Pacific Journal of Theological Research
‘THE EVIL ONE IN GOD’? A THEOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PAUL S. FIDDES’ PANENTHEISTIC DOCTRINE OF GOD TO ACCOUNT FOR A ROBUST ONTOLOGY OF THE SATAN1 AND DEMONIC. Rev. Alistair J. Cuthbert St Mary’s College, University of St Andrews INTRODUCTION Anglican ecclesial theologian Michael Brierley has named the panentheistic turn in modern theology a “quiet revolution.” Indeed, he names over 80 theologians past and present, including this paper’s primary source Paul S. Fiddes, who tread this middle path between the poles of classical theism and pantheism whether by adhering to process theism, self-identifying as a panentheist, or labelled as a panentheist by others.2 Given that theology can be described as the investigation into how all things interact and relate to God, it should not be surprising that in light of rapid developments and progress with regard to our understanding of the natural world and human nature, new ideas have been proffered vis-a-vis divine interaction with the world and vice versa. A standard definition of Panentheism is that it is “the belief that the Being of God includes and penetrates the whole universe, so that every part of it exists in Him, but (as against Pantheism) that His being is more than, and is not exhausted by, the universe.”3 While this is a good definition to start with, any perusal of the panentheism literature quickly unearths significant disagreement and debate over the nature and breadth of the preposition “in” and what it means that “all is in God.” Moreover, states Gregersen, we need to qualify what “pan” refers to and whether it is literal or not, and most crucially define the ontological position of panentheism in terms of whether there is a two-way interaction with the world somehow contained in God and God receiving a “return” of the world into the divine life. To aid the discussion, Gregersen articulates the three main varieties of panentheism, variations and syntheses of which all panentheisms fall under: soteriological panentheism, where God’s presence and being in the world is a gift and only at the eschaton will God totally be “all in all”; revelational (or expressivist) panentheism, in which God’s Spirit expresses his divinity by departing from God, interacting with the world and returning to God having been enriched by the world and his interaction with it; finally, dipolar panentheism of Whitehead et al, in which some
Despite the grammatical clumsiness of the title ‘The Satan,’ the definite article shall be used throughout the article when referring to the title and symbol of the Hebrew noun הַ שָּׂ ָּׂטָ֖ןand Greek noun ὁ Σατανᾶς as this better reflects the biblical authors’ usage of the noun and best represents the various images and mosaic picture of the spiritual being who is portrayed as the evil archetype behind all nefarious malevolence. 2 Michael W. Brierley, “Naming a Quiet Revolution: The Panentheistic Turn in Modern Theology,” in In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being: Panentheistic Reflections on God’s Presence in a Scientific World, ed. Philip Clayton and Arthur Peacocke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 1–15. 3 F. L. Cross, and E. A. Livingstone (eds.). Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1213. 1
3
