Sarum Modern Theology - Theodicy
Feb. 1st, 2021 11:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
yrieithyddSo my resolve to blog each week, managed to founder on week 2. But if I write two posts today I can get back on track. Partly this was because last week I went back to mum's for a few days bubbling before my cousin's funeral last Tuesday, so I lost thinking time.
So the topic for week two was Theodicy with Katie Cross.
That is how do we reconcile the idea of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God with the existence of evil.
My notes from the reading* focus around providence which is a word I really struggle with.
Migliore quotes Barth
This resonated with me. It made me think of Pullman's His Dark Materials. In Lyra’s world Calvin became Pope and the church is ruled by the Magesterium and it is this against which Lord Asriel rebels in seeking the Commonwealth of Heaven. My sense in reading the books has always been that were God as He (and the Authority is definitely He) is depicted in this literary universe then rebellion would be good. It also fascinates me that Christ does not feature in the theology, instead there is Enoch as the power taking over from the Ancient of Days (who isn’t the creator but the first Angel to take consciousness).
In the lecture, Katie Cross set out the background of the issue and then the classic Augustinian and Irenaean responses.
Augustine talks of Free Will and Original Sin. That we (Adam and Eve) spoilt the perfect world and so bad things are the consequences of our actions.
Irenaeus - humans are created imperfect (incomplete?) in the image of God but have to grown into God's likeness and suffering provides the opportunity for us to grow to be like God and make our souls. At this point I raised in the chat how this sat with the idea of Divine Impassibility. The answer was that it wasn't the suffering that was like God, but that through suffering we were able to become like God who was beyond suffering.
These can be summarised as punishment and pedagogy to which Migliore adds Divine Incomprehensibility - we cannot know why.
More modern - 20th century views given were given were
Protest Theodicy
Process Theodicy (which relates to the next lecture)
Soul-making Theodicy - linked to Irenaeus by John Hick
Liberation Theodicy - God struggles against suffering and we are to join in. (James Cone)
The discussion afterwards was very much that it was at some level unknowable and that the various attempts all have their issues.
*Daniel L. Migliore. Faith Seeking Understanding : An Introduction to Christian Theology, Third Ed. Vol. Third edition, Eerdmans, 2014
So the topic for week two was Theodicy with Katie Cross.
That is how do we reconcile the idea of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God with the existence of evil.
My notes from the reading* focus around providence which is a word I really struggle with.
Migliore quotes Barth
In practice, Barth contends, belief in providence in orthodox Reformed theology became indistinguishable from Stoic resignation, an acceptance of whatever happens as ordained by God. The consequence of such a teaching within modern culture was an inevitable “revolt against a capricious sovereign rule.” p. 22
This resonated with me. It made me think of Pullman's His Dark Materials. In Lyra’s world Calvin became Pope and the church is ruled by the Magesterium and it is this against which Lord Asriel rebels in seeking the Commonwealth of Heaven. My sense in reading the books has always been that were God as He (and the Authority is definitely He) is depicted in this literary universe then rebellion would be good. It also fascinates me that Christ does not feature in the theology, instead there is Enoch as the power taking over from the Ancient of Days (who isn’t the creator but the first Angel to take consciousness).
In the lecture, Katie Cross set out the background of the issue and then the classic Augustinian and Irenaean responses.
Augustine talks of Free Will and Original Sin. That we (Adam and Eve) spoilt the perfect world and so bad things are the consequences of our actions.
Irenaeus - humans are created imperfect (incomplete?) in the image of God but have to grown into God's likeness and suffering provides the opportunity for us to grow to be like God and make our souls. At this point I raised in the chat how this sat with the idea of Divine Impassibility. The answer was that it wasn't the suffering that was like God, but that through suffering we were able to become like God who was beyond suffering.
These can be summarised as punishment and pedagogy to which Migliore adds Divine Incomprehensibility - we cannot know why.
More modern - 20th century views given were given were
Protest Theodicy
Process Theodicy (which relates to the next lecture)
Soul-making Theodicy - linked to Irenaeus by John Hick
Liberation Theodicy - God struggles against suffering and we are to join in. (James Cone)
The discussion afterwards was very much that it was at some level unknowable and that the various attempts all have their issues.
*Daniel L. Migliore. Faith Seeking Understanding : An Introduction to Christian Theology, Third Ed. Vol. Third edition, Eerdmans, 2014
