David Fergusson, ‘Divine Providence’, in Nicholas Adams,
George Pattison and Graham Ward (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Theology and Modern European Thought (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2013), pp. 655–673
In recent years, David Fergusson has crafted a number of
essays on the doctrine of providence. Mostly, he focuses on analysing the
tradition, particularly the classical and Reformed statements of the doctrine,
but in ‘Divine Providence’, (probably) his latest, he explores the curious
question of how the doctrine of providence came to be secularised. This
happened, or began to happen, with the rise of deism: divine revelation and the
place of Scripture were diminished in favour of human reason and a natural
religion, a religion that neglected the previously crucial concept of the
redemption of a disordered, fallen world. On this account, the doctrine of
providence was pushed into the realm of natural laws and the moral order. Thus
the influence of deism (which Fergusson recognises is a broad category, capable
of admitting both Christian belief and practical atheism) led to providence
being applied mostly to progress and the development of human happiness and
amelioration in society. As long as people adhered to the moral order, ‘providence’
will oversee the orderliness and goodness of civic life.
This had at least two interesting consequences: imperial
expansion and free trade. Concerning the former, Fergusson claims that within
the early modern period, the notion of providence had become equated to ideas
of societal and cultural progress. Of course, for many early modern thinkers,
the various advancements made within the British and European context suggested
that white Europeans were the most advanced of all peoples. Indeed, were European
lifestyles to be imposed on the lesser, primitive, non-Europeans, it would be
an enormous kindness. Thus colonisation was regarded as a demonstration of
providence, understood deistically, as the various British and European empires
believed their rules to be instrumental in the betterment of the world at
large. And addressing free trade, Fergusson picks up on Adam Smith’s idea of the
‘invisible hand’ in economics that allows the pursuit of private gain to be
transformed into something of benefit to society as a whole. In this context,
market forces take on the form of a natural law, having similar effects to
empire.
Fergusson concludes his essay with some insightful comments.
He argues that as it’s likely that the secularisation of providence had roots
in classical formulations of the doctrine, with their emphasis on providence as
the exercise of purposeful divine action in every event, there is little point
in simply retrieving the thought of Augustine, Aquinas and Calvin in order to
re-baptise the doctrine. This doesn’t mean that the doctrine of providence
should be side-lined; for Fergusson, this would be to remove theology itself from
the public sphere. But what is needed is for a more modest account of
providence to develop, one not so prone to making bold declarations about
progress, and one that shies away from equating providence with morally
ambiguous positions. Fergusson’s closing statement sums up his position: ‘While
providence should not too swiftly be read into or out of history, neither
should it be eschewed altogether as a means of discerning divine involvement in
the world.’ (p. 671).
As I noted earlier, this is the latest in a series of essays
on the doctrine of providence that Fergusson has published in recent years. To
be honest, I found this essay a little disjointed: the penultimate section on free
trade appeared to lack the sharpness of analysis contained within the opening
sections on deism and empire, and could perhaps have been omitted to allow more
space for discussion of providence and empire. But this essay is also winningly
ambitious in scope, and it was refreshing to read something that explored the
doctrine of providence not so much in terms of its theological content, but
more in terms of its historical development and appropriation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.