“Did you ever stop to notice
this crying Earth, this weeping shore?”1
Introduction
To retrieve a biblical and theological understanding of why environmental care should matter to Christians and to the church, one must attend to how this debate has evolved over the course of Christian experience and be willing to consider the adjacent role paganism shares in this discussion. This paper will invoke dialogue about “sustainability hermeneutics”, which African theologian Kivatsi Kavusa says involves “the principles of intrinsic worth and interconnectedness” (Kavusa, AB), and will examine biblical assertions about environmental care and whether pagan understandings of environmental care are juxtaposed or complimentary to biblical affirmations, then ask: Is the gospel “green”?
Ilsup Ahn states “One of the charges brought against Christianity regarding the worldwide ecological crisis is its “otherworldly” eschatology; known also as the “unearthly eschatology” (Ahn, 458). Otherworldy eschatology could potentially resolve tensions prompted by passages found in Genesis 3:18 and Revelation 8:10. Each of these passages suggest that disruption of the ecosystem and its ultimate destruction are both rendered by God as either punishment for Adamic sin, or judgement for humanity’s corporate and systematic sin. In each case, however, the overt desecration of the ecosystem derives from human mismanagement and neglect, not God’s judgement. The paradox caused by an otherworldy hermeneutic is that Christians may be inclined to abandon their Adamic legacy (Gn. 2:15) under the misconception that because God has
_____________________
1. Jackson, Michael. “Earth Song”. HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I. Epic Records. NY. 1995.
rendered some irrevocable “judgement”, that all attempts to preserve the environment remains futile. “In these enlightened days”, writes Adrian Harris, “it is decidedly unfashionable to suggest that Nature exists purely as a resource for humankind to use” (Harris, 1/7). Hence, several hermeneutic models are explored herein that address Ahn’s essential query: “Can there be a ‘greening’ of Christian eschatology?”. I purport, “Yes”.
Patristic Model
According to Ahn, eschatology has a rudimentary function in this discourse regarding sustainability hermeneutics and he relies on Origen, the first architect of systematized eschatology, to support his thesis. Ahn informs us that “Origen is one of the earliest Christian thinkers who promote an otherworldly eschatology” (Ahn, 459). Quoting Peter Phan2, Ahn writes of Origen that, “The material world was not intended by God in his original creative plan; it was subsequently made as the place into which souls are consigned as a punishment for their pre-temporal fall” (ibid, 460). This notion makes earthly creation an existential modality rather than a material realm where humans coexist interdependently as part of creation, this allows room for environmental oversight and ethical disregard. “Origen’s teaching on the nature and destiny of the human soul can be understood only in the light of a universal teleology” writes M.J. Edwards, asserting that creation is merely what humans make of it for their own spiritual progression. “The soul…”, Origen believed, “…is sent to earth … to undergo a progressive transfiguration, both in this life and in the aeon which succeeds it.”, not to support creation, but be supported by it, so Edwards affirms (Edwards, 520). Ahn also confirms that Origen does not argue that evil resides in matter, he holds
______________________
2. Phan, Peter G, 1995, “Eschatology and Ecology: The Environment in the End-Times,” Dialogue & Alliance 9(2) (Fall/Winter), pp. 99-115, 103.
that matter is created “only for the purpose of educating humanity, through trials and tribulations, to return to a higher incorporeal, spiritual destiny.” (Ahn, 459); subsequently, creation is seen as subsidiary to human interests. The turnpike to environmental aggrandizement is paved.
Notwithstanding, Kieth Innes argues that “Augustine holds that the curse referred to in Genesis 3:17 affects human life alone without disrupting the cosmos” (Innes, 126), viz, the creation itself is not accursed. Despite the catastrophic results of Adamic sin and John’s cataclysmic vision of future geothanatos, it is humanity who suffers degradation, not the surrounding ecosystem, writes Innes of Augustine. Therefore, when discussing Paul’s image of the whole creation groaning in travail (Romans 8:22), Augustine maintains “the creature (ktisis) which Paul is referring to is the human creature alone, not the whole cosmos.” (Ahn, 460). Adam’s fall is his own, not a tree nor bumblebee; neither river nor falcon – humans alone carry moral injury, not a single blossom blushes before us – not a solitary drop of rain mourns its plummet from the nimbostratus.
Wherefore, it is affirmed that Patristic eschatology includes unresolved philosophical tensions regarding creation and its status in relation to humans which do not conclusively warrant the androcentric misuse of the Earth’s environmental capital.
Evangelical Model
Willie James Jennings purports that Christian theologies represent “creation in crisis” (Jennings, 388), suggesting that Christians have suffered the loss of our Gentile positionality in relation to creation resulting from the rise of colonialism. He writes that Christians “have also focused myopically on ecological concerns without thinking ecologically and holistically about the built environment in relation to racial and gender formation and multispecies connectivity and relationality (ibid). Therefore, Jennings asks: What work should a Christian doctrine of creation do now? (ibid). As Jennings seeks to reframe creation theology in a manner that emphasizes “being creatures”, he explores how Creation theology “took a wrong turn” and examines how our imperialistic formation derails theological expedience marking the distinctions between humanity and nature; religion and science; Western and Indigenous cultural intelligences.
Jennings begins his study by introducing the idea of “geographic unconsciousness” and writes, “Race is fundamentally a matter of geography. Racial existence came into being at the site of geographic enclosure. In turn, geographic enclosure formed in us a geographic unconsciousness not only haunted by race, but also one that desensitizes us to place, to plants, animals and earth” (ibid, 390). He tells us that racial identity is an imagined enclosure that transforms the world into a civilization that is apart from and above creation and is sustained by a theology that defines creation as subservient, fragmented, and ultimately, commodified through the process of industrial colonialization.
Jennings also points out that this colonial transformation of the New World was made possible via supersessionism. The belief that Christians replaced Israel as the “chosen people” made geographic aggrandizement, inclusive of the eradication of indigenous peoples and other lifeforms, the unquestionable mission of the Church because it fulfills the Great Commission to transform the world into an industrial expression of the biblical Garden.
However, the doctrine of a chosen people inherently carries with it the belief that creation must be subdued by the gospel and established through colonial powers, which are averse to all non-Christian, non-white forms of creation. The theory of a paradigmatic restoration of the kingdom of God is the most dangerous faith expression to have ever manifested throughout the Global South and other geographic territories, including America, because it reduces a living creation into a thing to capture, own, hoard, label, and sell. Hence, it is believed, Jennings propounds, “Colonial desire is made one with Christian desire not by the hand of a human being, but by God” (ibid, 395). Wherefore, Western Christianity’s colonial obsessions with dominance and the commodification of our natural resources preclude any possibility of environmental care as a nature-friendly doctrine becoming a sustainable reality within the context of our present hermeneutics regarding creation and humanity’s responsibility for it.
Pagan Model
Secular and extra-theological research may offer additional insight regarding environmental care. Sabina Magliocco, professor of anthropology at the University of British Columbia, informs us about climate grief responses that are associated with the loss of habitat, home, and livelihood as a source of wellbeing. She mentions that Australian environmental researcher Glenn A. Albrecht coined the term “solastalgia”3 to describe feelings that arise when a much-loved place where people enjoy comfort is destroyed, in fact, she states, we grieve (Magliocco, 426). Such feelings of grief derive from our intuitive sense that nature embodies spiritual as well as material dimensions, she says.
Ina Habermann reports this style of grief also appears throughout J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, she maintains, “There is an emphasis on land degeneration, a 'missing forest problem' which prompts a closer look at the role of woods and trees in Tolkien's work” (Habermann, 114). The preservation of trees is at the center of Tolkien's mythology and is set against a dystopian and secular modernism as well as the destructive aspects of modernity, which Habermann maintains
________________
3. Coined by philosopher Glenn Albrecht in his 2005 article 'Solastalgia: a New Concept in Human Health and Identity”, solastalgia is a neologism formed by the combination of the Latin words sōlācium (comfort) and the Greek root -algia (pain, suffering, grief)
was counter-resisted through the triumphant preservation of the Shire (ibid). In Tolkien’s work, tranquility is found in arcadian equilibrium, as Gandalf finds in the Shire; therefore, the “original sin”, if ever such thing existed in Tolkien’s mind, is affected by Saruman’s violent environmental decree: “Rip them all down!” (Crawford, 51); thus, Gandalf warns Frodo, “The wide world is all about you: you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot forever fence it out.” (ibid). There is a melancholy tone to these words that also hints at a somber misanthropy; they embody the epistemological assumptions that characterize the environmental sins of the Judeo-Christian heritage which motivated much of Tolkien’s writing after World War I when commenting on the violence of the Industrial Revolution.
Thus, paganism invigorates the Anglo mythology created by Tolkien, although Tolkien admits to borrowing from biblical themes. Rebecca Munro writes that, “Tolkien’s deeply Catholic Christian sensibilities and beliefs certainly inform his writing as they did his life. He mentions in [a] letter … that the ‘Valar’, the angelic beings whose greater history lies behind that of the novel’s Middle Earth, are beings of the same order of beauty, power, and majesty as the gods of higher mythology” (ibid, 46). Tolkien does not envision the pagan reverence for nature as something evil, but as something to be cherished and preserved against the emerging threat of the imperialistic enslavement of Earth’s environmental capital; consequently, Tolkien does not see the environmental wealth as capital per se, but as living, speaking, intelligent creatures, like Fanghorn, who travail against the onslaught of environmental destruction.
Unfortunately, Old Testament literature supplies little data to help biblical readers interpret pagan fertility rites like those of ancient Canaan, or those Tolkien describes. Harry Hoffner, Jr. confirms this fact, he writes: “The Hebrew Bible gives us very little concrete evidence regarding the forms which fertility practices may have assumed in ancient Canaan … not only were they condemned, but all too often the description or even the simple naming of them was suppressed from the sacred writings." (Hoffner, 328). This information gap has disfigured our understanding of Hosea’s use of sexual metaphor. Although Walter Brueggerman suggest that the Hosea narrative includes metaphors pertaining to a creation theology, that YHWH will curse the fertility of the earth as punishment for Israel succumbing to Canaanite fertility rites, Kirsten Abbott argues from a feminist perspective that sexual metaphor is used in Hosea to advance a patriarchal model of reality that is misogynistic, writing “Femaleness is identified with passive object, acted upon [by Jewish males] and voiceless.” (Abbot, V). Hence, the feminine principle is demonized along with the creation as punishment for worshipping feminine deities. This disfigurement of Canaanite fertility rites mentioned in Hosea allows for the destruction of the environment to be seen as an act of divine justice by YHWH.
In Hosea, the baalim or lovers after whom Gomer chases, are fertility deities and bound to the rhythmic cycles of nature. Ritual sex or “sex magic” was practiced in the Canaanite world, sex and procreation were mythically imbued with divine significance and are generally misperceived by biblical readers. Hoffner informs “Every serious biblical scholar today is well aware of the prominent role which fertility and sex enjoyed in the religions of the ancient Near East” (Hoffner, 326). In ancient Canaanite society, fertility and harvest were symbiotic occurrences that must not be disturbed nor disrupted. Consequently, Hosea vilifies Gomer as a prostitute rather than revere her as a priestess to exalt YHWH above the overpowering attraction of Baal and his consorts. This overt anti-Canaanitism sublimates the ecological advantages of the “old ways”; subsequently, disparages any cultic reverence for agrarian sustainability. Hence, Judeocentric patriarchal values encourage a distorted hermeneutic of cultic behaviors and philosophy relating to fertility rites as an expression of environmental care.
Nonetheless, “Canaanite influence on the religion of Israel is probable from the gradual and incomplete manner in which the conquest of Canaan was affected by the Hebrews”, insists Lewis Paton (Paton, 205), writing further that “In regard to this event the Old Testament traditions are singularly contradictory.” (ibid). Archaeological evidence on the whole favors the view that the Israelites entered Canaan during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Egyptian Dynasties; however, the Canaanites were not extinguished. Canaanite influence on the religion of Israel is probable also from the adoption of Canaanite civilization by the Hebrews. Paton remarks, “When the Hebrews entered Canaan, they were rude nomads of the desert, while the Canaanites had attained a high civilization.” (ibid, 209). From the Canaanites Israel inherited their forms of city life and their forms of municipal government. The Israelites also learned agriculture and all other industries of settled society, Paton purports (ibid). Wherefore, it is neither a strenuous nor unlikely proposal that cultural and religious linkages between these ancient near eastern cultures existed which demonstrate how pagan understandings of environmental care can be complimentary to biblical affirmations regarding environmental sustainability.
Mormon Model
Mormon eschatology is embodied in the LDS church’s tenth article of faith, to wit: “We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.”4. The language of this article of faith is problematized by the words “will be built on the American continent”,
________________
Book of Mormon. “Pearl of Great Price”. Intellectual Reserve: Salt Lake City. 1979:61
because the Global South is excluded from this phrase, and because these words were written during the era of Western Expansionism in the shadow of the Monroe Doctrine. This article of faith, in the context of decolonial hermeneutics, is inherently hegemonic, for its fulfillment would categorically involve American immigration policy. The words “Christ will reign personally upon the earth” implies that the Earth’s “paradisiacal glory” naturally depends on Christian empire, a theological modality which has historically been the source of environmental disruptions worldwide. This article of faith requires a post-colonial reboot. Unfortunately, the patriarchal structuralism of the Mormon priesthood does not allow for theological input from priesthood leaders who operate outside the Apostolic chain of command in Salt Lake City. Therefore, unless the three white males who occupy the First Presidency hear from God, the Global South will have to wait for the ecological renewal promised in that article of faith. Until then, the strongest admonition Mormons will heed is “Think celestial”, ergo, “otherworldy”.
Conclusion
Sustainability hermeneutics has evaded doctrinal resolution for centuries; nevertheless, our present climate crisis makes environmental care a Christian imperative, because the existential debt created by Western Christianity’s theological mishandling of the creation, and humanity’s role within it, has increasingly problematized how the biblical message must be interpreted in a futurological context. Our environmental capital is becoming dangerously vulnerable to the needs of an ever-increasing world population. In Ahn’s opinion, “…what really matters with regard to the ecological capital we are entrusted is not its status, but our attitude to it;” (Ahn, 470); thus, our attitude toward the planet’s ecological capital must neither be that of indifference nor disinterest, but responsibility, Ahn propounds. Our collective global awareness must continue to transform our shared global theology until it reflects a paradigmatic flux in environmental practices, behaviors, and economic values. The late Reverend James Warren Jones once said “If you're born in capitalist America, racist America, fascist America, then you’re born in sin. But if you’re born in socialism, you’re not born in sin”5. I believe these words still have significant theological value in a world where climate refugees are continuously being driven away from their beloved homelands because America’s rate of material consumption has outgrown the environment’s capacity to preserve herself and reproduce her natural resources. Rev. Jones knew something about systematic and corporate sin. Despite the tragic circumstances surrounding his death, his words in this context have eternal value relating to environmental care.
Sustainability hermeneutics must agree upon a global interpretation of biblical economics as practiced by the primitive church, to wit: “44 And all that believed were together and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” (Acts 2:44-45). Humans must share this planet, not only with each other, but with creation itself, remembering that environmental care starts by recognizing the quintessential personality of our environment and every creature within it. Pastoral leaders must see themselves as advocates for a voiceless creation and defend her right to peaceful cohabitation. Social justice advocates must acknowledge that social equity will not matter until creation’s right to share in that equity matters first; elsewise, society will have nothing left to share. A “green” ministry must ask: Does my church monitor its waste output? Does my church compost and recycle? Does my church sponsor urban farming? How many church members drive oversized trucks? Are any members bicyclers? To be sure, a green gospel is good news for every creature concerned.
______________
5. "The Letter Killeth." Original material reprint. Department of Religious Studies. San Diego State. Web. Retrieved May 21, 2024.
Bibliography
Abbot, Kirsten. “Creation Motiffs in Hosea”. Changes Journal. December. 2005. Web. Retrieved May 20, 2024: web.archive.org
Ahn, Ilsup (Asianus). 2017. “Deconstructing Eschatological Violence against Ecology: Planting Images of Ecological Justice.” Cross Currents 67 (2): 458–75.
Crawford, Kristian. “A Study of Tolkien as Modern Apocrypha”. The Belusian Palace. 2nd Ed. Kindle. 2020.
Edwards, M J. “Origen: Philosophy of History and Eschatology.” The Journal of Ecclesiastical History 59 (3) 2008: 520–21.
Habermann, Ina, Nikolaus Kuhn. “Sustainable Fictions – Geographical, Literary and Cultural Intersections in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings”. Cartographic Journal. 2011.
Harris, Adrian. "Sacred Ecology." Paganism Today. 1996: 149-57.
Hoffner, Harry A. "Symbols for Masculinity and Feminity: Their Use in Ancient Near Eastern Sympathetic Magic Rituals." Journal of Biblical Literature 85, no. 3 (1966): 326-334.
Innés, Keith, 2009, “Towards an Ecological Eschatology: Continuity and Discontinuity,” Evangelical Quarterly 81(2). 2009: 126.
Jackson, Michael (African American). “Earth Song”. HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I. Epic Records. NY. 1995.
Jennings, Willie James. “Reframing the World: Toward an Actual Christian Doctrine of Creation”. International Journal of Systematic Theology Volume 21 Number 4 October 2019
Kavusa, Kivatsi Jonathan (Āfricānae). 2017. “An Eco-Theological Interpretation of Proverbs 5:15-20 in the Light of Water Crises Experienced in Present-Day Africa.” Old Testament Essays (New Series) 30 (3): 707–24.
Magliocco, Sabina (femina), and Sadie Rittman. “Fairies, Environmental Justice, and Re-Enchantment in Modern Pagan Narratives.” Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture 17 (4), 2023: 419–38.
Paton, Lewis Bayles. "Canaanite Influence on the Religion of Israel." The American Journal of Theology 18, no. 2. 1914: 205-224.