Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
ral process without positing a mind or divinity behind such direction. It allows Ż. to then advance a modified panentheistic view of divine immanence. Ż. includes the possibility of human suffering, an element rarely found in theologies... more
ral process without positing a mind or divinity behind such direction. It allows Ż. to then advance a modified panentheistic view of divine immanence. Ż. includes the possibility of human suffering, an element rarely found in theologies of evolution. In doing so he opens the possibility of a profound, new, and fruitful insight, a notion that there is a dramatic reality immanent in nature that issues forth a mysterious beauty. Unfortunately, Ż. does not here fully exploit this theme. Taking a cue from J. V. Taylor’s The GoBetween God (1973), he seizes on the notion that God is “the foundation of our meetings” (178), on which he develops a panentheistic view of divine immanence where God is immanent in all cosmic process and reality, but at the same time transcends them. Such a panentheism allows for a kenosis of the Holy Spirit, a kenosis that “appears in the painful gap between experienced reality and our dreams inspired by the spirit of the Upper Room” (188). In a Christian evolutionary context, suffering means attempting to find that “difficult harmony” between our dreams and our experience. It calls for a “practical unification of nature and grace,” for an attempt to “connect natural factors with the Divine Reality surrounding us” (190–91). Thus, “the immanent God of evolution acts not through a determinism that would force an inevitable necessity of consequences, but in a yearning for difficult ideals, in the appreciation of beauty, and in the undertaking of actions which, despite the logic of losses and gains, makes of our lives a gift for others” (244). Ż. offers a genuine alternative to contemporary theologies of nature and evolution. It is grounded in a real engagement with science, while it challenges the philosophical assumptions of science. By taking into account human suffering, Ż. may have actually achieved a truly new direction for a theology of evolution, a notion of a divinely immanent drama that issues forth a mysterious beauty. Ż. did not exploit this tantalizing direction; he does, though, offer a profound insight in a field awash with simplistic and tired interpretations.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The voices of Mechthild of Magdeburg. By Elizabeth A. Andersen. Pp. 255. Oxford–Bern: Peter Lang, 2000. £26. 3 906765 60 1; 0 8204 5300 5 The soul as virgin wife. Mechthild of Magdeburg, Marguerite Porete, and Meister Eckhart. By Amy Hollywood. (Studies in Spirituality and Theology, 1.) Pp. x+331...more