book reviews 339

Gerald O’Collins & Mary Ann Meyers (eds.) Light from Light: Scientists and Theologians in Dialogue (Grand Rapids, mi: Eerdmans, 2012), vi + 250 pp., us$35.00, isbn 9780802866677.

“Light from Light” is a key phrase of the Nicene Creed, first presented in 325 and affirmed and extended at the Ecumencial Council in Constantinople in 381. It served to affirm the divinity of Jesus Christ. As a title of this book, it serves to bring together physicists and theologians. The physicists offer contributions about light as a form of electromagnetic radiation that provides a window upon the remarkable properties of the world as uncovered by quantum physics and relativity theory. The theologians write on ‘light’ as a symbol in the Scriptures and the Patristic tradition of Christian theology. The book is neatly divided in two parts; the editors have not entitled these parts but from the articles it is obvious that they correspond to the different disciplines. A thirteen page ‘Introduction’ by the two editors serves to articulate the overarching idea of this volume. They list seven themes that express differences and similarities of the ‘two cultures in conversation’: Scientists and theologians bring with them their particular contexts, the lab and the liturgy. They both assume that light is intelligible, at least to some degree. They both make truth claims about light. They both appeal to experience. They both emphasize relationships or correlations. They both seek to do things with light. They may jointly reflect on the mutual impact between the two domains. However, with respect to this mutual impact, the introduction shows substantial restraint when it concludes: “the scientists reached out effectively to the theologians. For their part, the theologians were intrigued by the scientific insights and data. The result was a shared sense that light can continue to function not only as an effective metaphor for God but also as a deep symbol that invites participation in the divine light and life” (8). The opening chapter by John Polkinghorne, physicist and Anglican priest, reviews modern insights about light, emphasizing the relational character of reality. He suggests that modern knowledge about light provides “metaphorical resources of a kind that the biblical writers could never have imagined” (27), but abstains from a judgement on the question whether it delivers an opportunity for analogical reasoning, from nature to its Creator. Michael Heller, a Polish mathematician, cosmologist, philosopher and Roman Catholic priest, has an interesting and very balanced contribution on Georges Lemaître, a Belgian priest and cosmologist. Lemaître was one of the early scientific cosmologists who launched the hypothesis of an initial singularity, a ‘primeval atom’. In 1921, when trained as a priest, he wrote a commentary on the first verses of Genesis. Heller, for this work relying on research by Dominique Lambert, especially

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi: 10.1163/15697312-00803020 340 book reviews his L’itineraire spirituel de Georges Lemaître, analyzes the way in which for Lemaître his spiritual background and personal biography (including ww i) formed a background to his cosmological work of 1927. At the same time, Heller makes clear that ideas brought forward in the scientific work were justified by purely scientific reasons. However, Lemaître’s religiously inspired ‘philosophy of light’ may have provided a context of discovery, a heuristic incentive for the scientific work, even though in his later years Lemaître emphasized that the beginning of the universe was not to be identified with the creation. Andrew M. Steaune, Markus Aspelmeyer and Anton Zeilinger, Robert W. Boyd, and Marco Bersanelli offer further contributions on physics and cosmology, with some thoughts on the religious or theological relevance and irrelevance of these insights.

In the second half of the book, theologians have the floor. Gerald O’Collins, s.j., discusses in some detail the way light metaphors have been used in the Hebrew bible, the New Testament, and the subsequent trinitarian discussions. Kathryn E. Tanner analyzes the way patristic and medieval theologians use the analogy between the first, second and third person of the Trinity to light— as source, as ray, and as radiation surrounding the ray. She then turns to light as analogy for creation and as analogy for God’s presence. The patristic and medieval theologians developed such analogies “on the basis of the perceived properties of light” (130). Thus, she invites the reader to explore how modern knowledge might affect such theological reflections. Kallistos Ware, Eastern Orthodox Metropolit, formerly known as an academic under the name Tim- othy Ware, considers light and darkness in Greek mystical theology. He com- pares Sinai, where Mozes encounters God in the darkness, with Mount Tabor, where Christ appears to some disciplines in a dazzling light—in the presence of Moses and Elijah. David Brown also writes on darkness and light, noting that God’s presence has been associated with utter darkness, a cloudy sky, dim and dazzling light. Thus, one should not work with just one metaphor or analogy, nor attach just one meaning to a particular metaphor—darkness may stand for divine presence (and mystery) as well as, in other contexts, evil. John Behr, another Orthodox theologian and scholar of patristics, discusses the Byzantine theology of light, while Robert Dodaro, o.s.a., turns to the main early the- ologian of the West, Augustine. The final contribution, by George Hunsinger, moves from the early period to protestant theologians such as Thomas Torrance and Karl Barth. The book has a useful index. Though the individual contributions are well informed and interesting, the main challenge remains the connection between the two parts. Even though some of the physicists enter slightly into the theological discourse, and the

Journal of Reformed Theology 8 (2014) 311–344