“The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom…”

By Nate Howard

If we take seriously that “His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made,” instead of seeing a conjectural separation between Creation and the Creator, we discover that Creation is “nothing less than the manifestation of God’s hidden Being.”

Thus, in light of our worship of a type of progress that destroys creation and dehumanizes man, I would venture to say that there is less fear of God today than at any other time in the history of humanity. By intuition then, I believe I may also say that wisdom is lacking.

Central to the philosophy of progress, preached by our economists, scientists, and politicians, is the belief that universal peace is achievable through unlimited economic progress. Certainly the notion of personal enrichment is a powerful mover, but as wise men and women have always asked, can the foundation for peace really be achieved through the “cultivation and expansion of needs?”

Traditional wisdom leaves no room for the romanticism of peace sought by employing the powerful human drives of selfishness. “Do not wear yourself out to get rich; have the wisdom to show restraint.”

Like the region of Sibinal, San Marcos where I work, “there are many poor societies that have too little, but where is the rich society that says “Halt!” we have enough? There is none.”

Here in Sibinal, there are numerous anti-life manifestations of this unwillingness by the rich to practice restraint. One of the most severe is the presence of Goldcorp Inc. Goldcorp is a Canadian-owned mining company that began operations in Guatemnala in 2006 at the Marlin Mine in Sipicapa, San Marcos and continues today with preliminary explorations in areas across the Highlands, one being the region of Sibinal where MCC alongside the San Marcos Diocese has been implementing a food security program. Goldcorp’s mining operation in Guatemala, which is almost entirely given to the extraction of gold, is very difficult to justify on any grounds. To begin, there are serious environmental issues raised as a result of its operations. According to the Mineral Policy Institute (MPI), safe disposal of mine waste is generally recognized as the single largest environmental challenge facing the mining industry worldwide. Similarly, the United States Environmental Protection Agency named water contamination from mining as one of its top three ecological security threats to the world. In addition to the waste, which amounts to 20 tons of earth and cyanide, 250,000 tons of water an hour are involved in the process to create sellable gold. Besides the physical dangers to local communities and ecosystems, this excessive use of water is especially concerning as numerous communities in Sibinal are without potable water systems and deal with water shortages for the irrigation of their crops.

Another area of concern is Goldcorp’s contribution to social conflict in Guatemala. Through a formal consultation process, it is documented that the overwhelming majority of communities are opposed to the presence of the mine. Nevertheless, due to exceptional rights for multinational corporations guaranteed by recent fair trade agreements and clever legal tactics, Goldcorp has been allowed to pay little attention to the stated will of these primarily indigenous communities. In Sibinal for example, though 32 of the 32 villages in the region cast their lot in opposition to the mine, Goldcorp through contracts with the Guatemalan national government has obtained a license to explore an area 25 km2. The result has been conflict. In December of 2004, and then again in January of 2005, blockades organized by indigenous peoples to stop the transport of materials to be used in the construction of the Marlin Mine, have ended in violent attacks perpetrated by the military and police. Since the mine began its operation, a number of clashes have arisen between local residents and the mine’s employees. As a result, indigenous leaders, many of which are women, have faced intense legal harassment, and in some cases, jail time. Most recently, on August 9, 2008, indigenous peoples once again took to the streets successfully blockading 16 points along Guatemala’s major highway system in protest to the mining exploration occurring throughout the highlands. The climate only continues to intensify.

All these negative social and environmental factors aside, the distribution of profits, four-fifths of which are generated by the sale of gold for ornamental purposes, is laughable. The current mining law in Guatemala requires that 1% of the mine’s profits be left behind in Guatemala, of which half is supposed to be passed on to the local authorities in the areas being mined. In the end, due to corruption and other factors, it is estimated that about 01% of total profits actually trickles down to the communities affected by mining operations.

The obvious beneficiaries are Goldcorp’s executives (in 2007 the CEO was the highest paid executive in British Columbia, earning $17 million) and its shareholders, who were paid $31.7 million in the second quarter of 2007 alone. Nevertheless, those benefiting from Golcorp’s practices do not end with those directly invested. A few examples are the 17 million Canadians contributing to the Canadian Pension Plan that is one of Goldcorp’s largest investors, and the thousands benefiting from Goldcorp’s massive donations to such institutions as the University of British Colombia. As cited in a report from the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, the reality is that most of Canada’s citizenry, due to its government’s relationship with the extractive industry through economic and political backing is benefiting from the more than 1000 Canadian mining companies that account for 40% of all mineral exploration undertaken globally. Sadly, these same companies have been implicated in human rights abuses and environmental disasters in more than thirty countries.

I could perform a similar connect the dots exercise with another life-threatening manifestation of this lack of restraint—soaring prices of basic foodstuffs and transportation—which the poor severely rely on for their daily survival. 40 years ago Guatemala produced enough corn to keep its price from rising beyond its poor majority’s purchasing capacity, but since capitulating to the guidance of international organizations in the 70s and 80s to cut subsidies and open up its agricultural sector to trans-national competition, production in Guatemala has markedly dropped and its once autonomous food prices are now dictated by the world market. For a season corn prices stayed low, however, with the price affects brought on by the signing of the Central American Free Trade agreement and the bubble-type demand for bio-fuels, the price of corn has increased by nearly 150% in the last 18 months. Unfortunately families in Sibinal do not have enough land to produce sufficient amounts of corn to feed their families and thus are forced to pay exorbitant market prices to eat. They have thus become dependent on mass transit to take them to their distant work, yet with rising prices of diesel their wages barely cover transportation costs. Resultantly, the malnutrition rate of children under five in Sibinal has risen to nearly 83% up from 50% in 2004, and the migration of working-aged males to the US and Mexico has continued to skyrocket to about 75% of the corresponding population.

Nevertheless, all this connecting the dots, only serves to make these cases appear independent and capricious, and as though considerable investigation and proximity are necessary to arrive at the conclusion that they are anti-life. Humbly I suggest that if we cannot see the breakdown in its simplest equation, i.e. that the single-minded pursuit of wealth—materialism—is first, at odds with Christian teaching, and second, contains within itself a limiting principle—Creation—then simply put—we are in trouble.

Let us take a look at the case of energy. As I write, the price of oil just clipped the $137 a barrel mark, a 500% increase since the U.S. invaded Iraq. Many are pointing to our wars in the Middle East and the resultant insecurity around the world’s largest source as the cause of this dramatic price increase in oil. Certainly it is a factor, but there are others too: increased demand from China and India, a falling dollar, price manipulation by OPEC, and the list goes on. Nevertheless, these happenings are the fruit of something much deeper.

As blood is to the body, oil is to economic growth. If it fails, all fails. And though demand may flucuate at times, the supply will oneday indeed fail. Surely there will be more wars to come as the “haves” and “have-nots” draw their lines in the sand and battle for oil rights (its no coincidence that the tables are being set for conflicts with Iran, Venezuela, and soon enough the resurging, oil-rich Russia), but eventually it will run out. Certainly these geo-political factors are creating an urgency around its use, but ultimately the resultant dangers facing communities all around the world like Sibinal, are due to the fact that our pursuit of unlimited growth, requires an unlimited source of energy. Unfortunately, to date, there is no such adequate renewable source.

In light of this basic arithmetical contradiction, a slew of responses have emerged and remerged. Most often we hear that technology will solve our problems. With great optimism our experts tell us that we need not practice virtue, for science will save us. It was less than a half decade ago that the production of bio-fuels on lands once used for domestic food production was hailed man’s new clever saviour. At present they are on the decline…although not without leaving behind a trail of food crisis’s in poor countries dependent on international food markets, instead of their own farms, to feed their $1 a day unemployed agrarian populations.

Another response is that of nuclear energy. Last month, Senators Jon Lieberman and John Warner formally introduced a new bill that would provide $544 billion worth of subsidies to the nuclear energy industry, including a special clause where which the government would assume all liability. Insurance companies, having run their numbers and read their Soviet history, have deemed ionizing radiation to be uninsurable. Yet, insured or not, the hazard remains. Once created there is nothing that can be done to reduce the radioactivity of radioactive elements. Only the passage of time reduces their intensity, and in many case we are talking about thousands of years. Not to worry. Our scientists assure us that we can safely manage these waste deposits, not to mention the nuclear reactors themselves, by employing the most advanced technologies. As if somehow technology can prevent earthquakes, wars, or civil disturbances. Like the dog and his vomit, it appears we intend to return to past follies.

This past January, our president in his address to the Union, had this to say about our exhausted economy, “Today, our economic growth increasingly depends on our ability to sell American goods and crops and services all over the world.” And this to say about the energy issue, “To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology…Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power.”

It is perhaps understandable that he and others would offer this counsel…but this my friends is not wisdom, but instead merely a reflection of the conventional Sisyphean ideas that form the foundation for our current type of globalization—a dream which is unable to logically hold itself.

For every technological breakthrough, or clever economic treaty, another ten of its kind are required to offset the resultant unforeseen negative impacts. Nevertheless, for reflective purposes, let us assume that technology will provide the magic “energy elixir”; let us presume that our politicians and multinational corporations will convince the Venezuelans and Iranians to adopt our free-market capitalism. Is that what they and we need? As asked at the onset, does the expansion and cultivation of needs make for a better world, foment healthier relationships, or create a more virtuous society?

For anyone paying attention it is obvious that the suggestion that we reduce our standard of living is missing from the debate. It’s as if our leaders and experts have a blind spot. Where then do we turn? The answer to me is obvious.

There is a great necessity for folks working at the grassroots to deal with specific cases and connect the dots, which in any sense I have avoided doing (albeit hopefully with eloquence). However, in confronting the philosophy of materialism, ultimately we are dealing with a meta-narrative issue, and thus, the resolution to our problem lies at the meta-narrative level.

As a Christian, I know no greater authority on “right” meta-narratives than the church that adheres to its holy scripture. It is the church that can best begin to steer us towards something more virtuous; or at least bear witness to a different way. There are many places to start, but I can see none more effective than heeding the wisdom given us by our faith tradition and putting first our own house, or in this case church, in order in three distinct ways.

The first is simply to be less greedy and selfish ourselves. Rather than new needs, we should work to cultivate virtues such as restraint and moderation. Do we really need to buy new gold, silver, or diamonds? The church should be an example of temperance. Until then our collective voice is just one of the many. The second acquires its girth from the first. Instead of yielding to those and that which promotes a type of “progress” that is anti-life, we should render our full support to those who truly work for peace. There are great organizations out there doing great work that could use our support. This requires the church actively work to educate itself and learn. The third is to be hopeful. If I have learned anything in my three years here in Central America it is that hope is central to the Christian faith and something that we should always be about. However true hope is displayed through action and so congregational activities such as writing a letter to your church’s Member of Parliament or buying a share and then attending Goldcorp shareholders’ meetings to raise concerns are in order. Be creative…

I leave you with these paraphrased words of hope from Leonardo Boff, a trailblazing Brazilian theologian/ecologist who spoke here in Guatemala…‘our Earth, this living bio-system, is groaning, nevertheless, these are not groans unto death but unto birth, and we along with her must choose life.’

Let us choose life…


After serving for 18 months as MCC’s Hurricane Stan Response Coordinator, Nate Howard is currently working with MCC providing food security support for its programs in San Marcos, Guatemala.