Non-contrastive transcendence as gift and challenge to science and religion

This article suggests that the nature of transcendence represents a promising topic for future engagement between revision-minded theologians in the field of science and religion and tradition-oriented ones. It does so by drawing on Kathryn Tanner's account of non-contrastive transcendence with...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Jordan, Peter 1979- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2025
In: Modern theology
Year: 2025, Volume: 41, Issue: 4, Pages: 613-624
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Summary:This article suggests that the nature of transcendence represents a promising topic for future engagement between revision-minded theologians in the field of science and religion and tradition-oriented ones. It does so by drawing on Kathryn Tanner's account of non-contrastive transcendence within the history of Christian theology to illuminate the thinking of contemporary science and religion pioneer Arthur Peacocke. Peacocke thought modern science showed God to be immanently present to and working in the natural world, and not merely transcendent over it as its creator. To correct an alleged theological overemphasis on God's transcendence—one that shaded into distance and disconnection—Peacocke sought to reintroduce immanence into the God-creation relation. His approach imagined transcendence and immanence as separate modalities that could be increased or decreased independently of one another. Had Peacocke adopted a non-contrastive view of transcendence, in which a particular kind of transcendence makes immanence possible, he could have met the requirements he set for satisfactory pictures of the God-world relation, claimed the profound sense of immanence he wanted, and situated himself within a more traditional way of thinking. In doing so, however, Peacocke would have had to settle for a vision of science-theology relations in which science's theological impact is less profound than the field often assumes.
ISSN:1468-0025
Contains:Enthalten in: Modern theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/moth.12998