102
R. A. Davis
set a limit for the sea (cf. Prov. 8:29). Its waves, indeed, are bellowing and crashing
against the shores just as if they were about to rush out onto the land, but their attack
is checked and restrained by God” (LW 6:243). This was Luther’s commonly used
metaphor for God setting a limit to personal afflictions or social chaos.
Among those who may doubt that God has set a “limit for the sea”, are those Pacific
peoples, who, threatened with rising seas, have built seawalls or other fortifications
around their village or island. On this topic, Luther said that we must have faith in
God in the face of threats, writing that, “We should learn to place our trust in God our
Creator and Protector, not in fortifications, guns, wisdom, and power” (LW 6:245).
Luther said that fortifications are worthless if God wills our destruction. So instead
of building seawalls, planting mangrove belts, or relocating villages, should Pacific
Islanders instead leave it up to God to protect them? From Luther’s perspective, such
adaptations can be pursued, but they will only work as intended if God wills them to;
without God’s blessing, such adaptations to sea-level rise may prove to be a complete
waste of money.
This Christian view of managing risk is a traditional one, but one invariably at odds
with the secular technological solutions proposed by the international community
and Pacific governments as they try to adapt to climate change. If climate change
induced sea-level rise is seen as God’s divine judgement in the Pacific, then, in the
Christian mindset, no fortification will be able to defend against it, unless God is
appeased. While this may appear to be a conflict of worldviews, it need not be so
in practice. Some Pacific Christians believe that “spiritual preparedness” for climate
changes is important (Cox et al. 2019, pp. 7–8), and there seems no reason why this
cannot be linked to material preparedness. For example, it would be possible to build
a sea-wall or plant mangroves as defences against sea-level rise and to have it prayed
over by local ministers of religion, petitioning God that they live lives worthy of
God’s protection.
The Flood
Facing rising seas, some Christians in the South Pacific find comfort in the narrative of Noah (Genesis 6–9) and the idea that islands cannot be flooded because of
the ‘Rainbow Covenant’ God made with Noah and his descendants (Mortreux and
Barnett 2009; Davis 2015). Confidently held, this perspective could hamper further
climate change adaptation efforts in the Pacific, as it could be claimed that the Pacific
is already under divine protection. The Covenant reminds humanity of the promise
to Noah that his children will populate the earth. Noah was sure about that. He was
also reminded by the Rainbow, as humanity is, of the past destruction of the Earth.
Christians are not only reminded of it, but also know that they will be spared that
particular judgement of God in the future. Christians believe that they may, however,
have to suffer other judgements of God on their sin.
Luther would agree that the whole Earth will not be flooded again. He commented
that we are fortunate that we have escaped the flood, but we remain under God’s
R. A. Davis
set a limit for the sea (cf. Prov. 8:29). Its waves, indeed, are bellowing and crashing
against the shores just as if they were about to rush out onto the land, but their attack
is checked and restrained by God” (LW 6:243). This was Luther’s commonly used
metaphor for God setting a limit to personal afflictions or social chaos.
Among those who may doubt that God has set a “limit for the sea”, are those Pacific
peoples, who, threatened with rising seas, have built seawalls or other fortifications
around their village or island. On this topic, Luther said that we must have faith in
God in the face of threats, writing that, “We should learn to place our trust in God our
Creator and Protector, not in fortifications, guns, wisdom, and power” (LW 6:245).
Luther said that fortifications are worthless if God wills our destruction. So instead
of building seawalls, planting mangrove belts, or relocating villages, should Pacific
Islanders instead leave it up to God to protect them? From Luther’s perspective, such
adaptations can be pursued, but they will only work as intended if God wills them to;
without God’s blessing, such adaptations to sea-level rise may prove to be a complete
waste of money.
This Christian view of managing risk is a traditional one, but one invariably at odds
with the secular technological solutions proposed by the international community
and Pacific governments as they try to adapt to climate change. If climate change
induced sea-level rise is seen as God’s divine judgement in the Pacific, then, in the
Christian mindset, no fortification will be able to defend against it, unless God is
appeased. While this may appear to be a conflict of worldviews, it need not be so
in practice. Some Pacific Christians believe that “spiritual preparedness” for climate
changes is important (Cox et al. 2019, pp. 7–8), and there seems no reason why this
cannot be linked to material preparedness. For example, it would be possible to build
a sea-wall or plant mangroves as defences against sea-level rise and to have it prayed
over by local ministers of religion, petitioning God that they live lives worthy of
God’s protection.
The Flood
Facing rising seas, some Christians in the South Pacific find comfort in the narrative of Noah (Genesis 6–9) and the idea that islands cannot be flooded because of
the ‘Rainbow Covenant’ God made with Noah and his descendants (Mortreux and
Barnett 2009; Davis 2015). Confidently held, this perspective could hamper further
climate change adaptation efforts in the Pacific, as it could be claimed that the Pacific
is already under divine protection. The Covenant reminds humanity of the promise
to Noah that his children will populate the earth. Noah was sure about that. He was
also reminded by the Rainbow, as humanity is, of the past destruction of the Earth.
Christians are not only reminded of it, but also know that they will be spared that
particular judgement of God in the future. Christians believe that they may, however,
have to suffer other judgements of God on their sin.
Luther would agree that the whole Earth will not be flooded again. He commented
that we are fortunate that we have escaped the flood, but we remain under God’s