Understanding the Mechanics of the Incarnation? Larry Chapp Interview

Last updated on: February 27, 2014 at 11:34 am by Artur Rosman

Understanding the Mechanics of the Incarnation? Larry Chapp Interview 2014-02-27T11:34:37-07:00 Artur Rosman

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

One of Larry’s students once asked him, “Can you get into heaven if you smoke.” Larry answered, “Yeah, quicker.”

Today brings you an excerpt from an interview I recently conducted with theologian Larry Chapp. Larry has been involved in dialogues between scientists and theologians for goodness knows how long.

His book on that very topic, The God of Covenant and Creation, was featured in the very first Cosmos TOP10 list entitled “Top 10 Theology Books of the Last 10 Years (That I’ve Read).”

Our conversation grows out of questions readers directed at me after my widely circulated science and religion in dialogue post.

You can read the rest of the interview with Larry tomorrow on the Ethika Politika portal Rabelaisian Catholicism.

Cosmos the in Lost: I’d like to throw you a curveball. Please pardon the lack of theological rigor, but I wasn’t trained as a theologian. I’ve always had trouble reconciling the understanding of God (transcendent yet immanent) as ipsum esse and the person of Jesus Christ (immanent yet transcendent)–they live in separate compartments of my mind and come together only in short flashes of insight. You’ve thrown some bridges between those two perspectives in the answer above. What are some other ways of thinking about this connection with more clarity? What are some (if any) implications of rightly conceiving these theological conceptions for bridging divides between theology and science?

Larry Chapp: The Transcendence of God is precisely what makes his ubiquitous immanence possible. Non transcendent gods cannot be truly immanent but can only occupy a delimited space in space and time like the rest of us. As such they are all “local”. Even God viewed as a “supreme Being” at the top of a great chain of being remains implicated in the worldly order in a temporal and spatial way. Only a God who is wholly “Other” (aliud) can be the radically “non other” (non aliud). A truly Transcendent God is radically distinct from finitude which is precisely what makes his omnipresence in all finite things most intimately, possible. Thus, it is possible for a truly Transcendent God to be metaphysically “present” in our spatio-temporal world without for all that becoming localized. If this were not so, then when the second person of the Trinity was incarnated as the man Jesus, then for all the years he was “on the earth” he could not have been also still within the Godhead. The Incarnation will always remain a theological mystery in the strict sense since we are not capable of truly conceiving how the Infinite “works” and thus we are not capable of understanding the mechanics of the incarnation.

We must also pay attention to the addition to our understanding given by the Revelation of the Trinity. What this doctrine does is highlight that God’s “act” as pure Being is an act of relational love. God is not first God and only then differentiated into three persons, as if the divine nature were somehow antecedent to the relational persons. Rather, it is precisely the eternal, relational, circumincession of the persons within God that IS the divine nature. It is relationality all the way down so to speak. This was the insight of the modern trinitarian theologians like Balthasar, and Schindler is one of its best current expositors. Furthermore, because God is not a homogenous and static “unity” conceived of in the flat mathematical currency of “one” or “sameness”, but rather, a dynamic unity in distinction and distinction within unity, then it is possible to say that there is “otherness” within God, so long as we understand the proper analogical limits of saying that, and that the intra divine otherness is always already the very source of the divine unity as love. Thus, the otherness within God becomes the condition of possibility for God to posit a world – – a finite other – – with which to enter into relation ad extra. Thus is all worldly difference and distinction grounded in the Trinitarian otherness. Philosophers from time immemorial have grappled with this problem – – the problem of the one and the many – – and usually come away with a monistic reduction of worldly difference in the acid of the One (Plotinus). Thus does the world become a mere illusion (maya as the Hindus call it) or a place where all distinctions are viewed as a false dualism of consciousness (advaita in Buddhism) needing to be overcoming by dissolving all differences in the universal solvent of non-being. Only Christianity, therefore, can provide us with an ontology of Trinitarian love that properly grounds the world precisely as “world” and grounds worldly difference and distinctions in the realm of real being giving them standing. Christianity thus preaches the resurrection of the flesh, and a new heavens and a new earth – – not the reduction of all things at the end into the realm of illusory shadows. Christianity is therefore the most worldly of all world religions and is the only religion that can give us a true theology of creation as such. Christ is therefore, as Balthasar puts it, the “concrete universal” that shows us that that path to the truth is not in bypassing worldly structure and the realm of “things”, but in and through their mediation. As Balthasar puts it: Das Ganze im Fragment (the universal is mediated in and through the particular fragment).

That’s it for today. The rest of this answer and several more questions will be published tomorrow. In the meantime here are two of Larry’s favorite people together: Dylan and Papa Wojtyla.

====================================================

UPDATE: Here’s another excerpt and the direct link to the interview.

Catholic

Hans Urs von Balthasar

Science & Religion

Catholic

Hans Urs von Balthasar

Larry Chapp

science and religion

theology

Previous Post

February 26, 2014

Quick Catholic Ch-Ch-Ch Changes: Pope Francis Does a Phil Jenkins

Next Post

February 28, 2014 I Don't Believe in an Interventionist God

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category #WhyRemainCatholic Abortion Advent Anti-Catholicism Arts Atheism Beauty Benedict XVI Bible Book Review Catholic Cinema Comedy Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey Czesław Miłosz Dariusz Karłowicz Devil Easter Eastern Orthodoxy Economics Environment Family Famous Atheists Who Weren't Atheists Guest Post Hans Urs von Balthasar HHS Mandate History Imagination Interview Islam Jean-Luc Marion John Paul II Judaism Just War Lent Literature Little Sisters of the Poor Liturgy Martyrdom Music News Paganism Patristics Phenomenology Philosophy Pierre Hadot Poetry Poland Pop Culture Pope Francis Poverty Prayer Protestantism Rabelais Race Remi Brague Rene Girard Russia Sam Rocha Science & Religion SCOTUS Secularization Sexual Abuse Sexuality Silence Solidarity Stratford Caldecott Synod14 Terrorism Top 10 Uncategorized Walker Percy War Weakened Edition World War II World Youth Day WYD Krakow

Select a Month July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does "Ichabod" mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

God's gift Blessed son No glory Holy child