A Theology for the Earth: The Contributions of Thomas Berry and Bernard Lonergan

FOREWORD

FOREWORD I have seldom reflected on the epistemological or critical implications of my writings. Thus it is a special delight to read these pages of Anne Marie Dalton. They give me insights into my own thinking that I have seldom thought about in any conscious manner. It is particularly helpful to have her reflections done in the context of the epistemological and theological work of Bernard Lonergan. She is quite correct in understanding my work in terms of Lonergan's notion ofDescriptive Discourse, for my intent has been simply to present and to leave the reader to respond out of whatever background the reader might have. This century, through most of which both Lonergan and I have lived and worked, can be compared to that of Thomas Aquinas. He was born into a world being transformed in its thinking through the newly acquired writings of Aristotle that came into Christian Europe from the Moslem schools of thought in Spain. Prior to his times, Western thought had been dominated by the Platonism of the Fathers and the Neo-Platonism of Dionysius as these had come down through Boethius and Scotus Erigina.These new writings that came in through the Moslem world, especiallythrough the interpretation of Averrhoes, were so convincing that the Moslem world had become anxious lest they foster rationalism and so draw believers away from faith in the Koran. This led to a sudden withdrawal of support for philosophical studies in the Islamic schools at Cordoba and elsewhere in the Moslem world. VI A THEOLOGY FORTHEEARTH The same question arose regarding reason and faith in the Christian world after the arrival of these Aristotelian writings. Thomas Aquinas was called from Paris to Rome in 1259 to advise church authorities concerning the attitude they should adopt to this issue. After having new translations made from the Greek text, Thomas spent several years writing commentaries on most of these writings. Of special importance were his commentaries on the Physics, the Metaphysics and the De Anima. Consequent on these studies and in the line of traditions that had come down through the earlier Christian thinkers, Thomas made clear his view. There was not only a consonance between the writings of Aristotle and the teachings of faith, but the principles presented in the cosmology of Aristotle provided a remarkably clear and coherent context for an integral exposition of Christian faith. The consequence was his Summa Theologica. Our situation can be compared to that of Thomas Aquinas. We have a new way of understanding the universe, a new cosmology. For the first time, we are able to extend and correct the work of the Greek scientists through new cosmological data based on empirical observation . We see infinitely more than they were able to see. Only recently , however, have we been able to see that the universe is less a fixed entity than a vast complex of astronomical forms that emerged into being some 14 billion years ago and have been undergoing an evolutionary sequence of transformations ever since. Unlike Thomas we have not been able to assimilate this new vision that is made available to us. The scientists who made these discoveries have indicated that they consider the universe as simply mechanistic in origin and in functioning, however, and this has become a dominant view. We have lost any expectation that significant spiritual insight could come from an intimacy with the universe as divine manifestation.We have failed to seriously engage a new way of understanding the universe, considering it irrelevant or harmful to religious faith. Both my work and that of Lonergan have in different ways responded to this challenge. Earlier in this century, Teilhard de Chardin, among the most distinguished Christian scholars of high academic credentials in geological and anthropological studies, was unique in his acceptance of this new understanding of the universe. He recognized it as a story, a great evolutionary epic. His work revealed the potential of the scientific account of evolution to be the context for a new and enriched Christian theology that would provide in turn a new rapport between Christianity and the modern world. While Teilhard had, in my judgment, an excessive admiration of modern scientific technologies and an extreme anthropocentrism, I FOREWORD Vll have learned from him three things of special import. The universe has a psychic-spiritual as well as a physical-material dimension from the beginning; the universe story and the human story...