Interviews
Psycho-Somatic Unity and the Soul
An Interview with Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen
When systematic theologian Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen had the opportunity to work in Thailand years ago, he jumped at the opportunity. But he refused to do so without a command of the native language, Thai. He’d already had several other languages under his linguistic belt—including Finnish (his native tongue), English, and German (what trouble was one more?!). Without a language barrier, Veli-Matti had all the more opportunity to understand the Thai people at a theological level. The sentiment behind Veli-Matti’s language-learning carries over to his interactions during his CCT Research Fellowship in Fall 2012: he consistently exhibited a desire for mutual understanding and clarification, even when disagreements emerged; this attitude—which resonated among all the Fellows—removed communication barriers, helping to produce rich discussion.
CCT: You have described your view of biblical/theological anthropology as “multidimensional monism.” Could you explain a bit about your perspective on what we are?
VMK: Indeed, I name my own view “multidimensional monism,” although the term “dual-aspect monism” (which has been championed by the physicist-priest John Polkinghorne of the UK) is close to my own understanding as well. The dual-aspect monist thinks that the best way to conceive of human nature is to imagine it in terms of such a tight psycho-somatic unity that it is not really possible to separate body and soul (or body and mind). Rather, they belong together and it is a matter of the viewpoint from which you are approaching the question, or the experience of human nature of which you are thinking. My “multidimensional monism” adds that there might not only be two integrally related “aspects” of humanity, but many; and they can be referred to in various names: body, soul, spirit, personhood, etc.
CCT: In light of your theological anthropology, what is the image of God that we all bear?
VMK: While Christian theology has come up with number of different interpretations—and I see them all as complementary rather than exclusive of each other—ultimately, being the image of God means that not only each human person but humanity at large is put in relationship to God, the Creator. In other words, what makes us human, distinctive among other creatures, is that we are referred to by God. Hence, it is not a particular aspect of the human person—say, the soul or spirit—that is the locus of the image of God but all of the human being/humanity.
CCT: How does your multidimensional monism account for life after death?
VMK: Based on Christian hope for a life after death, in terms of resurrection of the body in the new creation, in communion with all God’s people and with Triune God, I believe that there must be both continuity and discontinuity between this life and the life to come. Discontinuity means that I really die at physical death. By nature, there is nothing immortal about finite human life (according to the biblical teaching only God is immortal). The principle of continuity, however, tells me that even when physically dead, I am not forgotten by my Creator. Rather, I am remembered by my God and when the time of resurrection comes, I will be given a renewed body fit for life eternal, as a gift from God. One appealing way of speaking of the “means” (or, the how) of continuity is to use Polkinghorne’s concept of “information.” This is somewhat similar to the Thomistic idea of the soul as the “form” of the body. On analogy to my coming into existence in the first place by virtue of genetic and other in-form-ation that makes me a human person (along with the slow social, intellectual, emotional, and other development resulting in a unique life narrative), the Almighty God picks up the information and creates me anew. I think this elusive idea is in keeping with the best of Christian tradition and resonates with current scientific understanding.
