Theology, Science, and Postmodernism: Responding to Stanley Grenz

This article responds to Stanley J. Grenz's Templeton Lecture, “Why Do Theologians Need to Be Scientists?” published in the June 2000 issue of Zygon (Grenz 2000). In the first part I outline my reasons for finding the kind of theological reflections in which Grenz engages worthy of attention by noting my disagreement with the view that a sufficient response to theological issues can be formulated on the basis of an examination of our biological nature. I assert, in that connection, the autonomy of reason as a way of investigating and understanding the world. In the second part I respond directly to Grenz by explaining my disagreement with the postmodern critique of science upon which he relies and his adherence to Christian eschatology as an answer to the conundrums into which, he posits, we are drawn as a result of that critique. I note that I agree with Grenz, however, that the activity of valuing is necessarily a forward‐looking Godlike endeavor that is not derivable from science. In the third part I suggest that we must be open to the investigation of the possible existence of an objective realm of value and that, in any case, rejection of the postmodern critique of science in many cases pro‐vides a sound basis for the disciplined resolution of factual questions that frequently lie at the base of disagreements about values.     

The Argument from Design: What Is at Stake Theologically?

This article offers a brief overview of the argument for God's existence grounded in the evidence of design. It gives particular attention to the way the argument has evolved over time and in relation to changing scientific perspectives. The argument from de-sign has in fact been formulated and reformulated in response to the discoveries and challenges it has encountered from the field of science. The conclusion of the article explores the theological importance of this argument—its extent and its limits.     

How public theologies can better address fascism,nationalism, and our impatience with God's reign

This article considers the problems of fascism and nationalism today, particularly in the United States, and summarizes definitions of public theology that would be adequate to the current situation. Then three non‐theologians are consulted as resources for public theology: diplomat Madeleine Albright, philosopher Martha Nussbaum, and journalist Chris Hedges. I close with synthetic conclusions, including comment on the necessity of prayer, about the desired character of public theologies today.     

A NEW METHODOLOGY FOR CHRISTIAN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY

Science and religion are the two strongest influences on the conduct of human life, yet their respective truth claims frequently clash. To facilitate better communication between scientists and theologians on these rival truth claims, the author recommends that Christian theologians use the language and current methodology of science as far as possible so as to present the content of Church teaching in an idiom that would be intelligible not only to scientists but to the educated public as well. In this way, the rival truth claims might complement rather than compete with one another. That is, clothed in the language of science, the truth claims of religion would gain in rational coherence and intelligibility. Natural scientists in turn would have conversation partners better able to deal with philosophical and ethical issues arising out of new scientific discoveries.     

JOURNEY OF THE UNIVERSE: WEAVING SCIENCE WITH THE HUMANITIES

This article discusses Journey of the Universe as a project that consists of a film, book, conversation series, online classes, and a website. It describes how the creators worked to integrate science and humanities, not privilege or elevate science. It refutes arguments made in Lisa Sideris's Consecrating Science: Wonder, Knowledge, and the Natural World that suggest that Journey overlooks religion and distorts wonder. The article observes that Journey does not dismiss religion but includes it in explicit ways. It does not dictate wonder; it evokes wonder. In short, Journey is a living or functional cosmology with implications for mutually enhancing human–Earth relations.     

Why We Earthlings Should Colonize Mars!

Mars can and should be settled with Earth émigrés. For our generation and many that will follow, Mars is the New World. Exploration, settlement, and colonization are inherent in the human spirit. We earthlings must reject misleading prophesies such as the Malthusian fear that we are running out of resources on our planet. Resources abound off-Earth in space. Humanity's potential for growth is unlimited. Failure to terraform and colonize Mars would constitute a failure to live up to our human nature, and a betrayal of our responsibility as members of the community of life itself.     

FROM EXTENSION TO REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE IN CLINICAL PSYCHOANALYSIS: THE RADICAL INFLUENCE OF BION AND WINNICOTT

This paper addresses the radical departure of late Bion's and Winnicott's clinical ideas and practices from traditional psychoanalytic work, introducing a revolutionary change in clinical psychoanalysis. The profound significance and implications of their thinking are explored, and in particular Bion's conception of transformation in O and Winnicott's clinical‐technical revision of analytic work, with its emphasis on regression in the treatment of more disturbed patients. The author specifically connects the unknown and unknowable emotional reality‐O with unthinkable breakdown (Winnicott) and catastrophe (Bion). The author suggests that the revolutionary approach introduced by the clinical thinking of late Bion and Winnicott be termed quantum psychoanalysis. She thinks that this approach can coexist with classical psychoanalysis in the same way that classical physics coexists with quantum physics.     

THOMAS MERTON AND LEO SZILARD: THE PARALLEL PATHS OF A MONK AND A NUCLEAR PHYSICIST

Abstract Thomas Merton and Leo Szilard, two of the seminal religious and scientific figures of the twentieth century, briefly connected on the issue of the danger of atomic weaponry. This meeting resulted from paths that guided them to an “orbiting” or distancing from human society through a phase of intellectual (Szilard) or spiritual (Merton) abstraction followed by a return to the concerns of human society. These parallel trajectories and their eventual intersection reflect both the similarities and differences in their respective backgrounds. The briefness of their contacts and the unfulfilled possibilities from such contacts also suggest the importance of a continuing dialogue between major figures in religion and science.