Reference

The term "cruciform nature" as used by Southgate and Rolston captures the idea that the natural world is intrinsically tied to the notion of the Cross, symbolizing a realm of both profound creativity and inherent suffering. Here’s a brief explanation based on their perspectives:

1. Holmes Rolston's View: Rolston interprets nature as fundamentally "cruciform," meaning that it embodies the tension and paradox seen in the Cross – a mix of life, death, and redemption. Nature persists through a continuous cycle of perishing and rebirth, depicting a dramatic and sacred interplay.

   Source: Wiley Online Library

2. Christopher Southgate's View: Southgate highlights nature's dual aspect of suffering and creativity. He sees the natural world as inherently ambiguous, harboring both good and bad elements. This perspective requires invoking the Cross imagery to understand the profound anguish and passionate creativity that characterize the natural world.

   Source: PhilPapers

The notion of "cruciform nature" thus seeks to reconcile the evident suffering within nature with a broader theological and philosophical framework, viewing it as a perpetual cycle marked by aspects of sacrifice and regeneration. It suggests that to appreciate the travail of nature, one must consider it through the lens of the Cross, symbolizing suffering that gives way to creativity and new life.

For further reading, you may explore more comprehensive analyses in related articles:

• Zygon Journal: An in-depth discussion by Holmes Rolston.
• ResearchGate: Insights into Southgate’s compound theodicy and its implications in understanding nature.

This embodies the essence of "cruciform nature" — a blend of life's persistent complexity mirrored in both suffering and creation.