What is a theology of nature? It is a poetic rendering of the imagination that begins within the faith and involves post-experiential reflection on the life of faith. It is, then, a theo-ontology that is grounded in special divine revelation. This is not to suggest that an autonomous philosophy cannot begin with the facts of positivistic science and reason its way to an interpretive metaphysic of God in what might be called an onto-theology or natural theology, all consistent with general revelation, but, for lots of reasons, in my view, while it helps frame questions and is a useful way to probe reality, it doesn’t provide their answers and cannot prove reality. So, there is neither a philosophical nor a theological outside interpretive framework being imposed in any properly conceived theology of nature. At the same time, because we as Christians believe that other religions variously participate in the very same pneumatological (Holy Spirit-related) realities, there is some comparative formative spirituality going on in any mapping of concepts interreligiously. The essential dogmas of Christianity, as revealed in scripture, clearly convey THAT we are loved and those beliefs are generally categorized as theological (What about God?), Christological (What about Jesus?), pneumatological (What about the Spirit?), anthropological (What is wo/man?), soteriological (What do we need?), ecclesiological (What about community?) and eschatological (What about ultimates and “end things”?). And, while the answers do include such as our incarnational reality and sacramental economy, they don’t otherwise explain the empirical HOW. So, beginning with what we do know from our human sciences, cultures and philosophies and what we do believe from our religion, we imaginatively engage reality, like the psalmists, and offer what are essentially poetic renderings. Some do begin in philosophy with onto-theology, but all metaphysics are doomed to failure vis a vis primal reality. And, in our theo-ontology, all metaphors eventually collapse. As it is, a theology of nature is a mere heuristic device, a vague model at best, which acts as a conceptual hatrack for our hymns of praise; it doesn’t have speculative value and isn’t falsifiable. It has practical significance for the life of worship and prayer for those who might resonate with its poetry, which goes beyond the essentials of faith but neither without them nor inconsistent with them. Some people DO improperly conflate the otherwise autonomous methods of science, philosophy and theology; some DO aspire to a robust onto-theology; some DO articulate theologies of nature with bad science and bad anthropology or as inconsistent with their faith. But as long as we avoid those pitfalls, we can otherwise only be guilty of bad poetry. Mea maxima culpa.
1