Jump to content

Christianity and pandeism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Later on: more of Pandeism
Line 5: Line 5:
==Early on==
==Early on==


German [[Max Bernhard Weinstein]] examines the philosophy of 9th century theologian [[Johannes Scotus Eriugena]], who proposed that "God has created the world out of his own being", and identifies this as a form of pandeism, noting in particular that Eriugena's vision of God was one which does not know what it is, and learns this through the process of existing as its creation.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 283-84: "[[Johannes Scotus Eriugena|Johannes Scotus Erigena]] (um das 9. Jahrhundert in Irland geboren) läßt in einer seiner mehreren Ansichten alles von Gott emaniert sein. Gottes Klarheit, welche mit Recht auch Dunkelheit genannt wird, breite sich über alles aus. Die ungeformte Materie soll nur das Unendliche bedeuten, welches, da es formlos sei, alle Formen in sich enthalte. Gott hat die Welt aus seinem eigenen Wesen gebildet. Jedes Geschöpf ist eine Theophanie, ein Sichoffenbarmachen Gottes. Gott sei an sich vorhanden wie ein Gedanke im Menschen bestehe; er manifestiere sich in der Welt durch sich selbst, wie ein Gedanke, der sich denkt, sich selbst zur Erkenntnis komme. So sei Gott ohne die Welt absolut negativ. Es klingt wie eine Blasphemie, wenn gesagt wird, Gott wisse nicht, was er sei, und er werde erst geschaffen mit der Schöpfung, indem er sich in seiner Schöpfung offenbart, die Schöpfung so aus Nichts hervorbringend. Das ist auch fast so abstrakt wie die indische Tad-Anschauung. Freilich bleibt es bei diesem absoluten, und ja auch nicht zu durchdringenden, Pandeismus nicht. Wie der Indier muß Scotus Gott doch etwas zuschreiben, Willen, und die Geschöpfe sind dann Willensakte. Der Wille ist persönlich als Emanation Gottes (als Christus) gedacht, wie wohl auch die Ursachen (zusammengefaßt als Heiliger Geist), die Scotus von Gott ausgehen läßt, Emanationen sind, und die Wirkungen, die wieder von ihnen ausgehen, Emanationen ihrer selbst darstellen."</ref> In his great work, ''[[De divisione naturae]]'' (also called ''Periphyseon'', probably completed around 867 AD), Eriugena proposed that the nature of the universe is divisible into four distinct classes:
German [[Max Bernhard Weinstein]] examined the philosophy of 9th century theologian [[Johannes Scotus Eriugena]], who proposed that "God has created the world out of his own being", and identifies this as a form of pandeism, noting in particular that Eriugena's vision of God was one which does not know what it is, and learns this through the process of existing as its creation.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 283-84: "[[Johannes Scotus Eriugena|Johannes Scotus Erigena]] (um das 9. Jahrhundert in Irland geboren) läßt in einer seiner mehreren Ansichten alles von Gott emaniert sein. Gottes Klarheit, welche mit Recht auch Dunkelheit genannt wird, breite sich über alles aus. Die ungeformte Materie soll nur das Unendliche bedeuten, welches, da es formlos sei, alle Formen in sich enthalte. Gott hat die Welt aus seinem eigenen Wesen gebildet. Jedes Geschöpf ist eine Theophanie, ein Sichoffenbarmachen Gottes. Gott sei an sich vorhanden wie ein Gedanke im Menschen bestehe; er manifestiere sich in der Welt durch sich selbst, wie ein Gedanke, der sich denkt, sich selbst zur Erkenntnis komme. So sei Gott ohne die Welt absolut negativ. Es klingt wie eine Blasphemie, wenn gesagt wird, Gott wisse nicht, was er sei, und er werde erst geschaffen mit der Schöpfung, indem er sich in seiner Schöpfung offenbart, die Schöpfung so aus Nichts hervorbringend. Das ist auch fast so abstrakt wie die indische Tad-Anschauung. Freilich bleibt es bei diesem absoluten, und ja auch nicht zu durchdringenden, Pandeismus nicht. Wie der Indier muß Scotus Gott doch etwas zuschreiben, Willen, und die Geschöpfe sind dann Willensakte. Der Wille ist persönlich als Emanation Gottes (als Christus) gedacht, wie wohl auch die Ursachen (zusammengefaßt als Heiliger Geist), die Scotus von Gott ausgehen läßt, Emanationen sind, und die Wirkungen, die wieder von ihnen ausgehen, Emanationen ihrer selbst darstellen."</ref> In his great work, ''[[De divisione naturae]]'' (also called ''Periphyseon'', probably completed around 867 AD), Eriugena proposed that the nature of the universe is divisible into four distinct classes:


:1 – that which creates and is not created;
:1 – that which creates and is not created;

Revision as of 14:51, 13 August 2018

Relations between the Catholic Church and Pandeism have historically largely been critical, with the Church condemning the early pandeistic thought of John Scotus Eriugena as heretical.

Various Catholic thinkers have since generally disputed the theological premises of Pandeism, but some within the Church have also attempted to use Pandeism as an umbrella under which to bring other religions closer to Catholicism.

Early on

German Max Bernhard Weinstein examined the philosophy of 9th century theologian Johannes Scotus Eriugena, who proposed that "God has created the world out of his own being", and identifies this as a form of pandeism, noting in particular that Eriugena's vision of God was one which does not know what it is, and learns this through the process of existing as its creation.[1] In his great work, De divisione naturae (also called Periphyseon, probably completed around 867 AD), Eriugena proposed that the nature of the universe is divisible into four distinct classes:

1 – that which creates and is not created;
2 – that which is created and creates;
3 – that which is created and does not create;
4 – that which neither is created nor creates.

The first stage is God as the ground or origin of all things; the second is the world of Platonic ideals or forms; the third is the wholly physical manifestation of our Universe, which "does not create"; the last is God as the final end or goal of all things, that into which the world of created things ultimately returns to completeness with the additional knowledge of having experienced this world. A contemporary statement of this idea is that: "Since God is not a being, he is therefore not intelligible... This means not only that we cannot understand him, but also that he cannot understand himself. Creation is a kind of divine effort by God to understand himself, to see himself in a mirror."[2]

De divisione naturae was condemned by a council at Sens by Honorius III (1225), who described it as "swarming with worms of heretical perversity," and by Pope Gregory XIII in 1585. In 1681, the long-lost work was found at Oxford University, and was immediately placed on the 'Index of Forbidden Books', a turn of events which likely actually spurred its popularity. Despite this result, the Catholic Encyclopedia noted of Eriugena that "there can be no doubt that he himself abhorred heresy, was disposed to treat the heretic with no small degree of harshness..., and all through his life believed himself an unswervingly loyal son of the Church."[1]

Weinstein also found that thirteenth century Catholic thinker Bonaventure—who championed the Platonic doctrine that ideas do not exist in rerum natura, but as ideals exemplified by the Divine Being, according to which actual things were formed—showed strong pandeistic inclinations.[3] Of Nicholas of Cusa, who wrote of the enfolding of creation in God and the unfolding of the divine human mind in creation, Weinstein wrote that he was, to a certain extent, a pandeist.[4] And, as to Franciscus Mercurius van Helmont, who had written A Cabbalistical Dialogue (Latin version first, 1677, in English 1682) placing matter and spirit on a continuum, and describing matter as a "coalition" of monads, Weinstein also found this to be a kind of pandeism.[5] Weinstein found that pandeism was strongly expressed in the teachings of Giordano Bruno, who envisioned a deity which had no particular relation to one part of the infinite universe more than any other, and was immanent, as present on Earth as in the Heavens, subsuming in itself the multiplicity of existence.[6] This was reiterated by others including Discover editor Corey S. Powell, who wrote that Bruno's cosmology was "a tool for advancing an animist or Pandeist theology."[7][8]

Italian theologian Giordano Bruno was charged with heresy and burned at the stake for propounding what has been deemed by some commentators to be a pandeistic ideology.

In the 1820s to 1830s, pandeism received some mention in Italy. In 1834, publisher Giovanni Silvestri posthumously published a volume of sermons of Italian Padre Filippo Nannetti di Bibulano (aka il Filippo Nani, Padre da Lojano; 1759–1829), who named pandeism as being among beliefs he condemned, railing against "Jews, Muslims, Gentiles, Schismatics, Heretics, Pandeists, Deists, and troubled, restless spirits."[9] Nannetti further specifically criticized pandeism, declaring, "To you, fatal Pandeist! the laws that create nature are contingent and mutable, not another being in substance with forces driven by motions and developments."[10] Within a few years thereafter came the 1838 publication of an anonymous treatise, Il legato di un vecchio ai giovani della sua patria ("The Legacy of an Old Man to the Young People of his Country"), whose author, discussing the theory of religion presented by Giambattista Vico a century earlier, mused that when man first saw meteor showers, "his robust imagination recognized the effects as a cause, then deifying natural phenomena, he became a Pandeist, an instructor of Mythology, a priest, an Augur."[11] Neither Nannetti nor the 1838 author defines pandeism distinctly enough to cleanly distinguish it from pantheism, or possibly polytheism. But, again in 1838, another Italian, phrenologist Luigi Ferrarese in Memorie Riguardanti la Dottrina Frenologica ("Thoughts Regarding the Doctrine of Phrenology") critically described Victor Cousin's philosophy as a doctrine which "locates reason outside the human person, declaring man a fragment of God, introducing a sort of spiritual pandeism, absurd for us, and injurious to the Supreme Being."[12]

Later on

Charles Anselm Bolton states in a 1963 article, Beyond the Ecumenical: Pan-deism?[13] that he "first came upon this extension of ecumenism into pan-deism among some Roman Catholic scholars interested primarily in the 'reunion of the churches,' Roman, Orthodox, Anglican", and wondered, "what is the ultimate aim of the Curia in promoting the pan-deist movement."[13] This line of thought was carried forth by Rousas John Rushdoony, who wrote in his 1971 The One and the Many: Studies in the Philosophy of Order and Ultimacy that “The position of Pope Paul came close to being a pan-Deism, and pan-Deism is the logical development of the virus of Hellenic thought,” and further that “a sincere idealist, implicitly pan-Deist in faith, deeply concerned with the problems of the world and of time, can be a Ghibelline pope, and Dante's Ghibellines have at last triumphed."[14] Theologian Bert B. Beach wrote in 1974 that "during the Vatican Council there was criticism from WCC Circles" to the effect that "ecumenism was being contaminated by “pan-Deist” and syncretistic tendencies."[15]

References

  1. ^ Max Bernhard Weinstein, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 283-84: "Johannes Scotus Erigena (um das 9. Jahrhundert in Irland geboren) läßt in einer seiner mehreren Ansichten alles von Gott emaniert sein. Gottes Klarheit, welche mit Recht auch Dunkelheit genannt wird, breite sich über alles aus. Die ungeformte Materie soll nur das Unendliche bedeuten, welches, da es formlos sei, alle Formen in sich enthalte. Gott hat die Welt aus seinem eigenen Wesen gebildet. Jedes Geschöpf ist eine Theophanie, ein Sichoffenbarmachen Gottes. Gott sei an sich vorhanden wie ein Gedanke im Menschen bestehe; er manifestiere sich in der Welt durch sich selbst, wie ein Gedanke, der sich denkt, sich selbst zur Erkenntnis komme. So sei Gott ohne die Welt absolut negativ. Es klingt wie eine Blasphemie, wenn gesagt wird, Gott wisse nicht, was er sei, und er werde erst geschaffen mit der Schöpfung, indem er sich in seiner Schöpfung offenbart, die Schöpfung so aus Nichts hervorbringend. Das ist auch fast so abstrakt wie die indische Tad-Anschauung. Freilich bleibt es bei diesem absoluten, und ja auch nicht zu durchdringenden, Pandeismus nicht. Wie der Indier muß Scotus Gott doch etwas zuschreiben, Willen, und die Geschöpfe sind dann Willensakte. Der Wille ist persönlich als Emanation Gottes (als Christus) gedacht, wie wohl auch die Ursachen (zusammengefaßt als Heiliger Geist), die Scotus von Gott ausgehen läßt, Emanationen sind, und die Wirkungen, die wieder von ihnen ausgehen, Emanationen ihrer selbst darstellen."
  2. ^ Jeremiah Genest, John Scottus Eriugena: Life and Works (1998).
  3. ^ Max Bernhard Weinstein, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 303: "Andere Ganz- oder Halbmystiker, wie den Alanus (gegen 1200), seinerzeit ein großes Kirchenlicht und für die unseligen Waldenser von verhängnisvoller Bedeutung, den Bonaventura (1221 im Kirchenstaate geboren), der eine Reise des Geistes zu Gott geschrieben hat und stark pandeistische Neigungen zeigt, den Franzosen Johann Gersan (zu Gersan bei Rheims 1363 geboren) usf., übergehen wir, es kommt Neues nicht zum Vorschein."
  4. ^ Max Bernhard Weinstein, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 306: "Er ist bis zu einem gewissen Grade Pandeist. Gott schafft die Welt nur aus sich (de nullo alio creat, sed ex se); indem er alles umfaßt, entfaltet er alles aus sich, ohne doch sich dabei irgend zu verändern."
  5. ^ Max Bernhard Weinstein, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 338: "Wie er die Seele stoisch betrachtet, so hat er sich im Grunde auch eine Art Pandeismus zurecht gelegt, indem Gott zwar von allen Dingen verschieden, aber doch nicht von allen Dingen abgetrennt oder geteilt sein soll."
  6. ^ Max Bernhard Weinstein, Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 321: "Also darf man vielleicht glauben, daß das ganze System eine Erhebung des Physischen aus seiner Natur in das Göttliche ist oder eine Durchstrahlung des Physischen durch das Göttliche; beides eine Art Pandeismus. Und so zeigt sich auch der Begriff Gottes von dem des Universums nicht getrennt; Gott ist naturierende Natur, Weltseele, Weltkraft. Da Bruno durchaus ablehnt, gegen die Religion zu lehren, so hat man solche Angaben wohl umgekehrt zu verstehen: Weltkraft, Welt seele, naturierende Natur, Universum sind in Gott. Gott ist Kraft der Welt kraft, Seele der Weltseele, Natur der Natur, Eins des Universums. Bruno spricht ja auch von mehreren Teilen der universellen Vernunft, des Urvermögens und der Urwirklichkeit. Und damit hängt zu sammen, daß für ihn die Welt unendlich ist und ohne Anfang und Ende; sie ist in demselben Sinne allumfassend wie Gott. Aber nicht ganz wie Gott. Gott sei in allem und im einzelnen allumfassend, die Welt jedoch wohl in allem, aber nicht im einzelnen, da sie Ja Teile in sich zuläßt."
  7. ^ Corey S. Powell, "Defending Giordano Bruno: A Response from the Co-Writer of 'Cosmos'", Discover, March 13, 2014: "Bruno imagines all planets and stars having souls (part of what he means by them all having the same "composition"), and he uses his cosmology as a tool for advancing an animist or Pandeist theology."
  8. ^ David Sessions, "How 'Cosmos' Bungles the History of Religion and Science", The Daily Beast, 03.23.14: "Bruno, for instance, was a 'pandeist', which is the belief that God had transformed himself into all matter and ceased to exist as a distinct entity in himself."
  9. ^ Padre Filippo Nannetti di Bibulano (aka il Filippo Nani, Padre da Lojano), in Sermons and Panegyrics of the Father Filippo Nani of Lojana, Giovanni Silvestri, publisher, 1834, p. 284, Sermon XVIII: Miracles: "Ma questa religione predestinta col taumaturgo segnale si trova ella nel mondo i' Dove? in qual gente? in qual lido? Nelle sinagoghe giudaiche, o nelle meschìte dell l'Asia? Nelle pagoda cinesi, o nella società di Ginevra? Giudei, Maomettani, Gentili, Scismatici, Eretici, Pandeisti, Deisti, geni torbidi, e inquieti." ("But this religion predestined by the thaumaturgist signal, where in the world is she? in which people? on which shores? In Jewish synagogues, or mosques of Asia? Pagoda in Chinese, or in society in Geneva? Jews, Muslims, Gentiles, Schismatics, Heretics, Pandeists, Deists, and troubled, restless spirits.")
  10. ^ Padre Filippo Nannetti di Bibulano (aka il Filippo Nani, Padre da Lojano), in Sermons and Panegyrics of the Father Filippo Nani of Lojana, Giovanni Silvestri, publisher, 1834, p. 286, Sermon XVIII: Miracles: "A te, fatal Pandeista! le leggi della creata natura son contingenti e mutabili; non altro essendo in sostanza che moti e sviluppi di forze motrici."
  11. ^ Il legato di un vecchio ai giovani della sua patria" ("The Legacy of an Old Man to the Young People of his Country"): "Il selvaggio Nomado ex lege arrestato nelle spelonche dallo spavento, e dall'ammirazione con l'imponente spettacolo delle meteore, per la prima volta rivolse sopra se stesso lo sguardo della debole ragione, conobbe un potere fuori di lui più colossale della sua erculea brutalità, e per la prima volta concepì un culto. La robusta immaginazione gli fe ravvisare gli effetti come causa, quindi deificando i fenomeni naturali divenne un Pandeista, un istitutore della Mitologia, un sacerdote, un Augure." ("The wild nomad (who lived outside the law) stopped in the caves with fear and admiration at the impressive meteor shower, for the first time saw that reason was powerless, experienced a most colossal power outside himself of his Herculean brutality, and for the first time he understood worship (or conceived of a cult). His robust imagination recognized the effects as a cause, then deifying natural phenomena, he became a Pandeist, an instructor of Mythology, a priest, an Augur.").
  12. ^ Cite error: The named reference Ferrarese was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  13. ^ a b Charles Anselm Bolton, "Beyond the Ecumenical: Pan-deism?", Christianity Today, 1963, page 21.
  14. ^ Rousas John Rushdoony, The One and the Many: Studies in the Philosophy of Order and Ultimacy (1971 [2007]), Ch. VIII-7, p. 142-143.
  15. ^ Bert Beverly Beach, Ecumenism: Boon Or Bane? (1974), p. 259 (quoting George H. Williams, Dimensions of Roman Catholic Ecumenism (1965), p. 31-32).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Christianity_and_pandeism&oldid=854751977"