PANENTHEISTIC beliefs are present amongst Christian climate advocates and activists, latest research suggests. Survey respondents tended to agree that “God is embodied on the earth and universe, quite than separate from it.”
The finding appears in Religion, Theology and Climate Change, the report of a three-year study funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and hosted on the University of Manchester.
The team, led by the Revd Professor Peter Scott, director of the Lincoln Theological Institute at Manchester, carried out research with six organisations: CAFOD, Christian Climate Action, Operation Noah, the RC diocese of Salford, and the C of E dioceses of Manchester and Oxford. The task was “to offer evidence of creativity in theology, going beyond dominant traditions” in the varied groups.
The project included participant commentary, a survey of the six groups (gathering 319 responses between May and August 2023), and 62 in-depth interviews, to analyze “ecotheological beliefs”, emotions, influences, and views in relation to taking climate motion. “Significant theological creativity” was evident, the report says.
The survey used a “theologically informed questionnaire” to know respondents’ theological views and feelings concerning climate change, alongside their attitudes towards the justification of various sorts of climate motion. Respondents were asked to point their level of agreement with various statements, from 0 (disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). The overall average was 8.
The statement that “God is embodied on the earth and universe, quite than separate from it”, described as “an explicit type of panentheism”, secured a rating of 8.2. “These ideas bring a way of immanence to creation, and when the world is viewed as imbued with the divine, such views appear to encourage a theocentric outlook that values the world for its divine presence,” the report says. The belief that God “is in every part” was “commonly reported by respondents”. One respondent commented: “If I put my hand on a tree, it’s alive with the lifetime of God.”
This view was “not univocal”, the report says, “and the thought of creation revealing God, quite than God being inside creation, made for a vital contrast for some people”.
The statement “Humans have dominion over God’s creation” had a rating of 4.3. Two statements — “The entire creation, not only human beings, is within the image of God” (7.3) and “The earth is alive and its creatures have freedom and autonomy” (7.1) — are described as “quite outside the mainstream of Christian thought”, with the degree of support expressed “somewhat surprising”.
The “core claim” of the report is that “climate change will only be morally considerable for Christians if it is usually soteriologically considerable. . . now we have found the persistent and artistic effort to relate elements of climate change advocacy and activism to soteriology.” Among its 12 recommendations is the adoption of “a broader soteriological language for engaging people”, including “expanding a soteriological language that brings Christ into the work of creation care”.
It continues: “The incarnation has been related by our respondents to creation, and God’s valuing of creation is seen as an end result of such incarnational presence. The ministry of Jesus is appealed to by those that want to amplify the prophetic theme in Christian witness and testimony within the context of climate change: Jesus is presented as a disruptive and controversial figure.
“Crucifixion is referred to when parallels are drawn between the crucifying of Jesus and the present ‘crucifying’ of creation. Resurrection identifies the victory of life over death, and that is developed in ecological ways to point a future for the non-human creation. Hope relies within the expected return of Jesus and thereby the fulfilled establishment of God’s kingdom of justice and peace.”
Two roles were identified inside the six groups: “Climate stewards”, focused on lifestyles and organisational practice, and “climate prophets”, engaged in systemic critique and political activism. One Operation Noah respondent commented: “I feel if Jesus was alive, as a human man, this present day, he could be definitely shouting concerning the injustice within the climate crisis and he could be calling motion against quite a couple of organisations or banks.”
Across all groups, 39 per cent of respondents supported occupying land or buildings, 25 per cent disrupting transport systems, and 17 per cent interrupting energy supplies. More than two-thirds of respondents (68 per cent) were over-55s, including 77 per cent of those from Christian Climate Action. In total, only five per cent were under-34s.
Recommendations include conducting internal theological audits, using the questionnaire used to tell the study.
The report is out there at: pure.manchester.ac.uk
