Abstract
John B. Cobb, Jr. critically questioned the tendency of the church to claim closeness to Christ while remaining closed to His presence in the world. As a pioneering voice in process theology, Cobb' thought invites the church to become more open—engaging meaningfully with society, the natural world, and ecological concerns. His theological framework challenges the church to reorient itself from an abstract or institutional religiosity toward a Christ who is deeply incarnational and grounded in the realities of creation. Through Cobb' process theology, this paper argues that the church must cultivate the courage to change its posture—recognizing the revelatory voice of God not only in Scripture but also in ecological crises and the broader rhythms of the natural world.
Introduction
So many voices are trying to comment on today' pandemic, and the noise can be overwhelming. Still, in this paper, I want to focus on one rhythm among Christian voices, and perhaps also certain religious parties, that continues to emphasize spiritual diction and God' will. Rather than connecting this emphasis to eschatological nuances, it presents God as an external object, with humanity cast as the primary actor, pursuing fame through avoidance, fatalism, or “nrima.” Of course, the various tones and intonations of these voices cannot be explained in detail, but we can at least discern the messages: from claims that the coronavirus signals the beginning of the end times, to warnings that the vaccine is an antichrist revealing its fangs. The mouthpiece of these voices comes not only from individuals’ tongues but also from institutions. Having glimpsed the images and sounds circulating on social media, I draw as much as possible from John Cobb' works to comment on what is happening today. Indeed, in practical theology, it is undeniable that there is uncertainty in the method of theology as a science about God or knowledge of God Himself, so, naturally, the church and Christians have a desire to prioritize “divinity” when faced with problems from non-divine dimensions of life. But for me, this is where Cobb invites us all to talk about God, who is “here,” and we huddle together.
John B. Cobb, Jr. is a North American theologian who has had a prominent influence in the twentieth century. Cobb presents “process theology,” which he describes as a creative transformation that rebuilds Christian theology through its explicit engagement with modern philosophy, natural science, and social science. Cobb' views are colored by the thoughts of Alfred North Whitehead 1 and Charles Hartshorne 2 who attempted a re-understanding of Christian theology through the doctrines of modern philosophy. He saw that a combination of process philosophy and a new natural theology was needed to answer the postmodern human need for truth. By using the contribution of Whitehead' process philosophy as a basis for developing a new Christian natural theology, he believed it would help him in his theological task. 3
It can be said that the process philosophy used by Cobb has become a foundation that has consistently provided new understandings of Christian theology through his works compared to other theologians since the 1960s.
Cobb' doctoral dissertation explored the possibility of Christian freedom from speculative belief, an exercise that convinced him of the impossibility of such freedom. Issues relating to faith and philosophy became the preoccupations and focus of his work for many years. His understanding of Christian faith changed in the mid-1960s. He later acknowledged that his work before 1965 was dominated by “Whiteadian Scholasticism.” Although the categorical schematization process he derived from Whitehead's thought was always present in his work, Whitehead's technical ideas became less visible and his ideas more powerful. Furthermore, like Schubert Ogden, his writings reflect a conscious effort to move beyond the abstract analysis of theology toward a broader understanding of the theological significance of the responsibilities of witnesses to Christ in contemporary contexts, including issues such as ecology, economics, race, and gender.
In the late 1960s, his involvement with ecological organizations became an essential factor in his career advancement. Much of his writing since the early 1970s has focused more on the environment and issues related to political economy. Several of his books, such as The Liberation of Life (1981) and For the Common God (1989), were written in collaboration with a professional scientist and an economist.
After serving for five years at Emory University, Cobb joined the faculty of a new school, Claremont School of Theology, in California. He served there for over 30 years as professor and director of the Center for Process Studies founded in 1973 with his colleague David Ray Griffin. In 1971, Cobb and Lewis Foyd, a leading proponent of process philosophy, founded Process Studies, a publication dedicated to studying process philosophy and its offshoots. 4
Cobb has been a prolific writer. His works cover pastoral theology, political theology, ecology, and the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. Most importantly, he provides a contemporary articulation of process theology, the theological orientation that lies behind his engagement with all the other issues. 5
In this article, I seek to apply Cobb's process theology, which blurs the distinction between Creator and creation (within the Christian monotheistic context), to provide therapeutic insights for Christian attitudes that treat nature and the world not merely as objects detached from discussions about God. I hope that this approach can encourage Christians to more fully acknowledge God and the world, embracing the world’s richness and completeness in all its nuances.
Method
This study employs a qualitative theological-critical approach using library research as the primary method. The research focuses on analyzing the thought of John B. Cobb, Jr., particularly his contributions to process theology and their relevance to contemporary ecclesiology that is responsive to the world, society, and the natural environment.
Primary data sources include Cobb's seminal works such as Christ in a Pluralistic Age (1975) and Is It Too Late? A Theology of Ecology (1972), as well as secondary literature that interprets and critiques process theology.
6
The analytical approach consists of:
Theological hermeneutics, used to interpret the theological meaning of Cobb's thought in light of the contemporary church context.
7
Contextual critique, aimed at evaluating the relevance of Cobb's ideas to the ecological, social, and spiritual realities faced by the church today.
8
Normative theological reflection, intended to construct a synthesis between Cobb's theology and contemporary ecclesial practices that are more open, participative, and ecologically conscious.
9
The goal of this methodological approach is to show that Cobb's theology is not merely theoretical but also has operative potential for churches seeking to bear witness amid today' ecological and spiritual crises. Therefore, this study not only traces Cobb's intellectual contribution but also assesses the validity and practical significance of his theology for the contemporary church.
The Relevance of John Cobb's Thoughts to the Understanding of Creation and the Primacy of Christ
The Calling God and Human Possibilities
The primary task of theology is to formulate a doctrine about God. This fact has often been obscured in past generations when it sometimes seemed that man or history were the primary concerns of theology. If we do not speak of God, then much of what we have said about man and history is meaningless or arbitrary. The reality or unreality of “God” can be defined by definition. That is, on the one hand, it is possible to define “God” that would lead everyone to deny everything associated with the term. For example, “God” could be defined as a being who dwells above us, who is beyond the heavens, and sometimes intervenes in the events of this planet. If any clear meaning could be attached to such words, then almost all of us would affirm the non-existence of such a being, and if no meaning could be assigned to the word, then the question of the existence of “God” in this passage could not arise. 10
Cobb's teaching about God's will does not go through the process of metaphysical schemes that have been embedded in Whitehead's metaphysics. Although Cobb in his views and thoughts is greatly influenced by Whitehead, Cobb's reflection of belief is centered on the Theme of God as a source with the power to create all that is new. Cobb points to God as the source of creative transformation, God-Responsive Love, in his relationship with the world. This has similarities to the concept of process philosophy that gives God the choice to be accepted or rejected, as Stanley Grenz explains: Cobb … employed Whitehead to replace the classical view of God as the controlling power over the world. In its stead, he introduced the idea of God as Creative-Responsive Love, who relates to the world through persuasion, not coercion. According to process philosophy, the initial aim God provides can be chosen or rejected. Cobb interpreted this to imply that the outcome of the process is unknown and that God undergoes risk and adventure in the cosmic experiment, while remaining the source of unrest in the world.
11
In his God and the World (1969) and subsequent works, Cobb also paid great attention to Gods' “natural consequences”; this concept explains God' effects on the world and the world's impacts on God. This requires Cobb to pay fundamental attention to how one can give a proper account of God's “place” in his divine action in the world when the idea of God being “above” or “somewhere” no longer makes sense. If the light is assumed there, then how is one to interpret God's action in both nature and human history? 12
The first issue Cobb raises is what kind of reality God is if we cannot accept and understand God as a physical object among other physical objects or allow ourselves to be trapped in a dualism that views the physical and the mental as two separate realities. Both ideas have been widely discredited. For example, contemporary physics and process philosophy offer critiques of older understandings of physics. For example, science shows that solids, the inert objects that give rise to our naïve notions of the physical, are, in fact, composed of subatomic particles that act and react. Electrons can only be understood as a series of events. The building blocks of the world, the stuff that everything else is made of, are “energy-events.” 13
If physics is to be understood in terms of “energy events,” then its relation to thought must be revised. Since thought is not a physical reality in the older sense of the word, it may now be understood as an energy event. Our way of thinking receives energy from the past in our body and transmits or modifies it, to subsequent events. This way of thinking has its own unity and creativity. But this must not be considered a longing for a different role than being. Cobb suggests that if we can think of the energy potential of each event as applied to unconscious electronic events and human thought, we can solve the problem of Cartesian dualism and reconceptualize God as the unique energy inherent in each activity. We naturally think of electronic energy as standing alone. When we think of the energy activity in the consciousness of human experience, we think of it as coming from outside. However, Cobb suggests that it is quite appropriate to consider the energy activity of the electron as a subject.
Cobb proposes, then, to use our own experience as the closest analogy for thinking about the reality of God. One can immediately respond that subjective experience depends on thoughts, sights, sounds, and so on, and we cannot expect God to have anything comparable. Cobb’s answer is crucial because it has to do with the claim of process philosophy, namely that human experience is not simply sensory: “the fundamental data of the human mind or subject are not physical objects outside the body but energetic events inside the body.” Cobb explains that although worldly experience is sensory-saturated, the priority of the non-sensory is inferred in human experience. 14
Cobb recognizes two crucial questions, although only one is presented and discussed here: where can the energy event be? Either the transcendent image of God “up there” or the immanent image of God “there” are helpful since both can force or imply a loose connection. One might say that God is present here and now, which denies the idea that God could be located far away elsewhere. Cobb points out that since space implies the existence of physical bodies, one might say that God is spirit; God is transcendent beyond our space and time. Indeed, Cobb sees no objective religion that speaks of God as nonspatial; he prefers to say that “God is everywhere.” 15
Those who say that God is nowhere and those who claim that God is everywhere, rightly deny that God is bound by the limited perspective of space and time. However, the theological difference interpreted by this understanding is significant. Those who claim that God is nowhere say that God is different from all forms of energy. But those who say that God is everywhere believe that transformation is an interaction with God.” 16
Christocentric Pluralism
The experience of living in Japan, serving in the military, and encountering other religions made Cobb understand the importance of pluralism. Cobb agrees with pluralists that no religion can claim absolute or ultimate superiority over all others—but not in the pluralist sense of all religions being equally essential. Their respective tasks may appear superficially similar, but each religion has different tasks and so one cannot claim that any performs its role better than another. 17
Cobb wants to respect and preserve the fundamental differences among religions. He fears that pluralists do not do this. He accuses pluralism of not being pluralistic enough; they overlook the differences in their focus on the similarities between religions. Cobb recognizes the danger in his original pluralism, for it can easily slip into what he calls “Conceptual Relativism.” If all religions were genuinely different, a religion's truth would be what it says it is. There would be no interreligious criteria for what is true and false. Cobb proposes, in his “Relatively Objective Norm,” that he considers all religions to be engaged in a dialogue that acknowledges that there is more truth than what they know in their own religion and that they can learn from the “more” of other faiths by their exposure to and conversation with them. 18
Cobb advocates a Christocentric and pluralistic theology in its approach to other religions. He argues that Christocentrism is rooted in Sophia or divine wisdom, the essence of God manifested in Christ. He argues that Christians must reject arrogance, exclusivism, and dogmatism as obstacles to creative Christological transformation. In this sense, other religions can approach the essence of Christ without having to believe in Christ. Cobb sees Jesus as the center of history but not the whole of history. He sees the need to expand this history to include other religions. Even if this creative Christological process causes people to replace Christ's central position in history with something else, he says the replacement itself is a true and faithful attitude to Christ. 19
Christ and Transformative Creation
As a Christian theologian, Cobb made creative transformation the basis of his thinking on Christology. In this regard, Alfred North Whitehead and Henry Nelson Wieman significantly influenced Cobb's thinking. 20 He described his Christology as less of a “Jesusological” one that both became human in Christ and embodied the work of Jesus in the world. Cobb resisted using the word “Christ” because he felt that it unnecessarily “confuses Jesus who in the name of God is present with God himself.” Cobb's reflections on Christology reveal significant developments. He speaks of Christ as the divine Logos. 21
The incarnation of the Logos is Christ. In a broad sense, Christ is present in all things but with two qualifications. First, although there is no absolute line between the inanimate and the animate world, the presence of the Logos is almost indistinguishable from the repetition of the past; it is in living creatures that the work of the Logos is significantly manifested. Second, as we have agreed regarding organisms, the work of the Logos must be understood. in relation to them. This means that the degree to which the Logos is effective in a creature is largely determined by the creature itself. 22
For Cobb, it was very confusing to distinguish between Jesus as the incarnation of God and Jesus as himself. In Christ in a Pluralistic Age (1975), Cobb's reflections on Christology reveal a significant development in his thinking. He explains that Christ is the Logos. He does so in close connection with the traditional understanding of God' presence as the initial purpose by which each subject determines how they form themselves and God as the embodiment of creative transformation in the world. 23
To speak of Christ as Logos requires an understanding in Christian theology that the word “Christ” refers to a universal fact and that reflection on the Logos carries the characteristic of Christ as creative transformation. If, in the incarnation of Christ, the Logos represents creative transformation, then Christian theology must not be content with merely discovering Christ or the foundational truths of its history; rather, it must be clearly reflected in all life. Christ as creative transformation must be found in the religious atmosphere or church and in science, philosophy, art, and social organization—wherever creative transformation is found. 24
Creative transformation is the essence of growth, and growth is the essence of life. Growth is not achieved by adding elements to the world in different combinations. It requires, however, the transformation of the elements through introducing the new. This changes their nature and meaning without suppressing or destroying them. The source of this newness is the Logos, whose incarnate form is Christ, in whom Christ is effectively present. That is creative transformation. Creative transformation is involved in the whole response of love. Loving others is how we allow others to feel the influence within ourselves. But these feelings are distinct from ourselves and cannot simply be added to them. Usually, to protect ourselves, we shut out the feelings of others, preventing them from enriching our own experience. 25
Cobb asserts that Christ can be a complete and compelling presence, embodying rightness, truth, and openness. For Christians, the meaning of Logos as love is incarnated in Jesus because Jesus brings it into the history of human existence. That is why the creative love of God produces a creative transformation in creation. One main direction of transformation is the expansion of our anticipation toward the future, recognizing how it will be affected by one's actions. This broadens our horizon, helping to ensure that the future is not compromised by self-interest. Greater interest places the more limited interests about the aspects of the future in a new light and provides them with new guiding principles. The person who acts in the creativity of perfect love is thereby on the path of creative transformation. 26
Process Theology as Creative Transformation
Process theology is a reaction to pantheism, which does not sufficiently distinguish God from the world, and monotheism, which significantly separates humans from God. In process theology, the world is understood as a social organism, an an interdependent and interrelated whole, growing toward fulfillment through a network of interplaying influences that are God' persuasive purpose. In this process, God is influenced by the world as He influences the world. 27
Process theology is often equated with open theology, although there are differences. Cobb explains the main differences in context and constituents. Open theology emerges from the experiences, reflections, and sensitivities of the conservative Evangelical community. Its proponents recognize that some teachings inherited from society do not align with either the life experience of Christians or the Bible, and they seek to modify these teachings. They do not view such modifications as contradictory to faith, nor as a compromise with secular culture. In contrast, process theology often provokes strong reactions against conservative forms of Christian faith. Its adherents are open to intellectual and existential inquiry, even while maintaining belief in God, and they sometimes resist coercive interpretations of the Bible, such as those emphasizing arbitrary external power. 28 Fundamentally, both theologies reject solving life’s problems through harmful means and place love at the center of their teachings.
Process theology certainly gave a new color to the world of theology at that time. During the rampant development of monotheism, which separated humans too much, and the development of pantheism, which did not sufficiently distinguish God from the world, process theology provided a middle way by initiating pantheism. In this understanding, God is not “outside” or “beside” the world and did not exist before the world was created, but is always correlative or exists together with the world.
Process theology is fundamental to natural theology, reconciling science with religion and supporting an ecological vision and ethics. Several images of nature are essential to an environmental vision. First, there is no dualism between nature and humanity. All individuals have intrinsic value and are, therefore, worthy of respect for who they are. Second, process theology does not proclaim that all individuals have the same level of intrinsic value. Third, the parts that make up the world are ephemeral events that shape themselves by bringing together aspects of other envirnonmental events into a creative synthesis, as Cobb develops in his concept of creative transformation. Fourth, the “other” involved in each event is not simply another limited process in the environment but is the inclusive whole of God' process.
Process theology is one of the most open theological movements, directed outward to engage with the problems facing humanity and the world. The statement about the church is evident within the category of process theology. The pressing issues are with us and with the church. What is the actual picture of the church today? Is it found more in the world outside the church than in the church itself? Is it possible that the church has closed itself off to Christ and is not the church at all? Ecclesiology must concern itself with the relationship of the church' existence and the formation of an ideal picture of the church as it is. 29
The central motif in Cobb's writing is the idea of “creative transformation.” Creative transformation can occur in various dimensions of life, in morality, political action, personal relationships, art, and ecology, through introducing something new. The source of something new is the Logos incarnate in Christ. The presence of Christ is essential for creative transformation or process theology. The presence of Christ, who is the embodiment of God' love, makes human creative love possible, and this love is, in fact, a condition of creative transformation. With this transformation, humans are free to love or care in a way that allows for the presence of even more love, namely love that is a response to the fulfillment of the Holy Spirit. In his book, Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition, Griffin wrote that if the church wants to participate in this, it must be creatively transformed through its openness to Christ. 30 Thus, the church must be open in responding to ideas, even those who disagree. Practical theology will be found at points where praxis is critical.
Process Theology and Ecology
One of the most central issues of Cobb's process theology concerns the environment. He is a leading figure in the development of Christian ecological theology. However, he accuses Christianity, including theologians, of being the most responsible for the misinterpretation of the Bible in terms of the position of nature as subordinate to human authority. Cobb attempts to show that the natural world is not a machine or something inanimate but a great organism in which everything is interdependent and interconnected. 31
Cobb's perspective on human life is more comprehensive in its attention to its relationship with nature and the environment, recognizing intrinsic value in all aspects of the natural world. The orientation of theology towards human history and humans themselves tends to suppress or ignore the existence of humans in the universal life in which we are a large part of the universe. Process theology, on the other side, is very aware of the reality of human life on this planet and the implications of the reflection of God and nature. As Cobb explains: Process theology intends to think through the meaning for our existence and actions of the space-time scales that scientific cosmology suggests. It affirms there was real value and enjoyment in the aeons of time before high forms of life appeared anywhere in the universe but that the level and importance of enjoyment increased greatly when on this planet animals and finally humans emerged.
32
The threat to all life on this planet forces everyone to reflect, serving as both a warning and a matter of serious concern. Cobb emphasozes the importance of short-term, local communities in agriculture, resource management, economic development, and politics as a way to mitigate strategies that lead to greater environmental destruction. For example, so-called “development” in the Third World often brings industrial growth, ecological destruction, long-term depletion of natural resources and causes continuous life-threatening ecosystem damage. 33
Cobb speaks of the horizon of reflection on the human condition as a form of narcissism centered on “the human”—an arrogance that fails to appreciate our relationships and concerns essential to the world' well-being. Cobb's theological ethics are seen in the ecological model of life that states that all living things are interconnected, that living things are capable of transcending the past through renewal, and that life reflects the richness of experience. If, however, the principles of right and justice are considered inviolable and unchanging standards or ideals of the individual, then common sense would suggest that justice is fundamentally at odds with a process theology understanding of all entities as interconnected organisms.
Cobb tries to voice a theology that is more pro-nature. Innovation and the need of mankind to meet their needs have made nature increasingly damaged and uninhabitable. He said that the meaning of the word “development” in Third World countries is the acceleration of industrial development, forest destruction, and massive land, as well as environmental damage, which, in fact, only threatens the sustainability of the ecosystem itself. Cobb shows that economic development in the Western world is seen as something good, but there is no awareness of the long-term effects of this development on the balance of nature.
Christ in ecclesiastical praxis (with its stirring intensity) has become a monopolized commodity. Nevertheless, as Donovan argues, the Spirit of Christ is still active worldwide. “The Spirit is still poured out on non-Christians, just as much to our astonishment as it was on our Jewish ancestors in the time of Peter and Cornelius. Revelation is still occurring amid traditional religion, Hinduism, Buddhism, in the knowledge behind the scientific revolution, in the universe-in all creation.” 34 Perhaps this is what Rahner meant when he identified the post-Vatican II era as the third stage of the world church, because, until the time of Vatican II, the church had not made its presence felt among major non-Christian communities. Nor was there any dialogue with other world religions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or others. Christian missionaries boldly ignored the contributions of local faiths as if they were blank pages, oblivious to the fact that in those cultures, people were more deeply embedded in religion than in the West, where to eliminate the influence of religion, one almost had to destroy the culture itself. God wants humans to know and do Revelation, and faith is the authentic response to that revelation from the midst of human life.
Cobb recognizes that the ecological model of doing theology has gradually involved real science. On the other hand, ecological theology would not limit concern for the environment to its role in sustaining human society. From a process theology perspective, justice requires that all creation be treated with respect and recognized as having reality and value for human use. The rest of creation is of value in itself to God. 35
The Relevance of John B. Cobb's Thoughts for Today's Problems
Through the thoughts of John B. Cobb, Jr., we can find the nuances of adaptive theology in the movement of the church and Christianity during a contemporary pandemic. Covid-19 has become a “drop of bombshell” for the whole world and the church. A virus like Covid-19 is not unlikely to emerge from the imbalance of nature that makes nature metamorphose into various threats to human life. Therefore, all of us must be aware of this calling by Charles Birch and John B. Cobb, Jr.: “The human calling is to respond to Life here and now so that life on this planet may be liberated from the forces of death that now threaten it.” 36
Today, the church is universally forced to change its dynamics and stable doctrines. Theology is no longer just talking about “the one above” or “the one here and the one there,” but a theology that exists in this life. Doing theology is continuously formulating God' teaching that is open to the life of the world and nature. Cobb teaches us that if we want to care about the continuity of humanity and nature, it starts with the “reformation” of God. Cobb hopes that “we can rescue the word God from the oppressive and repressive and unreal connotations it has come to have for so many people. Perhaps we can give it new meaning, at once more Christian and more universal, at once more personal and more natural.” 37
The Christian church must be universal, and plurality and variety must be considered. In the New Testament, Jesus never calls anyone to a sterile doctrine or ethic. Jesus speaks of the Father and of concern for other human beings. The person of Jesus Christ, rather than any particular teaching about him, stands at the center of Christianity. If that is so, then the church must be disarmed. The sacraments are meaningful but can be celebrated in many ways. Forgiveness and the fluid movement of the Spirit are the main messages that can never be reduced to emphasizing the sacrament of penance alone. Repentance is at the heart of Jesus’ preaching, but it is more than a weekly confession of devotion or spiritual direction. In a church that does not have a single standard, worldly standards are not privileged. The church's unity does not mean adherence to a single doctrinal formula but tolerance for various, sometimes even contradictory, reflections on the event of Christ. The church's holiness can never be identified with the moral code or the lifestyle of pastors or canonized saints, but rather the comprehensive discipleship of the whole people of God. The church's catholicity cannot be guaranteed by one form or structure of church and ministry but by the cultural and religious inclusiveness of all types of the body of Christ. The church's apostolate is not the same as apostolic succession, which is technically defined, but relatively fidelity to the life and strength of the church of the apostles of the New Testament. In a decentralized church, as in the New Testament churches, the focus is on local communities that worship one God and serve one another. The church or Christians must re-understand the incarnation of Christ in the world that has transformed His Love and existence for this world. This is an ever-new bridge to connect one person with another and the relationship of humans with all dimensions of life. Humans cannot be arrogant, closed, or force others to follow their doctrines. All negative things and attitudes in life that seem “more right” than others will hinder creative transformation in human life.
Understanding Christ as a creative transformation in every religious adherent in the face of love makes it necessary to continuously build constructive dialogue. The form of Christ's transformation in every religion and adherent can be believed to exist through parallel relationships and dialogue. Christ is the leading cause of determining the importance of the church. Without proclaiming Christ, the church means nothing. Cobb also emphasized that Christians must be responsible for maintaining the sustainability of the world and the continuity of all living creatures. The world can no longer be considered comfortable to live in if the model of blind exploitation continues to persist. The process theology that is the basis of natural theology reconciles science and religion and supports ecological ethics and vision. From Cobb, we can learn the need for a new natural theology that reawakens the critical task of the church in its actual involvement in the process of “becoming” towards a wholeness of creation. Cobb believes that the current form of environmental ethics is no longer adequate to overcome the current ecological crisis. The traditional concept of stewardship has proven to have failed to address this issue. 38
Responding to the pandemic, which is a global crisis arising from the current disturbances in nature, does not only require the responsibility and response of the government or a few individuals; everyone is called to overcome and respond to the voice of God. For William Chang, the church, as a manifestation of the actual body of Christ in this world, is also called to participate in voicing its prophetic voice in responding to the ecological crisis. 39 The church must also exercise wisdom and grace in caring for the world, whether by coaching congregation members, sermons, or directly voicing the responsibility of humans on the earth created by God. Thus, Christians must realize their calling and responsibility to maintain and use nature according to their needs. Such spirituality will help Christians not only to see the Covid-19 pandemic as a punishment that disrupts all areas of life, but also to experience it as a form of Godly relationship and interaction with nature.
Conclusion
John B. Cobb, Jr.'s theological vision, rooted in process theology, challenges the church to reconsider its orientation in a world marked by ecological crisis, spiritual disconnection, and social fragmentation. Cobb's call is clear: the church must not remain insular or indifferent to the suffering of creation. Instead, it must reorient itself toward Christ—not only the transcendent Logos but also the immanent One who suffers with the world.
By embracing a dynamic, relational theology that listens to the voices of the earth, the oppressed, and the marginalized, the church can resist the temptation to ignore God' presence in the cries of the environment and in the groanings of society. Cobb's thoughts compel the church to rediscover its prophetic voice and pastoral mission in the face of an “ignored” God—God who speaks through the ecological and ethical crises of our time.
In conclusion, Cobb's process theology provides a meaningful framework for the church to move beyond dogmatic rigidity and embrace a more responsive, contextual, and holistic discipleship. A church that dares to listen and respond to the world with compassion and creativity will not only rediscover God's presence in all things, but will also become a more faithful witness to the gospel in a suffering world.
