Science has demonstrated that the universe creates itself through its own history. This history is the result of a probabilistic process, not a deterministic execution of a plan. Science has also documented that human beings are a result of this universal, probabilistic process of general evolution. At first sight, these results seem to contradict Christian teaching. According to the Bible, history is essentially the history of salvation. Human beings therefore are not an “accident of nature” but special creations to be (...) saved. With deeper theological probing, it becomes clearer, however, that creation must create itself. The Christian God is the loving God who enters into a loving relationship with human beings if they desire to reciprocate. If creation could not create itself, human beings could not be free. Without freedom to ignore or reject God's love, the central act of the Christian God, the drama of salvation, would become a parody played by marionettes in the hands of a supernatural manipulator. Christians should welcome the fundamental insight brought forth by science that the universe, including human beings, created itself through its own history. This article will try to show that this scientific insistence is required and confirmed by the intrinsic character of the orthodox, Judeo‐Christian concept of God. That nature has to create itself, including human beings, secures human freedom and with it, the responsibility for human actions. From this perspective one might better understand the Bible in the light of God's revelation through the book of nature. (shrink)

Taylor recognizes the problems posed by the ideals of disengaged reason and the affirmation of ?ordinary life? for unproblematic commitment to other ideals of universal justice and the like. His picture of ?the modern identity? neglects too much of present importance and he is too disdainful of Platonic realism to offer a convincing solution. The romantic expressivism that he seeks to re?establish as an important moral resource can only avoid destructive effects if it is taken in its original and Platonic (...) context. (shrink)

This article examines Engelhardt’s thesis from the standpoint of liturgical theology. Fagerberg’s previous work has claimed that liturgy gives birth to theology in such a way that liturgy is the ontological condition for theology, as Schmemann said. If we apply this approach to the question at hand, we will understand liturgy to be the source and foundation also for Christian morality. This is no particular surprise, since the Christian tradition has always integrated liturgy, theology, and asceticism, that last named treating (...) morality as a pathway to deification. Liturgical theology views liturgy as a pneumatic exercise that makes theologian souls, and liturgical asceticism understands such theologian souls to be molded by the doings of the body, and this delivers us to the threshold of liturgical morality, for in liturgy the God’s-eye perspective shares its light with us. (shrink)