Re: Pannenberg on Providence

Stephen Jones (sjones@iinet.com.au)
Sat, 24 Jun 95 22:19:11 EDT

Dennis

On Fri, 23 Jun 1995 11:32:58 -0500 (CDT) you wrote:

>To Interested Reflectorites:
>
> I'd be interested to your reactions to the following by
>theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg, _Toward a Theology of Nature_, ed. by Ted
>Peters (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1993), 34-35:
>
> "Affirmations about the contingency of the world at large and of
>all its parts already imply a close connection between creation and
>conservation. The world was not simply put into existence once, at the
>beginning of all things, in such a way that it would have been left to
>its own afterward. Rather, every creature is in need of conservation of
>its existence in every moment; and such conservation is, according to
>theological tradition, nothing else but a continuous creation. This
>means that the act of creation did not take place only in the beginning.
>It occurs every moment. Accordingly, in the traditional theological
>doctrine of creation the activity of every creature is dependent on
>divine cooperation, a _concursus divinus_. There is no activity and no
>product of creative activity in the world without divine cooperation.
> The divine activity operates without detriment to the contingency
>and immediacy of singular actions, which has been identified in the
>theological tradition with the idea of divine governance of the world.
>It is due to this divine government of creation that the sequence of
>contingent events and created forms takes the shape of a continuous
>process toward the divine goal of an ultimate completion and
>glorification of all creation."
>
> It seems to me that Pannenberg's analysis might help forge a
>middle road between those who want to identify God's
>God's activity with "special" creative acts only, and those who want to
>relegate God's activity in nature only to the initial creative event.
>
>What think ye?

I am not a theologian and I am not really familiar with Pannenberg's
thought (although I have heard of him).

I would say he confuses Creation with Providence. By analogy I can
conceive
of a distinct difference between: 1. original creation and even
forming and
making from that already created material; and 2. maintaining that
created or
formed material.

Perhaps I misunderstand what Pannenberg means?

God bless.

Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones | ,--_|\ | sjones@iinet.net.au |
| Perth | / Oz \ | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Australia | -> *_,--\_/ | phone +61 9 448 7439 |
------------------------- v ------------------------------------