sharing,

has to reinvent itself to confrontcontemporary challenges. When talking

about the responsibility of the churches

Ulrich Duchrow says, Prophetic critique,

resistance, l iving alternatives and

intervention towards legal reforms these

were the biblical forms of practising faith in

Yahweh, the compassionate God.44

As has been pointed out, the church is

under obligation to promote a non-market

framework and practise unconditional

giving in the face of competitive terms ofrelationship.45 The theological roots of

economy have to rework the truncated

hopes, unrectified losses, callous exclusions

and challenge the winner takes all

competitive market attitude.46

How is this possible? Enrique Dussel

advocates that it is possible only through

covenantal relationship, which is a pact for

the good of the community. Not through

moral order (morality of domination or

privatization) but by ethical praxis, not

through accumulation, but through freely

giving, by making ourselves responsible for

the other, we may be able to establish a

covenantal community.47

Thi s community relat ionship should

have the characteristics of sharing and

stewardship, not economically commodified

transaction. Salvation is not just an issue

concerning an individuals soul but also

involves transforming the sociopolitical and

economic structure of which the individual

is part. Privatization that replaces God with

self should be critiqued. In the context of

the dehumanizing forces of privatization

and globalization, Hans Kng stresses thenecessity of a global ethic that has binding

values, irrevocable standards and personal

attitudes.48

The church is an instrument of Gods

justice. Hence it is incompatible with the

unjust structures of the world and stands

under the obligation to strive and struggle

for the restoration of the fallen creation. It

should have in its heart combating for justice

and promoting right relationships,

relationships of equality, mutual sharing andcaring with love for the neighbour as the

driving force, embodying the image of God.49

In the light of the growing privatization

of water in India, the Indian church is called

upon to be prophetic, critiquing the kind of

dehumanizing privatization that is being


12/102

12

pushed by the national water policy under

the influence of international funding

agencies (World Bank, Asian Development

Bank and International Monetary Fund) and

to challenge the government to develop

policies that protect water resources.

Being a model, the church should

practise the ecologically sustainable use of

water resources and promote community-based initiatives with equal and just sharing.

It should encourage the government to take

up sustainable watershed management and

invest in ecofriendly technologies.50 It

should highlight to its members the benefits

of rainwater harvesting. As an instrument

of Gods justice, it should urge the

government to take the legal framework

seriously to protect the poor against this

onslaught, by regulating various water bodies

and monitoring the price, quality anddistribution of water. The church being the

epitome of a just shar ing commun ity,

withou t romant iciz ing commu ni ty ,

should live it out in all possible ways. It

requires a firm belief in a God who has

gifted us with all these resources and given

us a vocation as stewards to preserve,

nurture and share in a community.51 There

is no provision for claiming an exclusive

right to Gods gift to humanity and the

church has the mandate to resist such adevelopment. It is the duty of the church

in the light of Luke 4.14-21 (Jesus

Nazareth Manifesto) to ensure that justice

is done to the poor, the victimized and

the excluded, especially in the context of

privatization!

Conclusion

The strongest theological critique is that

the core aspect of privatization undermines

the very nature of community and the place

of God in it. As we found in this paper, it

breaks the bond of community and creates

inequality through accumulation and

exclusion, with the result that some have

access to good drinking water and some donot. Community in a Christian sense is

essentially sharing the resources and caring

for one another. The church as a community

of faithfuls should practise reciprocal

commitment52 by ensuring the wellbeing of

all the members. This is the fundamental

difference between privatization and the

communitarian aspect. The church should

promote a non-commodity exchange

community, based on a sharing and caring

principle, reflecting the economy of Godsgrace. Water is the basic source of life. It

needs to be considered not in terms of its

economic capabilities and potential, but as

a necessity for human sustenance, hence

the importance to its distribution to all,

irrespective of their ability to pay for it.

In India, water is understood to be lifeitself, on which our land, our food, ourlivelihood, our tradition and culturedepend. As the lifeline of society, wateris a sacred common heritage to bewo rs hi pp ed , pr es er ved and shar edcollectively, sustainably used andequitably distributed in our culture.53

I hope the church in India opens its eyes

and ears to these realities and takes a stand

against the privatized destruction of creation


13/102

13

and promotes Life instead! Here is how

the prophet Isaiah (41.17-18) proclaims

Gods promise:

When th e poor and needy se ekwater, and there is none, and theirtongue fails for thirst, I the LORD willhear them, I the God of Israel will not

Other sources

Statements

World Meteorological Organization (1992), International Conference on Water and the

Environment: Development Issues for the 21st Century: The Dublin Statement and Report

of the Conference, Geneva, WMO, http://www.wmo.int/web/homs/documents/english/

icwedece.html (accessed 24.04.2007).

WCC statement, http://www.wcc-assembly .info/en/theme-issues/assembly-documents/

plenary-presentations/committee-reports/public-issues-committee/water-for-life-

statement.html.

United Nations Economic and Social Council (2002), Substantive issues arising in the

implementation of the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights,

draft, General Comment No 15, Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights,

Geneva, 11-29 November 2002, http://www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/

budds_mcgranahan.pdf.

Web sites

Water Facts, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/waterfacts.html,

www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/pdf/chap13.pdf,

http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2003/4343.html.

The Water Policy of the Asian Development Bank 2002, www.adb.org,

http://www.newleftreview.net/Issue26.asp?Article=01.

forsake them. I will open rivers in highplaces, and fountains in the midst of thevalleys; I will make the wilderness a poolof water, and the dry land springs ofwater. 54

God is concerned about the poor and the

needy, what about the Church? Is it listening?


14/102

14

Notes

1 Karen Bakker, Neo-liberalizing Nature? Market Environmentalism in Water Supply inEngland and Wales, http://www.geog.ubc.ca/~bakker/PDF/neoliberalizing.pdf, p.544.2 Kathryn Tanner, Economy of Grace, Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press, 2005, p.34.3 Morgan Paul, Edd Noell, Capitalism and Liberation Theology in Latin America, SantaBarabra, CA., Westmont College, December 1990, gordon.edu/ace/pdf/MorganNoell_CapAndLiberTheolLat.pdf.4 Water Facts, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/waterfacts.html,

www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/pdf /chap13.pdf, http://www. indiaresource.org/news/2003/4343.html.5 World Meteorological Organization, International Conference on Water and theEnvironment: Development Issues for the 21st Century: The Dublin Statement and Reportof the Conference, WMO, Geneva, 1992; as quoted by: Jessica Budds, Gordon McGranahan,

www.i ied.org/human/eandu/documents/budds_mcgranahan.pdf, p.91.6 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, Are the Debates on Water Privatization Missingthe Point? Experiences from Africa, Asia and Latin America, http://www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/budds_mcgranahan.pdf. p.89.7 WCC statement on Water for Life, http://www.oikoumene.org/index.php?id=1955.8 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, op. cit., p.90.9 United Nations Economic and Social Council (2002), Substantive Issues Arising in theImplementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,draft, General Comment No 15, Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights,Geneva, 11-29 November 2002, http://www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/budds_mcgranahan.pdf, p.94.10 Conserving water, Water for All: The Water Policy of the Asian Development Bank,2002, www.adb.org.11 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, op. cit., pp.100-110.12 Ann Ninan, Private Water, Public Misery, India Resource Center, April 16, 2003,http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/privatewaterpublicmisery.html13 Maude Barlow & Tony Clarke, Who Owns Water?, http://www.thenation.com/docPrint.mhtml?i=20020902&s=barlow p.5.14 Ibid., p.6.15 Charles Santiago observes, Water as a global common good has come under the controlof market forces. This is because water promises to be the most precious commodity of the21st century, profiting corporations. The global trade in water is currently estimated to beUS$ 800 billion, involving about 6% of the world population receiving services fromcorporations. However, the global trade is expected to be a multitrillion dollar industry inthe near future when privatized water systems expand to serve about 17% of the worlds

population by 2015. The Big Ten multinational corporations control the water market andrelated industries. Nine of the ten largest water corporations in the world are located inEurope. European Water Corporations and the Privatization of Asian Water Resources:The Challenge for Asian Water Security, http://www.boell.de/downloads/global/cancun_water.pdf, p.9.16 Ann Ninan, op. cit.17 Elliott D. Sclar et al., The 21st Century Health Challenge of Slums and Cities ,http://www.earth.columbia.edu/images/TheLancet_slum_dwellers.pdf and http://


15/102

15

www.newleftreview.net/Issue26.asp?Art icle=01.18 McKenzie & Ray, Household Water Delivery Options in Urban and Rural India, http://scid.stanford.edu/events/India2004/McKenzie-Ray%205-11-04.pdf.19 Ibid., p.31.20 Anjali Kamat, Water Profiteers, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/

waterprof iteers .html.21 Ibid.22 McKenzie & Ray, op. cit., p.29.23 Anitha Sampath et al., Water Privatization and Implications in India, http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/aidaustin/water/water_privatization.pdf, p.6.24 Ibid., p.6.25 Charles Santiago, European Water Corporations and the Privatization of Asian WaterResources: The Challenge for Asian Water Security, http://www.boell.de/downloads/global/cancun_water.pdf, p.17.26 Ibid., p.18 and S. Viswanathan, Bottling Thamiraparani,http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2005/2022.html.27 Charles Santiago, op. cit., p.21.28 Maude Barlow, Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the Worlds Water,http://www.cceia.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/5/prmID/830.29 William P. Brown, Structure, Role, and Ideology in the Hebrew and Greek Texts ofGenesis 1.1-2.3, Atlanta, GA, Scholars Press, 1993, p.42f and William Henry Propp, Water inthe Wilderness: a Biblical Motif and its Mythological Background, Atlanta, GA, ScholarsPress, 1987, p.9f.30 There are plenty of Old Testament narratives to substantiate the significance of waterthat are not mentioned here.31

Craig R. Koester, Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press,2003, pp.175-206 and Stephen T. Um, The Theme of Temple Christology in Johns Gospel,London, T&T Clark, 2006, p.10f.32 Ibid., p.181.33 Ulrich Duchrow, Private Property: a Growing Danger for Life - or: Neglected in theGlobalization Debate, The Ecumenical Review, (54(4) , October 2002 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2065/is_4_54/ai_97118068.34 Joan L. ODonovan, The Theological Economics of Medieval Usury Theory in: OliverODonovan (ed.), Bonds of Imperfection: Christian Politics Past and Present, Grand Rapids,MI,Wm B. Eerdmans, 2004, pp.104-5.35 Ibid., p.117.36 Kathryn Tanner, op. cit., p.48.37 Ibid., p.50.38 Ibid., p.55.39 Ibid., p.74.40 Ibid., p.85.41 James B. Martin-Schramm & Robert L. Stivers, Taking on water in : ChristianEnvironmental Ethics, New York, Orbis Books, 2003, p.178.42 Working Group on Water, WCC Consultation at Mission 21, Basle, 9-13 May 2005, http://www.oikoumene.org/index.php?id=261243 Jrgen Moltmann, Creating a Just Future : the Politics of Peace and the Ethics ofCreation in a Threatened World, London, SCM Press, 1989, p.6.


16/102

16

44 Ulrich Duchrow, op. cit., p.480.45 Kathryn Tanner, op. cit., p.129.46 Ibid., p.90.47 Enrique Dussel, Ethics and Community, Turnbridge Wells, Kent, Burns & Oates, 1988,pp.40-46.48 Hans Kng (ed.), A Global Ethic and Global Responsibility: Two Declarations, London,SCM Press, 1998, p.41.49 This idea is borrowed from the feminist ecclesiology narrated by Natalie K. Watson,Introducing Feminist Ecclesiology, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2002, pp.116-120.50 Also support alternate models such as check dam and bund building, holistic watershedmanagement, integrated river basin management, etc. For further alternates in water

management see Anitha Sampath, p.14.51 James B. Martin-Schramm & Robert L. Stivers, op. cit., pp.101, 298.52 By reciprocal commitment, I mean it is not just that the members of a church should becommitted to the church as an institution or organization, the church should also show itscommitment for the betterment and wellbeing of its members.53 Quoted by Maude Barlow & Tony Clarke, Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the CorporateTheft of the Worlds Water, New York, The New Press, 2002, p.87.54 Isa 41.17-18.


17/102

17

Water, source of life -socioeconomic, theologicaland interreligious perspectives

Clifford Reinhold Leandro Rawlins


There are two things essential to life, writes Clifford Rawlins: water and breath.These two elements, water and breath, form the basis of a powerful biblical metaphorrelating to the second and third persons of the Trinity, the spiritual life of humanityand the whole created order and also of life in communion with Jesus Christ.Rawlins provides a succinct introduction to the socio-economic, theological, andinter-religious aspects of water. A native of Trinidad and Tobago, Rawlins has beena minister of the Church of Scotland in his country for 10 years. He is currentlydoing research in post-colonial studies and preparing a degree of Master of Theology.He is engaged in local ecumenism and in the contextual renewal of Reformedspirituality, particularly through church music. This article was one of the winnersof the 2005-2006 Lombard Prize.

Water is a unique element on Planet

Earth. It makes possible the existence of all

living organisms more than any other

element of life. Indeed, the very absence of

this element on other planets of the solar

system may well preclude the existence of

life forms on any of them. It has been

observed that only the planet Mars lies

within the narrow temperature band thatallows water to exist in its three states of

liquid, solid and gas, and only the earth is

blanketed by a living, water-built biosphere

in which the life force seems to issue from

the waters evaporation, precipitation, run-

off, seepage, plant transpiration, animal

respiration, melting, freezing and flowing.

Earth, as humanity knows it, is the only

water planet in this galaxy and therefore

the only one capable of propagating various

life forms.1

The Dublin Principles for Water have

declared that water is a finite and valuable

economic resource,2 which, although self-

recycling through the process of evaporationand condensation back into rainfall, is not

increasing in quantity. In other words, it is

argued that nearly every molecule of the

wa ter th at ex is ts tod ay fo r huma n

consumption was present at the time when

the seas formed the earth.


18/102

18

This is due mainly to the Dynamic

hydrological cycle that bathes and supports

all life.3 Also, this hydrological cycle yields

only a fixed quantity of water per time period,

which cannot be humanly improved though

it may be depleted by human waste and

pollution. It is estimated that just three

thousandths (3/1000) of the earths water is

available for human consumption. The restis either highly inaccessible, unfit to

consume or just too expensive to obtain.4

Water is a unique element. It can absorb

other elements such as heat and cold

thereby making it a vast energy storage bank.

Other substances can be dissolved in it, as

with sugar and salt, or be suspended therein

(i.e. existing side by side with the water

without changing the essential nature of

either) as in the case of milk, juices and

other liquid or semi-solid products.Seeing, therefore, that the earth is

essentially a water planet with just over

70% of its landmass covered in this element,

and all of its life forms having their origin

therefrom, and that the human body itself

is composed of about the same 70% of water,

it becomes evident that our own

preservation is closely and inextricably

linked with the availability of water for all,

with respect to basic human needs, and with

the preservation of this very limited andfinite resource from which all life originates.

Water is, literally, the source of life on earth

and vital for its sustainability, even for

human survival, dignity and development.

Indeed, The earth is the Lords, and the

fullness thereof, the world and those who

dwell therein; for he has founded it upon

the seas and established it upon the rivers

(Ps 24.1-2).

The demands on this finite resource are

enormous. Industrial purposes, food and

energy production, human consumption,

sanitation, jobs and recreation stake their

claim. And when these demands are

translated into actual figures they becomestartling indeed. Water resources are under

pressure from steadily increasing population

growth, economic activity and intensifying

competition from water users. At the

heart of this there is also the voice for

environmental needs among these other

users in the ecosystem. Then too, there

are growing concerns about climate

change and variabi l i ty such as the

greenhouse effect and El Nio

phenomena, floods and drought.5

Yet theamount of usable water remains invariably

unchanged.

Socioeconomic perspectives

It has been recognized that about one

in six of the worlds human population is

without access to potable water and at

least one half without adequate

sanitation.6 Many of these cases are

located in the poorer segments of the

developed and the developing world. Insome of these segments, however, this

inaccessibility is often confused with the

inability to obtain a developed, perhaps

even luxurious supply of water via in-house

taps and modern and/or elaborate bathing

and sanitation systems as against a truck-


19/102

19

borne or community taps/wells supply

which may have an invariable flow.

This still does not detract from the fact

that at least 1.2 billion people worldwide

are without recourse to an adequate water

supply required for basic human

consumption and sanitation needs, if any

supply at all in most circumstances. The

adult human body is 70% water, and thisfigure is higher for children, so that one may

be able to survive a traditional biblical period

of forty days without food, but only a few

days without water.7 It is therefore essential

to the very dignity of the human person

that each one has access to an amount of

water necessary for personal survival and

development, before the needs of the larger

user groups.

Th is would in va riably pl ac e wa ter

allocation firstly within the realm ofeconomics and the political will (or lack

thereof) to combat vested economic

interests in industry and foreign investment.

The Dublin Articles recognize that within

this principle it is vital to acknowledge the

basic right of all humans to have access to

water and sanitation at an affordable price.

Water must be seen as having economic

worth. The non-recognition of its full value

has led to wasteful and environmentally

damaging uses up to the present.8

Theremust needs be a cost for managing a nations

water resources in such a manner as to

ensure the availability of this resource on a

sustainable basis.

But would it be proper to levy such an

assessment on groups and communities

already disadvantaged by the inaccessibility

thereof, and who are also on the lowest

levels of economic empowerment? An

inherent danger here is that of the

privatization of water allocation and

management supply and services. Where

this action of a privatized supply of water

services has occurred, there have been

steadily soaring increases in rates, watershortages and disconnection without

concern or compassion for those who may

be unable to afford such services.

Applying such an economic instrument

to support thus disadvantaged groups would

affect behaviour towards conservation and

efficient usage, provide incentives for

demand management, ensure cost recovery

and signal the consumers willingness to

pay for additional investments in water

services. It is an important means ofdecision-making that impacts on social

aspirations as well. In a water-scarce

environment, would it be right to give water

to industrial giants instead of the poor simply

because they can afford to pay?

Water al loca tion may not be most

efficient when valued in economic terms

alone or acceptable when made only on

political grounds. Here the value of water is

measured against the economic charge for

use and services. The value of water rightlyassessed would place decisions on its

management and allocation now within the

realm of natural justice, fairplay and even

equity to a lesser degree, bearing in mind

increased scarcity of supply and a reduction

in conflict among users.9


20/102

20

No longer would it be the first, second

and third fruits for the strong and powerful

only, but as a kingdom principle, God

intended that the first fruits should go to

him, rightly recognizing water as a gift of

God, essential to the created order, of which

humanity is only a fraction. The second

fruits, as it were, would have to involve a

coordinated effort among all interestedparties. This means that all government

agencies with an interest in water usage,

such as health, local government, agriculture,

public util ities, water management

institutions, industry and other user groups

should clarify the entitlements,

responsibilities and roles in relation to

stakeholders.10

Water uses are interdependent and must

be considered together. However, entrusting

responsibility for drinking water to oneagency, for irrigation to another, for the

environment to another and for industry to

yet another, leads to uncoordinated water

development and resource development

management, resulting in conflict, waste and

unsustainable systems. Grassroots

involvement should be paramount here

because local solutions regarding water and

sanitation would then be found by local

people who are most affected.

This endeavour would clean up much ofthe bureaucracy, redundancy and

separatedness of human and other

resources with regard to water management

and ensure a sustainable use of the resource.

This effort serves to highlight as well the

interconnectedness of all of life which

postmodern society has maliciously

dissected into various compartments, often

in seeming conflict with one another, in a

vain attempt to attain some measure of

human control over the elemental and

other forces of the created order which was

never originally God-intended.

Lastly, the gleanings of the field should

demand an attitude that incorporates eventhe poor and disadvantaged (Lev 19.9-10).

God demands the right use of his gifts so

that his providential nature will be glorified

when all creation is cared for and looked

after and receives in celebration a just and

fair distribution proportionate to ones needs

without wasting, polluting, greed or selfish

indulgence (Ezek 34; Jn 10.10).

Lack of basic resources vital to human

existence and development and in many

instances wilfully withheld on politicalgrounds poses a serious threat to a persons

power in society and position in decision-

making circles. On the other hand, such an

empowerment could be seen also as a threat

to a governments power and position where

absolute power is tyrannically maintained.

Such possible threats are thus controlled

and a government consolidates its hold on

power. The General Council of the World

Alliance of Reformed Churches in its 1989

Open Letter to the Children and YoungPeople of the Planet had this to say,

Over and over again one refrainpersisted: The rich get richer, while thepoor get poorer. Surely the world shouldnot be the way that it is. But if the worldis to be changedthen the present global


21/102

21

economic order will have to be altereddrastically. Basic to all other injusticestodayis economic injustice; and thismeans that the churches are being calledto recognize that the present worldeconomic order and the systems andstructures which maintain it are unjustat base. They not only allow but theyactually foster injustice in terms of thedistribution of wealth and access toeconomic power. This means that manypeople are bound to be kept in acondition of utter poverty while a fewenjoy immense wealth. If the presenteconomic order is maintained, thisenormous discrepancy between rich andpoor will prevail, and it will become stillmore conspicuous.11

Decision-making on water management

and allocation must not be confined to the

vested interests of limited groups of users,

geographical boundaries, sectoral

institutions or national jurisdictions. It mustinvolve full public consultation and decisions

from the lowest levels of water users in

planning and implementation. This would

go a long way towards a rejection of the

notion and experience of victimhood by the

disadvantaged who desire to be on an equal

footing with the rest of the world, at least

where the equitable dis tri but ion of the

earths resources is concerned.

It may be that the powerful transnational

economic trading blocs, economicsuperpower nations and even despotic

regimes will keep setting objective standards

so that disempowered concerned groups and

other such lobbyists cannot fight, and who

are to be mourned for protests so seeminglyhelpless. In any event, too, such protest

actions appear to have only a hollow, passing

effect in that there is a great uproar about a

particular issue of a particular time-period,

and without influencing the desired decision

from the world powerhouses, the protest

dies or fades away quietly until another time

and another issue. This can be seen with

regard to the issue of the depletion of the

ozone layer, the refusal of the United Statesof America to sign the Kyoto Accord and the

Jubilee 2000 campaign to cancel the debts

of poorer nations.

The Dublin Principles again bear witness

to the need for gender equality with regard

to water allocation and the concomitant

empowerment that it brings to those so

disadvantaged. It recognizes that water

management is male-dominated because

of a preponderance of males in the decision-

making strata of government and itsagencies and in industry and agriculture. It

acknowledges, too, that different societies,

especially more traditional ones, assign

particular social, economic and cultural roles

to men and women, and that there is need

for synergy between gender equity and

sustainable water management, where such

gender equity would be improved by access

of both men and women to water and water-

related services to meet their particular and

essential needs.12

Women the world overhave traditionally been revered as guardians

of the living environment in their role as

mother. They have been at the bedrock of

sustainable development on the whole as

homemakers and through their involvement

in agriculture. They thus play a central role


22/102

22

in the provision, management and

safeguarding of water.

Water, while not the source per se, can

also be the means by which disease and

death-carrying species of life are borne.

Medical researcher David Bratt observes that

wate r- borne diseases are d ir ty -water

diseases, caused primarily by water that has

been contaminated by human, animal orchemical wastes. Worldwide the lack of

sanitary waste disposal and of clean water

for human consumption and hygiene is to

blame for over twelve million deaths a

year.13 He surmises, Water, like honesty or

trust, when not contaminated with garbage,

is healthy, clear and sparkling with life.14

The fact is that much of human activity

with water and interference with many of

the self-maintaining processes of nature,

and with nature in general, have long beenaccepted as part of humankinds God-given

right to take, have and hold dominion over

the earth (Gen 1.28). The construction of

the Aswan High Dam in the River Nile has

greatly affected the natural flooding of the

plains with the rivers silt and thus

considerably reduced the agricultural

capacity of the land to feed its people,

resulting in widespread famine,

malnutrition and disease. This is all due to

the silt that once fertilized the land nowbeing deposited and trapped in the dam,

and this also poses a problem to the

infrastructural safety of the dam itself.

More than a century earlier the

transplanting of the water hyacinth from

its unique home in the Orinoco River in

Venezuela to other parts of the world

because of its natural capacity as a water

purifier has led to the plant now becoming

an agricultural pest and a threat to many

species of water life. The plant was removed

from its place in a naturally controlled

environment where seasonal flooding,

insects, fish and others would feed and

otherwise use the plant thus constrictingthe untamed spread that occurred when it

was transplanted to other uncontrol led

environments.

In 1825 the Erie Canal in the northern

United States was opened with much

fanfare celebrating the arrival of easier

inland access through riverboats. Unseen,

however, was that the opening of the Great

Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean led to their

invasion by the sea lamprey. This was a

seafood delicacy in Europe from timeimmemorial, and unknown as such in

North America. It soon became a ravaging

parasite that greatly affected the fishing

industry in the Great Lakes region for

many years.15

These serve to highl ight an idea of the

earth as a dead, empty thing to be

conquered and subdued, (much the same

way as women were regarded and treated

in Western church and society), by the

political and private economic giants thathave continued the old imperial trends in

a modern and brazen resurgence of

neocolonialist tendencies. Yet the apostle

Paul reminds us that it was not only

humankind that was redeemed by the

Christ Event, but all creation, which was


23/102

23

groaning in labour pains until the dawning

of a new order (Rom 8.19-23).

Furthermore, Anne Hadfield, writing in

Reformed World reminds us that this

process of reconciliation to God is not a

completed one either; but rather a

continuing one that involves not just

personal repentance but the twin

movements of stopping the destruction ofcreation and the restoration of creation,

which would imply a christology of nature

as well.16

This idea, as well as that of humankind

as stewards of Gods creation, is fully

embodied in the churchs eucharistic rite

where not only thanks is invoked on behalf

of the whole created order, but where this

whole creation is together the sum total of

the oikoumene. In the words of Psalm 150

it is everything with breath that praises theLord. The other psalms just previous to this

one also invoke the elemental forces of

nature with its flora and fauna in a universal

thanksgiving. Indeed, All creation rightly

gives you thanks and praise; all life, all

holiness comes from you,17 and joins

humanity and the entire cosmic order

now in the ecstasy of the angel ic

Sanctus.

Therefore, it is the fu llness of the

benefits of the redemption of Jesus Christthat not only has been gained for the

whole created order but also poured forth

in eucharistic blessing through the

intercession and elemental partaking of

the priests and stewards of this creation,

namely humankind; and more particularly

those in direct communion with Christ (Rom

8.19ff; Rev 22).

Theological perspectives

There are two things essential to life:

water and breath. Interestingly one of waters

two component elements is that which is

also responsible for sustaining everything

that has breath, namely oxygen. These twoelements of water and breath have formed

the basis of a powerful biblical metaphor

relating to the second and third persons of

the Trinity, the spiritual life of humanity and

the whole created order and also of life in

communion with Jesus Christ.

In the beginning of the worlds creation,

it is the Spirit (ruach, breath) of God that

hovers over the vast expanse of water,

making it fertile to receive the life-giving

word of God and bring all things into being.This word of God itself is composed of water

and breath as are all words and sounds that

proceed from the mouth of any being. The

two primordial elements of water and

breath combine to incarnate thoughts into

the spoken word. In the book of Job, chapter

37, verses 9 and 10, it is written that from

Gods chamber comes the whirlwind, and

cold from the scattering winds (bringing

water in their condensation) and by the

breath of God ice is given, and the broadwaters are frozen fast.

In anticipation of the New Creation in

the Christ event, this same Spirit is involved

in the incarnation of the very Word of God,

the second person of the Trinity. He/she

[the Spirit] was there in the inspiration of


24/102

24

the prophets, the conception of Jesus and

the prenatal anointing of John the Baptizer,

the laudatory acclamations of Mary,

Zechariah and Simeon and Anna. It is the

Spirit that is Ready to give birth to all the

word will say.18 This Word of God, incarnate

as Jesus of Nazareth, was called upon to

heal a man blind from birth according to

Johns gospel, chapter 9. Jesus spits on theground and with the wet clay anoints the

mans eyes for healing. The spittle is

composed of water and breath and coming

from one who is Gods incarnate Word and

full of the Spirit. Thus the Spirit of God is

again seen bringing life to birth when water

and breath from the Holy One are cast upon

dry, infertile earth.

Jesus uses the metaphor of water to refer

to the Spirit of God indwelling those who

respond to God through him. It was a potentsymbol in a land that encompassed the

extremes of cold and heat, aridity and

fertility, desert and oasis. Water was an all-

important and many times scarce resource

so that its intrinsic value was fully recognized

and appreciated by the entire region for

generations on end.

More interestingly his referrals to the gift

of living or life-giving water, recorded in John

4.10, 13; 7. 38-39 (which themselves are seen

as a fulfilling of the prophecies of Isaiah 55.1-2, Jeremiah 2.13, 17. 13, Zechariah 14.8 and

the desire of Psalm 23.2) stand in stark

contrast to the existence of the Dead Sea

in which no life can be found or sustained.

Indeed, Jesus proclaimed blessings on those

who hunger and thirst for righteousness,

in Matthew 5.6, since this life-giving water

of the fullness of life in God through the

Spirit is given to those who live within the

Reign of God and seek, invoke and exude

his justice and mercy as priests of the new

creation.

The rivers of the Garden of Eden are life-

giving. The water from the rock provided

much needed relief in crossing the barrenwilderness into the Promised Land. Water,

even if it destroyed Pharaoh and his host,

did give a new life to the Israelites. The

Syrian captain, Namaan, was cleansed of

leprosy in the waters of the Jordan, as was

likewise the world cleansed in the deluge of

Noahs day. As Amos declares in chapter 5,

verse 24, Let justice roll down like waters

and righteousness like an ever-flowing

stream.

This justice and mercy of God in life-giving water is further contrasted with Gods

judgement and indignation against sin and

a life contrary to his will, in drought. The

absence of this li fe-giving resource

symbolizes the absence of his favour, his

Spirit, his Word and his life, as clearly

perceived in the story of Elijah who called a

drought upon the land for three and a half

years as Gods condemnation upon the

idolatry of his people. However, water itself

may also be used as a sign of Godsjudgement on the land. It is common among

Caribbean churchgoing folk to describe the

ravages of hurricanes as the judgement of

God upon a particular people. Recently, with

the double ravaging of the island of Grenada

in two successive years by hurricanes Ivan


25/102

25

and Emily respectively, the church has been

forced to ask whether this can really be

declared the judgement of God when there

are other islands with worse sins than that

one.

In the same manner the very question

begs to be asked in favour of those lands

tragically devastated by the tsunami of

December 26, 2004 in Southeast Asia andthe South Pacific, or of the Southeast of the

United States, New Orleans in particular,

that was effectively destroyed by hurricane

Katrina! In the latters regard one may say

that Katrina was used as a potent

instrument of revelation, to make known

the once hidden recesses of abject poverty

in the midst of a land and city of

overwhelming prosperity, and at the

forefront of world economic and political

domination! It might have been Godsinstrument of justice in regard to the

descendants of former slaves (who had

always considered themselves spiritually

akin to the children of Israel in their

Egyptian bondage and Mosaic deliverance)

to reveal their plight so that they may obtain

a share of the fullness of life which the rest

of the nation was enjoying without any

regard to their suffering brethren; and as a

means of judgement on those who have

wilfully sought economic and political meansin order to keep their fellow citizens

continually disempowered.

In any event they, along with volcanoes,

earthquakes and other such violent natural

phenomena, may also be seen as a way of

the earth cleansing, purging and renewing

itself; in much the same way a human being

would have naturally automated means of

self-cleansing and preservation. Or it could

very well be the earth reacting vehemently

to the interference with and inhumanity of

the human race against nature itself. The

earth has a judgemental reaction against

pollution, waste, wanton abuse, misuse and

pillage of the earths resources and of thecontinued domination by the rich few of

the poor, helpless masses.

But on the other hand, is there a way

that we can see the glory of God in the

power of water to give life as well as to

destroy? Scripture does testify to the Lord

who, thunders upon many waters, and who,

sits enthroned upon the floods (Ps 29.3,

10). Also the very floods and mighty waves

of the sea and the thunders worship God

and declare his power in Psalm 93. Thehymnwriter Robert Grant reminds us,

O tell of his might, O sing of his grace,

Whose robe is the light, whose canopy

space.

His chariots of wrath the deep

thunderclouds form,

And dark is his path on the wings of the

storm.19

These frightening effects of nature are

often a time to complain and murmur before

and against God; a time for frenziedintercession to be spared, yet scripture

testifies to their giving praise to Gods

almightiness in their potency, as Job 36.27-

37.24 also concurs.

This multifaceted imagery of water, its

natural fluidity to being adapted to various


26/102

26

uses, its all pervading character throughout

many states of being, has led to its adoption

in scripture by Jesus, John the Baptizer and

others as a symbol of cleansing, renewal,

promise and hope. And this is chiefly

demonstrated and effected in the

sacrament of baptism. Again Jesus makes

the reference to waters intrinsic

relationship to life and breath (ruach Spirit)in his notion that to be born again would be

through the one baptism of these two

intertwining principles, water and the Spirit.

Indeed, for the purposes of Christian

theology, water may be the source of life,

but water without the Spirit gives no real

life at all.

It is, thus, with a sense of grave concern

that this writer pens his deep disquiet over

Reformed Ministers of Word and Sacrament

who baptize without any thanksgiving overor epiclesis of the Spirit upon the baptismal

waters, especially over a falsely perceived

notion that it closely resembles practices of

the pre-Reformation Roman church. In the

creation narrative it is the life-giving Spirit

who breathes upon the watery chaos and

brings it into order. So that from the time of

Jesus, life-giving water and the gift of the

Holy Spirit must always be seen in the

closest relationship possible since they are

inseparable. But the Spirit must be invoked,called to breathe upon, and never taken for

granted. Otherwise we run the risk of

forsaking the fountain of living water,

Jeremiah 7.13, and performing a mere ritual

that is not an effective means of grace or

potent to apply the thing signified to the

recipient, though all the faith in the universe

be present.

The Reformed trad it ion has always

evangelically held that sacraments and

indeed the entire salvific economy of God

and the church are effected primarily by the

sovereign and graceful action of God

perceived and obtained through faith, but

that faith is never the centre of activity orpoint of departure. The same malpractice of

the failure to have an epiclesis of the Holy

Spirit is also true of many a Reformed

celebration of the Eucharist.

Water may be further used as a metaphor

of the Resurrection in the Caribbean. With

the advent of Christianity and missionary

activity in the colonial era, the Caribbean

church inevitably acquired all the trappings

and imagery of a European brand of the

faith. Within this were hymns and ideasrelating to the changing of seasons of a

temperate climate and especially to the

significance of spring as a time of new birth,

fertility and resurrection in relation to the

seemingly dead earth, delayed activity and

suspended animation of the effects of winter

upon the land. This is totally out of harmony

with the weather patterns of the Caribbean

where only two seasons abound, namely dry

and wet.

Yet there is a similar deathlike qualityover the land in the intense heat and

aridness of the dry season. Rain hardly falls,

there is the threat of drought, water reserves

are used up and water is rationed along with

penalties for failure to observe such water

rationing, as with the watering of lawns and


27/102

27

use of hoses. The land is parched and on

many a mountainside and plain there are

vicious bush fires, [hu]manmade or naturally

caused. The grass dries up and the land is

bare and hard. No planting takes place then.

But then the Poui tree sends forth her

blossoms in March/April and the people

breathe a sigh of relief because the Poui

signals the coming of the April showers withtheir promise of renewal, slightly cooler

temperatures, especially at night, and

fertility.

The dryness of the land is intimately

linked with the timing of the season of Lent

and the Crucifixion and is a ready symbol of

repentance, of yearning and thirst for living

water, of death, loss, suffering and sacrifice.

The advent of the April showers potently

point to Christ who by his rising again

becomes our Returning Rain and who comesto renew creation in all its colour and

splendour. This Returning Rain also comes

with victory to those who have known loss

and destruction, whose lives are parched

and dry from not having any more tears to

cry or have grown hard and callous from

pain and suffering. The Returning Rain

comes to bring freshness and colour to those

bound up in the staleness of routine or lack

of imagination.

Interreligious perspectives

Water, as a religious image, is common

to all religions, no doubt because of its

recognition as essential to life and living. It

is to be found in prayers, scripture texts,

teachings and rituals.

Whereas in Christianity water is only

now being appreciated as a gift of God, it

formerly being just another tract of

subjugated creation, other religions have

tended to see water as the sacred milieu in

which we live. This is due to a pantheistic

approach to creation which views the

created order as divided aspects of the divine

whole, each intrinsically divine in its ownright and worthy of praise, awe, respect and

therefore, correct use.

Christianity has tended formerly to

regard only that water consecrated for

spiritual use as in baptism or as holy water

for cleansing, blessing and purification as

sacred. Yet more traditional religions,

because of the peoples closeness with the

land and the elements of nature, have

preferred to give a more sacred character to

water on the whole and to see it as aninterconnected part of all life. It does not

follow that all believers of such religions

have always observed the tenets of their

respective faiths especially in regard to the

right use of nature. Throughout humanity

there is ever the tendency to evil and

destruction.

In Hinduism and in the Orisha religion

(transplanted in the Caribbean from West

Africa), rivers, streams and oceans contain

the vital mother spirit. From the churningof the seas the Hindu Mother Lakshmi, the

feminine aspect of Vishnu, was generated.

She is the mother of the universe and the

goddess of wealth and prosperity. For the

Orisha the water spirit is represented by

the Kweyol name, Mama Glo, from the


28/102

28

French, Maman de lEau, mother of the

water. This bears an interesting connotation

to the biblical connection between water

and the Spirit seeing that in Hebrew the

generic word for Spirit is feminine in gender.

ButMama Glo can be beneficent if her gift

is used rightly or vengeful if abused.

Water in Hinduism is worshipped as the

source of all life. Originally revered at themighty Ganges River in India as Ganga

Dhaara, postcolonial Caribbean diaspora

Hindus, who were believed to have lost their

caste and by extension all ancestral and

other connections with Mother India in

crossing the seas, have re-established that

bond in this ritual of Ganga Dhaara. It

purports that since all waters merge into

one in the oceans then all water, whether

of river or sea and separated by landmasses,

is essentially one through this oceanicconnection. So the Ganges can be revered

in the diaspora in this way. But for this

writer, this ideology does not augur well for

re-establishing the local validity of the land,

lost through Western imperialism, in itself,

since it has here to get validity from a

supposed connection with a foreign entity,

seeing it once had a local identity and

validity of its own.

For Africans transplanted to the West

from their native continent by the demonicsystem of slavery and its concomitant racism,

the crossing of the sea also signifies a

cutting off of ancestral ties and the

establishing of a new way of being, though

still intrinsically African, on new soil. For

many it is the salt in the seawater that cuts,

kills and even hinders. Added to water, salt

takes away its potability and is effective also

against spirits of evil. As the biblical prophet

Elisha used salt to restore this potability to

the Jordan (2 Kings 2.21), so too salt added

to water has traditionally been used in

Christianity to convey blessing and holy

water for warding off evil. And in popular

belief it is acknowledged that crossing thesea by any means of transport or even a sea

bath is potent to cleanse from Obeah, or

witchcraft. For the Orisha religion, salt in

food or water, is never offered to the gods

because it cuts off all spirit contact whether

for good or for ill.20

The crossing, though, of a river, especially

in a dream, often signifies death of some

sort, physical or spiritual. There is also an

interesting connection here with the biblical

concept of crossing the Jordan into thePromised Land, used by Christianity as an

image of passing over from death to eternity.

And there is also the connec tion with

baptism, especially believers immersion

baptism, which is the defining rite of the

large Afro-based indigenous Christian

expression in the Caribbean, the Spiritual

Baptist Shouter Faith. Here baptism refers

to the uniting of the believer with the death,

burial and resurrection of Jesus (Rom 6.3-

11).

Conclusion

Water is a sacred gi ft from God to

humankind, indeed to all life on earth. As

the guardians, stewards, priests of Gods

creation and acting thusly on behalf of the


29/102

29

rest of the created order, we must ensure

that all life has access to the water it needs

to preserve the intrinsic dignity of being and

the continuation in time to come of the

species.

This requires a recognition of all life as

being interconnected and that human

beings are not dominators or the sole

proprietors of Gods sacred gift; but that alllife which depends on water in some form

has a right to access it without fear or favour.

As a gift it must be held in a similarly sacred

trust, used correctly and managed properly,

without wasting, polluting or destroying this

already limited, overburdened and finite yet

absolutely essential resource for life.

Humanity, spearheaded by the church, must

continue to work and pray to ensure the

justice, peace and integrity of Gods creation,

that there may be a just and equal sharing

of all Mother Earths resources for all hercreatures and thatThe earth will be filled

with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord

as the waters cover the sea(Hah 2.14).

Note

All biblical quotations are taken from the New Oxford Annotated Bible, Revised Standard

Version, Oxford University Press Inc., 1962, 1973.

Notes

1 Jacques-Yves Cousteau and staff of the Cousteau Society, The Cousteau Almanac An

Inventory of Life on our Water Planet: Water Facts , New York, Doubleday and Co. Inc., 1981,p.116.2 The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development, International Conferenceon Water and the Environment, Dublin (Ireland), January 1992.3 Op. cit., no. 1, p.117.4 Ibid., Eating, Drinking and Breathing, p.616.5 Miguel Solanes, Fernando Gonzalez-Villareal, Dublin Principles for Water as reflected ina Comparative Assessment of Institutional and Legal Arrangements for Integrated Water


30/102

30

Resources Management, TEC Background Paper No. 3, June 1999 (http://www.unsgab.org/III-1.6.pdf).6 Ibid.7 David E. Bratt M.D., The Source of Life, published in The Trinidad Guardian, 28 March2006.8 Op. cit., no. 5.9 Ibid.10 Ibid.11 Section III: Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Report to the General Council

An Open Letter to the Children and Young People of the Planet, Reformed World, 40(7),September 1989, p.135.12 Op. cit., no. 5.13 Op. cit., no. 7.14 Ibid.15 Op. cit., no. 1, Unlearned Lessons Unintended Effects, p.180ff.16 Anne Hadfield, A Perspective from the Pacific, Reformed World, 46(1), March 1996,pp.31-2.17 Eucharistic Prayer B, Book of Common Prayer, Anglican Church in the Province of the

West Indies , 1995.18 John Bell and Graham Maule, Hymn: Enemy of Apathy, Wild Goose Resource Group,Iona Community, published in Iona Abbey Worship Book, Iona Community 2002.19 Robert Grant (1779-1838), Hymn: O Worship the King, all-glorious above, published in:The Church Hymnary, third edition, Oxford University Press.20 Maureen Warner-Lewis, Guineas Other Suns The African Dynamic in Trinidad Culture,Dover (USA), The Majority Press, 1991.


31/102

31


Water and the Christian communityin a liquid modernity - a Latin-Americanperspective

Carola Ruth Tron

The lack of water is giving us the chance to repent from our individualisticway of living and to choose a new way, writes the young Waldensian theologianCarola Tron. A water-related theology needs to overcome anthropocentrism andstart at home, to take root in daily life. This is what Jesus did every day when hegot in touch with common people. He cared about their stories of life and gave themsalvation. Tron is a Pastor of the Waldensian Evangelical Church of the River Plate,in Uruguay. She completed her theological studies at ISEDET in Buenos Aires,

Argentina, in 1998, after having also attended the Princeton Theological Seminary.She is particularly committed to gender and youth issues. She is one of the winnersof the Lombard Prize 2005-2006.

The problematic situation of water today

claims an urgent and effective re-elaboration

of classical theological topics. In order to do

that, this essay will develop some guidelines

to reframe theology within the new contexts.

First, I will look at the Bible as a big frame

in order to see the role of water in it. Second,

I would like to name some examples of water

problems that we are facing today, in a global

context. Third, I would like to focus on

globalization. By taking some tools from

sociology I will see what is behind the

concept of natural resources, humankind

and the relationship between the two.Fourth, I will relate sociological analysis to

theology in order to propose a reconstruction

of some theological understanding of

human relationships with water and

creation. Fifth, I will cite a case in Uruguay

and propose some guidelines from a new

rereading of the Bible and reconstructed

theology in context. Finally, I will give some

conclusions.

1. In the beginning, surrounded bywaters

Why is the water issue a matter of

theology? This rhetorical question will be

present throughout this essay. First, as I look

at the Bible I see that Genesis 1 and

7/30/2019 Reformed World vol 57 no 1 (2007

Reformed World vol 57 no 1 (2007)

Documents

Transcript of Reformed World vol 57 no 1 (2007)