Process Theology - The Life and Philosophy Of Charles Hartshorne

Process Philosophers Charles Hartshorne & Alfred North Whitehead

"For both Whitehead and Hartshorne, it is an essential attribute of God to affect, and be affected by, temporal processes, contrary to the [classical] forms of theism that hold God to be in all respects non-temporal (unaffected by time or process: eternal), unchanging (unaffected by circumstance or event: immutable), and unaffected by the world (unaffected by feeling: impassible).

Process theology does not deny that God is in some respects eternal (will never die), immutable (in the sense that God is unchangingly good or loving), and impassible (in the sense that God's eternal aspect is unaffected by actuality), but it contradicts the classical view by insisting that God is in some respects temporal, mutable, and passible."

- Wikipedia, Process Theology

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Amazon Link

The Mind of Charles Hartshorne: A Critical Examination Paperback – Illustratedby Donald Wayne Viney (Author), George W. Shields (Author)
April 28, 2020

Charles Hartshorne is the only major philosopher to have lived in three centuries. Now, for the first time, here is one volume that encompasses Hartshorne’s entire life and career, ranging from ornithology to psychology, from aesthetics to philosophical theology, and from analytic philosophy and logic to physics. Charles Hartshorne is widely regarded as an important figure in twentieth-century philosophy. His wide-ranging and diverse contributions encompass both philosophy and science—aesthetics, metaphysics, the history of philosophy, philosophical theology, numerous topics of applied philosophy, psychology, and ornithology. He championed the aspirations of metaphysics when it was unfashionable, and the metaphysic he championed helped change some of the fashions of philosophy. In writing this magisterial compendium of Hartshorne’s life and thought, authors Donald Wayne Viney and George W. Shields—two acknowledged authorities on Hartshorne—had two main aims. First, to give a reasonably comprehensive account of Hartshorne’s philosophy with an eye to presenting his best arguments and correcting some misunderstandings of his views appearing in the critical literature. Second, to update the field of Hartshorne scholarship by including later work by Hartshorne himself and more recent criticism. With these goals, the authors have produced an updated, wide-ranging, and sustained critical overview of Hartshorne’s thinking, the kind of project not seen since Eugene Peters’ landmark study half a century ago. This book is likely be the definitive study of its kind on the life and thought of Charles Hartshorne for some years to come, an indispensable guide for students, process philosophers, Hartshorne scholars, and the educated public at large. May it stimulate further reflection and scholarly research on this truly great and long-lived genius of American philosophical thought!

Editorial Reviews

Review

A book that is truly magisterial, in both its scope and quality, that is both an extended introduction to Hartshorne's life and thoughtanda thought-provoking interpretation for experts in the field of process thought. Quite an accomplishment! The authors rightly note that the closest anticipation of their work is Eugene Peters' 1970 book, Hartshorne and Neoclassical Metaphysics. But at the time of Peters' book only about half of Hartshorne's books had been published and his most systematic work, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, had hardly been digested as that, too, appeared in 1970. Both Hartshorne's empirical works on sensation and bird song are treated as well as his famous metaphysical works on divine existence and divine actuality.

- Daniel A. Dombrowski, Professor of Philosophy, Seattle University

Viney and Shields expertly take up the challenge of providing an intellectual biography of the only major philosopher to have lived in three centuries, Charles Hartshorne. Now, for the first time, we finally have an outstanding intellectual biography that encompasses Hartshorne's entire life and career. Its prodigious scope and intellectual depth echo that of Hartshorne himself. Including many resonances with the works of Charles Sanders Peirce and Alfred North Whitehead, this philosophical work should appeal to a very wide range of scholars, from ornithology to psychology, from aesthetics to philosophical theology, and from analytic philosophy and logic to physics. I highly recommend this work to most scientists, all philosophers, and anyone ready to be challenged by the quintessential 20thcentury philosopher.

- Timothy E. Eastman, space physicist, formerly with NASA, and philosopher

The Mind of Charles Hartshornelucidly reflects Hartshorne's interdisciplinary and comprehensive approach to the core aspects of philosophy, theology, ornithology and psychology. It is an impressive compendium of the oeuvre of one of the most important scholars of the 20th century. Viney and Shields, both outstanding philosophers themselves and close students of Hartshorne's work, start their book with an acknowledgement of Hartshorne's biography and academic career. They continue with an examination of Hartshorne's writings--from his psychological findings and theories to his philosophical writings and finally his religious philosophy. Viney and Shields complete their book by showing the practical impact and relevance of Hartshorne's thought for the challenges of life. With this masterpiece, the authors forge a bridge from Hartshorne's earliest writings to his very last thoughts; they manage to highlight the golden thread of Hartshorne's mind that can be traced through all his writings. In many ways, Hartshorne was ahead of his time. Thanks to Viney and Shields, The Mind of Charles Hartshornecan illuminate the 21st century. There are books that should be on one's bookshelf, and there are those that belong on the one's desk. The Mind of Charles Hartshornecertainly belongs to the second category.

- Julia Enxing, Professor of Systematic Theology, University of Dresden, Germany

About the Authors

Donald Wayne Viney received degrees in philosophy from Colorado State University (BA, 1977) and the University of Oklahoma (MA, 1979 and PhD, 1982) He is a three-time recipient of the title of University Professor at Pittsburg State University (Kansas) and has taught philosophy and religion at PSU since 1984. Viney is the author of Charles Hartshorne and the Existence of God (SUNY 1985) and is the senior editor of Hartshorne's book Creative Experiencing: A Philosophy of Freedom (SUNY 2011). He has written on and translated works of Jules Lequyer. Professor Viney is author of dozens of articles and reviews in the philosophy of religion in professional journals and scholarly books. He is on the editorial boards of Process Studies, The Midwest Quarterly, and The American Journal of Theology and Philosophy.

George W. Shields received the PhD from The University of Chicago and did further study at Oxford University. He is currently serving in the Comparative Humanities PhD Program and the Department of Philosophy at The University of Louisville. He is also Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Environmental Studies and former University Distinguished Professor at Kentucky State University, where he served for 15 years as Chair of Literature, Languages, and Philosophy and interim Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. He is author of nearly 120 articles and reviews in professional journals and scholarly books and is co-author/editor of Process and Analysis: Whitehead, Hartshorne, and the Analytic Tradition and co-author/co-editor of Science, Technology, and Religious Ideas, among other works.

Charles Hartshorne_Conversation w Charles Hartshorne_part 1

Feb 19, 2015

Center for Process Studies

Check out (http://www.whitehead2015.com) -- Seizing an Alternative Conference

An interview of Charles Hartshorne by John B. Cobb, Jr., October 15, 1983

Publications by Charles Hartshorne

https://www.amazon.com/kindle-dbs/entity/author/B001K8K6FK?_encoding=UTF8&offset=0&pageSize=12&searchAlias=stripbooks&sort=date-desc-rank&page=1&langFilter=default#formatSelectorHeader

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Charles Hartshorne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Charles Hartshorne
Portrait of Charles Hartshorne circa 1990
Born	June 5, 1897 Kittanning, Pennsylvania
Died	October 9, 2000 (aged 103) Austin, Texas
Era	20th-century philosophy
Region	Western philosophy
School	Process philosophy
Main interests	Metaphysics, Philosophy of religion
Notable ideas	Process theology Modal proof of the existence of God
Influences[show]
Influenced[show]

Charles Hartshorne (/ˈhɑːrtsˌhɔːrn/; June 5, 1897 – October 9, 2000) was an American philosopher who concentrated primarily on the philosophy of religion and metaphysics, but also contributed to ornithology. He developed the neoclassical idea of God and produced a modal proof of the existence of God that was a development of Anselm of Canterbury's ontological argument. Hartshorne is also noted for developing Alfred North Whitehead's process philosophy into process theology.

Contents

• 1Early life and education
• 2Career
• 3Intellectual influences
• 4Philosophy and theology
• 5Criticisms
• 6Works
• 7See also
• 8References
• 9Sources
  • 9.1Biographical and intellectual
  • 9.2Interpretations and influences
  • 9.3Critical assessments
• 10External links

Early life and education

Hartshorne (pronounced harts-horn) was born in Kittanning, Pennsylvania, and was a son of Reverend Francis Cope Hartshorne (October 4, 1868 - April 16, 1950) and Marguerite Haughton (September 6, 1868 - November 4, 1959), who were married on April 25, 1895 in Bryn Mawr, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Rev. F. C. Hartshorne, who was a minister in the Protestant Episcopal Church, was rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Kittanning from 1897-1909, then rector of St. Peter's Episcopal Church in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania for 19 years (from 1909-1928). After resigning from the ministry in late 1927 or early 1928, within a few years Francis was appointed pension fund manager of the Protestant Episcopal Diocese of Philadelphia.

Among Charles' brothers was the prominent geographer Richard Hartshorne.

Charles attended Haverford College between 1915–17, but then spent two years as a hospital orderly serving in the US Army. He then studied at Harvard University, where he earned the B.A. (1921), M.A. (1922) and PhD (1923) degrees. His doctoral dissertation was on "The Unity of Being". He obtained all three degrees in only four years, an accomplishment believed unique in Harvard's history.

From 1923-25 Hartshorne pursued further studies in Europe. He attended the University of Freiburg, where he studied under the phenomenologist Edmund Husserl, and also the University of Marburg, where he studied under Martin Heidegger. He then returned to Harvard University as a research fellow from 1925–28, where he and Paul Weiss edited the Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce v. 1–6 and spent a semester assisting Alfred North Whitehead.

Career

After Hartshorne worked at Harvard University, he became a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago (1928–1955), and was also a member of the University's Federated Theological Faculty (1943–1955). He then taught at Emory University (1955–62), followed by the University of Texas (1962–retirement). He published his last article at age 96 and delivered his last lecture at 98.^[1]

In addition to his long teaching career at the previous three universities, Hartshorne was also appointed as a special lecturer or visiting professor at Stanford University, the University of Washington, Yale University, the University of Frankfurt, the University of Melbourne and Kyoto University. He served as president of the Metaphysical Society of America in 1955. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1975.^[2]

Intellectual influences

Hartshorne acknowledged that he was greatly influenced by Matthew Arnold (Literature and Dogma), Emerson's Essays, Charles Sanders Peirce, and especially by Alfred North Whitehead.^[3] Rufus Jones was his Haverford teacher and continuing mentor. He also found inspiration in the works of Josiah Royce (Problem of Christianity), William James, Henri Bergson, Ralph Barton Perry and Nikolai Berdyaev. He conducted a lengthy correspondence over some twenty-three years with Edgar S. Brightman of Boston University about their respective philosophical and theological views.

In turn Hartshorne has been a seminal influence on the theologians Matthew Fox, Daniel Day Williams, Norman Pittenger, Gregory A. Boyd, Schubert M. Ogden (born March 2, 1928) and John B. Cobb, on the American philosophers Frank Ebersole and Daniel Dombrowski, and on the Australian biologist-futurologist Charles Birch.

Philosophy and theology

The intellectual movement with which Hartshorne is associated is generally referred to as process philosophy and the related area of process theology. The roots of process thinking in Western philosophy can be found in the Greek Heraclitus and in Eastern philosophy in Buddhism. Contemporary process philosophy arose in large measure from the work of Alfred North Whitehead, but with important contributions by William James, Charles Peirce, and Henri Bergson, while Hartshorne is identified as the seminal influence on process theology that emerged after World War Two.

The key motifs of process philosophy are: empiricism, relationalism, process, and events.

The motif of empiricism in process thought refers to the theme that experience is the realm for defining meaning and verifying any theory of reality. Unlike classical empiricism, process thought takes the category of feeling beyond just the human senses of perception. Experiences are not confined to sense perception or consciousness, and there are pre-sensual, pre-conscious experiences from which consciousness and perception derive.

The motif of relationalism refers to both experiences and relationships. Humans experience things and also experience the relationship between things. The motif of process means that all time, history and change are in a dynamic evolutionary process. The final motif of events refers to all the units (organic and inorganic) of the world.

While Hartshorne acknowledges the importance of Whitehead on his own ideas, many of the elements of his philosophy are evident in his dissertation, written in 1923, prior to his encounter with Whitehead. Moreover, Hartshorne was not always in agreement with Whitehead, especially on the nature of possibility. Whitehead construed the realm of possibilities in terms of what he called Eternal Objects. Hartshorne was never happy with this way of speaking and followed Peirce in thinking of the realm of possibility as a continuum which, by definition, has no least member and which can be "cut" in infinitely many ways. Definite qualities, for example, a particular shade of blue, emerge in the creative process.

Another difference between Whitehead and Hartshorne is that the Englishman usually spoke of God as a single actual entity whereas Hartshorne thought it better to think of God as a personally ordered series of actual entities, each exhibiting the abstract character of divinity, as necessarily supreme in love, knowledge and power. In Hartshorne's process theology God and the world exist in a dynamic, changing relationship. God is a 'di-polar' deity. By this Hartshorne meant that God has both abstract and concrete poles. The abstract pole refers to those elements within God that never vary, such as God's self-identity, while the concrete pole refers to the organic growth in God's perfect knowledge of the world as the world itself develops and changes. Hartshorne did not accept the classical theistic claim of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing), and instead held to creatio ex materia (creation out of pre-existent material), although this is not an expression he used.

One of the technical terms Hartshorne used is pan-en-theism, originally coined by Karl Christian Friedrich Krause in 1828. Panentheism (all is in God) must be differentiated from Classical pantheism (all is God). In Hartshorne's theology God is not identical with the world, but God is also not completely independent from the world. God has his self-identity that transcends the universe, but the world is also contained within God. A rough analogy is the relationship between a mother and a fetus. The mother has her own identity and is different from the unborn, yet is intimately connected to the unborn. The unborn is within the womb and attached to the mother via the umbilical cord.

Hartshorne reworked the ontological argument for God's existence as promulgated by Anselm of Canterbury. In Anselm's formula, "God is that than which no greater can be conceived." Anselm's argument used the concept of perfection. While Hartshorne believed that his reformulated ontological argument is sound, he never claimed that it was sufficient unto itself to establish the existence of God. Throughout his career, from the time of his dissertation, he relied upon a multiple argument strategy, commonly called a cumulative case, to establish the rationality of his di-polar theism.

Hartshorne accepts that, by definition, God is perfect. However, he maintains that classical theism, be it Jewish, Christian, or Muslim, has held to a self-contradictory notion of perfection. He argues that the classical concept of a deity for which all potentialities are actualized fails. Hartshorne posited that God's existence is necessary and is compatible with any events in the world. In the economy of his argument Hartshorne has attempted to break a perceived stalemate in theology over the problem of evil and God's omnipotence. For Hartshorne, perfection means that God cannot be surpassed in his social relatedness to every creature. God is capable of surpassing himself by growing and changing in his knowledge and feeling for the world.

Hartshorne acknowledged a God capable of change, as is consistent with pandeism, but early on he specifically rejected both deism and pandeism in favor of panentheism, writing that "panentheistic doctrine contains all of deism and pandeism except their arbitrary negations".^[4]

Hartshorne did not believe in the immortality of human souls as identities separate from God, but explained that all the beauty created in a person's life will exist for ever in the reality of God. This can be understood in a way reminiscent of Hinduism, or perhaps Buddhism's Sunyata (emptiness) ontology^{[dubious – discuss]} namely that a person's identity is extinguished in one's ultimate union with God, but that a person's life within God is eternal. Hartshorne regularly attended services at several Unitarian Universalist churches, and joined the First Unitarian Universalist Church in Austin, Texas.^[5]

By the end of his life, in his late nineties, Hartshorne viewed metaphysics as the most rewarding aspect of philosophy: "the search for necessary truths, truths that are not only true, but they couldn’t have been false.” ^[6]

Criticisms

Hartshorne's philosophical and theological views have received criticism from many different quarters. Positive criticism has underscored that Hartshorne's emphasis on change and process and creativity has acted as a great corrective to static thinking about causal laws and determinism. Several commentators affirm that his position offers metaphysical coherence by providing a coherent set of concepts.

Others indicate that Hartshorne has quite properly placed a valuable emphasis on appreciating nature (even evidenced in Hartshorne's hobby for bird-watching). His emphasis on nature and human-divine relationships to the world has goaded reflective work on developing theologies about pollution, resource degradation and a philosophy of ecology. Allied to this has been Hartshorne's emphasis on aesthetics and beauty. In his system of thought science and theology achieve some integration as science and theology provide data for each other.

Hartshorne has also been an important figure in upholding natural theology, and in offering an understanding of God as a personal, dynamic being. It is accepted by many philosophers that Hartshorne made the idea of perfection rationally conceivable, and so his contribution to the ontological argument is deemed to be valuable for modern philosophical discussion.

It has been said that Hartshorne has placed an interesting emphasis on affirming that the God who loves the creation also endures suffering. In his theological thought the centrality of love is very strong, particularly in his interpretation of God, nature and all living creatures. Hartshorne is also appreciated for his philosophical interest in Buddhism, and in stimulating others in new approaches to inter-religious co-operation and dialogue.

Langdon Gilkey questioned Hartshorne's assumptions about human reasoning experiences. Gilkey pointed out that Hartshorne assumes there is an objective or rational structure to the whole universe, and he then assumes that human thought can acquire accurate and adequate knowledge of the universe.

In Hartshorne's theology there is no literal first event in the universe, and the universe is thus regarded as an actually infinite reality. This has led some to point out that as Hartshorne has emphasized that every event has been partly determined by previous events, his thought is susceptible to the fallacy of the infinite regress.

Other critics question the adequacy of panentheism. The point of tension in Hartshorne's theology is whether God is really worthy of worship since God needs the world in order to be a complete being. Traditional theism posits that God is a complete being before the creation of the world. Others find that his argument about God's perfection is flawed by confusing existential necessity with logical necessity.

In classical Protestant and Evangelical thought, Hartshorne's theology has received strong criticism. In these theological networks Hartshorne's panentheist reinterpretation of God's nature has been deemed to be incompatible with Biblical revelation and the classic creedal formulations of the Trinity. Critics such as Royce Gordon Gruenler (born January 10, 1930), Ronald Nash and Norman Geisler argue that Hartshorne does not offer a tripersonal view of the Trinity, and instead his interpretation of Christ (Christology) has some affinities with the early heresy of the Ebionites. It is also argued that Hartshorne's theology entails a denial of divine foreknowledge and predestination to salvation. Hartshorne is also criticized for his denial or devaluing of Christ's miracles and the supernatural events mentioned in the Bible.

Other criticisms are that Hartshorne gives little attention to the classical theological concepts of God's holiness, and that the awe of God is an undeveloped element in his writings. Alan Wayne Gragg (born July 17, 1932) criticizes Hartshorne's highly optimistic view of humanity, and hence its lack of emphasis on human depravity, guilt and sin. Allied to these criticisms is the assertion that Hartshorne over-emphasizes aesthetics and is correspondingly weak on ethics and morality. Others have indicated that Hartshorne failed to understand traditional Christian views about petitionary prayer and survival of the individual in the afterlife.

Works

• The Philosophy and Psychology of Sensation, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1934, reprint Kennikat Press 1968
• Beyond Humanism: Essays in the New Philosophy of Nature, Chicago/New York: Willett, Clark & Co, 1937 (also published as Beyond Humanism: Essays in the Philosophy of Nature by University of Nebraska Press, 1968)
• Man's Vision of God and the Logic of Theism, Willett, Clark & company, 1941, reprint Hamden: Archon, 1964, ISBN 0-208-00498-X
• The Divine Relativity: A Social Conception of God, (Terry Lectures), New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948, reprint ed. 1983, ISBN 0-300-02880-6
• The Logic of Perfection and other essays in neoclassical metaphysics, La Salle: Open Court, 1962, reprint ed. 1973, ISBN 0-87548-037-3
• Philosophers Speak of God, edited with William L. Reese, University of Chicago Press, 1963, Amherst: Humanity Books, reprint ed. 2000, ISBN 1-57392-815-1 (fifty selections spanning the breadth of both eastern and western thought)
• Anselm's Discovery, La Salle: Open Court, 1965
• A Natural Theology for Our Time, La Salle: Open Court, 1967, reprint ed. 1992, ISBN 0-87548-239-2
• Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, SCM Press, 1970, ISBN 0-334-00269-9
• Reality as Social Process, New York: Hafner, 1971
• Whitehead's Philosophy: Selected Essays, 1935-1970, University of Nebraska Press, 1972, ISBN 0-8032-0806-5
• Aquinas to Whitehead: Seven Centuries of Metaphysics of Religion, Marquette University Publications, 1976, ISBN 0-87462-141-0
• Whitehead's View of Reality, with Creighton Peden, New York: Pilgrim Press, rev. ed. 1981, ISBN 0-8298-0381-5
• Insights and Oversights of Great Thinkers: : An Evaluation of Western Philosophy, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983, ISBN 0-87395-682-6
• Creativity in American Philosophy, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984, ISBN 0-87395-817-9
• Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984, ISBN 0-87395-771-7
• Wisdom as Moderation, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1987, ISBN 0-88706-473-6
• The Darkness and The Light: A Philosopher Reflects upon His Fortunate Career and Those Who Made It Possible, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990, ISBN 0-7914-0337-8
• Born to Sing: An Interpretation and World Survey of Bird Song, Indiana Univ Press, 1992, ISBN 0-253-20743-6
• The Zero Fallacy: And Other Essays in Neoclassical Philosophy, edited with Mohammad Valady, Open Court, 1997, ISBN 0-8126-9324-8
• Creative Experiencing: A Philosophy of Freedom, edited by Donald Wayne Viney and Jinceheol O, Albany: State University of New Press, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4384-3666-1

See also

• American philosophy
• List of American philosophers
• List of science and religion scholars

References

1. ^ Douglas Martin, "Charles Hartshorne, Theologian, Is Dead; Proponent of an Activist God Was 103," The New York Times, October 13, 2000.
2. ^ "Book of Members, 1780-2010: Chapter H" (PDF). American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Retrieved 7 April 2011.
3. ^ Cf. Michel Weber and Will Desmond (eds.). Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought (Frankfurt / Lancaster, Ontos Verlag, Process Thought X1 & X2, 2008) and Ronny Desmet & Michel Weber (edited by), Whitehead. The Algebra of Metaphysics. Applied Process Metaphysics Summer Institute Memorandum, Louvain-la-Neuve, Les Éditions Chromatika, 2010.
4. ^ Charles Hartshorne, Man's Vision of God and the Logic of Theism (1964), p. 348, ISBN 0-208-00498-X
5. ^ "Charles Hartshorne". Unitarian Universalist Association. Archived from the original on 2011-07-23. Retrieved 2007-03-14.
6. ^ "Charles Hartshorne, Theologian, Is Dead; Proponent of an Activist God Was 103" The New York Times And More - Reflections". VEERY JOURNAL - Quote originally from Veery journal (1996), then reprinted in the Austin American-Statesman (1997), and then quoted from in The New York Times obituary by Douglas Martin (2000). Retrieved 2020-07-20.

Sources

Biographical and intellectual

• Randall E. Auxier and Mark Y. A. Davies, eds. Hartshorne and Brightman on God, Process, and Persons: The Correspondence 1922-1945 (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2001).
• John B. Cobb and Franklin I. Gamwell, eds. Existence and Actuality: Conversations with Charles Hartshorne (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), ISBN 0-226-11123-7, online edition
• William L. Reese and Eugene Freeman, eds. Process and Divinity: The Hartshorne Festschrift (La Salle: Open Court, 1964).

Interpretations and influences

• William A. Beardslee, "Hope in Biblical Eschatology and in Process Theology," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 38 (September 1970), pp. 227–239.
• Charles Birch, "Participatory Evolution: The Drive of Creation," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 40 (June 1972), pp. 147–163.
• Charles Birch, On Purpose (Kensington: New South Wales University Press, 1990).
• Delwin Brown, Ralph E. James and Gene Reeves, eds. Process Philosophy and Christian Thought (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1971).
• John B. Cobb, God and the World (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969).
• Carol P. Christ, She Who Changes: Re-imagining the Divine in the World, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, ISBN 1-4039-6083-6
• George L. Goodwin, Ontological Argument of Charles Hartshorne, Scholars Press, 1978, ISBN 0-89130-228-X, published dissertation
• Schubert Ogden, The Reality of God and Other Essays (New York: Harper & Row, 1966).
• Norman Pittenger, Christology Reconsidered (London: SCM Press, 1970).
• Donald W. Viney, Charles Hartshorne and the Existence of God, forward by Charles Hartshorne, State University of New York Press, 1985, ISBN 0-87395-907-8 (hardcover), ISBN 0-87395-908-6 (paperback)
• Santiago Sia, editor, Charles Hartshorne's Concept of God: Philosophical and Theological Responses, Springer, 1989, ISBN 0-7923-0290-7
• Santiago Sia, Religion, Reason, and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead, Peter Lang Publisher, 2004, ISBN 3-631-50855-7
• Barry L. Whitney, Evil and the Process God, Toronto: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985

Critical assessments

• Gregory A. Boyd, Trinity and Process: A Critical Evaluation and Reconstruction of Hartshorne's di-polar theism towards a Trinitarian Metaphysic (New York: P. Lang, 1992).
• Robert J. Connelly, Whitehead vs. Hartshorne: Basic Metaphysical Issues (Washington: University Press of America, 1981).
• Daniel A. Dombrowski, Hartshorne and the Metaphysics of Animal Rights (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988).
• Daniel A. Dombrowski, Analytic Theism, Hartshorne, and the Concept of God (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996).
• Langdon Gilkey, Naming the Whirlwind (Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill, 1969).
• Alan Gragg, Charles Hartshorne (Waco: Word Publishing, 1973).
• Royce G. Gruenler, The Inexhaustible God: Biblical Faith and the Challenge of Process Theism (Grand rapids: Baker, 1983).
• Colin Gunton, Becoming and Being: The Doctrine of God in Charles Hartshorne and Karl Barth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978).
• Lewis Edwin Hahn, ed. The Philosophy of Charles Hartshorne (La Salle: Open Court, 1991).
• Bernard M. Loomer, "Process Theology: Origins, Strengths, Weaknesses," Process Studies, 16 (Winter 1987), pp. 245–254.
• Ronald H. Nash, ed. Process Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987).
• Douglas Pratt, Relational Deity: Hartshorne and Macquarrie on God (Lanham: University Press of America, 2002).
• Edgar A. Towne, Two Types of Theism: Knowledge of God in the thought of Paul Tillich and Charles Hartshorne (New York: P. Lang, 1997).
• Michel Weber and Will Desmond (eds.). Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought, Frankfurt / Lancaster, Ontos Verlag, Process Thought X1 & X2, 2008.

External links

Wikiquote has quotations related to: Charles Hartshorne

• Charles Hartshorne by Dan Dombrowski, from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Hartshorne's collected papers are archived at the Center for Process Studies
• Hartshorne's ornithological works are housed at Florida Museum of Natural History
• Online biography of Hartshorne from American Philosophers Before 1950, Dictionary of Literary Biography, Volume 270
• Charles Hartshorne: The Einstein of Religious Thought with a short biography, photos and sayings
• Charles Hartshorne Archive at AnthonyFlood.com
• Special Hartshorne Edition (PDF), Process Perspectives (newsletter of the Center for Process Studies), v. 20, n. 3, spring 1997. Includes reminiscences by Hartshorne.
• Special Hartshorne tribute, Process Studies 25 (1996), (includes 2 new Hartshorne articles)
• Special Focus on Hartshorne, Ed. Barry Whitney and Don Viney, Process Studies 30.2 (2001), (4 Hartshorne articles and discussion)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Process theology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to sear

For both Whitehead and Hartshorne, it is an essential attribute of God to affect and be affected by temporal processes, contrary to the [classical] forms of theism that hold God to be in all respects non-temporal (unaffected by time or process: eternal), unchanging (unaffected by circumstance or event: immutable), and unaffected by the world (unaffected by feeling: impassible). Process theology does not deny that God is in some respects eternal (will never die), immutable (in the sense that God is unchangingly good), and impassible (in the sense that God's eternal aspect is unaffected by actuality), but it contradicts the classical view by insisting that God is in some respects temporal, mutable, and passible.^[1]Process theology is a type of theology developed from Alfred North Whitehead's (1861–1947) process philosophy, most notably by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000) and John B. Cobb (b. 1925). Process theology and process philosophy are collectively referred to as "process thought".

According to Cobb, "process theology may refer to all forms of theology that emphasize event, occurrence, or becoming over substance. In this sense theology influenced by Hegel is process theology just as much as that influenced by Whitehead. This use of the term calls attention to affinities between these otherwise quite different traditions."^[2][3] Also Pierre Teilhard de Chardin can be included among process theologians,^[4] even if they are generally understood as referring to the Whiteheadian/Hartshornean school, where there continues to be ongoing debates within the field on the nature of God, the relationship of God and the world, and immortality.

Contents

• 1History
• 2God and the World relationship
• 3Themes
• 4Relationship to liberation theology
• 5Relationship to pluralism
• 6Relationship to the doctrine of the incarnation
• 7Debate about process theology's conception of God’s power
• 8See also
• 9References
• 10Further reading
• 11External links

History

Various theological and philosophical aspects have been expanded and developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000), John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin.^[5] A characteristic of process theology each of these thinkers shared was a rejection of metaphysics that privilege "being" over "becoming", particularly those of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas.^[6] Hartshorne was deeply influenced by French philosopher Jules Lequier and by Swiss philosopher Charles Secrétan who were probably the first ones to claim that in God liberty of becoming is above his substantiality.

Process theology soon influenced a number of Jewish theologians including Rabbis Max Kadushin, Milton Steinberg and Levi A. Olan, Harry Slominsky and, to a lesser degree, Abraham Joshua Heschel. Today some rabbis who advocate some form of process theology include Bradley Shavit Artson, Lawrence A. Englander, William E. Kaufman, Harold Kushner, Anson Laytner, Michael Lerner, Gilbert S. Rosenthal, Lawrence Troster, Donald B. Rossoff, Burton Mindick, and Nahum Ward.

Alan Anderson and Deb Whitehouse have applied process theology to the New Thought variant of Christianity.

The work of Richard Stadelmann has been to preserve the uniqueness of Jesus in process theology.

God and the World relationship

Whitehead's classical statement is a set of antithetical statements that attempt to avoid self-contradiction by shifting them from a set of oppositions into a contrast:

• It is as true to say that God is permanent and the World fluent, as that the World is permanent and God is fluent.
• It is as true to say that God is one and the World many, as that the World is one and God many.
• It is as true to say that, in comparison with the World, God is actual eminently, as that, in comparison with God, the World is actual eminently.
• It is as true to say that the World is immanent in God, as that God is immanent in the World.
• It is as true to say that God transcends the World, as that the World transcends God.
• It is as true to say that God creates the World, as that the World creates God.^[7]

Themes

• God is not omnipotent in the sense of being coercive. The divine has a power of persuasion rather than coercion. Process theologians interpret the classical doctrine of omnipotence as involving force, and suggest instead a forbearance in divine power. "Persuasion" in the causal sense means that God does not exert unilateral control.^[8]
• Reality is not made up of material substances that endure through time, but serially-ordered events, which are experiential in nature. These events have both a physical and mental aspect. All experience (male, female, atomic, and botanical) is important and contributes to the ongoing and interrelated process of reality.
• The universe is characterized by process and change carried out by the agents of free will. Self-determination characterizes everything in the universe, not just human beings. God cannot totally control any series of events or any individual, but God influences the creaturely exercise of this universal free will by offering possibilities. To say it another way, God has a will in everything, but not everything that occurs is God's will.^[9]
• God contains the universe but is not identical with it (panentheism, not pantheism or pandeism). Some also call this "theocosmocentrism" to emphasize that God has always been related to some world or another.
• Because God interacts with the changing universe, God is changeable (that is to say, God is affected by the actions that take place in the universe) over the course of time. However, the abstract elements of God (goodness, wisdom, etc.) remain eternally solid.
• Charles Hartshorne believes that people do not experience subjective (or personal) immortality, but they do have objective immortality because their experiences live on forever in God, who contains all that was. Other process theologians believe that people do have subjective experience after bodily death.^[10]
• Dipolar theism is the idea that God has both a changing aspect (God's existence as a Living God) and an unchanging aspect (God's eternal essence).^[11]

Relationship to liberation theology

Henry Young combines Black theology and Process theology in his book Hope in Process. Young seeks a model for American society that goes beyond the alternatives of integration of Blacks into white society and Black separateness. He finds useful the process model of the many becoming one. Here the one is a new reality that emerges from the discrete contributions of the many, not the assimilation of the many to an already established one.^[12]

Monica Coleman has combined Womanist theology and Process theology in her book Making a Way Out of No Way. In it, she argues that 'making a way out of no way' and 'creative transformation' are complementary insights from the respective theological traditions. She is one of many theologians who identify both as a process theologian and feminist/womanist/ecofeminist theologian, which includes persons such as Sallie McFague, Rosemary Radford Ruether, and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki.^[13][14]

C. Robert Mesle, in his book Process Theology, outlines three aspects of a process theology of liberation:^[15]

1. There is a relational character to the divine which allows God to experience both the joy and suffering of humanity. God suffers just as those who experience oppression and God seeks to actualize all positive and beautiful potentials. God must, therefore, be in solidarity with the oppressed and must also work for their liberation.
2. God is not omnipotent in the classical sense and so God does not provide support for the status quo, but rather seeks the actualization of greater good.
3. God exercises relational power and not unilateral control. In this way God cannot instantly end evil and oppression in the world. God works in relational ways to help guide persons to liberation.

Relationship to pluralism

Process theology affirms that God is working in all persons to actualize potentialities. In that sense each religious manifestation is the Divine working in a unique way to bring out the beautiful and the good. Additionally, scripture and religion represent human interpretations of the divine. In this sense pluralism is the expression of the diversity of cultural backgrounds and assumptions that people use to approach the Divine.^[16]

Relationship to the doctrine of the incarnation

Further information: Incarnation (Christianity)

Contrary to Christian orthodoxy, the Christ of mainstream process theology is not the mystical and historically exclusive union of divine and human natures in one hypostasis, the eternal Logos of God uniquely enfleshed in and identifiable as the man Jesus. Rather God is incarnate in the lives of all people when they act according to a call from God. Jesus fully and in every way responded to God's call, thus the person of Jesus is theologically understood as "the divine Word in human form." Jesus is not singularly or essentially God, but he was perfectly synchronized to God at all moments of life.^[17] Cobb expressed the Incarnation in process terms that link it to his understanding of actualization of human potential: "'Christ' refers to the Logos as incarnate hence as the process of creative transformation in and of the world".

Debate about process theology's conception of God’s power

A criticism of process theology is that it offers a too severely diminished conception of God’s power. Process theologians argue that God does not have unilateral, coercive control over everything in the universe. In process theology, God cannot override a person’s freedom, nor perform miracles that violate the laws of nature, nor perform physical actions such as causing or halting a flood or an avalanche. Critics argue that this conception diminishes divine power to such a degree that God is no longer worshipful.^{[5][18][19][20][21]}

The process theology response to this criticism is that the traditional Christian conception of God is actually not worshipful as it stands, and that the traditional notion of God’s omnipotence fails to make sense.^[22]

First, power is a relational concept. It is not exerted in a vacuum, but always by some entity A over some other entity B.^[23] As such, power requires analysis of both the being exerting power, and the being that power is being exerted upon. To suppose that an entity A (in this case, God), can always successfully control any other entity B is to say, in effect, that B does not exist as a free and individual being in any meaningful sense, since there is no possibility of its resisting A if A should decide to press the issue.^[24]

Mindful of this, process theology makes several important distinctions between different kinds of power. The first distinction is between "coercive" power and "persuasive" power.^[25] Coercive power is the kind that is exerted by one physical body over another, such as one billiard ball hitting another, or one arm twisting another. Lifeless bodies (such as the billiard balls) cannot resist such applications of physical force at all, and even living bodies (like arms) can only resist so far, and can be coercively overpowered. While finite, physical creatures can exert coercive power over one another in this way, God—lacking a physical body—cannot (not merely will not) exert coercive control over the world.^[26]

But process theologians argue that coercive power is actually a secondary or derivative form of power, while persuasion is the primary form.^[25] Even the act of self-motion (of an arm, for instance) is an instance of persuasive power. The arm may not perform in the way a person wishes it to—it may be broken, or asleep, or otherwise unable to perform the desired action. It is only after the persuasive act of self-motion is successful that an entity can even begin to exercise coercive control over other finite physical bodies. But no amount of coercive control can alter the free decisions of other entities; only persuasion can do so.^[27]

For example, a child is told by his parent that he must go to bed. The child, as a self-conscious, decision-making individual, can always make the decision to not go to bed. The parent may then respond by picking up the child bodily and carrying him to his room, but nothing can force the child to alter his decision to resist the parent's directive. It is only the body of the child that can be coercively controlled by the body of the physically stronger parent; the child's free will remains intact. While process theologians argue that God does not have coercive power, they also argue that God has supreme persuasive power, that God is always influencing/persuading us to choose the good.

One classic exchange over the issue of divine power is between philosophers Frederick Sontag and John K. Roth and process theologian David Ray Griffin.^[28] Sontag and Roth argued that the process God’s inability to, for instance, stop the genocide at Auschwitz meant that God was not worthy of worship, since there is no point in worshipping a God that cannot save us from such atrocities. Griffin's response was as follows:

One of the stronger complaints from Sontag and Roth is that, given the enormity of evil in the world, a deity that is [merely] doing its best is not worthy of worship. The implication is that a deity that is not doing its best is worthy of worship. For example, in reference to Auschwitz, Roth mocks my God with the statement that “the best that God could possibly do was to permit 10,000 Jews a day to go up in smoke.” Roth prefers a God who had the power to prevent this Holocaust but did not do it! This illustrates how much people can differ in what they consider worthy of worship. For Roth, it is clearly brute power that evokes worship. The question is: is this what should evoke worship? To refer back to the point about revelation: is this kind of power worship consistent with the Christian claim that divinity is decisively revealed in Jesus? Roth finds my God too small to evoke worship; I find his too gross.^[28]

The process argument, then, is that those who cling to the idea of God's coercive omnipotence are defending power for power's sake, which would seem to be inconsistent with the life of Jesus, who Christians believe died for humanity's sins rather than overthrow the Roman empire. Griffin argues that it is actually the God whose omnipotence is defined in the "traditional" way that is not worshipful.^[28]

One other distinction process theologians make is between the idea of "unilateral" power versus "relational" power.^[29] Unilateral power is the power of a king (or more accurately, a tyrant) who wishes to exert control over his subjects without being affected by them.^[30] However, most people would agree that a ruler who is not changed or affected by the joys and sorrows of his subjects is actually a despicable ruler and a psychopath.^[31] Process theologians thus stress that God’s power is relational; rather than being unaffected and unchanged by the world, God is the being most affected by every other being in the universe.^[32] As process theologian C. Robert Mesle puts it:

Relational power takes great strength. In stark contrast to unilateral power, the radical manifestations of relational power are found in people like Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, and Jesus. It requires the willingness to endure tremendous suffering while refusing to hate. It demands that we keep our hearts open to those who wish to slam them shut. It means offering to open up a relationship with people who hate us, despise us, and wish to destroy us.^[29]

In summation, then, process theologians argue that their conception of God’s power does not diminish God, but just the opposite. Rather than see God as one who unilaterally coerces other beings, judges and punishes them, and is completely unaffected by the joys and sorrows of others, process theologians see God as the one who persuades the universe to love and peace, is supremely affected by even the tiniest of joys and the smallest of sorrows, and is able to love all beings despite the most heinous acts they may commit. God is, as Whitehead says, "the fellow sufferer who understands."^[33]

See also

• Conceptions of God
• Essence–Energies distinction
• Liberal naturalism
• New Thought
• Open theism
• Panentheism
• Philosophical theism
• Philosophical theology
• Postliberal theology
• Process philosophy
• Synergism (theology)
• Theopoetics
• Earthseed
• Neo-Hasidism
• Systematic theology
• Divine Principle

References

1. ^ Viney, Donald Wayne (January 28, 2014). "Process Theism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved March 15, 2018.
2. ^ Cobb Jr., John B. (1982). Process Theology as Political Theology. Manchester University Press. p. 19. ISBN 978-0-664-24417-0.
3. ^ O'Regan, Cyril (1994). The Heterodox Hegel. Albany, New York: SUNY Press. p. 448: "Any relation between Process Theology and Hegelian ontotheology needs to be argued. Such argument has become more conspicuous in recent years". ISBN 978-0-791-42005-8.
4. ^ Bonting, Sjoerd Lieuwe (2005). Creation and Double Chaos. Science and Theology in Discussion. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Fortress Press. p. 88. ISBN 978-1-451-41838-5.
5. ^ Jump up to:^a b John W. Cooper, Panentheism: The Other God of the Philosophers (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 342.
6. ^ Seibt, Johanna (October 26, 2017). "Process Philosophy". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved March 15, 2018.
7. ^ Whitehead, Process and Reality, Corrected Ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1978), 348.
8. ^ Charles Hartshorne, Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes (Albany: State University of New York, 1984), 20—26.
9. ^ John Cobb and David Griffin, Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), 14—16, chapter 1.
10. ^ Hartshorne, 32−36.
11. ^ Viney, Donald Wayne (August 24, 2004). "Charles Hartshorne: Dipolar Theism". Harvard Square Library. Retrieved March 15,2018.
12. ^ Cobb Jr., John B. (1978). "Process Theology". Religion Online. Retrieved March 15, 2018.
13. ^ Center for Process Studies, "CPS Co-directors," retrieved September 6, 2014.
14. ^ "The Body of God - An Ecological Theology," retrieved September 6, 2014.
15. ^ C. Robert Mesle, Process Theology: A Basic Introduction (St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press, 1993), 65—68, 75−80.
16. ^ Mesle (1993). p. 101.
17. ^ Mesle (1993). p. 106.
18. ^ editor, John S. Feinberg ; John S. Feinberg, general (2006). No one like Him : the doctrine of God ([Rev. ed.]. ed.). Wheaton. Ill.: Crossway Books. p. 178. ISBN 978-1581348118.
19. ^ Roger E. Olson, “Why I am Not a Process Theologian,” last modified December 4, 2013, Patheos.org, accessed May 7, 2014.
20. ^ David Basinger, Divine Power in Process Theism (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988), 14.
21. ^ Al Truesdale, God Reconsidered (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 2010), 21.
22. ^ David Ray Griffin, God, Power, and Evil: A Process Theodicy(Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 268.
23. ^ David Ray Griffin (2004). p. 265.
24. ^ David Ray Griffin (2004). p. 267.
25. ^ Jump up to:^a b David Ray Griffin (2004). p. 9.
26. ^ David Ray Griffin (2004). p. 8.
27. ^ David Ray Griffin (2004). p. 6.
28. ^ Jump up to:^a b c David Ray Griffin, "Creation Out of Chaos and the Problem of Evil," in Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy, ed. Stephen Davis (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981), 135.
29. ^ Jump up to:^a b C. Robert Mesle, "Relational Power Archived 2017-08-24 at the Wayback Machine," JesusJazzBuddhism.org, accessed May 7, 2014.
30. ^ Schubert M. Ogden, The Reality of God and Other Essays(Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992), 51.
31. ^ Charles Hartshorne, "Kant's Traditionalism," in Insights and Oversights of Great Thinkers: An Evaluation of Western Philosophy, ed. Charles Hartshorne (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983), 174.
32. ^ Charles Hartshorne, The Divine Relativity: A Social Conception of God (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964), 58.
33. ^ Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality (New York: The Free Press, 1978), 351.

Further reading

• Bruce G. Epperly Process Theology: A Guide for the Perplexed (NY: T&T Clark, 2011, ISBN 978-0-567-59669-7) This is "perhaps the best in-depth introduction to process theology available for non-specialists."
• Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki's God Christ Church: A Practical Guide to Process Theology, new rev. ed. (New York: Crossroad, 1989, ISBN 0-8245-0970-6) demonstrates the practical integration of process philosophy with Christianity.
• C. Robert Mesle's Process Theology: A Basic Introduction (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1993, ISBN 0-8272-2945-3) is an introduction to process theology written for the layperson.
• Jewish introductions to classical theism, limited theism and process theology can be found in A Question of Faith: An Atheist and a Rabbi Debate the Existence of God (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1994, ISBN 1-56821-089-2) and The Case for God (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1991, ISBN 0-8272-0458-2), both written by Rabbi William E. Kaufman. Jewish variations of process theology are also presented in Harold Kushner's When Bad Things Happen to Good People (New York: Anchor Books, 2004, ISBN 1-4000-3472-8) and Sandra B. Lubarsky and David Ray Griffin, eds., Jewish Theology and Process Thought (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995, ISBN 0-7914-2810-9).
• Christian introductions may be found in Schubert M. Ogden's The Reality of God and Other Essays (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-87074-318-X); John B. Cobb, Doubting Thomas: Christology in Story Form (New York: Crossroad, 1990, ISBN 0-8245-1033-X); Charles Hartshorne, Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984, ISBN 0-87395-771-7); and Richard Rice, God's Foreknowledge & Man's Free Will (Minneapolis, Minn.: Bethany House Publishers, 1985; rev. ed. of the author's The Openness of God, cop. 1980; ISBN 0-87123-845-4). In French, the best introduction may be André Gounelle, Le Dynamisme Créateur de Dieu: Essai sur la Théologie du Process, édition revue, modifiée et augmentee (Paris: Van Dieren, 2000, ISBN 2-911087-26-7).
• The most important work by Paul S. Fiddes is The Creative Suffering of God (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992); see also his short overview "Process Theology," in A. E. McGrath, ed., The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Modern Christian Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 472–76.
• Norman Pittenger's thought is exemplified in his God in Process (London: SCM Press, 1967, LCC BT83.6 .P5), Process-Thought and Christian Faith (New York: Macmillan Company, 1968, LCC BR100 .P615 1968), and Becoming and Belonging (Wilton, CT: Morehouse Publications, 1989, ISBN 0-8192-1480-9).
• Constance Wise's Hidden Circles in the Web: Feminist Wicca, Occult Knowledge, and Process Thought (Lanham, Md.: AltaMira Press, 2008, ISBN 978-0-7591-1006-9) applies process theology to one variety of contemporary Paganism.
• Michel Weber, « Shamanism and proto-consciousness », in René Lebrun, Julien De Vos et É. Van Quickelberghe (éds), Deus Unicus, Turnhout, Brepols, coll. Homo Religiosus série II, 14, 2015, pp. 247–260.
• Staub, Jacob (October 1992). "Kaplan and Process Theology". In Goldsmith, Emanuel; Scult, Mel; Seltzer, Robert (eds.). The American Judaism of Mordecai M. Kaplan. NYU Press. ISBN 978-0-8147-3257-1.
• Kwall, Roberta R. (2011–2012). "The Lessons of Living Gardens and Jewish Process Theology for Authorship and Moral Rights". Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law. 14: 889–.
• Bowman, Donna; McDaniel, Jay, eds. (January 2006). Handbook of Process Theology. Chalice Press. ISBN 978-0-8272-1467-5.
• Loomer, Bernard M. (1987). "Process Theology: Origins, Strengths, Weaknesses". Process Studies. 16 (4): 245–254. doi:10.5840/process198716446.
• Cobb, John B. (1980). "Process Theology and Environmental Issues". The Journal of Religion. 60 (4): 440–458. doi:10.1086/486819.
• Faber, Roland (6 April 2017). The Becoming of God: Process Theology, Philosophy, and Multireligious Engagement. Wipf and Stock Publishers. ISBN 978-1-60608-885-2.
• Burrell, David B. (1982). "Does Process Theology Rest on a Mistake?". Theological Studies. 43 (1): 125–135. doi:10.1177/004056398204300105. S2CID 171057603.
  • Devenish, Philip E. (1982). "Postliberal Process Theology: A Rejoinder to Burrell". Theological Studies. 43 (3): 504–513. doi:10.1177/004056398204300307. S2CID 160021337.
• Pixley, George V. (1974). "Justice and Class Struggle: A Challenge for Process Theology". Process Studies. 4 (3): 159–175. doi:10.5840/process19744328.
• Mesle, C. Robert (1988). "Does God Hide from Us?: John Hick and Process Theology on Faith, Freedom and Theodicy". International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 24 (1/2): 93–111. doi:10.1007/BF00134167. ISSN 0020-7047. JSTOR 40024796. S2CID 169572605.
• Dean, William (1984). "Deconstruction and Process Theology". The Journal of Religion. 64 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1086/487073.
• Dorrien, Gary (2008). "The Lure and Necessity of Process Theology". CrossCurrents. 58 (2): 316–336. doi:10.1111/j.1939-3881.2008.00026.x. ISSN 0011-1953. JSTOR 24461426.
• Stone, Bryan P.; Oord, Thomas Jay, eds. (2001). Thy Nature and Thy Name is Love: Wesleyan and Process Theologies in Dialogue. Kingswood Books. ISBN 978-0-687-05220-2.
• Mueller, J. J. (1986). "Process Theology and the Catholic Theological Community". Theological Studies. 47 (3): 412–427. doi:10.1177/004056398604700303. S2CID 147471058.
• O'Connor, June (1980). "Process Theology and Liberation Theology: Theological and Ethical Reflections". Horizons. 7 (2): 231–248. doi:10.1017/S0360966900021265.
• Trethowan, Illtyd (1983). "The Significance of Process Theology". Religious Studies. 19 (3): 311–322. doi:10.1017/S0034412500015262.
• Hare, Peter H.; Ryder, John (1980). "Buchler's Ordinal Metaphysics and Process Theology". Process Studies. 10 (3/4): 120–129. doi:10.5840/process1980103/411. JSTOR 44798127.
• Hekman, Susan (2017). "Feminist New Materialism and Process Theology: Beginning the Dialogue". Feminist Theology. 25 (2): 198–207. doi:10.1177/0966735016678544. S2CID 152230362.
• Pittenger, Norman (1977). "Christology in Process Theology". Theology. 80 (675): 187–193. doi:10.1177/0040571X7708000306. S2CID 171066693.
• Pittenger, Norman (1974). "The Incarnation in Process Theology". Review & Expositor. 71 (1): 43–57. doi:10.1177/003463737407100105. S2CID 170805965.
• Inbody, Tyron (1975). "Paul Tillich and Process Theology". Theological Studies. 36 (3): 472–492. doi:10.1177/004056397503600304. S2CID 170482044.
• Griffin, David Ray (31 July 2003). "Reconstructive Theology". In Vanhoozer, Kevin J. (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-79395-7.

External links

• The Center for Process Studies
• Process and Faith

Reference works

• Byrne, Peter; Houlden, Leslie (2013). "Process Theology". Companion Encyclopedia of Theology. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-13492200-0.
• An encyclopedic-type article
• Michel Weber and Will Desmond (eds.), Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought, Frankfurt / Lancaster, ontos verlag, Process Thought X1 & X2, 2008 (ISBN 978-3-938793-92-3).