6 Climate Justice and God’s Justice …
105
If one could conceive the nature of this reward he would be compelled to say: “Were it
possible for me to suffer ten deaths by fire or flood, that would be nothing in comparison
to the future life of glory. What is temporal suffering, however protracted, contrasted with
eternal life? It is not worthy to be called suffering or to be esteemed meritorious.” (Luther
1909, p. 99)
At this point, Luther may have anticipated the objection of Pacific leaders who
claim that the people of the South Pacific nations are victims of a great climate
injustice—they suffer the most from climate change, even though they contribute
the least to it. This is based on the existential crises faced by many Pacific Islands
nations and their relative climate innocence (based on their low per capita greenhouse
gas emissions). On the face of it, this claim seems justified, but problems arise here
when this narrative of innocence is articulated theologically; for if it is God who
is punishing the Pacific with climate change, then this questions God’s justice, for
God appears to be punishing an innocent people. Furthermore, we might question,
from a theological perspective the implicit assumption that a just God must match
the punishment (climate change) with the sin (carbon emissions). This conundrum
will be discussed further below; in the meantime we might note two ways around
this. First, get rid of the idea of God’s punishment altogether, or; second, note that
throughout church history theologians and preachers have matched all manner of
sins with all kinds of natural and anthropogenic disasters used by a wrathful God to
punish humanity. For the believer in God’s wrath, then, the soundness of the Pacific
Islanders’ complaint of injustice is found in the relationship between God’s divine
wrath and the sins which prompt it.
Luther wrote this of those suffering and crying out about injustice done to them:
It ill becomes them to make extravagant complaint and outcry about injustice. “But,” you
say, “I have truly suffered injustice.” Very well, so be it. But why do you make so much of
your sufferings and never give a thought to what awaits you in heaven? Why not exalt the
future glory also? If you desire to be a Christian, truly it will not do to conduct yourself
in this impatient manner. If you must air your grievances, surely you may do it quietly and
decorously. (Luther 1909, pp. 99–100)
What does this mean for the victims of climate injustice? First, according to
Luther, that they should put their suffering in perspective of the coming redemption
of creation and themselves. However, such an otherworldly perspective on current
human suffering will not be terribly popular today. Even if contemporary Christians
can agree with Luther, that in the end we will be better off in heaven, many will
rightly ask whether God’s justice extends to this life too. The second lesson is that
they should air their grievances, even in subdued ways. Luther does not advocate
quietism in the face of injustice.
Furthermore, according to Luther, it is not only humans who suffer the consequences of climate change, other creatures do as well. The land, sea, coral, plants,
and animals are all under stress and suffering from loss of habitat or the risk of
extinction. Creation suffers quietly and Luther pointed out that humans can learn
from the quiet suffering of other creatures. In a sermon on Romans 8, he wrote:
Paul holds up as an example to us the condition of the whole creation. He exhorts us to
endure patiently, as the creature does, all the violence and injustice we suffer from the devil
105
If one could conceive the nature of this reward he would be compelled to say: “Were it
possible for me to suffer ten deaths by fire or flood, that would be nothing in comparison
to the future life of glory. What is temporal suffering, however protracted, contrasted with
eternal life? It is not worthy to be called suffering or to be esteemed meritorious.” (Luther
1909, p. 99)
At this point, Luther may have anticipated the objection of Pacific leaders who
claim that the people of the South Pacific nations are victims of a great climate
injustice—they suffer the most from climate change, even though they contribute
the least to it. This is based on the existential crises faced by many Pacific Islands
nations and their relative climate innocence (based on their low per capita greenhouse
gas emissions). On the face of it, this claim seems justified, but problems arise here
when this narrative of innocence is articulated theologically; for if it is God who
is punishing the Pacific with climate change, then this questions God’s justice, for
God appears to be punishing an innocent people. Furthermore, we might question,
from a theological perspective the implicit assumption that a just God must match
the punishment (climate change) with the sin (carbon emissions). This conundrum
will be discussed further below; in the meantime we might note two ways around
this. First, get rid of the idea of God’s punishment altogether, or; second, note that
throughout church history theologians and preachers have matched all manner of
sins with all kinds of natural and anthropogenic disasters used by a wrathful God to
punish humanity. For the believer in God’s wrath, then, the soundness of the Pacific
Islanders’ complaint of injustice is found in the relationship between God’s divine
wrath and the sins which prompt it.
Luther wrote this of those suffering and crying out about injustice done to them:
It ill becomes them to make extravagant complaint and outcry about injustice. “But,” you
say, “I have truly suffered injustice.” Very well, so be it. But why do you make so much of
your sufferings and never give a thought to what awaits you in heaven? Why not exalt the
future glory also? If you desire to be a Christian, truly it will not do to conduct yourself
in this impatient manner. If you must air your grievances, surely you may do it quietly and
decorously. (Luther 1909, pp. 99–100)
What does this mean for the victims of climate injustice? First, according to
Luther, that they should put their suffering in perspective of the coming redemption
of creation and themselves. However, such an otherworldly perspective on current
human suffering will not be terribly popular today. Even if contemporary Christians
can agree with Luther, that in the end we will be better off in heaven, many will
rightly ask whether God’s justice extends to this life too. The second lesson is that
they should air their grievances, even in subdued ways. Luther does not advocate
quietism in the face of injustice.
Furthermore, according to Luther, it is not only humans who suffer the consequences of climate change, other creatures do as well. The land, sea, coral, plants,
and animals are all under stress and suffering from loss of habitat or the risk of
extinction. Creation suffers quietly and Luther pointed out that humans can learn
from the quiet suffering of other creatures. In a sermon on Romans 8, he wrote:
Paul holds up as an example to us the condition of the whole creation. He exhorts us to
endure patiently, as the creature does, all the violence and injustice we suffer from the devil