THE EXCITEMENT CREATED by the posthumously published work of Father Teilhard de Chardin continues unabated. As most readers know, the intense interest in this remarkable Catholic thinker began with the appearance of his book, The Phenomenon of Man. It was here that his views on the evolution of man were so brilliantly argued. In connection with his evolutionary thesis, Teilhard also revealed his vision of the future. All things, he insisted, work towards God as their great Omega. The end of creation and its evolution is God, who shall be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28).
In this last regard, many have wondered whether Teilhard did not underestimate the degenerative power of evil. But passionate disciples of his thought answered that Teilhard’s optimism was based not on nature, but on faith, a faith that refused to take the world’s rebuff against God as the final word. At least this is how Henri de Lubac interprets Teilhard (cf. de Lubac, The Religious Thought of Teilhard de Chardin, 1962).
Teilhard was never brought to an open break with the Roman Catholic faith, and he remained a faithful son within the Roman family until he died. He was born in 1881, taught for a long time at the Catholic Institute of Paris, and took part in several research expeditions in China and other parts of the world. His views on evolution were being talked about back in 1925, but fame waited until after he had died.
Teilhard fought hard against all forms of existentialism that threatened to take the meaning out of life. His views of the primitive past as well as his hope of the fulfilled future carried sharp polemics against existentialism’s message of despair and emptiness. A month before he died, he wrote, “I am more optimistic than ever,” and went on to speak of the presence of God in all the world, a presence whose purpose and power removes all bitterness and fills life with triumphant joy even in darkness.
But how does Teilhard now rate within the Roman Catholic Church? The Roman church has had a position against atheistic evolution for a long time. But times are changing, and Rome has been faced with strong insistence that the Catholic faith does not reject all forms of evolutionary theory. In the encyclical Humani Generis of 1950, Pope Pius XII gave the Catholic scientist freedom for research in the evolution of man as long as it was limited to man’s body. The Catholic had to believe in the immediate creation of the human soul. But within this dualism, all kinds of problems have arisen, and so-called Christian evolutionism has increasingly been in the center of dispute.
The discussion has just recently been given a new twist by the sharp criticism of Teilhard’s views issued from the Holy Office in Rome. This criticism charges Teilhard with “ambiguous expressions” and “serious errors” and gives earnest counsel to keep Teilhard’s books from immature eyes. One guesses that the Holy Office’s rebuke is not unrelated to the publication of Henri de Lubac’s very appreciative evaluation of Teilhard. For de Lubac is one of the prominent leaders in the Theologie Nouvelle, a movement which has been a constant thorn in the side of the Roman Catholic traditionalists and a knotty problem for the Pope. So Teilhard may become a large factor in the tensions that already exist between the more progressive and the more conservative wings of the church. The tension arises from differing ideas as to the posture the church should take vis-à-vis modern culture and modern science.
Clearly the case of Teilhard is symptomatic, however, of the situation in Protestant as well as Roman Catholic circles. The evolution question is high on the agenda of the on-going discussion concerning faith and science. And in today’s situation, the question of evolution has to do, not simply with unbelieving science in opposition to the Christian faith, but with a new and earnest look at the place of man within God’s creation. In this situation there is utmost need for clarity. No one may be permitted the luxury of quick negatives to serious questions. Those who say No must first pay the price of a deep and earnest consideration of the many new questions which devout Christian thinkers have conscientiously raised. Those who refuse to pay this price may manage to keep the problems from the inquiring minds of the younger generation, but they will do so with the disastrous result of alienating many from the leadership of the Church.
The problems are not the same nor are they raised in the same way as they were in Darwin’s time. Today, in Christian, evangelical circles the new study is being carried on, not in opposition to, but in the light of, the Bible. In this regard, it ought not to surprise anyone that new consideration is also being given to the problem of hermeneutics, and that specifically in reference to the creation story of Genesis 1. The new situation, in both Catholic and Protestant circles, calls for responsible reaction. On one side, we must take care that we do not fall blindly under the yoke of science as the unyielding master of our thinking. On the other hand, we must take care not to underestimate the results of scientific research, remembering the sad episodes of the past when the Church rejected the results of scientific studies with Bible texts in a way that only hurt the Church. I have the feeling that we have entered a new and important phase of the long process of science-faith interaction. This is apparent, I think, in the Roman Catholic Church’s response to Teilhard du Chardin as well as in the Humani Generis encyclical. Protestantism has no Holy Office to solve its problems—or to make them worse. But the same problems confront us. And it is of immense importance for us to see that the coming generation of leaders are honestly and respectably educated in the problems of faith and science. They will have to find the way of Christian faith in the world of today and tomorrow. Honesty and courage must be ours as we try to help them. And, if anywhere, then here, prayers must be offered in earnest for men of science. Veni Creator Spiritus!
