Posted by Jay Dampier | Posted in uhhhh | Posted on 02-12-2008
Tags: biodiversity, coffee, conservatory, Exodus, food, Genesis, social action
Oh of course not! If you did, you would definitely go to hell*.
Yesterday, I was walking** through the Thunder Bay Centennial Botantical Conservatory. I had been there numerous times and had never noticed that Thunder Bay has its very own coffee tree. This was very exciting for me.
In the Genesis account God created trees and seed bearing plants on the third day. God saw that the plants were good, and who am I to disagree. I especially agree with God, when it comes to those plants that I have a particularly strong affinity for. I especially like apples (Malus spp.) and coffee (Coffea arabica).
I wonder if God put the coffee tree on the earth with pastors in mind. I have yet to meet a pastor who isn’t borderline addicted to the drink made from Coffea arabica. Doing ministry, studying the Scriptures, counselling people, writing sermons and lessons, practicing prayer, etc. is rarely done without a cup of coffee nearby.
I can quit drinking coffee if I wanted to … really … I just don’t want to.
I bet you heard that one before.
Interestingly, caffeine acts as a natural defence against the coffee plant’s predators, but it looks like that strategy backfired. People figured out that we could pick the “beans,” roast ‘em and grind them up, then run hot water through the grinds, then after our hard work, drink the remaining liquid.
Scriptures are clear that we should have no false gods before us. I wonder if our love for coffee approaches worshiping a false god. Would God may make an exception in this one case?
* You won’t really go to hell. That was a joke.
** OK, actually I was playing hide and seek with my three year old daughter.
On a shady note: Some folks know that it is more ethical to purchase shade coffee rather than errr… non-shade coffee, but don’t know why. Coffee trees don’t grow very tall, are very shade tolerant and naturally found in the understory of forests. Shade coffee is generally grown in a more naturalized setting which sustains higher biodiversity. Compare that to areas where natural forests have been cut to make way for coffee plantations which support less biodiversity and require more human inputs such as fertilizer and chemical controls.
So, why is it more “ethical,” though, to buy shade coffee? BTW, I never knew that there were distinctions
Here when I say “ethical” I am thinking of Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic and environmental ethics. When we care for the land and gain benefit from it i.e. forestry, agriculture, etc. we have choices. Some choices may produce less product per acre, but can be done in a more sustainable fashion. Systems that maintain greater biodiversity, (which in turn have higher resilience) tend to be more sustainable for the longer term.
Using less fertilzer and pesticides can become an ethical arguement; especially when overuse, or off target drift causes problems away from the managed land. Land stewardship is deeply connected to “loving our neighbour.” If our practices are causing problems for the folks down stream, or down the street, then it becomes an ethical issue on a whole other level.
I suspect most shade coffee we purchase is also organic. Can you guess why? More complex systems (remember the shade coffee grows in the understory in a more diverse plant community) need less inputs. Nutrient cycling, and natural predators to coffee predators reduce the need for artifical inputs.
I think I heard from someone that to worship god or any of his creations is ok as long as it’s done ultimately to honor God itself (so you’re not really worshipping say the coffee tree in this example but honoring and appreciating what God gave us by putting that coffee tree on this earth). I hope that makes sense.