What is man?
Carl Trueman argues that this is the most pressing question we face today. Paul Kingsnorth seems to agree; in his recently published book, Against the Machine, Kingsnorth asserts that “We have forgotten who we are, or we don’t like who we are, or somehow both.”
Yes, somehow both. And some of us don’t like who we are because we have forgotten who we are.
Trueman contends—and rightly so—that human nature has been “dismantled, disenchanted, disembodied, and desecrated.” He suggests some potentially fruitful ways we can try to address the first three of these modern assaults on human nature, but he is too quick to minimize our ability to counter the desecration of man. His argument is as follows:
[A] lack of social consensus on the existence of God, let alone on religious dogma and practice, precludes consensus on any view of human nature grounded in the divine image. This lack of consensus is a problem, since the response to the desecration of human nature must be its consecration, and consecration must occur in a religious context. Given the secularity of our contemporary context, Christians must be modest about what we can achieve.
Admittedly, many people in today’s secular society are unwilling to consider the possible truth of one of the foundational claims of Christian (and Jewish) anthropology: that human beings are created imago Dei, in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26-27). But there are other images of man that we could use in discussions aimed at the “new humanism” for which Trueman calls, images to which secularists might be more amenable, but which might nonetheless help to steer such discussions, albeit perhaps slowly and even imperceptibly at first, in the direction of the re-consecration of man.
One such image would be that of man as methorion or “boundary phenomenon.” Man uniquely straddles the boundary between body and mind, matter and spirit, object and subject, finite and infinite. As Hans Urs von Balthasar noted, the image of man as a boundary phenomenon has been found in some form or another, in practically all the philosophies and religions of man. In the Catholic Church’s formulation, man is the “unity of soul and body.”
The image of man as boundary phenomenon seems particularly well-suited to contemporary discussions regarding human nature. This, in part, is because that image is implicated not only in the desecration of man but also in the dismantling, disenchantment, and disembodiment of human nature as described by Truman, and thus could help address all four contemporary assaults on who we are as human beings.
The image of man as boundary phenomenon is also highly relevant to all three of the intellectual/cultural currents that have done the most damage to our contemporary understanding of human nature: materialism, expressive individualism, and transhumanism.
Materialists claim that we’re nothing but our bodies, with mind/consciousness being merely an epiphenomenon of biochemical processes.
Expressive individualists want to claim, simultaneously (and therefore incoherently), that our bodies both do and do not matter for establishing what a man is (e.g., in arguing that a person’s “gender” is whatever the person believes it to be, regardless of their body, while also arguing for the crucial importance of that person being able to alter their body via hormones, surgery, etc. in an attempt to bring their body into alignment with their internally perceived “gender”).
Transhumanists seek a way to separate us completely from the “limitations” of our bodies, possibly achieved through such techniques as the uploading of human minds to the digital cloud (which, incidentally, would still require a physical substrate as the host for those “minds”).
The image of man as a unity of matter and spirit, body and soul, is useful in countering all three of these dehumanizing schools of thought in contemporary society, as well as the general confusion about human nature that seems so prevalent today.
But how might we effectively broach such an image of human nature, keeping in mind the resistance that so many secular thinkers reflexively exhibit whenever any topic even remotely related to God, Christianity, or a transcendent realm is raised? Here are a few initial suggestions:
- Draw upon the arguments of Thomas Nagel (who is himself an atheist) that materialism fails to account for such central aspects of human life as consciousness, meaning, and value.
- Discuss how man is a finite being who is open to the infinite, as emphasized by Thomas Aquinas, among others.
- Incorporate the image of man as “microcosm” (the “embodiment of the world,” the being which “ontogenetically recapitulates in himself, crowns and transcends, all the forms of nature”), an image which is closely related to the image of man as a liminal being and which has been advocated by a variety of thinkers, including Plotinus, Origen, Augustine, Gregory the Great, Maximus the Confessor, and Bonaventure.
- Focus on human beings’ status as both subjects and objects, as emphasized in the thought of Kant, Hegel, and, more recently, Roger Scruton. Scruton discusses how this description of human nature can open people’s eyes to what he calls our “metaphysical predicament,” a predicament to which he admits that “God is the only solution.”
- And finally, because some people aren’t attuned to what they would likely perceive to be “academic” arguments about human nature, we need to find ways to explore and reflect upon human nature as a “boundary phenomenon” in popular culture (movies, music, literature, art, etc.).
These are only some of the ways in which a rediscovery of the image of human nature as a “boundary phenomenon” could make at least some small contribution to the re-consecration of man in contemporary society.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
The author leads off with the question, “What is man?” Not to be picky, but it should read “Who is man?”.
What is directed to a thing; who refers to persons. This is a critical distinction, especially in the debate on the sanctity of human life. Pro-aborts think of the unborn fetus as a “what” and so destroying a thing is no different from throwing unwanted household items into the dumpster. Catholics refer to an unborn fetus as a “who” because it is a human person in his/her earliest stage of development and deserves the protection afforded to all human persons. The distinction between “what” and “who” is not irrelevant.
What is man…? (Ps. 8:5)
It didn’t seem like the author was denying personhood to man, but rather WHAT we all are. But maybe I misunderstand the objection?
Dear Richard Clements – a brave essay to cover some possible ways of comprehending human uniqueness, for philosophically-compentent readers.
For the biologically-informed the biggest challenge to all these ways of thinking will come from paleoanthropology and it’s discovery of a variety of human ancestors from 3 million years ago or so.
Even our Homo sapiens species, in a vast diversity of morphological forms, has been around for some hundreds-of-thousands of years. This begs the question: “In what way are these ancestors of ours called images of GOD?”
Omniscient GOD will have known all these circumstances in advance & will have made provision. The ancient Psalmist cries out:
“Ah, how happy are those of blameless life who walk in the Law of GOD!
How happy those who respect GOD’s decrees, & seek GOD with their whole heart; doing no evil, they walk in GOD’s ways!” (Psalm 119:1-3)
There is no reason why this could not apply to the earliest humans, millions or hundreds-of-thousands of years ago; AND right up until today! The ability to freely make this choice for righteous ethics is uniquely humans.
Perhaps only those who want GOD & seek to follow GOD’s ways could be described as ‘images’ of GOD? That is, righteous Abel, not murdererous Cain.
Certainly, this is strongly suggested by the life & teachings of Jesus Christ, who is: “The Image of the Unseen GOD”; see e.g. Colossians 1:15.
CHRIST instructs us that it is IN HIM & HIS WAYS we are FAMILY WITH GOD.
This ethical approach is formalised as a worldview in ‘Ethical Encounter Theology’, summarized & available in a popular conference format at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326247275_Ethical_Ontology_Harmonises_Science_Revelation_and_Human_Lives_Physical_Temporality_Yields_Supra-Universal_Ethical_Distillates
Taking account of beginnings also empowers our evangelization of today’s STEM-educated, techno-generations.
Ever in the love of Jesus; blessings from marty
While “methorion or ‘boundary phenomenon’ [by which] Man uniquely straddles the boundary between body and mind, matter and spirit” – the centrific value that separates body and soul is the permanence of sexual identity ordered by God. For example, that God ordained this person to be a woman.
The human soul, after death and in accord with Catholic doctrine lives as a soul sans body until the resurrection of the dead and the necessary reunification of body and soul. Although during the interim the human soul, be he man or woman retains the features of masculinity and femininity. Consequently, despite the surgeries, hormone treatments the person who mutates surgically to be another sex remains the sex ordained by God.
Theologically, our human nature insofar as our humanness is known initially as prescient knowledge called the natural law within. And known primarily in the revelation of God in Christ – in whose image we are created.
Dear Fr Dr Peter Morello: “- in whose image we are created.”
Having worked for decades to help our fellow humans who are in need, I’m sympathetic to the notion that all people are images of GOD. Each human deserves to be respected and even cherished as our relative in Christ.
Yet, practical experience around the world has shown me that some are: “seeds planted by the devil” as in Matthew 13:28. Seemingly: “made for destruction” as in Romans 9:22. 2 Peter 2:14 mentions an accursed brood.
Both John the Baptist & Jesus Christ refer to errant church leaders as: “you brood of vipers” (see Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33; Luke 3:7).
{incidentally, what would they say about many of our contemporary leaders?}
A posible resolution of this conundrum might be in thinking of all humans as born able to be images of GOD: a uniquely human potential that deserves our respect. Whilst allowing that many people belong to the enemy’s brood, as effectively images of the prince of this world.
I have experienced the immense suffering that follows from accepting as fellow divine images those whose identity proved determinedly demonic.
This matter seems far more nuanced than generally thought.
In everyday Church practice no one seems to have a solution to the sickening problem of Catholics with dual allegiance to the demonic powers of freemasonry and/or witchcraft; and who often seek leadership positions.
Yes, all have the potential to be an image of GOD; many renounce it.
Ever seeking to hear & obey King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty
Dr. Rice: You are so write. We ignore Satan’s presence in the world and in persons at our own peril. Pollyanish mind-sets are not without grave consequences.
Yes, it’s hard to think Our LORD was referring to ‘images of GOD’ in Matthew 13:39.
Here, In His parable of the weeds, Jesus explains that the enemy is the devil who sows the weeds among the wheat (images of GOD). Thus teachng us of the presence of evil individuals in the world, the weeds representing the people of the evil one. This highlights the need for us to exercise Holy Spirit discernment & vigilance in the face of deception & corruption. The prevalence of imposters reveals the challenges all believers will face on their spiritual journey.
In Luke 13:27, Jesus makes plain how dire the situation is.
Those who He tells: “I don’t know you . . .” are obviously not images of GOD.
Just some thoughts . . .
I would like urgently to recommend a book of mine, Imago Dei: Man/Woman Created in the Image of God, published a few years ago by Wipf andStock. It responds, in its way, to many of the issues discussed in this interesting article. Any serious publications on this vital issue need to be publicized and widely recommended.
“Boundary phenomenon “ new to me, but sounds like a way to begin meaningful dialogue toward prolonging human survival.
Why do we fallen mortals see stuff as divided between matter and spirit, or body and soul? Instead of unities, we see as through the compound eyes of insects! The unifying “aha” moment for St. Augustine is described in this way:
“…he was confronted with the difficulty of conceiving substance [!] as spiritual, but with the discovery that this was possible, the greatest of his intellectual problems was solved. For he was thus enabled to perceive that, so far from being ultimate, ‘form’ and ‘matter’ alike were merely figments of the human mind [!]; they were the spectacles [compound eyes] through which men saw the corporeal or object world. His subsequent emancipation from the delusions of materialism and idealism followed as a matter of course and, with this, the revolution was complete [….] For, by his acceptance of Trinitarian Christianity, he identified himself with the effort of thought initiated by Athanasius” (Charles Norris Cochrane, “Christianity and Classical Culture: A Study of Thought and Action from Augustus to Augustine,” Oxford University Press, 1940, pp. 396-7).
That’s not a bad start, dear Peter D. Beaulieu, but cannnot contain the richly diverse spiritual world that New Testament theologians encounter.
The Red Dragon aka The Ancient Serpent aka Slanderer/Liar & Father of Lies aka the Accuser of True Christians aka the Enemy aka The Devil aka Lucifer aka Satan aka The Prince of This World aka The Ruler of the Power of the Air aka Corrupter of numerous demonic Fallen Angels; then the Frog-like Unclean Spirits that are demon-gods performing miracles; then Babylon the Great, Mother of Idolatries and of the Disgusting Things of the Earth, whose sorcery leads all the nations of the world astray; the miracle-working Monstrous Creature Coming Up From the Earth; the Monstrous Blaspheming Creature Coming Up Out of the Sea; the False prophet; Idols inspirited so as to tell people to worship The Evil One; and so on.
Saint Paul bundles this whole complex of rebellion against GOD under the heading of Stoikheia, that is the Principalities, Powers, Dominions, Rulers, Authorities, Governments, Thrones of this world, a host of evil in high heavenly (i.e. unseen spiritual) places.
Good Catholics should not be surprised to find that freemasons, witches, wizards, astrologers, new-agers, gurus, imams, etc., etc. are able to do extraordinary miracles. The powers of the enemy (permitted by GOD) extend throughout this fallen world and universe. They can indeed make their ungodly acolytes powerful, wealthy, & famous; capable of levitation, translocation, transmutation, and many other things unknown to science.
Scandalously, some Jewish rabbis & Catholic clergy are among those acolytes of Lucifer. For example, in Banyo/Nundah Parish Fr Bernard Joseph Gallagher openly boasted of his freemason wizard powers. His freemason-pro successor, Fr Dan Redhead, teaches that Judas Iscariot and Adolf Hitler are in Heaven!
Praise GOD that we still have a few authentically Christian clergy in Brisbane! Ours is not a total spiritual wasteland!
Let no one think that the spiritual battle is a myth. It is a very real experience of testing Ethical Encounter, it perseveres on a daily basis, and is at its most severe WITHIN The Church.
Most importantly – it’s GOD’s will that we all engage in that Ethical Encounter and bravely battle to choose divine right ethics not demonic wrong ethics. Alone among biological species we occupy this key boundary position.
Saint Paul inspires us:
“Be blameless & innocent children of GOD, without blemish in the midst of a crooked & perverse generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe.”
I remember back in the 1970s, there was quite a bit about “finding yourself:”
From ushistory.org:
Tom Wolfe called the 1970s the “Me Decade.”
“Across the land, Americans seemed determined to escape from the wars and social movements of the previous decade. Disillusionment with national and global action led many to look inward and find solace in discovering more about themselves.
A magazine entitled Self sold thousands of copies. Women demanded respect as equal partners. Fashions veered toward….”
(I imagine part of it is that when technology and modern farming allowed people more downtime versus just surviving)