Imperialism Isn’t Dead—It Just Drives Climate Change

The Theological Imperative to Cancel Climate Debts and Confront Global Inequality

Imperialism is a word we do not hear much anymore outside of history, but it is very much alive in the world. At its core, imperialism is a system in which powerful states and institutions extract wealth, resources, land, and labor from other peoples and places in order to sustain their own power. Imperial powers consume what they can and often call that consumption progress.

History offers many examples of this pattern, though no two empires operated in exactly the same way. Egyptian, Roman, and Mongol expansion relied on different combinations of conquest, tribute, labor, resource control, and trade. Yet each built a political and economic order that benefited the imperial center at the expense of subordinated peoples and places. European powers later colonized much of the globe through intertwined economic, political, and religious ambitions, forcing colonized societies into unequal relationships that enriched European companies and treasuries. In the modern era, the United States has repeatedly used its military and political power to advance its economic and geopolitical interests abroad, often framing those interventions as the defense of democracy.

The details differ across these examples, but the underlying logic remains recognizable: empire depends on endless accumulation, the subjugation of human bodies, and the aggressive manipulation of natural resources. What harms people also damages the places that sustain them. Imperial power therefore has consequences not only for human communities, but for creation itself.

climate

Climate change is driven by this same imperial logic. Corporate and state entities extract fossil fuels, clear forests, and pollute waterways in pursuit of continued growth, treating long-term survival as less important than immediate accumulation. The consequences fall first and worst on frontline communities, including the poor, Indigenous peoples, and the marginalized. These communities are treated as “sacrifice zones,” places whose health and survival can be exchanged for the comfort and prosperity of the imperial center.

Exodus offers a radically different vision of power. God says, in effect, “enough,” and uses the wind, cloud, and sea to disrupt Egypt’s military machine. The waters open a path for the enslaved people and then close over the pursuing army. Creation is not passive background to liberation. It becomes an instrument against imperial domination, physically breaking the machinery of exploitation. In Exodus, God does not merely save souls from an oppressive system. God brings the enslaved out of that system and dismantles the power that pursues them.

The Egyptian war chariots were the pinnacle of ancient technology. They were fast, heavy, terrifying, and built for one thing: domination. Today, our extractive economy is like a high-speed freight train fueled by coal, oil, and gas. It powers our modern comforts, but it has no brakes. It is barreling down the tracks, and the people riding in the luxury cars at the front, namely wealthy corporations and affluent nations, are enjoying the ride. But the people at the back of the train, and the communities living right next to the tracks, are breathing the toxic smoke, dealing with the derailments, and watching the bridges collapse beneath them. When God parted the Red Sea and clogged the wheels of Pharaoh’s chariots, God was throwing a wrench into the gears of a runaway machine. Climate justice isn’t just about tossing trash out of the train window; it is about standing with God to pull the emergency brake on the entire system.

Empire looks at a mountain in West Virginia and sees a giant pile of coal to be blown apart for cash. It looks at a river and sees a convenient sewer line for chemical runoff. Empire behaves like a ruthless landlord who treats a house like dirt because they don’t have to live in it. But Psalm 114 completely shatters this worldview. The Psalmist says the sea looked and fled, the Jordan turned back, and the mountains skipped like rams. The earth isn’t a dead object we own; it’s a living participant in God’s cosmic choir. When we treat the earth as mere raw material for human profit, we aren’t just mismanaging resources, we are committing a theological crime. We are vandalizing a sanctuary. We are gagging a choir that is trying to sing praises to its Creator.

In Matthew, the unforgiving servant is handed a clean slate for an astronomical, unpayable debt, yet he immediately turns around and chokes a fellow servant over a pocketful of change. This is a powerful picture of climate debt. For the last 150 years, wealthy industrialized nations have thrown a massive, fossil-fueled party. It built our skyscrapers, filled our supermarkets, and created incredible wealth. But the bill for that party, in the form of rising sea levels, extreme heat, and crop failures, has arrived. Instead of paying for the cleanup, the nations that threw the party are turning to the Global South, to countries that contributed comparatively little to global emissions, and saying, “You figure out how to pay for the damage.” When we demand that the poorest nations bankrupt themselves to survive a climate crisis they did not create, we act exactly like the unforgiving servant. God’s economy demands that we acknowledge what we have received, cancel unjust debts, and pay our fair share for the restoration of the world.

The parable is not a prediction of divine wrath so much as a warning about what happens when mercy received never becomes mercy practiced. My fear is that this warning is falling on deaf ears. Much of humanity remains too attached to its creature comforts to accept that lip service, thoughts, and prayers about the climate will not change anything. If we think we are innocent in regard to the climate, we are no better than the servant who, after receiving mercy, refused to extend it to someone else. The question before us is not whether we have benefited from the system of empire. We have. The question is whether we will continue choking those who have been given the least room to breathe.

Climate justice requires more than acknowledging the debt. It requires changing the economy that created it. Wealthy nations must reduce emissions rapidly, provide meaningful resources for adaptation for loss and damage, and stop asking vulnerable countries to choose between surviving the climate crisis and paying debts they cannot reasonably afford. The gospel does not leave us with private guilt or empty concern. It calls us to repair what we have helped break, to release burdens that keep others from flourishing, and to join God in the restoration of the world.  

5 Practical Ways Churches Can Bridge the Gen Z Baby Boomer Divide in the Pew

Bridging the Gen Z–Baby Boomer Divide in the Pew

We live in a culture that sorts us by age almost without thinking. Children gather with children. Teenagers stay with teenagers. Adults build friendships with people who share their stage of life. Even our online spaces often place us inside age-based circles.

Two women reviewing community outreach materials in a church pew
Two women review community outreach materials together during a church gathering.

That arrangement can feel comfortable, but it also leaves us with a problem: many of us rarely build meaningful relationships with people who grew up in a different decade. We may share a neighborhood, a workplace, or a church building and still remain strangers.

American churches have a unique opportunity here. We can bring generations together in ways that much of modern life does not. The church can become one of the few places where a Gen Z Christian and a Baby Boomer Christian worship, serve, learn, and grow alongside each other. That is more than a pleasant idea. It is a powerful gift.

Here are a few concrete ways we can start: pair older and younger members for weekly prayer partnerships, organize joint service projects like neighborhood cleanups or food drives, create mentoring pairs where a Baby Boomer shares life experience and a Gen Z member brings fresh questions about faith and culture, and simply schedule regular shared meals or small-group discussions that mix the generations on purpose.

The pew can be a meeting place

When we sit in the same worship service, we begin with something important in common. We may disagree about music, technology, politics, or the proper temperature for the sanctuary, but we gather around the same faith. That shared center gives us a reason to know one another rather than simply make assumptions.

A younger person may see an older believer as out of touch. An older person may see a younger believer as impatient or uninformed. Usually, those judgments become less certain once we hear one another’s stories. A conversation after worship can reveal the sacrifices someone made, the questions they carried, or the faithfulness they practiced when life was difficult.

The same thing happens in the other direction. Older adults may discover that younger Christians are not careless about faith. They may be trying to follow Jesus in a world shaped by pressures previous generations never faced. Younger Christians may discover that Baby Boomers are not merely defenders of old habits. Many have endured loss, doubt, change, and disappointment while continuing to show up.

Relationships give us what arguments rarely can: context. They help us replace caricatures with actual people.

We can make that happen on purpose. Start a monthly “story swap” after worship where a Gen Z member and a Baby Boomer each share a short faith journey. Form prayer triplets that mix generations. Invite younger adults to help older members with tech for online giving while the older members teach practical skills like budgeting from a faith perspective. These small, repeated actions turn the pew into a place where we actually know one another.

More than sitting in the same room

Being in the same sanctuary is a starting point, not the finish line. Cross-generational relationships grow through shared work and ordinary time together.

We can pair older and younger members for service projects, prayer partnerships, Bible study, mentoring, and informal meals. We can invite people from different generations to tell their stories, not as museum pieces or lectures, but as fellow disciples. We can create space for both practical wisdom and fresh questions. We can also form intergenerational small groups that study Scripture together, organize joint outreach events like neighborhood cleanups or meal deliveries, and set up skill swaps where younger members teach phone apps for daily devotionals while older members share how they navigated faith during major cultural shifts.

The exchange should go both ways. Older Christians may offer patience, perspective, and a long memory of God’s faithfulness. Younger Christians may offer curiosity, creativity, and a willingness to experiment. Neither generation has everything the church needs. That is precisely why we need each other.

A healthy relationship is not built by pretending our differences do not exist. We do not need to agree on every preference before we can listen well. We can ask honest questions, explain why something matters to us, and resist turning every disagreement into a verdict on someone’s character.

What we gain from one another

When generations worship and serve together, the church becomes a place where faith is not only discussed but observed. Younger believers can see what perseverance looks like over decades. Older believers can see the courage it takes to live faithfully amid rapid cultural change.

We also gain a wider understanding of belonging. A church family should not be a collection of age-based groups that happen to meet under one roof. It should be a community where people at different points in life recognize their responsibility to one another.

That kind of community takes intention. If we leave everything to convenience, we will usually choose people who are most like us. So we may need to change how we organize events, whom we invite to lead, and what we consider a successful ministry. A program that brings together three generations may look less polished than separate age-specific gatherings, but it can produce deeper relationships. We can start a quarterly “faith story night” where pairs from different generations interview each other and share highlights with the group. We can run a tech-and-tradition swap where younger members teach apps for daily prayer while older members demonstrate handwritten prayer journals. We can plan short mission trips or local service days that require mixed teams. These concrete steps turn intention into habit.

We should also be patient. One meal will not erase decades of misunderstanding. One conversation will not settle every dispute between generations. But repeated contact, shared service, and honest listening can slowly build trust.

A superpower worth practicing

The church cannot solve every difference between Gen Z and Baby Boomers. We should not pretend that generational tension is simple. Still, we possess something many parts of society have lost: regular opportunities to meet across age, experience, and background around a shared purpose.

That is our superpower, but it only matters if we practice it.

We can start small. Sit beside someone from another generation during worship. Ask about their faith journey over coffee after the service. Invite them to lunch and share a short Scripture reflection. Form a monthly prayer text chain with one older and one younger member. Volunteer together for a single service project like sorting donations at a food pantry. These tiny, repeated steps turn strangers into fellow travelers.

In a divided culture, these ordinary choices become a quiet witness. They show that Christian community is not built on sameness. It is built on love, patience, humility, and a shared commitment to follow Christ together.

The pew can be more than a place where we sit near strangers. It can become a bridge. And when we cross it, we may find that the people we were tempted to dismiss have wisdom, questions, humor, and faith that we need.

Reimagining Jesus’ Teachings: From Knowledge to Action

From Hearing the Teachings to Living the Truth

Jesus’s teachings are many, and in this case he opens the conversation by asking, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” (Matthew 16:13-20) The disciples list the popular answers: John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. It is safe, easy, and culturally acceptable to talk about who others think Jesus is, but is it safe to share your own thoughts on the matter?

The crowds following Jesus respected him. They elevated him to the status of a great teacher or prophet of old, but they stopped short of recognizing him as their king. Why might that be? Is it because they are afraid of being wrong? Are they afraid of what the Roman or Temple authorities might do to them? Or do they just want to keep their options open? That temptation is familiar to many of us.

Knowing facts about Jesus or surrounding yourself with religious chatter can feel like faith, but it remains strictly intellectual and spectator-based. The crowds knew something about Jesus, but they stopped short of recognizing him as king. Words and admiration are not the same as allegiance.

Person reading a book beside a lit fireplace with tea and notebooks thinking about the teachings of Jesus.
A reader enjoys a warm, peaceful evening with books, tea, and a glowing fire.

I think that many of us fall for the illusion that we know Jesus, when truly we don’t. We know of him, we know some things he likely said, but we don’t actually know him, in many respects we are observing him from a distance and likely waiting for the thumbs up as a sign it is time to fully commit, which is one of the many reasons why living a life of faith and love is so difficult. We place our trust in someone we have not learned to encounter personally, and therefore treat faith as a spectator sport.

Many people live off the theological residue of their parents, pastors, or Christian culture without ever taking ownership of these convictions. Some attend Christmas and Easter services, seek out a church service for a loved one when they die or ask to be married and have their children baptized because that is what their families have always done.

A few years ago, I agreed to assist with a funeral on a Sunday afternoon. A few years earlier, the family had held their mother’s funeral at the church because she and her husband had joined the parish. They felt the service was so moving that when their father died, they decided to do the same, even though they were not religious at all. The church was packed with friends and family and the service was a classic episcopal funeral, but it was also one of the most awkward experiences of my life. No one participated except the priest, me, and the acolyte. No one stood, knelt, sang, or anything. They were purely there because it was what their father would have wanted. The family was honoring the theological residue of their father, but I am not sure how meaningful it actually was for them. They said it was very lovely and they appreciated our willingness to do it. I believe God was present in that room because love was present. Even though the experience felt awkward, perhaps that presence of love was what mattered most.

I am left wondering where in our lives we have settled for knowing about Jesus rather than knowing Him personally. I am not afraid to admit that I have never felt a personal connection to Jesus. The Holy Spirit feels far more present to me because I believe the Spirit resides within us, nudging us to seek God in all things and follow Jesus’s teachings as best we can, like the little angel on our shoulder you sued to see in cartoons.

I think many of us miss a critical step in knowing Jesus: allowing his parables to move from stories we interpret to teachings we practice. The parable of the Good Samaritan, for example, does not simply ask us to admire compassion. It asks us to notice the person we would rather pass by, cross the road toward them, and make their need our concern. We know the stories, we can probably explain or even tell them, but that is not the same as internalizing them. When we internalize a teaching, it becomes more than information we can repeat. It begins to guide our instincts: we forgive when resentment would be easier, serve when no one is watching, and make room for the person we would rather avoid. Knowing the parables matters, but internalizing their teachings shows that we understand them and allows them to shape how we live.

When Jesus asks his friends who they believe he is, Simon answers “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” To which Jesus responds, “For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church…” he is praising Simon for understanding that Jesus is the one sent by God to help rescue them, but he is also saying much more. In this retelling, we are witnessing the moment Simon understands who Jesus is. Simon is not merely identifying Jesus correctly, he is beginning to know him by recognizing that the stories and parables are not just stories, but the foundation for a different kind of life. To know Jesus is to let his teachings gradually become visible in us, not simply admired from a distance. We will not live them perfectly, but they should begin to change what we notice, choose, and do.

The question, then, is not only who do people say Jesus is, but who is he becoming in us? The faith we inherit may give us words, rituals, and stories, but it cannot answer for us. At some point, theological residue must either become a living conviction or remain only the trace of someone else’s faith. Where do his teachings challenge our instincts? Whom are they asking us to see, forgive, or love? And when we answer who Jesus is, will we speak from our own encounter with him, or only from what others have left behind?