Abstract
The article begins with a reflection on the ‘conversation between mythologies’ present in the debate between C. Robert Mesle and John Hick on the role of Irenaean theodicy and process theology to tackle convincingly the problem of evil in the contemporary and future context of scientific advancement. I argue that, although these two authors consider their mythological perspectives to be widely different, there is a possibility of advancing toward conciliating the two views. I call the resulting myth the ‘aesthetic myth,’ which focuses on the Trinitarian God, seen concomitantly as omnipotent and limited. Inspired also by the thought of St. Francis of Assisi and St. Maximus the Confessor, this myth asserts nature’s free initiative as co-creator with the Logos and the natural evil emerging from this initiative. Moral evil comes from natural evil; thus, ‘original sin’ shows no unsurpassable gap between God and humanity.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, M. M. (1999). Horrendous evils and the goodness of God. Cornell University Press.
Bultmann, R. (1989). New Testament and mythology and other basic writings. Fortress Press.
Farley, W. (1990). Tragic vision and divine compassion: A contemporary theodicy. Westminster John Knox.
Hick, J. (1991). Response to Mesle. In C. Robert Mesle (Ed.), John Hick’s Theodicy: A process humanist critique (with a response by John Hick) (pp. 115–134). Palgrave Macmillan.
Hick, J. (2010 (1966)). Evil and the God of love. Palgrave Macmillan.
Hoye, W. J. (2013). The emergence of eternal life. Cambridge University Press.
Hutcheson, F. (2013). A system of moral philosophy (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, C. S. (1957). The problem of pain. Fontana.
Mesle, C. R. (1986). The problem of genuine evil: A critique of John Hick’s Theodicy. The Journal of Religion, 66(4), 412–430.
Mesle, C. R. (1991). John Hick’s Theodicy: A process humanist critique (with a response by John Hick). Palgrave Macmillan.
Meyendorff, J. (1983). Byzantine theology: Historical trends and doctrinal themes. Fordham University Press.
Millikan, R. G. (2001). Language, thought, and other biological categories: New foundations for realism. 4th edition (1984). The MIT Press.
Nasou, J. P. (2012). Meditations on the Holy Scriptures for Orthodox Christians. Trafford Publishing.
Peacocke, A. (2003). Complexity, emergence, and divine creativity. In N. Henrik Gregersen (Ed.), From complexity to life: On the emergence of life and meaning, 187–205. Oxford University Press.
Plantinga, A. (1974). The nature of necessity. Oxford University Press.
Santurri, E. N. (1982). Theodicy and social policy in Malthus’ thought. Journal of the History of Ideas, 43(2), 315–330.
Sorrell, R. D. (1988). St. Francis of Assisi and nature: Tradition and innovation in Western Christian attitudes toward the environment. Oxford University Press.
St. Maximus the Confessor. (2010). Questions and doubts. Northern Illinois University Press.
Stoeber, M. (1992). Evil and the mystics’ God: Towards a mystical theodicy. Macmillan.
Stoeber, M. (2005). Reclaiming theodicy: Reflections on suffering, compassion and spiritual transformation. Palgrave Macmillan.
Swinburne, R. (1998). Providence and the problem of evil. Oxford University Press.
Swinburne, R. (2004). The existence of God. Second Edition (1979). Clarendon Press.
Tallon, P. (2012). The poetics of evil: Toward an aesthetic theodicy. Oxford University Press.
Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Tollefsen, T. T. (2008). The Christocentric cosmology of St Maximus the Confessor. Oxford University Press.
***, The Bible, New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE). https://www.biblegateway.com. Accessed 17 Nov 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Untea, I. From the Aesthetic Theme to the Aesthetic Myth: a Reflection on the Trinitarian God’s Connection to Nature and the Problem of Evil. SOPHIA 61, 839–868 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00868-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00868-y