Essays in Analytic Theology PDF
Preview Essays in Analytic Theology
OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY Series Editors MICHAEL C. REA and OLIVER D. CRISP OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY AnalyticTheologyutilizesthetoolsandmethodsofcontemporaryanalytic philosophyforthepurposesofconstructiveChristiantheology,payingattention totheChristiantraditionanddevelopmentofdoctrine.Thisinnovativeseries ofstudiesshowcaseshighquality,cuttingedgeresearchinthisarea,inmonographs andsymposia. : MetaphysicsandtheTri-PersonalGod WilliamHasker TheTheologicalProjectofModernism FaithandtheConditionsofMineness KevinW.Hector TheEndoftheTimelessGod R.T.Mullins RitualizedFaith EssaysonthePhilosophyofLiturgy TerenceCuneo InDefenseofConciliarChristology APhilosophicalEssay TimothyPawl Atonement EleonoreStump HumilityandHumanFlourishing AStudyinAnalyticMoralTheology MichaelW.Austin Humility,Pride,andChristianVirtueTheory KentDunnington Essays in Analytic Theology Volume 2 MICHAEL C. REA 1 3 GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©MichaelC.Rea2020 Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin2020 Impression:1 Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2020944362 SetISBN 978–0–19–886679–4 Volume1 978–0–19–886680–0 Volume2 978–0–19–886681–7 DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198866817.003.0001 PrintedandboundinGreatBritainby ClaysLtd,ElcografS.p.A. LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork. Acknowledgements WiththeexceptionofChapter9andthepostscriptstoChapters7and8,allofthe essaysinthisvolumehavebeenpreviouslypublished.Ihavemadenochangesto the previously published material except to correct a few minor errors, add an occasional editorial note, and make some formatting changes for the sake of uniformity. I am grateful to the following publishers for permission to reprint themateriallistedhere. ‘The Metaphysics of Original Sin’, pp. 319–56 in Persons: Human and Divine, editedbyDeanZimmermanandPeter vanInwagen (Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press,2007).ReprintedbypermissionofOxfordUniversityPress. ‘Hylomorphism and the Incarnation’, pp. 134–52 in The Metaphysics of the Incarnation, edited by Anna Marmodoro and Jonathan Hill (Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress,2011).ReprintedbypermissionofOxfordUniversityPress. ‘TheIll-MadeKnightandtheStainontheSoul’,EuropeanJournalforPhilosophy ofReligion11(2019):1–18. ‘In Defence of Sceptical Theism: A Reply to Almeida and Oppy’ (with Michael Bergmann),AustralasianJournalofPhilosophy83(2005):241–51. ‘Wright on Theodicy: Reflections on Evil and the Justice of God’, Philosophia Christi 10 (2008): 461–70. Philosophia Christi is the journal of the Evangelical PhilosophicalSociety(http://epsociety.org). ‘Skeptical Theism and the “Too-Much-Skepticism” Objections’, pp. 482–506 in The Blackwell Companion to the Problem of Evil, edited by Justin McBrayer and DanielHoward-Snyder(Malden,MA:Wiley-Blackwell,2014). ‘Narrative, Liturgy, and the Hiddenness of God’, pp. 76–96 in Metaphysics and God: Essays in Honor of Eleonore Stump, edited by Kevin Timpe (New York: Routledge,2009). ‘Hiddenness and Transcendence’, pp. 210–25 in A. Green and E. Stump (eds), Hidden Divinity and Religious Belief (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015).CopyrightCambridgeUniversityPress.Reprintedwithpermission. I am also grateful to Michael Bergmann for his permission to reprint our ‘In DefenceofScepticalTheism:AReplytoAlmeidaandOppy’,toOliverCrisp,Hud Hudson, and the anonymous referees for Oxford University Press for very helpful comments on the introductions and postscripts, and to Callie Phillips viii forpreparingtheindex.Finally,IwouldliketothankOliverCrispforencouraging me to publish these essays here and in the companion volume, for our ongoing collaboration on all things analytic-theological, and, most of all, for our many yearsoffriendship.ItisingratitudeforallofthisthatIdedicatedthefirstvolume tohim.ThissecondvolumeIdedicatetomyyoungestson,Matthias. To MatthiasRea Introduction This book is the second of two volumes collecting together the most substantial workinanalytictheologythatIhavecompletedbetween2003and2019.Volume Icontains chapters focused,broadlyspeaking,onthenatureofGod;thissecond volumecontainschaptersfocusedmoreondoctrinesabouthumanity,thehuman condition,andhowhumanbeingsrelatetoGod.ThechaptersinPartIdealwith the doctrines of the incarnation, original sin, and atonement; those in Part II discuss the problem of evil, the problem of divine hiddenness, and a theological problem that arises in connection with the idea that God not only tolerates but validates a response of angry protest in the face of these problems. The section headings of this introduction match the part divisions of the book; but, as in VolumeI’sintroduction,theaimhereisnottosummarizethechaptersincluded ineachsection’scorrespondingpart,butrathertosupplementthemwithamore general discussion of some of my past and current thinking on the various loci coveredbythechaptersinthevolume.¹ 1. Incarnation, Sin, and Atonement The WestminsterShorterCatechism opens with the question,‘What is thechief endofMan?’andthenoffersthefollowinganswer:‘ToglorifyGodandenjoyhim forever.’ Gender-exclusive language notwithstanding, this captures the heart of Christian teaching about the human telos. It implies that we cannot flourish outside of a relationship with God, that the purpose for which we are created is wholly oriented towardsGod,that we are capable of living forever, andthat our purposeincludeseternalenjoymentofGod. ButChristianityalsoteachesthathumanbeingsarenotcapableontheirownof cominganywhereclosetorealizingtheirtelos.Theyneeddivinehelp,owingtoa further (contingent) fact about human nature. In short, human nature has been damaged, or become corrupted. (Different traditions within Christianity have different views both about whether it is better to say that human nature is ‘wounded’ or ‘corrupted’ and also about the precise nature and extent of the ¹ ForsomeofthecontentofthisintroductionIhavedrawnonpartofanotheressaynotincluded here—onewhichIcharacterizedatthetimeIwroteitas‘aminiaturesketchofapartialsystematic theology’(Rea2017).Iamgratefultothepublisherforpermissiontoreusethismaterial. EssaysinAnalyticTheology:VolumeII.MichaelC.Rea,OxfordUniversityPress(2020).©MichaelC.Rea. DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198866817.003.0001 2 : woundorcorruption.²HenceforthIwillsimplyspeakof‘damage’inaneffortto straddle the lines between these different views.) This damage is supposed to be something we are born with, a result somehow of the first human sin, and a conditionthatmakesitverylikely—manywouldsayinevitable—thatwefallinto furthersin.Theseclaimsconstitutethemainpartofthedoctrineoforiginalsin.³ Theotherpart,morecontroversial,isthedoctrineoforiginalguilt,whichimplies thatthedamagetoournatureissufficient,evenintheabsenceofvoluntarysinin our earthly lives, to preclude us from eternal life with God unless it is somehow remedied.⁴ Bothpartsofthisdoctrinearepuzzling;bothpartsaretheologicallyimportant. Whyshouldthefirsthumansin(assumingtherewasasingle,definiteeventthat constituted the first sin) result in universal damage? Why should such damage presentinusfrombirthposeanobstacletoourrelationshipwithGodeveninthe absenceofvoluntarysinonourpart?Therearenoeasyanswerstothesequestions, astheextendeddiscussionofalternativesinChapter1makesclear.Butneitheris it easy simply to abandon the doctrine. Original sin (taken to include original guilt) is supposed to explain two facts about the human condition. First, sin is universal. Everyone is disposed to sin, and everyone who lives long enough to becomeafull-blownmoralagentdoessin.Second,everyoneneedssalvation.The supposition that there was a first sin that damaged human nature explains the universalityofsinwithoutimplyingthatGodcreatedusinadamagedcondition, orthatitissheercoincidencethatwearealldamaged.Thesuppositionthatitis human nature that got damaged, and damaged in such a way as to separate us fromGod,explainswhyeveryhumanbeingneedssalvation. Ithinkthatthetwofactsjustmentionedcanbeacceptedindependentlyofthe doctrine of original sin, simply on the strength of the scriptural evidence that supportsthem.Ialsothinkthatthedoctrineitselfcanbereasonablyaccepted as an article of faith, even in the absence of answers to the challenging questions mentionedabove.Still,itwouldbenicetohaveatleastsomeideaofhowthefirst sin might have resulted in the consequences that the doctrine affirms.⁵ I do not haveafulltheorytooffer;butIcantakesomeinitialstepsinthatdirection. ² Forexample,theCatechismoftheCatholicChurchemphasizesthe‘wound’toournature,and explicitly denies that it is totally corrupted (see 1.7.3, esp. para. 405), whereas theologians in the Reformedtraditiontypicallyinsistthatoriginalsinisaformofcorruption. ³ Or‘ancestralsin’inEasternChristianity;butmycharacterizationmorecloselyfollowsWestern linesofthought. ⁴ IntheconfessionsoftheReformedtradition,thedoctrineoforiginalguiltisnormallytakento includetheclaimthatweareguiltyforthecorruptionofournature,orthatGodblamesusforit.Itis alsocommonlysaidthatGodisangrywithusforit.Idonotrejectthesestatementsoutright,butIthink thattheyareapttomislead;andIthinkthatthe‘divinewrath’claimsareparticularlyunfortunatein thisregard.SinceIcannotpossiblyhopetodothemjusticeintheshortspaceallottedhere,Isimplyset themaside. ⁵ We might also ask howbelief in a ‘first sin’ or an ‘historical Adam’ could be reconciled with evolutionarytheory.Thisisamatterofinterestingcontroversy,andseveralproposalsstrikemeas promising;butIshallnotpursuethisissuefurtherhere.
The list of books you might like
