Preservation and Protest: Theological Foundations for an Eco-Eschatological Ethics by Ryan Patrick McLaughlin (review)

Ryan Patrick McLaughlin's book on ecological-eschatological ethics explores four different taxonomies of "nonhuman theological ethics": anthropocentric and cosmocentric conservation ethics, which fall under values-based ethics, and anthropocentric and cosmocentric transfiguration ethics, which fall under teleological-based ethics (1–2). McLaughlin's focus is a constructive ethics of cosmocentric transfiguration whereby the entire cosmos "shares in the eschatological hope of a harmonious participation in God's triune life that entails the end of suffering, predation, and death" (2). The title of the book reflects an internal tension based on the protection of nature and honoring the integrity of ecosystems (entailing the recognition of suffering, predation, and death that occurs in nature) and the protest or "witness" against these violent aspects of nature, with hope for eschatological transformation of them (400).

The bulk of McLaughlin's book outlines his taxonomical classification of various ecological ethics. Relying heavily on the work of Jürgen Moltmann and Andrew Linzey, McLaughlin focuses on the theological areas of cosmology, anthropology, and eschatology, addressing issues of "both salvation and value" (24). He engages in this strategy to point out potential weaknesses in other ecological ethics paradigms that can then be addressed in his construction of cosmocentric transfiguration.

While the taxonomies and reviews are clear, the overall effect of such lengthy exploration of others' work is that McLaughlin's creative theo-ethical work is really limited to two chapters (and a third if you include the chapter responding to potential critiques). For McLaughlin, "the good is always the promotion of life and the alleviation of suffering" (394)—a cogent point central to his thesis, and yet this becomes obscured in some ways because of the detailed exposition of others' work. Moreover, his reliance on white male scholars engaged in this field limits the effectiveness of his review and diversity of perspectives. His system of classification may also restrain creative engagement with others' work and the possibilities of cosmocentric transfiguration since the taxonomy may force the work into particular boxes that obscure nuances within the paradigm and the field itself.

This book explores an as-yet underdeveloped field within ecological ethics. As such, the audience is primarily other scholars, from Orthodox to evangelical. The in-depth theological exploration of cosmology, anthropology, and eschatology within the framework of cosmocentric transfiguration offers new insights for ecological ethics and thus furthers the conversation. McLaughlin also points toward some concrete actions that people can take to witness against suffering (e.g., vegetarianism), which allows this book to be a valuable contribution to practical and applied ethics in ecology. One area that I believe warrants further consideration and exploration is the dialogue around suffering and death (redemptive or not) as well as finitude. While there is much suffering and death that is not redemptive in any way from a Christian perspective, there is also value to some forms of suffering and death.

The book could be used pedagogically in an advanced graduate seminar in ecological ethics, particularly as a helpful secondary source to be read in conjunction with the primary sources McLaughlin draws on in the first ten chapters. His review of various eco-theologians is certainly extensive and commendable. McLaughlin's construction of cosmocentric transfiguration is worth wrestling with as he continues to refine and develop this perspective within the field of ecological ethics.