Perspectief 2022-57

28 Prof. Dr. Eduardo Echeverria Perspectief open” (260). Once again, Huijgen underscores the difference between nature and creation, but now with respect to this eschatological accent as it pertains to sex and gender. The meaning, nature, and structure of human sexuality and gender is open-ended, future oriented rather than oriented to the normative order of creation and the nature of things with its embedded principles and the inherent meanings of creation. This future orientation is, according to Huijgen, derived from the Christian eschatological perspective of the new creation. “Dat eschatologisch accent markeert het verschil met gnostiek en natuurlijk theologie. Spreken over structuren in Gods scheppend handelen laat zich niet verzelfstandigen van de verlossing in Christus, net zomin als de verlossing de mens losmaakt van God de Schepper” (261-262). How are we to understand, then, the distinction and relation of nature and grace? How should we understand the impact that the fall has had upon human nature? Nature has to do with the fundamental structures of reality, in particular, of human reality, in short, the deepest foundations of what God created. How has sin affected those foundational structures of creation? Has the nature of creation been corrupted or completely destroyed by sin? What has been called the Augustinian Principle affirms that the nature of humanity persists in the regime of man’s fallen state. Augustine writes: “The natures in which evil exists, in so far as they are natures, are good. And evil is removed, not by removing any nature, or part of a nature but by healing and correcting that which had been vitiated and depraved.” Huijgen agrees: “De schepping op zichzelf is goed, de zonde hoort oorspronkelijk niet bij de schepping en de wereld doet er voor God toe” (155). He rejects the conflation of creation and the fall because he rejects gnosticism (256) Still, Huijgen rejects the claim that natural reason has access via the givens of reality to a “kennis . . . van wat goed, waar en schoon is.” The noetic effects of sin bars access to that knowledge; indeed, states Huijgen, there is no knowledge of God, of man and the world, and his purposes outside of revelation. Natural theology does not take sufficiently seriously that the world is fallen into sin. (256) There is more here. It’s not just sin’s noetic effects that blocks access to objective reality. Huijgen also holds that objective reality is unknowable and hence he rejects epistemic realism. “Waardevrije waarneming bestaat niet, en er is geen feit los van interpretatie. Alleen al daarom kan uit

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=