There’s a Molinist in our midst! University of Notre Dame philosopher Tom Flint presented “Similarities and Differences Between open Theism and ‘classical’ theism,” in which he defended Molinism to a group of open theists. I joke; it was actually quite tame. (The real fireworks came in the next lecture, when Northwest Nazarene University’s Tom Oord presented process theology.)

He began by presenting an intro to Molinism (ok, it was more Molinism for Ph.D.s than Molinism for Dummies, but the crowd thanked him for his articulate explanation.) Molinism rests on the two foundations of the libertarian notion of free will (basically, that our actions aren’t predetermined) and divine providence (God has foreknowledge, he is sovereign and in control, and he cares for all creatures). Molinists hold on to both of these tenets simultaneously because they believe God knows all necessary truths (laws of nature and such) and contingent truths (what would happen if something else happened first), and God’s middle knowledge contains his knowledge of counterfactuals of creaturely freedom.

He said that Molinists and open theists have a few things in common, one being that they both adhere to a libertarian notion of freedom. (Anna Case Winters of the McCormick Theological Seminary later pointed out that she thinks a Molonists definition of libertarian views and an open theist’s definition is quite different.) The second similarity is an insistence that their picture of God be fully consistent with Scripture. (Though each side uses different Scripture passages to reinforce their position.) And lastly, both believe in a very powerful, very knowledgeable, very loving creator intricately involved with his creatures’ lives. (The extent to which God is powerful, knowledgeable, and loving is to be debated.) At least they all agree there is a God.

Tom Oord presented the second lecture, “Similarities and Differences Between open theology and process thought.” Oord went through the core doctrines of process thought as seen defined by David Ray Griffin, a retired professor of philosophy of religion and a foundational thinker in process theology, and then outlined his own ideas about open theology.

While process and open theists have similarities, their differences are huge and are taken very seriously by each side. Here’s a quick summary of Oord’s points, taken almost verbatim from his handout:

* Make the love of God a priority

* Hold onto libertarian freedom
*Critical of conventional theism
*Seek a more dynamic model of God
*Contend that God has real, not merely rational, relationships with the world
* Believe God is affected by what happens in the world
* Say God knows all that can be known, which doesn’t amount to exhaustive foreknowledge
* Appreciate the value of philosophy in helping to shape theological convictions (most conference participants are philosophy professors, and know that Oord loves Alfred North Whitehead)
* Connect positively to Wesleyan/Arminian tradition.

* Open theologians identify with evangelicalism; process theologians identify with mainline denominations or independent organizations
* OTs intend to privilege the Bible; PTs put less emphasis on the Bible, noting its cultural and historical contingencies
* PTs tend to be more involved in political, cultural, and scientific concerns as they relate to theology. (Except for the participants at this conference, who are obviously willing to connect theology and science!) And PTs tend to endorse what OTs see as liberal positions on social issues (homosexual ordination, as an example)
* OTs embrace voluntary divine self-limitation with regard to God’s power. PTs argue that God is inherently limited in power with relation to creatures (Oord offers up involuntary divine limitation as a middle ground, but clearly that is not a good middle ground for some people)
* Most OTs affirm creatio ex nihilo, most PTs deny this
* Most OTs emphasize that God related necessarily within the trinity and contingently through creation (that God doesn’t need a world to be God); PTs argue that God necessarily relates to an everlasting world
*Most OTs consider it important to claim that God’s love for creatures is voluntary. PTs think it’s necessary.