c) Metaphysical Systems and Divine Action
Several approaches to the relation of divine and natural
causality rely on fully-developed metaphysical systems and their relation to
natural science, in place of the philosophically less detailed agential models
(above). Since these will be treated in some detail below, I will only note
them here.
i) The philosophical system of Alfred North Whitehead was
formulated specifically in light of relativity and quantum theory, giving it an
important advantage over older metaphysical systems. Process theologians argue
that the causes of every actual occasion includes the divine subjective lure,
past occasions through prehension (in a form that is consistent with SR), and
spontaneous, intrinsic novelty. This system has been deployed in discussions of
evolutionary and molecular biology (Barbour, Cobb and Birch, Haught) and of
physics and cosmology (Barbour, Haught, Jones, Shimony, Stapp). The close
relation between Whiteheads metaphysics and quantum mechanics deserves special
further attention.
Clearly process theology offers a robust non-interventionist
version of divine action which allows for God to participate intrinsically in
every event in nature without entirely determining their outcome. The challenge
in general, though, is to show how Gods action could make a meaningful
difference in the world at any level but that of quantum mechanics, if
regardless of the effect of Gods lure, all but subatomic levels are described
by deterministic equations.
ii) Neo-Thomists view God as the primary cause of the world
and every event, process, and property in it; science studies secondary causes
(Johnson) via such fields as physics and cosmology (Stoeger), and evolution
(Rahner). The challenge here is to show how God as primary cause could have an
effect on the flow of secondary causality, bracketing the traditional notion of
miracles as interventions.
iii) Trinitarians use the identity of the Immanent and
Economic Trinity to discuss Gods work in nature and history, drawing on
evolution (Moltmann, Johnson) and on physics and cosmology (Pannenberg,
Peters). Clearly if God is already acting within the world as the Economic
Trinity, the issue of interventionism is mute. The challenge here, once again,
is to show how God, acting immanently with nature, brings about novelty when
science describes the process deterministically.
Final Cautionary note to the use of either agential
models or metaphysical systems (and to all that follows throughout this
paper!): 1) Even if special relativity is given a flowing time interpretation
for each worldline, it challenges the existence of a universal, cosmic present
which seems entailed by such concepts as the world-as-a-whole and the
future. 2) The possibility of re-envisioning non-interventionist, objective,
and special divine action dramatically increases both the severity and the
scope of the problem of theodicy. It is essential that those arguing for divine
action address this problem directly (see Section E-2 below).
Contributed by: Dr. Robert Russell
|
