Adventures in the Spirit: Part Three

Last updated on: May 26, 2009 at 12:26 am by James F. McGrath

Adventures in the Spirit: Part Three 2009-05-26T00:26:00-04:00 James F. McGrath

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.

Part Three of Philip Clayton’s Adventures in the Spirit is about Panentheism. Chapter 8 offers an introduction to panentheism and the closely related subject of process thought. A cumulative case is made for why panentheism might be adopted as a theological framework rather than classical theism. Clayton realizes that for some the attractiveness of panentheism is self-evident while others fail to see what the attraction is: the former tend to be philosophical theologians rather than systematic or biblical ones (p.120). Some feel that panentheism does less justice to the notion of God interacting with us in a personal way than classic theism does, but Clayton points out that it is not enough to simply express the desire to retain divine personhood, and he will go on to show that panentheism can do justice to God’s status as “at least personal” and “more than personal”. But in the present context, he emphasizes that the concept of “person” is “not a self-explanatory category” (p.122), and further reflection and exploration is needed no matter which sorts of language are to be applied to God.

Interacting with Spinoza and Hegel (among others), Clayton shows that the notion of God as infinite seems to lead naturally to panentheism, since the truly infinite must include all finite realities within itself (p.126). And yet (in contrast to a quotation from Hartshorne provided on p.119) the “in” of the concept of “everything in God” (panentheism) is to be viewed as a metaphor (p.128), particularly if we wish to use the language of God being in us or in the world, as well as vice versa.

Clayton articulates his view of religious language: “If one is to speak of the divine at all, one must speak analogically – even though all finite, human analogies are inadequate to the infinite God. If one chooses to speak, one will wish to use the best analogies available, while openly acknowledging their limitations” (p.129). He then goes on to expound further on why he believes that concepts such as emergence and panentheism are particularly helpful ones for thinking theologically in relation to our current understanding in the natural sciences and other disciplines. He warns once again, however, against assuming that the notion of the universe as becoming divine and not-yet-divine is the best that can be salvaged from traditional notions of God in light of modern science (pp.131-132). This represents an appropriate caution, firmly rooted in Clayton’s understanding of theological language and of the history of theology. All analogies must ultimately be negated when applied to God (p.173), and the contributions of theologians from the past have been found wanting time and time again not only when they have refused to engage contemporary currents of thought and knowledge, but also when they have allowed themselves to be carried uncritically along with them.

Chapter 9 offers a postfoundationalist approach to pneumatology and the language of Spirit. Postfoundationalism, Clayton explains, means the approach to reason that seeks coherence rather than seeking to build the entire edifice of thought on a sure foundation that can be neutrally established (p.134). A key area that requires reconsideration is how to think about Spirit other than in the classic terminology and concepts of substances. Once again, the analogy of mind and body is introduced, with spirit representing an irreducible level and aspect of human existence, but not a separate substance introduced into and distinct from the physical constituents of human persons (p.145). The dual pitfalls Clayton identifies (p.146) are in introducing the language of spirit at too low a level (leading to vitalism or pantheism) or in abstraction from what we know about human persons (leading to dualism). Drawing on the analogy with human bodies, the regularities of the universe can usefully be compared to the autonomic functions of our bodies (p.148). And once again, Clayton warns against simply following the logic of the analogy to its end, leaving room for God (and human persons?) to survive independently of their bodies (p.148). Before concluding this chapter, Clayton relates theology to anthropology, in a manner reminiscent of Peter Berger’s treatment of this subject. Theological language points towards transcendence but at the same time tells us much about ourselves and the contexts within which we formulate our theologies (p.155).

Chapter 10 articulates a “trinitarian” process theology. It is not Trinitarian in the sense that it seeks to cohere with the traditional creedal formulations about God as triune, but in the sense that, in contrast to the dipolar theology of much process thought, Clayton is persuaded that theology requires a threefold structure. Helpful and challenging treatments are offered on topics such as God as not “a being”, the “God above God”, and the economic and immanent Trinity, with some fascinating interaction with Schelling in the process (if you’ll excuse the pun). Towards the end of the chapter (cf. p.173), Clayton begins grappling with the Christological questions raised by his theology.

Chapter 11 is the last in part 3, and applies the notion of kenosis to creation. Cosmology is defined as an enterprise that must be scientifically well-informed but which remains inherently metaphysical (p.176). Clayton formulates an “open panentheism” in dialogue with open theism, addressing how each deals with the relationship between divine self-limitation and the problem of evil (p.179). In contrast to many panentheists, Clayton seeks to preserve the traditional doctrine of creation out of nothing (pp.183-4).

Clayton’s articulation of his theological conclusions in this section continues to grapple with issues of method as well as with specific outcomes and conclusions. Some will feel that Clayton has gone too far in one direction, while others will claim he hasn’t gone far enough. But Clayton’s model of seeking to relate Christianity, the natural sciences and philosophical metaphysical questions in a serious and thoughtful way provides an excellent basis for such ongoing discussions.

The two remaining sections of the book will look at divine action and the broader practical application of the approach outlined thus far.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

May 24, 2009

Muslims, Baptists and Sabeans in Sunday School

Next Post

May 26, 2009 Operation Aborted

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 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 June 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 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz