Oh WELS

My recent affiliation with a conservative wing of the Lutheran denomination called the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod was a hangover from my earlier tendencies toward charismatism, which eventually landed me and my young family in a cult led by one Rev. Beatrice R. Hicks. I left the cult because it disappointed in innumerable ways, but when I moved with my second wife and family to our current locale in Maryland, this WELS Lutheran church was handily only a few miles away. We joined and were functionaries through many years. Now, it's time to grow up some more.

I have to draw a line on the matter of creation and the WELS' literal interpretation of the Genesis story. In reading Ishmael by Daniel Quinn, I've come to understand the implications of allowing oneself to ignore the question of evolution and prehistoric man. I've also read an irrefutable volume by David Cunningham on the geological evidence for an ancient Earth called, The Rocks Don't Lie. I've always figured evolution and geologic aging to be true, but suspended judgement so as to not rock the boat. I avoided the issues because they seemed irrelevant.

These issues are important enough that I must walk away from WELS. Quinn surmises that the whole mess that the world is in today is a result of the growth of agro-industrialism. Yet, the Genesis story, taken at face value, would posit that there was never any other way of dwelling on the earth (except for the first family before their fall). Only when you factor in the millions of years prior to the rise of agrarianism does it become clear that agro-industrialism was a relatively recent curse from which so many of today's problems were spawned.

For a while, I thought I could hang around and try to convince others and possibly even the pastor of my former congregation to open up their minds to the evidence of science, but after reading an article in the church's rag, Forward in Christ, by some numb-nuts Ph.D. (in "creation science", I'll guess) spouting biblical literacy as the only standard, I realized any efforts to change this church would be hopeless. Time for me to let go, leaving them to amble toward extinction utterly blind to the disservice they do to the planet.

Whatever is next in my religious journey may be presaged by the evening assembly we attended last week at the National City Christian Church in Washington, D.C. Reclaiming Jesus was the theme. The service and subsequent demonstration in front of the White House gave us a chance to listen to other sects' take on current issues. The formal declaration, which I mainly support, is more in tune with reality than the deliberate ignorance of fundamentalist sects like WELS.

Going Tropical

I've got rain on the brain. After listening to a local presentation last week on "Gardening in a Changing Climate," the monsoon arrived on cue. We have received 15" of rain in the past week. Normal is 4" for the entire month. More intense storms are an expected consequence of global warming and increased rainfall in the Mid-Atlantic states is the general outlook from climate models.

Time to brush up my knowledge forest gardening, but more particularly agroforestry (or its more ecological cousin, climate eco-forestry). Trees need a lot of water and, with our increasing rainfall, growing trees should be easier here. Ironically, my understanding of sustainable forestry leads me to conclude that I have too many trees growing on most of my property. That is, they, like people, over-propagate when left unattended, making life more difficult for all of them. Culling selected trees to grow mushrooms and make biochar will open up space for many of the more desirable trees and for planting new species.

The species added could be selected for their usefulness as food, lumber, fuel, or in making biochar and even bio-oils. All of these have potential to draw down atmospheric CO2. For example, according to a 2014 study, building with wood could reduce annual global emissions of carbon dioxide by 14 to 31 percent. Another, more recent, study estimates that drawdown to the 1.5 ⁰C increase stated as the Paris agreement goal is completely within the capacity of a biocarbon-producing world if everyone does their part with the land under their care. According to Project Drawdown, an acre of multistrata agroforestry can achieve rates of carbon sequestration that are comparable to those of afforestation (ranked 15th by Drawdown ) and forest restoration—2.8 tons per acre per year, on average. This fits my situation well, since multistrata systems are well suited to steep slopes.

My choice for a biocarbon crop might be bamboo. According to Albert Bates, bamboo is the second fastest growing plant on Earth, after microalgae. It will double its biomass every year if conditions are right. Running varieties can expand as far out from their base in one year as they are tall, and do it again the next year, and the next. Some edible shoot running types that would be good in zone 7b are the 10' Chishima-zasa (Sasa kurilensis) and the 30' Sweetshoot Bamboo (Phyllostachys dulcis).  They grow in full sun or partial shade and make great barriers - just the thing to avoid panic attacks by neighbors over distant sightings of my flame cap kiln or TLUD oven in operation.

Strategic Corporals

As societies devolve into tribes, "think globally - act locally" will make a comeback (at least the principle, if not the phrase). In social terms, it could be revised to "think universally, act locally". "Global" has political and geographic connotations, whereas "universal" is the word used, for example, in the U.N.'s declaration that describes the rights of every human. We must think both globally and universally, but action always remains local.

"Local" pertains to one's domain, which may be large or small, but is limited by how familiar one is with its many internal relationships and issues. Intimate familiarity with these is essential to applying one's global/universal perspective, otherwise important elements may be overlooked or incorrectly assumed, leading to negative outcomes. Likewise, neglecting to gain a global/universal perspective can lead to counterproductive results due to unreckoned forces outside one's local domain.

Acting locally is normally all one can do. To act globally or at any other level outside one's domain is to violate the sovereignty of others. There are usually repercussions. Acting non-locally also requires resources sufficient to conduct expeditions, expend energy, and/or transmit information outside one's borders. The logistics are often too costly to justify anything but local action.

Thinking globally does not require acting globally. Disaster aid outside one's borders will become rare as global economic growth stalls and climate change claims more and more victims. Alleviating the burden of others in their distress is wonderful, but the logistics tails will be too long for most to contribute, and tribes contiguous to afflicted areas may have cause for letting their neighbors suffer.

Thinking globally and acting locally entails having a grasp of a global problem, and then acting within one's domain to address the problem as if the local solution was going to make the difference in the global problem. This approach is particularly relevant to environmental problems since every location has unique geographical characteristics that demand tailored solutions. Similarly, each locale has unique political and cultural characteristics that necessitate tailored corrective actions in the social sphere.

Conventional thinking says that global problems must be solved by international agreement and cooperation. The subtle shift of the Think Globally - Act Locally approach is that no agreement is necessary, though understanding of common predicaments is. The dissolution of national governments and international authority that appears to be likely in the next few years will leave their fractured replacements to operate on the faith of this approach. A new world order could emerge that no longer tolerates extreme imbalances, but places local sovereignty above imperial ambitions.