God-world Relation Research Articles

Grounding Intelligibility, Safeguarding Mystery: A Neoclassical Reading of Ernan McMullin’s Legacy

This paper suggests a “neoclassical” reading of Ernan McMullin’s thought on science and theology. McMullin’s Augustinian convictions on God and the God–world relation coincide with those of some prominent scholars from two renowned schools of neo-scholastic philosophy of the twentieth century in Louvain and Milan. The school of Milan, thanks to the work of some disciples of its leading figure, Amato Masnovo, developed a neoclassical version of neo-scholasticism, articulating a fundamental theory of knowledge, as well as an essential, rigorous path to God. We recall the main tenets of a neoclassical path to God, and we interpret this path as a possible contribution to the science–theology dialogue, in line with McMullin’s Augustinism. A neoclassical approach to science and theology, with its rediscovery and reactualization of some ideas of classic philosophy in an interdisciplinary context, grounds the intelligibility of the universe and safeguards its mystery.

A critical assessment of Bruce L. McCormack's christological proposal

AbstractBruce L. McCormack's recent christological proposal intends to move beyond the apparent impasse in theological discourse between God's aseity and God's world relation. In describing the second mode of divine being as personally constituted by receptivity to the human Jesus of Nazareth without losing the logos asarkos, McCormack's proposed christological innovation offers a way to consider relation to the world as proper to God through the Son, without absolute pronobeity coming to dominate in the doctrine of God. This being said, his christological proposal, as it stands, implies both that election is antecedent to triunity and that the person of Jesus of Nazareth is antecedent to the act of the incarnation. With the former comes the problem of sequence in the priority of divine act over divine being. With the latter comes the problem of offering a unified account of two agencies. As such, while ontological receptivity continues to hold significant possibilities for the doctrine of God, it requires more careful coordination to the relation of passive generation as such.

On Orthodox panentheism

AbstractPanentheism is the position that the world is in some sense ‘in’ God, and God ‘in’ the world, without the world being identical to God. Thus, it tries, like what I call mainstream theism and against pantheism, to protect the transcendence of God, while giving greater emphasis to his immanence in creation than the former. I aim to explicate an approach that I call Orthodox Panentheism. The word ‘orthodox’ is to be read in two ways. First, the picture is derived from the writings of some of the most important figures in Eastern Christian thought, so that it is Orthodox in the ‘big “O” sense’. Second, I hope to show that it is a legitimate Christian picture of the God–world relation which is both distinctive and worthy of being called ‘panentheism’ – an orthodox panentheism in the ‘little “o” sense’.

The Apocalypse of Wisdom: Louis Bouyer's Theological Recovery of the Cosmos by Keith Lemna

Reviewed by: The Apocalypse of Wisdom: Louis Bouyer's Theological Recovery of the Cosmos by Keith Lemna Aaron Williams The Apocalypse of Wisdom: Louis Bouyer's Theological Recovery of the Cosmos by Keith Lemna (Brooklyn, NY: Angelico, 2019), xxx + 488 pp. Keith Lemna has done the theological world a great service. In The Apocalypse of Wisdom: Louis Bouyer's Theological Recovery of the Cosmos, he offers the English-speaking world for the first time a monograph on the thought of the Oratorian Louis Bouyer. Bouyer is undoubtedly one of the theological giants of the twentieth century. Born in Paris in 1913, he was ordained a Lutheran pastor in 1936. After only three years as a Lutheran clergyman, he was received into the Catholic Church at the Benedictine Abbey of Saint Wandrille. Then ordained as an Oratorian priest in 1944, he taught from 1946 to 1962 at the Institut Catholique de Paris and abroad for the three decades following.1 He is most well-known for his work on the liturgy both before and after the Second Vatican Council. With fifty books to his name, including a nine-part synthesis on Christian doctrine, the breadth of his theological vision and work is astounding. In France he is considered one of the four preeminent theologians of the post-World War II era, and his theological contemporaries in Europe, such as Hans Urs von Balthasar and Joseph Ratzinger / Benedict XVI, always held the Oratorian in high regard.2 Yet, in the English-speaking world, much of his work has gone without comment.3 Thankfully, into the void steps this excellent work by Lemna. [End Page 1353] Anyone familiar with the Bouyerian corpus knows the challenge of approaching it. With its vast array of subject matter, ranging from biblical to liturgical to historical to spiritual to speculative theology, one wonders whether there is any one thread woven throughout the varied strands, a single theme around which the whole sprawling corpus can be understood. In fact, there is, and Lemna has deftly identified it. For Bouyer, the fundamental question of theology is the world's relation to God.4 The structure of the first six books of his nine-part treatise on systematic theology attest to the priority of the question with the first three works addressing the question of the world, or the economy of creation and salvation, and the latter three works addressing the question of God, or theology properly speaking: the doctrine of the Trinitarian God. Interestingly, though Bouyer's work on theological cosmology, Cosmos, is the third book in the series, it was, in fact, the last of the six to be written. In this sense, as Lemna points out, "Cosmos is a capstone monograph . . . summarizing in important ways the decisive first six volumes" (xiv). Theological cosmology fully illuminates the God–world relation as Bouyer sees it, and since this relation sits at the heart of his thought, Cosmos is for Bouyer both his "most personal, as well as most speculative work" and indeed, "opens up the meaning of his other writings" beyond the dogmatic sphere (25). One could, then, scarcely choose a better entry point into the wide theological world of this "mind with a very special character," as Joseph Ratzinger saw him.5 The Apocalypse of Wisdom is an expansive commentary on Bouyer's cosmology at the heart of which is a liturgical, even nuptial, vision of the whole of creation known and loved in the mind of God from all eternity, as the uncreated Wisdom of God. In creation God freely gives existence to the world ex nihilo, so that it might return to him in a liturgical song of praise and thanksgiving, as the Bride of his eternal Son, the eschatological and cosmic Church, created wisdom now made glorious and radiant through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. As Lemna puts it, "Bouyer shows that cosmology should be a pursuit of wisdom, but that Wisdom is ultimately a gift revealed or uncovered by means of apokalypsis in the re-creative interventions of the divine Word and Holy Spirit in history" (xvii). The wisdom of man seeking a unified vision of the whole of reality [End...

RESPONSE TO DUMSDAY'S “PALAMISM AND DISPOSITIONALISM”

AbstractRecently, I proposed a theory of ontology for the God–world relation that draws inspiration from: Deacon's emergent dynamics where absence plays a role in causal work; dispositionalism as the most suitable philosophical tradition for accommodating absence as a mode of being; and Palamism as the most suitable theological framework for articulating the absence of God as presence. Dumsday's “Palamism and Dispositionalism” in the present issue of Zygon is a cogent breakdown of that thesis, exposing philosophical and theological worries that touch on pan‐dispositionalism, bundle theory, Platonism, divine essence, created–uncreated distinction, God–world synergy, and more. This response article engages with the landscape of ideas that Dumsday surveys in an attempt to clarify and extend the proposed thesis that nature's powers are God's energies.

Panentheism and Open and Relational Theology

Open and relational theologies have a particular affinity for panentheism. But what does it mean to say that ‘all’ (pan) is ‘in’ (en) God? How one answers this question will be determined by a number of factors, including one’s metaphysic (understanding what constitutes the ‘all’ that is in God), one’s concept of God, and then one’s understanding of the God-world relation. This essay describes open and relational theology. It also describes panentheism, broadly understood. It concludes with an analysis of how an open and relational view of God and the world can often entail a particular type of panentheism.

NATURE'S POWERS AND GOD'S ENERGIES

AbstractThis is an exploration into the synthesis of Mumford and Anjum's pandispositionalist philosophy with Deacon's emergent dynamics, which when interpreted within the theological framework of Palamas’s essence–energies distinction, it all comes together into a new metaphysics that offers a more satisfactory account of the God–world relation. The argument proceeds in two stages. First, a philosophical framework for establishing a dual‐aspect monistic view of the world in terms of presence/absence (or manifested/unmanifested), acknowledging unmanifested powers as a genuine mode of actuality. Second, a theological consideration for a befitting conception of God within this scheme, according to which nature's powers are equated with God's energies, though God's essence is not exhausted by them. The resulting proposition promises a non‐Whiteheadian process view, a panentheistic (not pantheistic) articulation of divine presence, and an account of reality as the dramatization of God's manifestation in the world and our participation in that cosmic revealing.

The Ontology of the Offense: Rowan Williams and Johannes Climacus on Christology and Ontology

In Christ the Heart of Creation, Rowan Williams argues that Christology as expounded by the classical tradition in Western theology holds a bounty for thinking in Christian ontology about the God-world relation. In particular, he uses the work of Soren Kierkegaard throughout to show that the relation between finite and infinite, immanent and transcendent, is not competitive, and thus there need be no metaphysical problem when holding that the incarnate God-man is both fully human and divine. This essay argues, however, that Kierkegaard’s own pseudonymous work cited by Williams holds the incarnation to be far more paradoxical and intellectually offensive than Williams allows. However, such priority of offense does not put an end to Christ’s central ontological position but rather shifts it to new directions in our thinking about theological ontology. Rather than Williams’ own conception of a cosmos in which the divine and non-divine are compatible and harmonious, Kierkegaard presents a doctrine of existence in which God and the human are in constant, dynamic engagement and in which temporal being bears ultimate primacy for Christian existence.

God, World, and Freedom

The second volume of Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion emphasizes the pulsating particularities that distinguish the religions of history from one another. This volume discloses Hegel’s philosophical theology to be an open system whose concepts, as Jon Stewart points out, are no mere abstractions but principles concretely instantiated in the real world. This article first reviews key analytical notions used in investigating religions, with the notion of freedom being the most important. Next are examined two models of the God-world relation that have gained significant attention in the secondary literature on Hegel: pantheism, which affirms God as the substantial power in all things, and panentheism, which affirms all things as being in God. The essay’s final portion turns to a third model of the God-world relation, pantransentheism, which affirms that all things are being transformed in God. There I offer a very abbreviated gesture towards a Hegelian pantransentheism.

More than a Person

The question whether God should be thought of as personal or a-personal is closely linked to the issue of an appropriate model of God-world relation on the one hand and the question how to conceive divine action on the other hand. Starting with a discussion of the scientific character of theology, this article critically examines the univocal-personal concept of God. Traditional Christian conceptions of God have, however, always acknowledged a radical asymmetry between the personal existence of created beings and the ground of being itself. In a second step, the ontological truth claim associated with this way of speaking about God is being related to its methodological consequences. In final step, attention is given to the relation of immanence and transcendence as it is defended in different versions of panentheism: As an alternative to divine interventionism, panentheism can be shown to explicate divine providence as formal and final causation.

Timely, Transcendent, and Alive: Trinity in Jenson’s Understanding of the God–World Relation

Robert W. Jenson conceives of the God-world relation through a temporally inclusive idea of God that many critics find objectionable. Central to Jenson’s proposal is that God precedes the history that God lives with others by means of God’s own future. Does this make sense? In this essay I argue that it does, and that Jenson’s account needs to be demystified. The key to this, particularly, demonstrating the coherence of the God-time relation in view of the divine futurity, lies in the understanding of Jenson’s trinitarian theology. I will show that Jenson’s temporal idea of God, with a focus on his doctrine of the Spirit, is consonant with the trinitarian relations and should not be identified with the poles of created time in an overtly literal way. I also draw on Jenson’s trinitarian logic of divine unity to illustrate the reality of God in the process of time in his doctrine of creation.

Personalistic Theism, Divine Embodiment, and a Problem of Evil

One version of the problem of evil concludes that personalistic forms of theism should be rejected since the acts that one would expect a God with person-like qualities to perform, notably acts that would prevent egregious evils, do not occur. Given the evils that exist in the world, it is argued, if God exists as a person or like a person, God’s record of action is akin to that of a negligent parent. One way of responding to this “argument from neglect” is to maintain that there is a good reason for the apparent neglect—namely, that God could not intervene even once with respect to suffering (the “not-even-once principle”) without thereby incurring the responsibility of doing so on every occasion, which would be deleterious. So God never responds to evil. It is argued in this paper that a profoundly integrated, personalistic model of God and the God-world relation—one that is reflected in a soul-body analogy—provides a way of addressing the argument from neglect without affirming the not-even-once principle.

Divine Immutability, Divine Action and the God–World Relation

AbstractIn his thought‐provoking critique of classical Christian theism, Isaak Dorner argues that a traditional understanding of God's immutability precludes any diversity in God's action and presence in the world. Dorner reasons that the view of God developed in scholastic thought entails a ‘uniform’ divine causality in which God cannot act in new and distinct ways according to the various circumstances of his creatures. This sort of critique elicits the question of whether God's immutability, if taken to include his pure actuality, flattens out his action such that he is no longer truly engaged in the lives of his creatures. In this article, I propose that a development of the virtual distinction found in scholastic theology proper will enable us to integrate (1) the pure actuality of God and (2) what we may call the formal and temporal diversity of God's action pro nobis that confirms his authentic involvement in the world. Unfolding the explanatory power of the virtual distinction will require considering its relationship to the concept of God's pure actuality and analyzing different aspects of divine action in which the diversity of that action might be located.

Concepts of God and Models of the God–world relation

AbstractThere is a variety of concepts of the divine in the eastern and western theological and philosophical traditions. There is, however, not enough reflection on the logic behind concepts of God and their justification. I clarify some necessary and sufficient conditions any attempt to explicate a concept of God has to take into account. I argue that each concept of God is a cypher for a particular worldview and distinguishes three types of justification frequently used to bestow content on particular concepts of God: philosophical, theological, and scientific. I turn to four fundamental models of the God–world relation and argue that the most promising concept of God is panentheistic, on which the universe is essentially divine but is not exhaustive of the divine being.

A Postconservative Evangelical Response to Panentheism

The concept ‘panentheism’ is undergoing a dramatic evolution in Christian theology. Whereas it once meant that God is essentially non-voluntarily dependent on the world, it is being expanded in contemporary theology to include a wider spectrum of views of the God-world relation. Of special interest is so-called ‘Christian panentheism’, a qualified view and via media between classical theism and traditional panentheism. Today it is important to investigate what is meant when a person affirms ‘panentheism’; nothing can be assumed.

God's Transcendence and Compassion

This article considers the arguments for and against the notion that God suffers. It explores the theological arguments that support affirmations of divine impassibility and passibility respectively; especially as these are articulated in patristic discussions of divine apatheia and contemporary treatments by theologians such as David Bentley Hart and Robert Jenson. The article affirms the importance of reciprocity as a part of our understanding of the God-world relation and suggests that, from the perspective of time, the notion of divine suffering while not constituting the last word, nonetheless might be the “telling word” that the gospel compels us to use.

Christ, creation and the drama of redemption: ‘The play's the thing . . .’

AbstractThe Christian doctrine of creation is predicated upon two convictions: the transcendence of God and the creative activity of God in the world. While recent studies have shown the compatibility of these two seemingly conflicting convictions, the grounding for them has received less attention. This paper argues that a proper Christian understanding of these convictions and their relationship is dependent upon seeing their basis in christology and trinitarian doctrine. It thus traces the close relationship between Christ and creation and that between creation and redemption in scripture, the patristic period and their more recent retrieval in Schleiermacher and Barth, comparing such conceptions to pagan and neo-pagan alternatives for understanding the God–world relation.

The World’s Participation in God’s Trinitarian Life

Abstract Like process theism, Christian theology affirms the immanence of God in the world and of the world in God. Unlike process theism, it also affirms the ontological priority of God over the world. As a result, Christian theologians will object to describing God’s relation to the world by analogy with the mind’s relation to the body or in terms of whole-part relations. In Christian history, the God-world relation has been more often described in terms of "participation." The world is said to participate in God, keeping in mind that this language is highly metaphorical. The idea of participation is a development of themes enunciated by Plato and Aristotle, but adapted by Christian theologians to trinitarian ends. The created world participates in God by reflecting the trinitarian life of identity and difference. This establishes an organic and internal relation between God and the world.

Hegel on the Sublime

Hegel's treatment of the Sublime is both self-consistent and distinctive. He not only defines sublimity, but discovers and ranks its types or stages from one select point of view—the viewpoint of God-world relation; and the way he does this, on the one hand, distinguishes him from many others who have contributed to an understanding of the concept, and, on the other hand, enables him to suggest, if but implicitly, a criterion for distinguishing the sublime from allied concepts. Besides, he discusses the matter in the wide context of diverse cultures, making quite a few insightful references to Eastern literature; and, consistently with his own conception of philosophy, also from the viewpoint of historical necessity, so that the sublime appears, in his Aesthetik, as a specific stage which the evolving story of art must in fact traverse.

A Note on the God-World Relation in Whitehead's Process and Reality

A Note on the God-World Relation in Whitehead's Process and Reality