It is important that we define what we mean by “the new universe” before we try to study its theological implications.  The essential elements of the new universe may be emphasized by comparing the view of A.R. Wallace at the turn of the century with the Space Telescope's Hubble Deep Field at its end.  The universe of Wallace, co-founder with Darwin of the theory of natural selection, was only 3,600 light years in diameter (Figure 1).  It was static, gave humanity a central position, and harbored no extraterrestrials.  The Hubble Deep Field (Figure 2), by contrast, reveals a universe some 12 billion light years in extent, whose central theme is cosmic evolution, full of  billions of evolving galaxies floating in an Einsteinian space-time with no center.  Cosmic evolution, it is conjectured, has produced not only planets, stars, and galaxies, but also life, mind, and intelligence.

The Biological Universe

While the abundance of extraterrestrial life is by no means proven, it is the view accepted by many working on the origins of life, has seemed likely to most astronomers for thirty years, and is the working hypothesis of those in the growing hybrid fields of bioastronomy and astrobiology.  More than that, it is the view widely accepted by the public, as conveyed over the past forty years by the astronomers Harlow Shapley, Carl Sagan, Frank Drake, Eric Chaisson, and Armand Delsemme, among many others.  This new world view of a universe full of life, produced by cosmic evolution, I call “the biological universe.”  The central assumptions of the biological universe are that planetary systems are common, that life originates wherever conditions are favorable, and that evolution culminates with intelligence.  Alien morphology and intelligence may not be similar to that on Earth, but at least some who subscribe to the biological universe believe that compatible technologies (most commonly, radio  astronomy) will allow us to communicate.  Decipherment of an extraterrestrial message could take a slow or fast track, with diverging consequences depending on the nature of the message.(1)

Beyond the biological universe, the anthropic principle and other considerations lead us to believe that our universe may be only one of many.  These, presumably, undergo their own forms of cosmic evolution, within a “multiverse” too vast to conceive.(2)

The transformation from the simple diagram of Wallace to the striking image presented by the Hubble Deep Field is a drastic change over one century, a new world view that theologies ignore at their peril and must eventually accommodate if they are to remain in touch with the real world.  Although this accommodation took place over centuries for the Copernican world view, and is still in process for the Darwinian world view, a systematic study of the theological implications of the new universe is not only a task whose time has come, but one that is long overdue.  Indeed, the decade of the 1990s has seen an upturn of interest in the general implications of the new universe, especially in connection with the existence of extraterrestrial life.  In 1991-1992 NASA convened a series of workshops on the Cultural Aspects of SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence), as it was about to launch its SETI program.  Theology was only a small part of that discussion, but the Proceedings show the richness of the questions that remain to be asked.  Such meetings have had little public impact, but in the wake of claims of fossil life in Martian meteorite ALH84001, media speculations about the implications of life reached a wide and receptive audience.  The interest also extends to the highest levels of government; in 1996 Vice President Al Gore convened a meeting that included several theologians to discuss the implications of possible life on Mars and beyond.  The current NASA Astrobiology Roadmap recognizes as one of its four Principles “a broad societal interest in our subject, especially in areas such as the search for extraterrestrial life and the potential to engineer new life forms adapted to live on other worlds.”(3)

The awareness that these questions need to be addressed, and the rudimentary discussion thus far, ought to inspire increased thought, word, and action at many levels in the near future.