Climate and Environmental Justice Committee votes for selective divestment and regenerative farming

Image

LOUISVILLE — To what degree will the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) continue to divest from fossil fuel companies? That’s one of the issues being pondered by the Climate and Environmental Justice Committee (CLJ) of the 227th General Assembly, which is meeting this week online. 

On its first day of business, the CLJ committee approved a report from the Committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI) that calls for placing ConocoPhillips and Duke Energy on the General Assembly Divestment/Proscription List for failing to meet GA criteria related to the environment.

The CLJ-01 report, favoring “selective divestment,” was approved 56-7 despite a failed effort to postpone voting on it, so that it could be considered alongside CLJ-02, an overture from Susquehanna Valley Presbytery (SVP) that calls for divestment from companies whose primary business is tied to fossil fuels.

A motion to postpone voting on CLJ-01 was rejected after parliamentarian Paul Belz-Templeman explained that the committee would be able to revisit CLJ-01, if necessary. CLJ-02, “On Changing Course for a Green Future,” is expected to be discussed on Tuesday.

In other business on Monday, the CLJ committee voted in favor of CLJ-05, which is policy guidance from the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) via the paper “Intent, Effect, Haste: Ethical Guidance on Fossil Fuels.”

The document emphasizes that PC(USA) social policy should be framed around principles such as these: social witness policy regarding the production, distribution and use of fossil fuels should not aim to continue or favor their use, nor should it have the effect of further embedding their present use in society. However, it should be oriented toward practices that can most rapidly promote transitions to renewable energy sources and less harmful products while remaining faithful to PC(USA) values and commitments.

Speaking to the committee on Monday, Sue Smith, a member of ACSWP, explained the need for swiftness. “The Presbyterian Church should pursue the path that supports the quickest and most efficient transition away from fossil fuels  because the impacts of fossil fuel use are so dramatic and enduring, the rate of change matters. The quicker the transition away from the burning and use of fossil fuels, the less overall harm is done to God's creation,” she said. However, she also acknowledged that there aren’t viable alternatives for some products, such as medicines and medical devices, that fossil fuels are used in the production of.

In its own presentation, MRTI spoke of the urgency of the climate crisis.

“We recognize that climate change is undeniable and is one of the most pressing moral and theological problems of our time,” said MRTI’s chair, the Rev. Marcella Glass, who was quoting the report. “Human action and corporate degradation of creation threaten the survival of the planet upon which we live and depend for our sustenance.”

MRTI also noted that selective divestment “follows GA policy and is responsive to the 226th General Assembly's directive to MRTI. So, if approved by the 227th GA, the recommendation can be implemented by the investing agencies of the PC(USA), the Board of Pensions and the Presbyterian Foundation.”

Besides taking action on ConocoPhillips and Duke Energy, CLJ-01 includes a handful of other components, including directing MRTI to continue engaging with certain companies identified by Climate Action 100+ and to report back to the 228th General Assembly (2028) with possible divestment recommendations for those not making progress toward compliance with GA-established criteria. CLJ-01 also calls for adding the companies AES and EOG Resources, to a list of companies that MRTI engages with.

Regenerative farming

Earlier in the day, the CLJ committee approved CLJ-04 in support of regenerative farming practices, following a public hearing on various CLJ business.

The overture, approved 55 to 5 with a small amendment, calls on Presbyterians to learn about and support regenerative farming practices to restore soil, foster biological diversity and heal the land.  

It also directs the church to equip Presbyterians with a deeper understanding of the theological, scientific, economic and social bases for public policy advocacy and lifestyle choices in support of soil care and regenerative farming. That effort would draw from past policies and study papers, such as 2002’s “We are What We Eat,” thanks to an amendment approved by the CLJ.

Presbyterian congregations and members would be encouraged to model faithful soil stewardship in their own farms, gardens and yards and to support local and regional food providers if CLJ-04 is approved at plenary.

CLJ-04 passed despite concerns raised by committee member Jeffrey Bridgeman, a teaching elder from Los Ranchos Presbytery in California, about the expense of printing educational materials and how much farmers might have to pay to switch to a new way of operating.

“I really wish we had, like, 100 farmers who are not doing regenerative farming to speak about what this would mean, particularly in our Presbyterian congregations in the San Joaquin Valley here in California,” he said. 

The Rev. Bruce Gillette, overture advocate, said costs vary. However, these are “simple processes that truly make a difference on the farms, on the pocketbook, and in God's Creation.”