Virtual Sessions
The New Visions in Theological Anthropology (NViTA), funded by the John Templeton Foundation, is committed to the study of and research in science-engaged theology (SET).
Teaching science-engaged theology
Tuesday, 1 December 2020 8am US West Coast time; 11am US East Coast time; 4pm UK time; 5pm Paris time
Wednesday, 2 December 2020 2am Australia (Brisbane) time
Science-engaged theology is an emerging sub-discipline, distinct from the study of science and religion. It seeks to integrate studies and theories from the natural sciences into the theology classroom. Numerous research groups and large grants are driving an increase in the research in this area, but how should this research impact our teaching? This session will introduce and discuss good practice in teaching science-engaged theology, drawing on the views of experienced teachers.
Presenters: Kevin Nordby (chair), Lee University (USA); Joanna Leidenhag, University of St Andrews (UK); Bethany Sollereder, University of Oxford (UK); Andrew Davison, University of Cambridge (UK), Alexandru Manafu, York University (Canada)
(This session is listed under “Other Events” in the SBL/AAR Virtual Annual Meeting programme. Please note you do not have to be signed up to the Meeting to attend this session.)
Puzzles in science-engaged theology
Tuesday, 8 December 2020 8am US West Coast time; 11am US East Coast time; 4pm UK time; 5pm Paris time
Wednesday, 9 December 2020 2am Australia (Brisbane) time
Recently theologians have started to examine how to undertake research engaging a wide range of sciences and especially behavioural sciences into their theological research. Some of this research is taking the form of theological ‘puzzles’, which are short investigations bringing scientific studies and theories to the service of traditional theological questions. Join us to learn more about a number of puzzles developed recently by theologians involved in the New Visions in Theological Anthropology project. There will be an opportunity to discuss these puzzles and how to become involved in the development of future puzzles.
SESSION ABSTRACTS:
Preston Hill Richmont Graduate University, TN, USA
Does God Need a Body to Keep the Score of Trauma?
Short Abstract: Recent findings in neuroscience and psychology show that “the body keeps the score” of PTSD. However, trauma-informed theology to date has deployed pneumatology to explain how God experiences trauma in the Christian narrative of salvation. Yet in Christian theology the divine person of the Holy Spirit has no assumed human body. This puzzle assesses whether a body is needed for God to keep the score of posttraumatic stress in a manner consistent with neuroscience and how this might shape one’s account of trauma in Christian soteriology.
Tasia Scrutton University of Leeds, UK
1. Psychopathology and Religious Experience: Might a disruptive episode involving hearing voices be a mental illness and a genuine religious experience at one and the same time?
Psychiatric literature about when instances of voice hearing should be regarded as religiously-inflected psychopathology and when they should be regarded as genuine religious experiences tend to presuppose that a person’s experience can only be either psychopathological, or else a genuine religious experience. This paper argues that both might be the case, drawing on theological work on grace, psychiatric case studies, and psychological literature on post-traumatic growth and spiritual emergence.
2. Psychopathology and Religious Experience: Might a disruptive episode involving hearing voices be both a mental illness and a genuine religious experience?
Psychiatric and psychological literature about when religiously-inflected instances of voice hearing should be regarded as psychopathological and when they should be regarded as genuine religious experiences tend to presuppose that a person’s experience can only be either psychopathological, or else a genuine religious experience. This paper tests the hypothesis that both might be the case, or ‘the both-and view’. It does this by testing the plausibility of two possible ‘both-and’ models, drawing on psychiatric and psychological, and theological, criteria, studies and ideas.
Natalia Marandiuc Southern Methodist University, TX, USA
Love and Human Thriving: A Feminist Soteriology
The attachment theory associated with developmental psychology and the neuroscience research that supports it show that attachment bonds are direct sources of human thriving. How can this research be deployed toward a robust theological proposal that the experience of attachment love is a generative element in salvific fulfillment? This puzzle brings together the question of human thriving and fulfillment with feminist soteriological concerns.
Presenters: Mikael Leidenhag (chair), University of St Andrews (UK); Tasia Scrutton, University of Leeds (UK); Natalia Marandiuc, Southern Methodist University (USA); Preston Hill, Richmont Graduate University (USA)
(This session is listed under “Other Events” in the SBL/AAR Virtual Annual Meeting programme. Please note you do not have to be signed up to the Meeting to attend this session.)
Science-engaged theologies: variations on a common theme?
Thursday, 10 December 2020: 1pm US West Coast time; 4pm US East Coast time; 9pm UK time; 10pm Paris time
Friday, 11 December 2020: 7am Australia (Brisbane) time
Largely due to the support of the Templeton foundations, there are now several large grants on Science-Engaged Theology. Do all these grants currently have the same vision for what ‘science-engaged theology’ is, or are there competing versions of science-engaged theology being developed? To repurpose Ian Barbour’s typology are these difference science-engaged theologies in conflict, independent from one another, or can they be in dialogue or even integrated into a unified vision? Would we even want that? We would like to co-ordinate and discuss what science-engaged theology is and the future of this new concept.
Presenters: Sarah Lane Ritchie (chair), University of Edinburgh (UK); John Perry and Joanna Leidenhag, University of St Andrews (UK); Mark Harris, University of Edinburgh (UK); Jesse Couenhoven, Villanova University (USA); Meghan Page, Loyola University Maryland (USA); Peter Harrison, University of Queensland (Australia); Paul Tyson, University of Queensland (Australia); Justin Barrett, Blueprint 1543 (USA); Carmody Grey, Durham University (UK).