Introduction
The first quarter of the twenty-first century can be characterized by five Ps: postglobal economics and politics that marginalize, postnational migration, posthuman in terms of the ecological crisis, post-truth that undermines objective data and appeals to emotion and personal beliefs resulting even in the weakening of democratic processes, and the COVID-19 pandemic that doubly exposes systemic fissures in national-global levels.Footnote 1 Although they intersect and interact with one another, the climate emergency encompasses them all because of its multiplier effect on the other 4Ps.
I use the word “posthuman” in these 5Ps to refer to the huge influence of humanity on the quality of the environment while at the same time suffering from the consequences of ecological disasters. In this regard, the term “Anthropocene” comes to mind as it underlines the dynamic interaction among the 4Ps as well. Derived from the Greek words ἄνθρωπος (ánthropos, human) and καινός (kainós, recent or new), which means the “recent age of [hu]man,” the Anthropocene stands for the unofficial geologic time wherein the collective activities of humanity “began to substantially alter Earth’s surface, atmosphere, oceans, and systems of nutrient cycling.”Footnote 2 The 2016 Anthropocene Working Group of the International Union of Geologic Sciences (IUGS) voted to endorse the Anthropocene as a formal geologic epoch.Footnote 3 The IUGS rejected the suggestion, however, so use of the term “Anthropocene” in scientific circles will not be as widespread as the working group envisioned.Footnote 4 Notwithstanding, the IUGS stated that “Despite its rejection as a formal unit of the geologic timescale, the Anthropocene will nevertheless continue to be used not only by Earth and environmental scientists but also by social scientists, politicians and economists as well as by the public at large.”Footnote 5 They recognized that “It will remain an invaluable descriptor of human impact on the Earth system.”Footnote 6 Sociologist Jason W. Moore even argued that the term “Anthropocene” is not enough to describe the origin of our ecological crisis. Instead, he proposes the use of “Capitalocene,” “understood as a system of power, profit and re/production in the web of life.”Footnote 7 In other words, instead of just naming the actors involved in the changing climate, the motivation should be also pinpointed. Whether one uses “Anthropocene” or “Capitalocene,” both terms underline the impact of destructive collective human activities against the Earth and other more-than-human creation as well as the interrelation of the 5Ps mentioned previously. Kathryn Yusoff, whose research includes political aesthetics, geophilosophy, and environmental change (including climate change, extinction, and the Anthropocene), regards humans “as geomorphic agents” who can cause a “change in the materiality of a human signature in relation, or difference, to nature and geology.”Footnote 8
Due to the intricacies of the 5Ps, considered against the backdrop of the Anthropocene or the Capitalocene, experts also underline the toll on mental health that the climate emergency causes, especially what is called ecoanxiety or ecological anxiety.Footnote 9 So, how can theological disciplines contribute to the interdisciplinary responses needed to address the complexities of the posthuman climate emergency and the other 4Ps? How do we study and teach religion in these dark times?Footnote 10
In Laudato Si’, Pope Francis underlined that the complexities of climate change are sometimes worsened by human interventions to address it or the maximization of profits that create aggravating vicious cycles.Footnote 11 For him, what is needed is more ethical and circumspect scientific advances as well as ecological education and spirituality imbued with concrete civic and political love to effect individual, communal, and planetary change.Footnote 12 Given the advances in biblical scholarship, I propose that a change in the way we read, interpret, and teach biblical, religious, and other important texts such as rituals, laws or policies, research findings or data, and so forth, is equally vital in responding to climate change because, in my view, ecological conversion must be preceded by ecological education. In this contribution, I will first discuss the interrelation of climate change, psychospiritual health, and meaning-making through the Scriptures. Next, I will briefly present contemporary methodological developments in biblical interpretation such as ecological hermeneutics and normativity of the future that can facilitate engendering alternative insights into the dynamics among the divine, humans, and the more-than-human creation in biblical, religious, and other authoritative texts. Finally, I will apply these advances to Romans 8:18-30 to generate alternative insights and offer practical implications for this post-COVID-19 world in which we live.
Climate Change, Ecoanxiety, and Disorientation
During ecological disasters, news revolves around the nature of the calamity; the number of wounded, missing, or fatalities; and the infrastructure, agricultural, and economic damages. Today, the impact of the environmental crisis on mental health is more and more recognized, arising from direct experiences of disasters or from secondary experiences through media awareness of the climate emergency.Footnote 13
In 2017, the American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica sponsored the research project Mental Health and Our Changing Climate: Impacts, Implications and Guidance.Footnote 14 Susan Clayton and colleagues’ findings primarily show that most studies on the impact of climate change prioritize physical health whereas mental health comes only second.Footnote 15 Likewise, impacts of climate change on peoples’ and communities’ physical, mental, and community health arise directly and indirectly.Footnote 16 In addition, some individuals and communities are more vulnerable due to the intersections of geography, preexisting conditions, and socioeconomic-demographic inequalities.Footnote 17 Moreover, people do not immediately grasp the connection between climate change and its impacts on individuals or communities, which can affect their engagement in climate actions even if they are available now, including mental health support. For example, major mental health challenges arising from the ecological crisis can be acute, such as shock and trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder, compounded stress, and the subsequent effects on physical health and strains on social relationships.Footnote 18 Chronic impacts of the changing climate include higher rates of aggression and violence, more psychological emergencies, fatalism, and intense feelings of loss in terms of personally important places (a phenomenon called solastalgia), autonomy and control, as well as personal and occupational identity.Footnote 19 The changing climate also affects personal and communal interactions. Therefore, resilience-building is vital in responding to the physical and mental health impacts of climate change.Footnote 20 This psycho-emotional ability is necessary as the report likewise states that environmental disasters cause immediate psychological problems, while climate change leads to long-term effects, such as helplessness, depression,Footnote 21 fear, resignation, and ecoanxiety.Footnote 22
The Journal of Anxiety Disorders in 2020 highlighted the challenges of climate change, emphasizing the rise of extreme weather events, disease outbreaks, and their negative impacts on mental health, leading to conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), mood disorders, substance use disorders, and ecoanxiety.Footnote 23 While scholars in the West conduct more ecoanxiety investigations,Footnote 24 scholars agree that demographic groups most susceptible to mental health problems associated with the ecological crisis are the youth, the poor, Indigenous peoples, communities of color, occupational groups such as first responders, health-care workers, and those who work outdoors such as farmers, fisherfolks, transport and utility employees, persons with disabilities, the elderly and women, and those living in disaster-prone areas.Footnote 25 Although disaster situations can happen to both those in the developed and in the developing nations, poorer countries suffer more in relation to their lack of preparedness, impact mitigation, and actual responses, and even more so when their countries happen to be geologically situated in more hazardous areas such as the Pacific Ring of Fire.Footnote 26
Focusing on ecoanxiety, “a chronic fear of environmental doom,”Footnote 27 clinical psychologists S. Clayton and B. Karazsia describe the condition as negative emotionality manifested by physical symptoms and future-oriented apprehension, which can either be adaptive or maladaptive.Footnote 28 Adaptive anxiety can lead to appropriate preparation or precaution for possible vulnerabilities leading to climate change activism.Footnote 29 This constructive anxiety leads to “a motivated pro-environmental response” with “pro-ecological worldview, pro-environmental values, past pro-environmental behaviour and a ‘green’ identity.”Footnote 30 Maladaptive anxiety may manifest in dysregulated emotion, sustained chronic state of worry, or apprehensive expectation experienced as fatigue, restlessness, irritability, or sleep disturbance, which can be severe, debilitating, and needing interventions.Footnote 31
Experts offer various responses to this often-secondary yet equally devastating effect of climate change on mental health or “great grief.”Footnote 32 Proposals include effective communication of both the threat of the climate emergency and interdisciplinary mitigating actions such as sharing best practices of coping strategies, recognizing intersectional variables in terms of stressors and interventions, and interconnecting individuals with community and ecosystem resilience.Footnote 33 Other suggestions also consist of countering anxiety, promoting and developing individual-communal resilience, and improving psychological first aid.Footnote 34 This “great grief” may also be related to what death and grief expert David Kessler, a long-time collaborator of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, calls “collective grief,” which gripped the world at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and was not unrelated to the ecological crisis.Footnote 35 Although Kübler-Ross earlier identified five stages of grief, namely, denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance, Kessler proposed a sixth stage, meaning-making, to better cope with individual and global-planetary crises.Footnote 36 For Emily Esfahani Smith, sought-after speaker and author of the international best-seller The Power of Meaning, meaning-making has four pillars: belonging to a community, purpose, sense of transcendence, and storytelling.Footnote 37 It is in meaning-making as a response to the climate crisis that ecological interpretations of biblical, religious, and other authoritative texts can contribute to ecological education, ecological conversion, and ecospirituality. As the historian Lynn White observed, “What we do about ecology depends on our ideas of the man-nature [sic] relationship. More science and more technology are not going to get us out of the present ecologic crisis until we find a new religion, or rethink our old one.”Footnote 38 In rethinking Jewish-Christian religion, technology and theological disciplines become companions in reimagining the relationship among the divine, humans, and more-than-human creation and in contributing to individual and communal psychospiritual well-being challenged by the planetary emergency.
Considered one of the most influential Old Testament scholars of the past decades, Walter Brueggemann observed converging-diverging points between Israel’s lament and the stages of grief earlier discerned by Kübler-Ross.Footnote 39 Recalling Kübler-Ross’s work, Brueggemann explained that denial, which leads to feelings of isolation, is a brief and temporary period, whereas anger comes when the competent “I” is reduced to a dependent “it,” an objectification resulting from being victimized by circumstances.Footnote 40 Bargaining attempts to suspend the circumstances and asks for considerations in exchange for good behavior, usually linked to religion or virtue, whereas depression sets in when the sufferer is overwhelmed by a sense of nothingness, of loss, and of worthlessness.Footnote 41 Acceptance happens when the struggle ceases and the loss is radically accepted as a surrender of self-sufficiency, an affirmation of all-rightness, and coherence of what is going on is seen within a larger context of meaning-making.Footnote 42 In this line of thought, meaning-making begins when death or loss is understood as a new way of understanding presence or belonging, when purpose is reclaimed, when events are considered in the greater scheme of things, and the narrative of the event is understood and retold from another more encompassing viewpoint.
This radical turnaround is also seen in Israel’s lament psalms. As Israel’s starting point is their dialogical covenant interaction with YHWH, they do not have a counterpart of the feeling of isolation in denial because they know the addressee of the complaint.Footnote 43 This covenant context gives Israel’s lament the space for indignation at the feeling of abandonment, humiliation, or betrayal by the covenant partner.Footnote 44 While the same feeling of diminishment in depression is palpable in the many expressions of bitter helplessness in the laments such as Psalm 22:6 where the psalmist compares oneself to a worm scorned by others or Psalm 13:1-2 where the psalmist asks God how long will the divine forget him/her, these emotions are more textured because of the presumed dialogue partner with whom Israel can speak with or because of the assurance of being listened to.Footnote 45 Instead of a monologue, Israel’s cry becomes an ardent petition, and a compassionate response can be expected because their complaint is taken seriously.Footnote 46 The radicality of acceptance is comparable with Kübler-Ross’s insight on the dramatic turnaround. Although it is unclear if Kübler-Ross defines this stage as a feeling of “affirmation” or “resignation,” Israel’s lament turns from plea to praise based on the certainty that the authoritative voice of the one who grieves has been listened to, the matter has been settled, and the psalmist counts on an appropriate response.Footnote 47 In terms of meaning-making as the sixth stage of grief that Kessler and Esfahani Smith propose, the covenant becomes the core reason for and the context of the claims for the sense of belonging, purpose, transcendence, and storytelling.
This discussion on the formfulness of grief, or the capacity to acknowledge, accept, and embrace grief, is central to Brueggemann’s understanding of Israel’s psalms as seasons of faith that mirror the seasons of life’s ups and downs. He calls them seasons of orientation, disorientation, and new orientation.Footnote 48 Orientation is the phase of guaranteed creation when everything is okay, there is regularity and predictability, such as when the sun rises and the sun goes down. This is living life without any disruptions such as job loss, illness, hurt, or death. Disorientation periods are moments when people groan and sigh in anger, sorrow, fear, and so on when things or events are out of hand. The acknowledgment that one is not okay, and the accompanying relinquishment gives space for the surprise of a new way of understanding that ushers in a new orientation or meaning. In the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, this pattern of orientation, disorientation, and new orientation is seen in how Israel thrived in Egypt, their slavery, and Exodus. This arrangement is also manifested in Israel’s united kingdom, the schism and exile, and their waiting for the messiah. Psalms of well-being, of creation, and of Torah or those that praise God and God’s commandments such as Psalm 119 are examples of orientation. Scathing laments and imprecations exemplify disorientation, such as in Psalm 88 or Psalm 109. Psalms of praise that give thanks to God without minimizing the pains and hurts in the laments such as Psalms 22, 23, 118, or 138 are psalms of new orientation that assure believers that it is okay to be not okay sometimes. The same pattern is seen in Jesus’s ministry (orientation), passion and death (disorientation), and resurrection (new orientation).
Employing Brueggemann’s seasons of life and faith could be a way to rethink the “old” religion, as Lynn White suggests. This rethinking includes new methods of interpreting the Scriptures from the viewpoint of ecological emergency, contemporary ways of reading that also acknowledge the pain and despair that accompany the disastrous effects of the planetary crisis, and the consequent transformation of mind, heart, and behaviors that all of us need to undergo. Rethinking the old religion means to reread biblical texts with a more conscious awareness of the role of the more-than-humans in the story of salvation, not just divine-human relations. Developments in biblical ecological hermeneutics provide a new orientation when the relationship between and among the divine, humans, and more-than-human creatures are discerned more intentionally, especially when something goes wrong or when the disorientation of the climate emergency exacts its toll on psychospiritual well-being.
Ecological Biblical Hermeneutics as Ecological Pedagogy
A more critical approach to understanding and interpreting any text, especially authoritative texts such as the Scriptures and other important ones such as those about law, is to explore the various worlds that the text inhabits as exegete-theologian Sandra Schneiders did in her book on biblical interpretation, The Revelatory Text. Schneiders categorizes as world behind the text the generally diachronic investigation on matters that pertain to the historical-theological contexts of the author and the readers; the world of the text is a more synchronic analysis of the signs and meaning in the received canonical text; and the world before the text addresses the significance and implications of the text for the context of the present readers.Footnote 49 The gateway to these different hermeneutical worlds is the world of the text, or the received text, which includes reading written texts using the eyes or the feel of the hands as in using the Braille system; interpreting audio texts by singing, dancing, or playing musical instruments; or appreciating visual texts such as paintings, sculptures, or installations. In interpreting a text, Schneiders also clarified some important terms such as “approach,” “methodology,” and “method.”Footnote 50 An “approach” pertains to the particular way that the text is interpreted, such as world behind (historical), world of (literary), or world before the text (contextual). “Methodology” refers to the systematic investigation of the structure of the text such as source criticism (for world behind), narrative criticism (for world of), and liberationist or ecological (world before). “Method” is a more particular procedure, such as vocabulary investigation of a term in the ancient Near East (world behind); or characterization, the study of the words and actions of a character in narrative criticism (world of); or the tracing of the interrelations among the divine, humans, and more-than-human creation (world before). The reader should know that in interpreting a text, the approaches, methodologies, and methods can be used individually on their own or in combination.
In what follows, I will briefly discuss a simple way to interpret the text narratively (world of) and also explain “ecological hermeneutics,” a new methodology that interprets the text from the lens of the ecological emergency (world before). The methods that make up these methodologies (narrative and contextual) aim for a reader/learner-centered, process-oriented, output-based participatory interpretation of the Bible from a psych-ecological lens. These methodologies underline the importance of how the more-than-human creatures are characterized in the text in relation to the divine and their human counterparts.
Even just the manner of reading or hearing a story is already an exercise of interpretation. For Megan McKenna, a prolific theologian-storyteller, some of the most basic questions for a more dynamic synchronic engagement with the text are the following queries, which the readers themselves or a facilitator can ask to engage with the text and the hearers better:Footnote 51 “How do you feel about this text?” to personalize the story as it engages the senses and emotions of the reader or hearer; “What is true in the story?” to discern some universal truths in the narrative or debate on their falsity or inapplicability in other contexts, which could then lead to “What is disturbing in the story?” to facilitate the generation of other or alternative insights that may also come from emotions or subjective claims of truths or falsity. Oftentimes, what is “disturbing” serves as a key to entering the world behind, of, and before the text.
The most accessible of these worlds is the world of the text because almost half of the Scriptures is narrative.Footnote 52 Even if there are poetic portions in the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, however, they still express narrativity or progression of thought and intensification.Footnote 53 Recent studies also claim that the New Testament letters have backstories.Footnote 54 Thus, when one wants to engage the story or narrative in a more systematic way, one can focus on its plot, time, place, narrator, and, of course, the characters. Although the other aspects of the narrative are important, I find it most essential to pay attention to the various words and actions of the actors in the text by using what David Rhoads calls the method of characterization.Footnote 55 To more easily investigate the biblical actor on the levels of pericope, chapters, books, and even in between the testaments, the reader-interpreter should focus on four aspects of Rhoads’s characterization, which I summarize here: What does the character say?; What does the character do?; What do other actors say to, about, or against the focus character?; and What do other actors do to, for, or against the focus character. Although these questions are usually applied to divine-human relations in the Scriptures, the worsening ecological crisis prompted more systematic contemporary methodologies of interpreting the Bible with an ecological lens, that is, including the more-than-humans as characters in interpreting the biblical text and discerning the narrative of redemption.
Using a contextual approach, this methodological development is called “ecological hermeneutics.” It began in 2000s with the Earth Bible Project (EBP) in Australia under the tutelage of exegete Norman Habel. The EBP team’s ecological reading of Earth as the subject does not in any way undermine other earlier studies on the Bible that have already hinted at care for creation. Instead, the EBP partnered with experts in natural sciences to collegially define what could direct ecological biblical interpretation. The EBP reads the text with Earth and uses a basic hermeneutic of suspicion, identification, and retrieval championed in feminist readings.Footnote 56 For Habel and Peter Trudinger,Footnote 57 Habel’s cochair at the Ecological Hermeneutics research unit of the Society of Biblical Literature, “suspicion” looks at how past readers have often undervalued the Earth through human-centered interpretations. “Identification” means understanding that humans come from the Earth and are part of the creation community, recognizing the injustices faced by the Earth and other beings. “Retrieval” focuses on exploring the ignored roles and voices of the Earth and its creatures. Scholars who employ ecological hermeneutics express these ideas through creative imagination and narrative to amplify the voices of the Earth and the creation community.
The EBP employs “ecojustice principles,” which were formulated “in dialogue with ecologists” and were consciously articulated in non-biblical-theological language to “facilitate dialogue with biologists, ecologists, other religious traditions … and scientists….”Footnote 58 There are six ecojustice principles.Footnote 59 The first principle is intrinsic worth, which holds that the universe, Earth, and its components have inherent value. Second, interconnectedness underlines the Earth as a community of interlinked living beings that mutually depend on one another for flourishing and survival. Third, the voice of the Earth as subject means that Earth can raise its unique voice to celebrate righteousness and counter injustice. Fourth, the principle of purpose within the greater cosmic design emphasizes that the universe, Earth, and its components have a unique place in the creation community. Fifth, mutual custodianship shows how the components of Earth have balanced responsibilities as partners for sustaining the diversity of the Earth community. Finally, the principle of resistance against injustice acknowledges that Earth and its components suffer from human injustices but can actively resist them.
The EBP and its principles generated a debate in theological disciplines in terms of the terminologies and methods used.Footnote 60 For example, environmental exegete-theologian Hilary Marlow critiques the EBP’s method, terminology, and principles.Footnote 61 Marlow questions whether the use of feminism’s hermeneutics of suspicion would not be anachronistic (the judging of societies of the past based on present-day standards) and ethnocentric (interpreting the text from the lens of a particular set of values, namely, Western, white feminists).Footnote 62 She also questions the terminology that grants subjectivity to “the Earth” and its components, noting that because the EBP is viewed through an Indigenous Australasian lens, such as the Māori belief of an individual’s spiritual connection from one’s birthplace, it does not necessarily mean that other cultures would find immediate echo with it.Footnote 63 Finally, Marlow argues against the EBP’s avoidance of using “God” and “creation” and the more secular roots of the EBPs to foster dialogue with other disciplines because other theologians have already argued from an ecological lens without eschewing religious/theological language.Footnote 64 Marlow, therefore, suggests that a way forward could be a world of the text approach with full awareness that the interpreter is reading the biblical text through the lens of the ecological concerns of the twenty-first century.Footnote 65 In developing her method for ecological hermeneutics, she underlines the interrelations (1) between the divine and the humans, (2) between the divine and the more-than-human creatures, and (3) between the humans and the more-than-human creatures, which she calls “ecological triangle.”Footnote 66 Exploring the ecological triangle discernible in some prophetic texts, Marlow asks the following questions: What understanding of the more-than-human (whether cosmic or local) does the text represent? What assumptions are made about YHWH’s relationship to the created world and how he acts within it? What effect do the actions and choices of human beings have on the more-than-human creation and vice versa?
Affirming Marlow’s insights in an earlier work of mine, I added complementary questions to modify and further nuance the ecological triangle by accentuating both the unique relationship between and among the ecological triangle actors:Footnote 67 How does God feature in the human/Israel–more-than-human relations? How does more-than-human creation feature in the God–human/Israel relation? How does humanity/Israel feature in the God–more-than-human relation?
As ecoanxiety is a “future-oriented concern about climate change” that could directly or indirectly impact individual and, consequently, communal psychological functioning,Footnote 68 it is also necessary to emphasize that these narrative and ecological readings can lead to eschatological considerations through the Normativity of the Future approach (NF) proposed by New Testament scholar Reimund Bieringer and ethicist Mary Elsbernd.Footnote 69 NF advances the earlier ideas on the three worlds that a text inhabits, namely, the world behind the text (historical), the world of the text (literary), and world before the text (context of the readers). The Normativity of the Future approach even nuances the world before the text as an “alternative world into which the text wishes to transform the real existing world,”Footnote 70 or the inbreaking of that world where the interpreter can participate in realizing the world that God envisions. For NF, the biblical text:
Is an icon that leads the viewer into a world where God is present. Icons in the Eastern Orthodox churches are not understood as realistic depictions but rather represent holy mystery, the world of God. By articulating a vision of the future, a vision that the texts evoke we try to enter that world. In this way the future can already begin today.Footnote 71
With the dynamic in the modified ecological triangle in mind, the NF’s guide questions focus on the vision of the future discernible in the text, its inclusive and exclusive dimensions, the consequent ethical challenges, pneumatological clues, and other metaquestions.Footnote 72 Some examples are: What are the concepts in the text that express the vision? In which way does the text incorporate an eschatological horizon or an end-times dimension? What kind of world does the text project? What are the explicit or implicit statements saying about the Spirit? In which way is hope present in the text and what are the implicit or explicit hope statements saying? What does the text say about the God whose dream for the world is expressed in vision statements and who invites us to friendship? How do we accept accountability to the text and its history of interpretation? How does our interpretation impact the marginalized and oppressed?Footnote 73
According to Cherryl Hunt, David G. Horrell, and Christopher Southgate, “an ethical response to our environmental challenges will require an imaginative, theologically, and scientifically informed engagement” with the text.Footnote 74 The aforementioned methodologies and guide questions can facilitate the discovery of ecological insights. Let us take Romans 8:18-30 as an example.
Groaning of Creation, Groaning with Creation
As discerning the narrative and characterization of the actors in the modified ecological triangle are vital in ecological hermeneutics, these same methodologies for interpreting Paul’s letters and theology have gained traction in the last decades. These developments in understanding Paul and his letters from a core narrative viewpoint of covenant and divine triumph explain the coherence and consistency in Paul’s thinking and the contingency of his message as he interprets and applies this core narrative in a variety of ways among his letters and within each individual letter.Footnote 75 In other words, Paul explained these two concepts of covenant and divine victory depending on the contexts or situations of the early communities he founded. These core narratives of the covenant and divine triumph provide insights into the character of Judaism(s) of Paul’s day, the manner of community building and paraenetic instruction, and the phenomenology of consciousness that facilitates the exploration of his identity and theology,Footnote 76 especially the cosmic effect of how the Christ-event inaugurated the renewal of all creation.Footnote 77 The Letter to the Romans and even the treatment of Paul as a narrative character after his martyrdom to preserve his memory exemplify this development.Footnote 78 Paul’s Letter to the Romans was probably written around 56 or 57 CE in Corinth.Footnote 79 In this letter, Paul wanted (1) to introduce himself and his theology to the house churches in Rome; (2) to correct misunderstanding about his teachings; (3) to underline the priority and inviolability of God’s covenant with Israel among Jewish-Christians while also reassuring the Gentiles of God’s impartiality and inclusiveness; (4) to encourage the Roman Christians to live united amid diversity; (5) to recommend Phoebe, his coworker and maybe the letter carrier; (6) to build trust with the Roman Christians for his intended Spain mission, and most importantly, as the “apostle to the Gentiles” (11:13), and (7) to announce to them the gospel of God.Footnote 80 As A. Katherine Grieb puts it:
Paul’s argument is best understood as a great story that has within it a series of other smaller stories. The great story is that of what God has done in Jesus Christ. The many smaller stories are those of Paul and of the Roman Churches (1:1-17 and 15:14-33); of how God saved the lost world (1:18-3:31); of faithful Abraham, Sarah, and Isaac (4:1-25); of disobedient Adam (and Eve) retold from Genesis 3 (Rom. 5–8, especially 5:12-21 and 7:7-11); of Jesus’ Christ’s obedient death on the cross (throughout, but especially 5:12-21); of the Christian baptized into the death of Jesus (6:1-23 and 8:1-39); of creation and its fulfillment (8:18-30); and of Paul’s missionary preaching, Gentile responsiveness, and Israel’s unbelief (9-11). And there is the ongoing story of what God is doing in the Roman churches and in Paul’s upcoming mission to Spain (12–16, especially 14:1–15:13) and, finally, the story of Paul’s present journey to Jerusalem and his hopes to visit Rome (15:14-33).Footnote 81
This larger literary context recalls the seasons of life pattern in the psalms, which Brueggemann labeled as orientation–disorientation–new orientation and applied to the plot of God’s salvation told from the faith of Jesus to the believers’ faith in Jesus. These seasons are also palpable in Romans 8:18-30 on the fulfillment of creation. The disorientation season is Paul’s pivot point (sufferings of this present time) that easily allows him to reach back to the time before creation was subjected to futility (orientation) and reach toward the longed for future that will set creation free and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God (new orientation). Pauline expert Jae Hyun Lee correctly observes that in these temporal phases, God works.Footnote 82 God and the Spirit help the believers and creation endure the present suffering in hope,Footnote 83 a movement from disorientation to new orientation as their characterizations would show.
For Grieb, the literary context of “creation and its fulfillment (8:18-30)”Footnote 84 has three focus characters: the divine (God, the Spirit, and the Son), the humans or the sons/children of God (τέκνων τοῦ θεοῦ), and creation (κτίσις).Footnote 85 These actors do not “speak” on their own, but Paul unites them with the verb συστενάζω, “to groan together,” and the noun στεναγμός, “groaning.”
The cogroaning of these actors depicts their interrelation in the modified ecological triangle. First, συστενάζει (8:22) is used for creation and could mean to “‘engage in a general moan,’ lament, groan.”Footnote 86 The use of κτίσις (creation) rather than γῆ (earth) is more encompassing and lifts the narrative to a cosmic level.Footnote 87 Paul’s second use of the verb στενάζομεν (8:23) relates with identifying himself as a member of the human creation, the “children of God,” who also “make a deep inarticulate moaning sound” probably “in response to a disturbing stimulus” (8:23).Footnote 88 The children of God share in the central role in the plot as it is “their liberation on which that of creation depends and onto which the hopes of creation are focused.”Footnote 89 Finally, στεναγμοῖς ἀλαλήτοις, the “inexpressible groaning” (8:26) of the Spirit (πνεῦμα) unites the believers and the collective creation. This action and role of the Spirit as cogroaner with the more-than-human and human creatures elevate the groaning as a divine attribute that binds them in turn with Christ and with God whose crucial though hidden role transforms creation from being “subjected in hope” to being liberated.
Biblical theologian Laurie J. Braaten’s exploration of στεvάζειν includes Judaic studies expert Saul M. Olyan’s idea that behind this word are petitionary mourning rites that are “designed to motivate YHWH to act during times of individual or community crisis.”Footnote 90 These rites could be either penitential or nonpenitential depending on whether they were judged to be caused by sin and needing reestablishment of the social order or an unexplainable act of God.Footnote 91 For Braaten, στεvάζειν in the LXX is employed in mourning contexts, including lament psalms expressed by groaning and inarticulate sighing and other key stories of oppression that have become the focus of a later liturgical remembering just like Israel’s core story of slavery and exodus from Egypt (Ex 2:24).Footnote 92 “The language of groaning or mourning often shares similar judgment contexts, but this way of expressing oneself is also frequently employed in situations where God is expected to hear the groaning of the oppressed one, and be moved to change the situation. This is the way Paul uses the cognates in Romans 8.”Footnote 93 Some other examples of the creation community mourning are the fasting animals in Jonah 3:7, the equal concern of the Lord over the 120,000 people and “many animals” (New Revised Standard Version) or “all the animals” (New American Bible) in Jonah 4:11, and how the famine in Israel was lifted by God only when David rectified an injustice during his reign (2 Sam 21:1-14).Footnote 94 Other instances include how the Earth mourned because of sin and injustice (Hos 4:3; Jer 4:23–28; Jer 23:9–12; Jer 12) and the promise of salvation to the mourning creation because of human sin (Isa 24; Isa 33:7–9; Joel 1–2).Footnote 95 Thus, for Braaten, Paul’s use of στεvάζειν in Romans 8 is eschatological, corporate, in solidarity with creation’s mourning, and fits the salvation narrative of God hearing people’s groaning from slavery and acting for their deliverance.Footnote 96 Salvation, as we mentioned, follows the plot of orientation–disorientation–new orientation.
Just like the seasons of life and faith in Romans 8, contemporary believers find themselves disoriented with anxiety concerning the complexities of the climate emergency. The capacity to acknowledge our communal disorientation expressed in the 5Ps in relation to the disastrous effects of the Anthropocene on our common home and the recognition that psychospiritual health should be part of the interdisciplinary responses to the planetary challenge are vital in reaching a new orientation, a rethinking of the “old” religion critiqued by White. This application of ecological biblical hermeneutics to Romans 8 proposes a way of meaning-making by telling a more inclusive story of salvation involving God, humans, and the more-than-human creation through the Spirit’s groaning.
This analysis of the cogroaning of the Spirit using the normativity of the future approach can be enriched by how systematic theologian Klaus Nürnberger regards the “mind” as “an emergent reality that builds on the organic entity of the brain” while he thinks that the human “spirit” is “structured and oriented consciousness,” “based on a network of synaptic connections between neurons in the brain that can be switched on or off,” and formed genetically and nurtured by life’s experiences.Footnote 97 These mental structures and processes are symbolically expressed through language, rituals, and gestures that can reduplicate in other consciousness resulting in both individual disposition and communal spirit (like national consciousness).Footnote 98 The human brain, mind, and spirit represent a conglomeration of “neurological, biological, chemical, physical and subatomic processes” that God engages with and transforms through the Spirit in benevolent intentionality,Footnote 99 a process that can generate new orientation through meaning-making. Thus, in reframing the crucifixion of Jesus within the continuing core narrative of the covenant, the gospel that Paul preaches to the Romans shows the Christ-event as “God’s creative and redemptive intentionality and agency.”Footnote 100 Nürnberger underlines:
The theologically relevant question, therefore, is not whether the spirit is divine or human, but whether it is authentic or inauthentic; life-enhancing or life-obstructing; redemptive or demonic; geared to God or to an idol. The “Holy Spirit” must be contrasted, therefore, not with the human spirit, as if the human spirit could not be holy, but with an “unholy spirit.”
Such a “holy spirit” will alleviate the groaning of creation (including human bodies) as far as possible, try to overcome the causes of premature and violent death, and serve the optimal unfolding of life in all its forms as long as it lasts. The ecological concern of Christians, therefore, emerges from the spirit of creative and redeeming love motivated and powered by divine love as manifest in Christ. That is the gist of the matter.Footnote 101
In the words of Hunt, Horrell, and Southgate, the cogroaning of creation, the children of God, and the Spirit “indicates that somehow they are caught up in the same process, yearning for the same outcome, which the future dimensions of the story will go on to depict.”Footnote 102
From the normativity of the future lens, the common groaning also narrows the divide among the three actors.Footnote 103 As Hunt, Horrell, and Southgate observe, Paul “depicts the creation as also bound up with humanity and the Spirit in a solidarity of shared groaning, and, similarly, a shared hope,” which is aimed at the moment of the revelation of the children of God.Footnote 104 Moral theologian Christopher Steck expresses it well in saying that “God’s eschatological plan is to draw all creatures together in Christ and attributes to creation its own form of agential density through which it becomes, with humanity, a genuine participant in the divine economy.”Footnote 105 This collective travail in the present also envisions how the Spirit is with us in the future, which for Bieringer and Elsbernd can be understood as a matter of time (tomorrow), as an ethical claim (the quality of life of the next generations), as an inclusive eschatological vision especially for the marginalized, and as a divine gift which stretches or breaks into the present.Footnote 106 As Nürnberger affirms, the Spirit “makes us bold to protest and act against all manifestations of evil, whether personal, social or natural,” “transcends immanent inevitabilities and obstacles,” grounds “our lives on faith and trust, rather than evidence,” “opens up the horizons of time, space, power and potentiality,” and “gives hope, direction, motivation and dedication.”Footnote 107 In other words, Nürnberger sees that groaning with God’s Spirit
fortifies our resolve to withstand failure, frustration, fatalism and despondency—and that to a degree not available in any other way. As such groaning is exceptionally functional and indispensable for a wholesome human life. As long as the future is open, there is a vision, and where there is a vision, there is a mission.Footnote 108
This discussion on the importance of the groaning together of the creation community, both in hardship and in hope, tells us that self-efficacy and community belonging are determinants of mental health resilience in the face of proximal or distal climate disasters.Footnote 109 In addition, intersections of geographical location, race, systems of power and privilege, and culturally informed ways of dealing with emotions related to climate change should also be addressed because studies show that fear and hope are prevalent among the Global North climate activists while those from the Global South are inclined to manifest fear, guilt, and anger.Footnote 110 More research on this matter is needed but when there is a vision of how emotions can motivate our climate action, a mission awaits.Footnote 111
The mission challenge that contemporary believers face is what the Amazon Synod defines as “ecological sin”:
[Such sin is] an action or omission against God, against one’s neighbour, the community and the environment. It is sin against future generations, and it is committed in acts and habits of pollution and destruction of the harmony of the environment. These are transgressions against the principles of interdependence, and they destroy networks of solidarity among creatures and violate the virtue of justice.Footnote 112
Whether as a sin of commission or omission, the groaning of creation community shown in the modified ecological triangle in Romans 8:18-30 because of ecological sin seems to depict what Brueggemann calls “disorientation,” but now in collective human, planetary, and cosmic levels. This pericope confirms that each actor (the divine/Spirit, the humans, and more-than-human creation) has intrinsic worth, that all are interconnected, and that their cogroaning expresses their voice and resistance against injustice and sin. Moreover, their interweaving relation demonstrates a new orientation where mutual custodianship between and among them establishes the greater cosmic design that the Christ-event brings to all creatures. For Steck, “Creation has its own integral agency within the divine drama and is a partner ‘with’ us in it.”Footnote 113
This partnership, according to biblical scholar Thomas Vollmer, shows that although Paul acknowledges in Romans 8:18-30 that there is suffering, Paul also recognizes that suffering is not God’s will and that an alternative world is breaking in by means of how people transform society into God’s dream, intra- and intergenerationally.Footnote 114 For the Pauline exegete Jan Lambrecht, it is the utmost responsibility of humans to promote the “preservation of nature, the livability of the cosmos, the legitimate ecological, nature-loving condition.”Footnote 115 Thus, to overcome ecological sin concretely, the so-called goals of Laudato Si’ come to mind, namely, responding to the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor, practicing ecological economics, adopting simple lifestyles, promoting ecological education, engaging ecological spirituality, and encouraging community involvement and participation.Footnote 116 In Laudato Si’, Pope Francis also invokes the Earth Charter, an interreligious, multisectoral, international document:
The Earth Charter asked us to leave behind a period of self-destruction and make a new start, but we have not as yet developed a universal awareness needed to achieve this. Here, I would echo that courageous challenge: “As never before in history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning … Let ours be a time remembered for the awakening of a new reverence for life, the firm resolve to achieve sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace, and the joyful celebration of life.”Footnote 117
It is also necessary to underscore that the Earth Charter is one of the bases of the 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals:
We stand at a critical moment in Earth’s history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward we must recognize that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.Footnote 118
These goals, which can better direct a post-COVID–19 future, are: no poverty (1), zero hunger (2), good health and well-being (3), quality education (4), gender equality (5), clean water and sanitation (6), affordable and clean energy (7), decent work and economic growth (8), industry, innovation, and infrastructure (9), reduced inequalities (10), sustainable cities and communities (11), responsible consumption and production (12), climate action (13), life below water (14), life on land (15), peace, justice, and strong institutions (16), and partnerships for the goals (17).Footnote 119 As one can observe, most of these goals address the concerns of marginalized humans, their anthropocentric focus is evident. Goals 14 and 15, on life below water and life on land, however, are more inclusive of more-than-human creatures and they further concretize goal 13 on climate action. In a sense, these three goals pay attention to the groanings of the more-than-human creation in Romans 8:18-30 and, thus, broaden the anthropocentric perspective of the UNSDGs that respond to the 5P world we live in today.
Conclusion
In summary, this contribution centers on how biblical-theological disciplines contribute to the interdisciplinary response to the climate emergency and on how we can primarily teach religion, and more concretely Christianity, in these critical times. One of the ways we expound on these concerns is the use of ecological biblical hermeneutics. This hermeneutical method is a contemporary and interdisciplinary endeavor that is not only reliant on the expertise of exegetes and theologians. It also draws from the converging studies from the natural and social sciences as well as advances in the humanities. In this particular discussion on ecoanxiety, psychological advances dialogue with biblical research with the hope of contributing to a more wholistic response to the climate emergency.
Likewise, while Romans 8:18-30 has already been interpreted in relation to creation even in previous studies, incorporating it within the pattern of orientation–disorientation–new orientation against the backdrop of the climate crisis, in general, and ecoanxiety, in particular, widened the field of interpreting Paul’s theology and also provided more grounds for a theological basis of ecological advocacy.
These combined insights allowed us also to reinterpret Romans 8:18-30 within the context of the climate emergency and the normativity of the future approach. This investigation provides formative (understanding, character, and value formation) and normative (actions and practices) aspects of new orientation, which is vital in building a more inclusive and sustainable future.Footnote 120 In unity and imbued with the Spirit’s intercessory groans, the children of God and all of creation are transformed from the disorientation of ecoanxiety into a new orientation that allows the inbreaking of God’s vision for the world in the near and distant future, manifested concretely by Laudato Si’ and its goals, the Earth Charter, and the seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which member states agreed to fulfill by 2030.
Acknowledgements
This study is funded by the RCW-11-2022-Shalom Project.
Competing interests
The author declares none.
