10 Standing in the Middle of the Ocean: Time for a Public Theology
197
What was most noticeable about the line of approach adopted by the Carroll report
was the ease with which the intersecting matters of resilience and theology turned
to ‘The Bible and Disasters’. The underlying assumption was the need to wrestle
with the biblical witness while being well aware of the need for a contemporary
hermeneutic. For the present purpose two matters stand out. The first was the recognition of the call for a relevant theology and the employment of Biblical references
in doing so. There was an obvious need to counter notions of divine retribution and
the occasional acts of transference in assigning responsibility for such. The second
was the sheer diversity of texts actually cited. The focus was not confined to Noah
or to Job. In a manner which frequently has not happened in the response of those
inhabiting low-lying islands there were references to the synoptic gospels (especially
Luke), John, and Paul’s epistles as well as 1 Peter. There was an evident willingness
to draw upon the New Testament as well as the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. With
regards the latter it was the book of Psalms that furnished examples of lament and
protest. The impact of climate change was set alongside Paul’s understanding of a
‘groaning creation’ (Romans 8).
From the vantage point of a Christian ethics the biblical texts were here being
used in a way other than the prescriptive mode in which the Noah cycle is often
used or dismissed. The intention—whether realized or not—was to tap into what has
been described as the instinct of the faithful. The rhetoric was designed to constitute
a ‘we’ and use the biblical texts in a way which adopted an amalgam of what has
been described as illuminative and formative types. Whereas the prescriptive mode is
likened to evoking a mirror response the illuminative serves as a window. There is no
direct correspondence between the text and the current issue under scrutiny. The text
releases ethical directives and principles, an orientation, through which a response
to the climate emergency, in this instance, may be viewed. The frequent exhortatory
tone—itself a standard feature of the Greek epistolary tradition in which the apostle
Paul stands—coupled with default-like use of the first person plural pronoun—we—
ensured that the Carroll report had effectively located the call for resilience within
a formative use of Scripture. The citing of Scripture is now not primarily for the
explicit resolution of a problem. Nor is it designed to be the equivalent of a Biblebased apologetic which seeks to explain and maybe justify the ways of God in
uncertain times.
The formative use of the Bible in a theological ethics fastens attention upon
personal and communal character. It involves consciousness-raising, a moral predisposition, and the prospect of appropriate action. Here the Carroll report referred
specifically to the epistle of James and, more tellingly, to the close of the parable
of the Good Samaritan where Jesus commands those with ears to hear to “go and
do likewise”. It means, in the first place, that the fundamental analogy between the
biblical text and the current context lies not in some ethical situation or event but in the
believing community itself. The distinctive social reality of the Christian community
is the primary form of continuity with the biblical world.
The selection of texts was woven in and through the unfolding narrative of
resilience. It was coloured by a desire to make a faithful response, to be pastoral,
197
What was most noticeable about the line of approach adopted by the Carroll report
was the ease with which the intersecting matters of resilience and theology turned
to ‘The Bible and Disasters’. The underlying assumption was the need to wrestle
with the biblical witness while being well aware of the need for a contemporary
hermeneutic. For the present purpose two matters stand out. The first was the recognition of the call for a relevant theology and the employment of Biblical references
in doing so. There was an obvious need to counter notions of divine retribution and
the occasional acts of transference in assigning responsibility for such. The second
was the sheer diversity of texts actually cited. The focus was not confined to Noah
or to Job. In a manner which frequently has not happened in the response of those
inhabiting low-lying islands there were references to the synoptic gospels (especially
Luke), John, and Paul’s epistles as well as 1 Peter. There was an evident willingness
to draw upon the New Testament as well as the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. With
regards the latter it was the book of Psalms that furnished examples of lament and
protest. The impact of climate change was set alongside Paul’s understanding of a
‘groaning creation’ (Romans 8).
From the vantage point of a Christian ethics the biblical texts were here being
used in a way other than the prescriptive mode in which the Noah cycle is often
used or dismissed. The intention—whether realized or not—was to tap into what has
been described as the instinct of the faithful. The rhetoric was designed to constitute
a ‘we’ and use the biblical texts in a way which adopted an amalgam of what has
been described as illuminative and formative types. Whereas the prescriptive mode is
likened to evoking a mirror response the illuminative serves as a window. There is no
direct correspondence between the text and the current issue under scrutiny. The text
releases ethical directives and principles, an orientation, through which a response
to the climate emergency, in this instance, may be viewed. The frequent exhortatory
tone—itself a standard feature of the Greek epistolary tradition in which the apostle
Paul stands—coupled with default-like use of the first person plural pronoun—we—
ensured that the Carroll report had effectively located the call for resilience within
a formative use of Scripture. The citing of Scripture is now not primarily for the
explicit resolution of a problem. Nor is it designed to be the equivalent of a Biblebased apologetic which seeks to explain and maybe justify the ways of God in
uncertain times.
The formative use of the Bible in a theological ethics fastens attention upon
personal and communal character. It involves consciousness-raising, a moral predisposition, and the prospect of appropriate action. Here the Carroll report referred
specifically to the epistle of James and, more tellingly, to the close of the parable
of the Good Samaritan where Jesus commands those with ears to hear to “go and
do likewise”. It means, in the first place, that the fundamental analogy between the
biblical text and the current context lies not in some ethical situation or event but in the
believing community itself. The distinctive social reality of the Christian community
is the primary form of continuity with the biblical world.
The selection of texts was woven in and through the unfolding narrative of
resilience. It was coloured by a desire to make a faithful response, to be pastoral,