Last Days and the Resurrection the Dead III: The Omega Point of Teilhard de Chardin

The Vision of Teilhard de Chardin
from Wikimedia Commons

“The great cosmic attributes of Christ, those which (particularly in St John and St Paul) accord him a universal and final primacy over creation, these attributes... only assume their full dimension in the setting of an evolution... that is both spiritual and convergent.[emphasis added]” Teilhard de Chardin, Catholicism and Science.

“The Church, the reflectively christified portion of the world, the Church, the principal focus of interhuman affinities through super-charity, the Church, the central axis of universal convergence and the precise point of contact between the universe and Omega Point.” Teilhard de Chardin, My Fundamental Vision

INTRODUCTION 

This is the third in a series on unconventional propositions about last days and the resurrection of the dead.  The first was on that of the Russian mathematician, Andrej Grib, dealing with quantum logic;   the second on that of the American physicist, Frank Tipler, dealing with his physics derived Omega Point;  this, the third, on the Omega Point as a goal in evolution, devised by the French Jesuit paleontologist, Teilhard de Chardin.   

With respect to the first two--Grib and Tipler--I want to emphasize that although I find parts of these propositions appealing, I disagree with what they say about last days and the resurrection of the dead.    They are not consistent with Catholic Teaching.   Nevertheless, we can sometimes learn more about the truth by showing what is false, and it was in that spirit that I posted those two articles:  to highlight what Catholic teaching tells us about last days and the resurrection of the dead.

Teilhard de Chardin's thesis is one more difficult to summarize and encapsulate in a short post.   He has fan clubs pro and con; there have been books and articles (including those by Popes) extolling his work, and those by emininent theologians consigning it to an ash-heap.    I will try to summarize the essential points and to point the reader to online sources (for and against) that delve more deeply.

THE THESIS OF TEILHARD DE CHARDIN

Teilhard de Chardin participated in an important discovery in the evolutionary descent of humans, the discovery of Peking Man.     His training as a Jesuit and a scientist formed his belief  that both the Catholic faith and science were true and good, and that one need not forsake one to follow the other.  As N.M. Wildiers put it,

"In order fully to understand a writer...[we must] form as clear a picture as we can of the problem to which the teaching is presumed to supply a solution... the central problem with which Teilhard was concerned, the problem which is the core of his theological thought,... was without doubt what is now known as secularization."  N.M. Wildiers, Foreword, Christianity and Evolution

The implication here is that secularization, the loss of religious values, comes about because science is separated from religion.   Accordingly, de Chardin's project was to bring them together again.

The diagram at the top of the post illustrates Teilhard de Chardin's scheme for uniting science and Catholic teaching.   The scheme operates under the following principle: 

"...creation is not a periodic intrusion of the First Cause:  it is an act co-extensive with the whole duration of the universe.  God has been creating ever since the beginning of time, and, seen from within, his creation (even his initial creation?) takes the form of a transformation.   Participated being is not introduced in batches which are differentiated later...God is continually breathing new being into us.[emphasis in original]"  Teilhard de Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, p. 2

Thus there are stages in this continuous development, in the evolution of the cosmos, as listed in the figure above:  matter--> life--> thought --> spirit,  or atoms --> cells --> man --> Omega Point (Christ).    At the Omega point all will coalesce and, as near as I understand de Chardin, there will be a super consciousness into which individuals are subsumed. 

The Christ of Teilhard's Omega Point is more than Christ the Word, who as God created all things, and Jesus, the man who suffered and died to save us.  He is "Christ-the-Evolver".   

"[He is identified] not with the ordinating principle of the stable Greek kosmos [the Logos], but with the neo-Logos of modern philosophy, the evolutive principle of a universe in movement." op. cit, p. 181.

Finally, de Chardin would combine the three mysteries of Christology--Creation, Incarnation, Redemption--into a fourth:

"The three mysteries become in reality no more, for the new Christology,...they are aspects of a fourth mystery, which alone...is absolutely justifiable and valid...it is the mystery of the creative union of the world in God or Pleromization." op.cit., p. 183

MY TAKE

In the above I have not commented on de Chardin's views on resurrection of the dead;  as near as I can tell from his works and commentaries on them he supposes that we are immortal (as a soul) and will be subsumed into the Omega Point at the end.   This is not the view given in Catholic teaching: both body and soul will be resurrected and we will be resurrected as individuals, not as components of a super-being.

With respect to other parts of de Chardin's Christology and theology, I can only say it is like the curate's egg:  there are some excellent parts and parts which are BAAD!    I'll leave it to the reader (after he/she goes through the references linked below) to decide which is which.

PROS AND CONS

Early in his career de Chardin ran into problems with Church authorities because of his novel views on evolution and the Dogma of Original Sin.   I won't discuss this matter here (it's worth at least two posts) but link to the following reference:  Evolution and Original Sin: the Problem of Evil (written by Jesuit priests and seminarians).

I'll list the links below for Teilhard fans and anti-fans:

PROS 
Teilhard de Chardin, World Public Library
Orthodoxy of Teilhard de Chardin, Part V.
Teilhard de Chardin and Trans-humanism
Will the Vatican let Teilhard de Chardin save the Church?
In the above there are quotes from Pope-emeritus Benedict XVI, writing as Joseph Ratzinger, extolling de Chardin's new views on Christology.   In addition, prominent theologians, such as Henri, Cardinal du Lubac, have praised his work. 

CONS
Challenging the Rehabilitation of Teilhard de Chardin
Critique of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin by Dr. Deitrich von Hildebrand
A Review of "The Phenomenon of Man" by Sir Peter Medawar (this review criticizes de Chardin's science, not his theology.)

Last Days and the Resurrection of the Dead II:Frank Tipler Does it with Physics

Penrose Diagram, for an Omega Point; Arrow is the "world-line" of a photon
from Wikimedia Commons

"It is our relative insignificance in time, not space, which is the real challenge posed by modern cosmology for traditional religion.  I shall show that this view leads naturally to a physical theory for an evolving God, which I term the Omega Point theory." Frank Tipler, "The Omega Point Theory: A Model of an Evolving God" in Physics, Philosophy and Theology--A Common Quest for Understanding

INTRODUCTION

In the post, Last Days and the Resurrection of the Dead I: Quantum Cosmology and Quantum Logic, I discussed  Andrej Grib's proposition that there would be a "Big Crunch", the universe disappearing in a singularity.    Grib, in his article about this and quantum logic, referred to that Big Crunch being an "Omega Point", proposed by the Jesuit paleontologist and theologian Teilhard de Chardin and later by the American physicist Frank Tipler.   I'll discuss Tipler's version (with which I disagree) in this post,  and then turn to that of de Chardin in a third.

PANTHEISM RUN RIOT?--TIPLER'S OMEGA POINT

If you do a Google search: "Frank Tipler Omega Point", you'll find several entries with the term "crackpot".    I won't go that far;  if you agree with Tipler's base assumptions, his arguments are cogent, to an extent.   These assumptions are listed below:

1. "...the possibility of a TOE [Theory of Everything]...might imply that there is only one logically possible universe. This would refute...the premise that God had some freedom of choice in creating the universe."
2. "An evolving God is very much in the world, creates it, and is created by it."
3. "...at the most basic ontological level there is nothing but physics and the 'stuff' studied by physics."
4. "...value is something connected with life, and thus if value is to remain in the universe, life must persist indefinitely;"
5. "...I claim that life is a form of information processing (the converse is not true) and the human mind--and the human soul--is a very complex computer program. [emphasis added]"
6. "...the future c-boundary of the universe consists of a single point--call it the 'Omega Point'." Frank Tipler, op.cit.

Let's examine these assumptions.   I don't disagree with #4 (which is not exactly the same as agreeing with it--there are quite a few qualifications that have to be added to make that statement satisfactory).    The pantheism implicit in #2 is rejected by Catholic teaching;  God transcends the universe even though He is immanent in it*.   I also reject the scientism implicit in #1 and #3;  I have posted

many articles** to the effect that much in the world cannot be explained by science, and that even in that prime example of physics theory, quantum mechanics, there is "a veiled reality" which science can not penetrate.  The proposition that  mind is nothing more than the emergent product of a meat computer,  the brain, is one with which many philosophers and scientists would disagree (including the mathematical physicist Roger Penrose, and the philosophers of mind, John Sears and Thomas Nagel).

The term "c-boundary" comes from terminology devised by Roger Penrose in his  cyclic conformal cosmology thesis.  (And this thesis deserves a post, nay a chapter, on its own.)   The c-boundary is defined as the set of points which are not the pasts of any points or the future of any point in spacetime.  The c-boundary is essentially the "edges" of spacetime--the perimeter of the square, as in the diagram above.   As the list of terms in the link gives it, an Omega point is a c-boundary in which an infinite amount of information has been stored***.

Tipler's vision of the Omega Point is described in more detail in his book,  The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead.   In the far distant future the universe is contracting.   Super-intelligences (not necessarily carbon-based life) use the shear forces of this contraction for energy.   These intelligences are benevolent:  they can reconstruct and download personalities into computers, where they will live a virtual life (a la' Matrix?), happy and pleasurable.  This virtual life will be essentially eternal, since time will slow down as the universe approaches the Big Crunch (as if one were descending into a black hole).    One remarkable "benefit" of such a virtual life is romantic fulfillment:

"it would be possible for each male to be matched not merely with the most beautiful woman in the world, not merely with the most beautiful woman who has ever lived, but to be matched with the most beautiful woman whose existence is logically possible." Frank Tipler, The Physics of Immortality.

And what's the story for females, and those of non-heterosexual inclination? Certainly this is a picture of Heaven different from that given by Jesus:

"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." Matt 22:30 (KJV)

I have raised objections above to Tipler's thesis, and it is evident that it does not correspond to a Catholic position on the transcendence of God, the resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgment and being a saint in Heaven.

*See the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Relation of God to the Universe.

**See, for example, "There's more to there than physics", "Philosopic Issues in Cosmology 4: Creatio ex Nihilo, Theology vs. Physics", "Are All Great Scientists Atheists?", "Tipping the Sacred Cow of Science: Confessions of a Science Agnostic"

***If you go to this link you'll see many terms that are used for Tipler's Omega Point thesis.

Designer Babies via CRISPR/Cas9?Science-Fiction vs Catholic Teaching

Mechanism of CRISPR/Cas9 Genetic Modification
From Wikimedia Commons

"...the Sleepless [genetically modified humans] are superior in mind and body, and easily capable of outperforming their normal cousins. All men are not created equal. Where, then, is the line between equality and excellence? How far should any superior minority hold themselves back for fear of engendering feelings of inadequacy in their inferiors?—especially if this minority is not hated and feared, but rather the elite?"  Wikipedia comment on Beggars in Spain, Nancy Kress's sci-fi novel on genetically modified humans

"In moral evaluation a distinction must be made between strictly <therapeutic> manipulation, which aims to cure illnesses caused by genetic or chromosome anomalies (genetic therapy), from manipulation <altering> the human genetic patrimony. A curative intervention, which is also called 'genetic surgery,' 'will be considered desirable in principle. provided its purpose is the real promotion of the personal well-being of the individual, without damaging his integrity or worsening his condition of life.'...On the other hand, interventions which are not directly curative, the purpose of which is "the production of human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities," [emphasis added] which change the genotype of the individual and of the human species, "are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being, to his integrity and to his identity. Therefore they can be in no way justified on the pretext that they will produce some beneficial results for humanity in the future,'... 'no social or scientific usefulness and no ideological purpose could ever justify an intervention on the human genome unless it be therapeutic, that is its finality must be the natural development of the human being.' [emphasis added] "  Charter for Health Care Workers, Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance.

INTRODUCTION

Designer babies?  Yes, that possibility looms ahead of us, as I recently learned from a Biologos Forum post:   CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing of human embryos by Chinese scientists is reported in a late issue of  Protein and Cell.*   

In this post I want to explore what science fiction has had to say about genetic engineering and the idea of society divided into classes, classes defined by ability.  Since science-fiction has been successful in anticipating other changes imposed by science on the world we live in, perhaps we should take note of what it has to say about a world with ubermensch and lumpen-proletariat.  

Finally, and this will be the message, what does Catholic teaching have to say about the moral course to follow?  (It's already there in the second quote above, but I want to enlarge on that.)

GENETIC ENGINEERING IN SCIENCE FICTION

Nancy Kress's Hugo Award winning novella, Beggars in Spain.  dealt with the societal and moral issues of genetic engineering in 1995, before the advent of the CRISPR/Cas9  technique.   The title comes from a character's question, one of the genetically engineered elite, "what do the productive members of society owe to the unproductive members who have nothing to offer except need"?  These unproductive members are presumably "the Beggars in Spain"*, whence the title.  I won't spoil the novel's conclusion (it's actually a trilogy), except to note that it's surprising.

The same question arises in a classic science-fiction story, "The Marching

Galaxy Magazine cover
for "The Marching Morons"
from Wikimedia Commons

Morons" by C.M. Kornbluth.    In this story an intelligentsia, an elite in which each member has to hold several jobs, manages a world in which there is no material want.   They keep the lumpen-proletariat satisfied with mindless TV quiz and reality shows (and how does that 50 year old story strike a chord today!), cars that seem to go 80 mph but are actually doing only 20.  (Warning! Spoiler!)  They attempt to keep the population down by trying to make contraceptive pills glamorous, but that solution doesn't work.  So, their "final solution" is to popularize a "Trip to Venus" in TV, movies and posters, pack the lower orders into rocket ships that will end nowhere, and thus rid themselves of "The Beggars in Spain".

Aldous Huxley, in his novel Brave New World, had a somewhat different approach.   In his "brave new world"**, babies came from bottles, not the wombs of mothers;  they were sleep indoctrinated to be happy in their pre-ordained caste--alpha, beta, gamma, delta, epsilon:

 "Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard... And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able to read or write. Besides they wear black, which is such a beastly colour.  I'm so glad I'm a Beta." Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Chapter 2.

Astounding Science Fiction Cover
Beyond this Horizon
from Wikipedia

Robert Heinlein's 1942 novel,  Beyond this Horizon, (written under the pseudonym Anson McDonald), also dealt with genetically modified superhumans.   As in the previous works, there is enough material wealth to supply everyone. Indeed, a major problem in Heinlein's quasi-utopia is how to dispose of surplus goods.   The value of genetic spontaneity--unpredictability--is established by setting a class of "control naturals", a protected group who have not been subject to genetic engineering.

In each of the above works it is not that those with lower abilities can not be supplied with what they need (in Beggars in  Spain, there is unlimited energy source from a special device), but rather what is owed from those with high ability to those of lower ability, that they should also partake of a good world.

Both Nancy Kress and Aldous Huxley show how a world managed by pre-ordained ability and oriented towards material satisfaction is, ultimately, not a satisfactory world in which to live.   There is a particularly moving episode in Beggars in Spain, in which a genetically engineered dog, a luxury curiousity--frightened beyond its ken--jumps off a penthouse patio.    But none of these authors, whether or not they view genetic enhancement as enabling a worthwhile society, raise the question of whether there is an absolute, intrinsic moral prohibition against genetically modifying humans as if they were things or animals.  So, that's where we go next.

CATHOLIC TEACHING AND GENETIC ENGINEERING

The substance of Catholic teaching on genetic engineering is given in the document from which the second quote above was taken, Charter  for Health Care Workers, Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance., and from works footnoted in that document.   I want to summarize and comment on this.

First, the distinction between genetic treatment to remedy or cure a disease is carefully laid out.   For example, there are a number of diseases which are genetic in origin:  Huntington's chorea (Woody Guthrie's disease), hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, susceptibility to breast cancer, to mention just a few.  Can we conclude then, that God allows us to alter these defects, to enable us to live better lives?   Suppose genetic therapy had been available to correct the childhood condition of Bl. Hermann Contractus, who was the author of the prayer Salve Regina (Hail Holy Queen) and who supposedly suffered from cleft palate and spinal defects.  Would we then have had that prayer?

Now let's go to the borderline situations.   What about diseases that may disable a person, or make him more liable to die, conditions which are secondary causes  of disease:  obesity (as a precondition for circulatory problems), depression (as a precondition for addiction or suicide)?   What about babies with Down's syndrome?  What do the prescriptions laid out by the Charter tell us here?  Would genetic manipulation to avoid such problems be treatment or enhancement?

The situation is clear in other respects;  genetic manipulation to get 180 IQ, 7 ft basketball players is not to be done (if it be possible).   Pope St. John Paul II made this abundantly clear in his address to the World Medical Association, as quoted in  the encyclical Donum Vitae

"Each human person, in his absolutely unique singularity, is constituted not only by his spirit, but by his body as well. Thus, in the body and through the body, one touches the person himself in his concrete reality. To respect the dignity of man consequently amounts to safeguarding this identity of the man  'copore et anima unus' [body and soul one thing]...It is on the basis of this anthropological vision that one is to find the fundamental criteria for decision-making in the case of procedures which are not strictly therapeutic, as, for example, those aimed at the improvement of the human biological condition" Pope St. John Paul II, Address to the World Medical Association, as quoted in Donum Vitae

And this says it all.   That which preserves the dignity and uniqueness of the human being as God has intended, is that which is to be allowed.   Enabling a designed class of superhumans will not bring happiness to the world, as Brave New World and Beggars in Spain demonstrate.   And the final question (to which I don't know the answer), is there a slippery slope in genetic engineering on which we can't control our descent?   If we can replace the gene that causes Huntington's chorea, will we then be content not to engineer the superman or superwoman?

Perhaps the answer is to find a gene for holiness.  As C.S. Lewis put it, the next evolutionary advance will not be in physical or mental improvement, but to be sons of God:

"...I should expect the next stage in Evolution not to be a stage in Evolution at all:  I should expect that Evolution itself as a method of producing change will be superseded. And finally, I should not be surprised if, when the thing happened, very few people notice it ....it is a change that goes off in a totally different direction---a change from being creatures of God to being sons of God... [t]he first instance appeared in Palestine two thousand years ago." C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity.

NOTES

*Very briefly, this is the molecular biology involved in this gene editing; it's also illustrated in the diagram above:  RNA is introduced into a plasmid, with a protein complexing agent, Cas9, which procedure enables the RNA to snip genomic DNA at a predetermined site, into which alternative genomic material can be introduced.   For a more extended discussion please do a Google search or consult the Wikipedia article.

** "Beggars in Spain" refers to a 16th Century English nursery rhyme that I have not been able to source.  I have read (can't recall where) that it refers to impoverished Spanish noblemen who are too proud to beg, but still need to be supported.

***"The title is from Shakespeare's The Tempest, "O brave new world, that has such people in it"