John F. HAUGHT. The Cosmic Vision of Teilhard de Chardin. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2021. Pp. 260 + xvii. $26.00 pb. ISBN 9781626984493 (pb), ISBN 9781608339129 (epub). Reviewed by Calvin MERCER, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858.

John F. Haught brings great passion to the topic of this book, the cosmic vision of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, in Haught’s mind the most important Christian thinker from the past century. From his early twenties, John F. Haught, systematic theology professor at Georgetown University, has been intellectually and spiritually influenced by Teilhard, e.g., “swept away by the power and freshness of his thought.” (p. xi)

Haught has interests in science, cosmology, evolution, ecology, and religion, and his previous work includes Resting on the Future: Catholic Theology for an Unfinished Universe and The New Cosmic Story. This recent book sets forth Haught’s insistence, inspired by Teilhard, that the cosmos is a work in progress, an unfinished drama of awakening. Although the severity of his critique could be questioned, Haught argues that current Christian thought clings to outdated notions of a fixed universe and has not incorporated what science, especially the contributions of Darwin and Einstein, have revealed.

The book is not merely an exposition or condensation of Teilhard’s thought, but, rather, Haught’s development and application of Teilhard’s thought about the cosmos to a variety of topics. Chapters are devoted to the following subjects: future, hope, action, spirituality, God, descent (i.e., evolution), life, suffering, thought, religion, and transhumanism. Some chapters are stronger than others, but all provide material worthy of consideration. In the interest of space, I give focus to transhumanism, a critically important topic and one that displays well Haught’s approach.

Human enhancement therapies and technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence, robotics, genetic engineering, tissue engineering, brain-computer integration) are poised to radically reshape our lives, raising a host of theological and ethical questions, along with political, legal, economic, and other ones. It is imperative that faith traditions weigh in, so Haught’s reflections are most welcome. With Teilhard as inspiration and guidance, Haught places transhumanist projects in the larger context of the unfolding cosmos.

Haught rejects the extremes of sacramentalism and activism. Sacramentalism values creation as revelatory of God and, therefore, off limits for major adjustment. This approach is wary of radical enhancement projects and of uncritical embrace of scientific advances that have delivered horrific possibilities, such as nuclear holocaust.

If sacramentalism is unnecessarily cautious, the other extreme, activism, plunges ahead, insisting it is a violation of human nature, dignity, and sacred vocation to suppress our creative energies. We are to participate with God in the unfolding drama of cosmic awakening.

In the spirit of Teilhard’s cosmic vision, Haught charts an “anticipatory” path through the transhumanist and technological future. “It is not only possible but also obligatory for Christian theology to support the natural instincts of human beings to participate in the ongoing creation of the universe of which they are a part.” (p. 199) However, that involvement should be expressed within certain restraints, according to Haught.

First, there must be a concern for vitality, for life. It must increase, not decrease, in the technological future. Human enhancement must increase our capacity to strive, borrowing a word from Michael Polanyi and distinguishing us from our inanimate backdrop. Computational algorithms and mechanical control must not drown out vitality. Haught critiques transhumanism as tending to reduce life and intelligence to inanimate mechanical processes. Haught’s criterion here is a good caution, but he unfairly paints transhumanism as intent on expelling vitality from the sphere of being. The leading transhumanist organization, Humanity + (https://www.humanityplus.org/about), makes clear the goal is enhancing human wellbeing and expanding capabilities.

The second criterion Haught offers is intensifying subjectivity. Again, he is wary of our technological future leaving us without an interior life and indistinguishable from physical objects. And, again, he misrepresents transhumanism here, although his caution is well taken.

Finally, Haught wants our future to result in an increase of creativity, with us participating in the divine task of bringing something new into existence. It is a valuable criterion, and Haught’s reflections could have benefitted from Philip Hefner’s theological notion of created co-creator.

Haught’s path forward is one where we approach the transhumanist vision with “the reverence of the sacramental approach, the spirit of adventure and creativity of the activist dreams of new being but also with an eye to enhancing rather than diminishing the values of vitality, subjectivity, and creativity so central to the universe as it now stands.” (p. 207)

We are, indeed, on the brink of radical changes resulting from increasingly potent therapies and technologies. We best not leave the direction of this future only in the hands of politicians, scientists, extremist agents, and the corporate world. Haught’s Teilhardian-inspired reflections are a good start for theologians and faith communities to consider.