Thesis: With Chardin’s
views of evolution as being part of God’s
plan along with Christ as a universal redeemer,
he has succeeded significantly in establishing
a relationship between Evolution and Christianity.
Introduction: The world in which one lives is
one in which there are several systems of belief.
Some of these beliefs may be purely dogmatic,
relying on nothing but inner acceptance of what
has been passed down from generation to generation.
Other forms of belief include those that seek
evidence; science is observed as a system of belief
because of the scientific explanations that it
seeks in order to reinforce claims. However, scientific
belief has been in conflict with dogmatic belief,
namely Christianity, because of the fact that
it accepts evolution’s importance to human
existence.
Teilhard de Chardin’s work in his popular
titles ‘Christianity and Evolution’
and ‘The Phenomenon of Man’ aims at
establishing common ground between the believer
and the scientist. At the base of his approach
is the consideration for ‘Original Sin’,
and it is for his views regarding Original Sin
that many have criticized his work. In addition
to his views on Original Sin, and the importance
of Christ as a Universal redeemer, Chardin also
manages to establish a relationship between evolution
and Christianity through maintaining that evolution
is also part of God’s plan. This is because
it would bring humanity to a stage where they
would need to be redeemed from the evil that grips
them.
Analysis: Considering science as a system of
belief, Dalton’s atomic theory stood as
the foundation of science. However, his theory
was inverted after it was discovered that atoms
are further divisible. In view of this, it also
must be considered that through history, a single
religion has stood as the authentic and the only
accepted way of life (Chardin, 2002, 22-24). This
is because of the fact that some of these religions
have been surpassed by others that have appealed
more to people.
Hence, it may be asserted that it is the power
and authenticity that people consensually give
to a belief that makes it popular and widely accepted.
An example of this is the manner in which major
religions have evolved into another form; Judaism
was first popular, then Christianity, and then
Islam.
Considering the manner in which people as whole
have come to accept this transition in belief
and belief structure, it is also possible to consider
the fact that in a sense evolution has taken place
with religion itself. However, focusing more on
Christian beliefs, evolution is something that
was not accepted by the church.
In view of undeniable evolutionary forms in science
and in religion, Teilhard de Chardin’s views
are interesting. He seeks to explain to the scientist
and to the believer how science and religion are
related. In this attempt, it is apparent that
Chardin has done a great deal for believers in
Christ as well as believers in God in general.
Teilhard de Chardin has faced opposition regarding
his effort of establishing common ground between
the scientist and the believer because of the
view that he has of God, Jesus Christ, Original
Sin, etc. Strong believers in science might say
that Teilhard de Chardin’s views are optimistic
as far as molding Christianity to fit the truth
that science provides.
On the other hand, believers assert that he has
developed a twisted approach to Christianity,
and that Chardin’s views are really the
reverse of Christianity. However, if one were
to take an unbiased view at his work, it would
reveal that he has been quite logical in his approach
to attaining the truth.
Since it is the truth that everyone seeks, one
is compelled to trust what Chardin presents. This
is because of the fact that it is truth that Chardin
seeks, and through his life experiences as well
the reader knows what exactly he is after.
After joining the Jesuit and becoming a priest,
Teilhard de Chardin also pursued his education
to become a geologist. This led him to understand
the importance of evolution in addition to having
a rich knowledge of religion, particularly Christianity.
Making use of his foundation in Christianity was
perhaps the root of Chardin’s ability to
integrate religious thought in scientific belief.
His understanding of ‘Original Sin’
as a core example is explained in scientific terms.
In other words, the evil and chaos that the world
has seen and still witnesses is his interpretation
of it.
The evil the world witnesses today from a believer’s
point of view is a result of the first sin, the
Original Sin (Chardin, 1976, 68-70). Hence, Original
sin has evolved from its original form and developed
into the many different forms of sin that one
witnesses today; it manifests itself in different
ways.
Based on this understanding, Chardin holds that
evolution of the Original Sin itself cannot be
ignored, and this coincides with the evolution
of man (Chardin, 1976, 96-99). Whether one chooses
to accept this or not is a matter of one’s
thinking. However, in a realistic sense, man has
evolved; this evolution may not have occurred
physically, but has certainly occurred psychologically
(Chardin, 2002, 37-40).
In argument of this, one can assert that man’s
thinking is not the same as it was thousands of
years ago; he has changed significantly over the
centuries passed and will continue to do so without
anyone being able to stop this process. How then
can anyone possibly deny evolution? If this argument
from a psychological perspective is not satisfactory,
it is worth considering man’s physical transformations
as well.
These include the all important issue of life-span;
apart from the contemporary efforts that have
altered life-span over the past hundred years,
there is a clear decline in man’s average
life-span. In contrast with the biblical accounts
of life-spans, contemporary man lives for fewer
than a hundred years. This apparent evolution
has scientific explanations, and so does it have
explanations from believers.
While the scientific ones are rooted in several
physical factors, the dogmatic one holds that
it is because of sin that man has been cursed,
and this is one of the many ways in which man
has been cursed, starting off with Original Sin.
In argument of this, Chardin would hold that it
isn’t logical to think in those terms (Chardin,
2002, 41-42). If life for all men was so cursed
why would God permit them to go on living anyway?
Instead, Chardin provides an alternative explanation
for the Original Sin. He holds that Original Sin
is not really what people today make it out to
be. Of course people do commit crimes that are
counted as sins, but it is the environment so
created that is sinful, and this understanding
has come down from generation to generation; anything
that one feels is wrong or bad, is called a sin
and is believed an indirect cause of the Original
Sin. However, consider all crimes one sees today
as a result of situations in which human beings
are places; consider a child born into a poor
home, in which he has to chance of living a comfortable
life.
The only chance that the child might have of making
a living is by committing crimes and becoming
rich overnight. The opportunity that the child
takes up could well define his fate and make him
rich just like several other children are already
because generations back their forefathers made
use of opportunities. How does one correct that
legally? How does the court bring one’s
forefathers to justice? Certainly, a court cannot
hold up someone because his or her father might
have killed. How then does Original Sin have practicality
here?
In view of the arguments made above, it also
must be asserted that there is no attempt to deny
the existence of an Original Sin. However, there
is need to draw attention to the ‘universal
aspect of Original Sin. This means that Original
Sin has come down through one particular nation,
and spread out to the rest of the world today.
Hence, the notion of Christ saving the world too,
by logical interpretation, should be considered
as encompassing all of humanity and not a specific
nation.
This part of Chardin’s work is emphatic
because he searches to establish a logical relationship
between evolution (science) and Christianity.
Since the consensual notion of Christ saving only
those who were the promised ones or those that
were aware of his teachings is a view that is
devoid of logic, he holds that Christ is a universal
redeemer, and that Christ as a major part of God’s
plan is one who would come again to redeem all
humanity and not just a single nation (Chardin,
2002, 174-179). In addition to the coming of Christ
again being part of God’s plan, so is evil
a part of God’s plan, and therefore a part
of evolution as well. Hence, Chardin holds that
evolution is a part of God’s plan. This
is because if there was no evolution, no transformations
from one state to another, no further intensification
of evil and the like, there would be no need for
Christ to come and judge the living and the dead.
Conclusion: To bridge a gap between any two theories
or beliefs is a tedious task. One never knows
what the aftereffects might be. Even if there
are several similarities between two particular
views, it is not necessary that they both can
be successfully merged.
The only way that a merger might take place is
through considering the element possibility. It
is this element of possibility that has the ability
to write off rigid beliefs; beliefs that may hold
true at one point in history, and be nullified
later on. Such has been the case with systems
of belief, and their examples stand as evidence
of how a system of belief can be inverted.
Chardin’s aims at establishing a relationship
between Christianity and Evolution, and may have
well won over many readers’ hearts and minds
through his insistence on searching for a logical
relationship between the scientist and the believer
(Christian).
Chardin, in his work has done will to consider
the possibilities of all that is known to humanity.
He has considered the importance of both, science
and religion, and aimed at establishing a logical
relationship between the two. However, accepting
his views is something that is up to the individual
or all those who are strongly influenced by particular
religious institutions. His views of the individual
searching for the truth are perhaps some of the
most interesting parts of his work. As an individual,
one should search for the truth and be at peace
with knowing what is right; one should be ready
to accept the possibilities as well, as this would
help one prepare for changes in the world as well.
Aside from all his interesting views, it is this
aspect that can awake one from his or her religious
slumber or ignorance, and drive one towards understanding
the vast possibilities regarding the relationship
between evolution and religion (Christianity).
|